The Tufts Democrats and Republicans squared off on how to move forward with the war in Iraq and other current issues at a debate Thursday night.
Dean of Undergraduate Education James Glaser moderated the debate, which took place at Hotung Café as part of the eatery's grand opening ceremony.
Four representatives each from the Democrats and the Republicans partook in the debate, which began with a question from Glaser at 6:30 p.m.
In the first portion of the debate, which centered on the war, the Republicans argued that it is necessary to build a stronghold in the Middle East, while the Democrats called the war ill-advised.
The dean kicked off the discussion by asking why many people are calling for troop withdrawal if the military's recent "surge" tactic appears to be working.
"The situation in Iraq is improving, no one can deny, but it is improving from a horrible situation," said Democrat Emeka Okparaeke, a freshman, in response to the prompt.
Republican Chas Morrison, also a freshman, countered Okparaeke. "Ultimately in war you need to look at, 'Do we want to win?'" he said. "If we don't want to win, who will? The Islamic radicalists [will]."
Morrison continued his argument to say that it is important to create a pro-American stronghold in the Middle East to act as a balance in the conflict between the Sunni and Shiite sects of Islam.
"The biggest threat to [Shiite] Iran is the heretic, and we can be that little heretic," he said.
Morrison further compared the struggle against terrorism to the struggle against communism. Just as the rift between Russia and China damaged global communism in past decades, a similar rift must be created between the fundamentalist Iranian Shiites and the more moderate Iraqi Shiites, he argued.
The debate eventually ranged over a variety of areas other than the war, touching on illegal immigration, the healthcare system and the trade-off between civil liberties and national security.
Freshman and Republican Mike Hawley said that the government had the right to deny detainees many of their rights while interrogating them in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. He suggested that the detainees are not American citizens and are therefore not included in the jurisdiction of the Constitution.
"They were captured on the battlefield ... this allows us to execute them, but we don't," he said, contending that the government has exercised restraint in counterterrorism techniques.
Hawley said the Constitution is still in effect for American citizens. "It's the government's responsibility to protect our liberties and our lives ... but under no circumstances should the government break their own laws," he said.
"I agree completely with the last statement ... but we have been breaking the law for the last six years," freshman and Democrat Brian Agler said in a rebuttal, citing the Bush administration's wiretapping programs. He suggested that although the detainees are not citizens, they are prisoners of war and should be treated by the provisions of the Geneva Convention, which bars torture.
Hawley answered by saying that prisoners of war must wear a uniform and must be servants of another state. The Guantanamo Bay detainees, he said, are not technically prisoners of war.
Morrison supported Hawley's stance. "You need to know how these guerrillas think," he said. "When they capture our troops ... [the terrorists] cut their heads off."
The debate kept up its intensity as it transitioned to the topic of illegal immigration.
Sophomore Nick Burns suggested from the Democratic side that while illegal immigration may appear to be a problem, it is not as large an issue as many people think.
"Do [immigrants] really disrupt any of the fabric of our society? Are there incentives for the U.S. to halt illegal immigration or to liberalize immigration laws?" Burns said.
Sophomore and Republican Alex Dietz argued that the number of illegal immigrants will continue to rise. "If you don't think illegal immigrants are a big problem, just wait until we have 20 million [immigrants]," he said.
Both sides opted for a change from the current healthcare system, but they disagreed on how to alter the system.
"The problem with healthcare now is that most Americans don't buy their own healthcare," sophomore and Republican Xander Zebrose said. Zebrose is also a columnist for the Daily.
He suggested that because consumers do not directly pay for their own healthcare, there are no checks to raising medical costs. His solution was privatized healthcare, where individuals pay for their own insurance plans.
Sophomore and Democrat Will Ehrenfeld opted to socialize healthcare, not to privatize it. "People in the lowest income bracket can't afford healthcare," Ehrenfeld said.
He also suggested that a socialized healthcare system would be less expensive for the country, because it would eliminate the bureaucracy of private insurance. "The entire EU [European Union] pays half as much as the U.S.," he said.
Zebrose countered for the Republicans. "I don't think you get rid of bureaucracy by creating a new one," he said.
