today I took part in an voluntary activity that's called American debating competition. And it's so interesting and significant for me.

the topic of the debate is:is the UN no longer important (that's what I heard from some competitors)and I just caught some of their viwpoints (or called their arguments)

I found the most common arguments of pro are the health problems,food providing problem,food safety,refugees,problem,ect. Another argument that left a deep impression on me is it never succeeded in stopping a xx(I forget the exact word )war.the explanation of this kide of wars is they happen in one country.I remember team B of the last competition of which the second debater listed senven arguments!cool!and also almost all of the pro held the idea that the UN is no longer important because it has made a lot of mistakes and didn't do a good job when it should.

and talking about the con,most of them used the idea that perfect doesn't equal to important as their thesis statement.nearly all of them mentioned that every people and every organization has made some mistakes.but it doesn't mean this people or this organization is no longer important.besides,though the UN is not perfect,it did solve a lot of problems and save a lot of people 's lives.when there are some problems between presidents the UN can take a key role in solving them.and it can not be replace by any other organizations beacause at present no organization can play some a role in the world.it can use its power to give people a brighter future.in one word,if the UN is no longer existed,the world will go into a mess.

I get a lot of advantages from this activity.

some words in my mind:concerning,however