我们班要开一场关于圆明园是否该重建的辩论赛，英文版的，我是反方

Question

请大家帮帮忙，急需！！我该如何辩解？

Answer 1

Affirmative: should rebuild (hereinafter referred to as "positive")
Anti side: should not reconstruction (hereinafter referred to as the "anti")
Positive: you argue the other side, dear audience friends, hello! Our view is Old Summer Palace should rebuild. Let me give you an example for everyone to listen to it: the former Soviet Union and Germany is a hostile country during the two World War, when the Soviet Union in the resistance to the German invasion of war, there are many cultural relic palace is destroyed, after the war, the Soviet government according to historical records, pictures, photos and other information, as it is for the reconstruction. Another example: American and England are two powerful nation, but they also experienced the baptism of fire, America white house was burned, and later re repair. So many countries have had the same experience, but for the reconstruction, so I think Old Summer Palace should reconstruction.
Anti: you argue the other side, dear audience friends, hello! Our view is Old Summer Palace should not reconstruction. For just the other friends of the debate speech, I would like to ask: "do not forget national humiliation" to consider, ruins and reconstruction better what kind of effect? Needless to say, it is the former can remind people, to remain vigilant! We saw the ruins, they will think of the Qing government's corruption and incompetence, let us never forget the history of humiliation, ruins bring power far beyond its former glory. Old Summer Palace sites exist, the main function is to let the children remember the history, taking history as a mirror, do not forget national humiliation.
Positive: in fact, we should put the national best things for people, this is the respect and care for the national culture, and should not put those humiliating history for posterity. But, in the education of Chinese, we should turn to self-esteem, rather than blame self pity, so as to better promote the revitalization of the nation. Besides, as we all know, Old Summer Palace is a famous historical monuments, if rebuilding, it will be the development of China's tourism industry, this is not better?
Anti: about the other friends of the debate "tourism" point of view, I think the question the other friends of the debate, have you ever thought, reconstruction Old Summer Palace to how much money, manpower and time ah, if so, China's national strength will be weakened gradually.
Positive: but, you argue the other side, if built Old Summer Palace, this is not Chinese powerful witness?
Anti: can indeed be witness, but if the reconstruction of the Old Summer Palace, equal to say that the Eight Power Allied forces together to wash off the crime? They can't admit this fact. And if not reconstruction, it ruins the witness is their crimes, they want to deny it or not!
Positive: you argue the other side, you have to know, this "Wan round round" is also the outstanding landscape art of ancient China witness?
Anti: but Old Summer Palace "only one", if the posterity to rebuild a, do not have the same meaning!
Positive: you argue the other side, if the Old Summer Palace reconstruction, to solve the employment problem of many people, they can Old Summer Palace tourism services.
Anti: but the money to rebuild Old Summer Palace than to help those children, poor families, you say is not it? Moreover Old Summer Palace actually is unable to restore, because, some celebrity calligraphy and painting, priceless treasures that have lost overseas, how do you go to the reconstruction Old Summer Palace?
Moderator: because of the time, the debate is over, please judge for the player scoring. Thank you!

正方：应该重建（以下简称“正”）

反方：不应该重建（以下简称“反”）

正：对方辩友，各位观众朋友，大家好！我方的观点是圆明园应该重建。我先举一个例子给大家听吧：前苏联和德国在二次大战中是敌对国，当时前苏联在抵抗德国入侵的战争中，有许多文物宫殿被毁坏，战后，苏联政府根据历史记载、画卷、照片等资料，按照原样进行了重建。再举一个例子：美国和英国是二个强盛大国，但它们也遭受过战火的洗礼，美国的白宫也曾被焚毁，也是后来重新修复的。那么多国家有过同样的遭遇，可都进行了重建，所以我方认为圆明园也应该重建。

反：对方辩友，各位观众朋友，大家好！我方的观点是圆明园不应该重建。对于刚才对方辩友的发言，我想请问：从“勿忘国耻”来考虑，废墟与重建哪种效果更好？不用说，肯定是前者更能提醒国人，时刻保持警醒！我们看到这些废墟，就会想起清政府的腐败无能，让我们永不忘记那段耻辱的历史，废墟带来的震撼力远远超过了它昔日的辉煌。圆明园遗址的存在，主要作用就是让子孙后代牢记历史，以史为鉴，不忘国耻。

正：其实我们应该把民族最好的东西留给后人，这才是对民族文化的尊重和珍惜，而不应该把那些屈辱的历史留给后人。而且，在教育国人方面，我们应该转向自强自尊，而不是自责自哀，这样才能更好地促进民族振兴。再说了，大家都知道，圆明园是个闻名中外的历史古迹，如果重建的话，那就可以发展我国的旅游业，这不是更好吗？

反：关于对方辩友“可以发展旅游业”的观点，我想质问一下对方辩友，你是否想过，重建圆明园要化多少金钱、人力和时间啊，如果这样，我国的国力也会逐渐减弱。

正：可是，对方辩友，如果建好了圆明园，这不是中国强大的见证吗？

反：的确可以见证，但如果重建了圆明园，等于说就是把八国联军的罪行也一起洗刷掉了？他们就可以不承认这个事实。而如果不重建，那这个遗址就是他们罪行的见证，他们想抵赖也抵赖不了！

正：对方辩友，你可曾知道，这个“万圆之圆”也是中国古代杰出的园林艺术的见证啊？

反：可是圆明园“只有一个”，如果后人再重建一个，就不具有那种意义了！

正：对方辩友，如果重建了圆明园，就解决了许多人的就业问题，他们可以为圆明园的旅游业服务。

反：但重建圆明园的这笔巨款还不如用来帮助那些失学儿童、贫困家庭，大家说不是吗？更何况圆明园其实是无法恢复的，因为，当时的一些名人书画、奇珍异宝都已经流失海外，你该怎么去重建圆明园呢？

主持人：因为时间关系，辩论会到此结束，请各位评委为选手打分。谢谢大家！