Around the time of the Spanish Armada?

How about freedom of the press vs responsibility of the press? Did you know the reason for news crews being banned from accompanying cops on busts was because the idiots started broadcasting them live? While the cops went in the front door, the criminals who were watching the "breaking news" saw them coming and went out the back door! These days the reporters don't even go out to find thier own information much, they just wait for it to come to them. Then they don't always research the sources or consider the harm reporting the info may cause. On the flip side, if the press is responsible and works at it, they can be an important check on the power of the government. It's just that nowadays that's becoming a big if. Another recent example is the aftermath of hurricane katrina. The press went nuts about there being riots, raping, and looting around the areas where the victims were seeking shelter. This caused the FEMA VOLUNTEERS to not want to go anywhere near there. I can't eally blame them myself, they weren't troops or even actual cops who were trained for that. It turned out that the reports were started from a very few rumors (later proved false, without much trouble doing the proving) that were unconfirmed at all. This caused help to arrive even later than it would have. Please don't just take this as a sign that I'm in favor of full censorship or anything, because I'm very much opposed to that.
Maybe this will work for you. I hope it helps.

The SpaceNuts always return.

There is a real debate going on right now on wether or not the Trojan war actually was a real war. Many historians say they don't buy the whole hiding in a gigantic wooden horse to infiltrate Troy and open the front gate to let the army in.

BTW to the mods, I'm not trying to start a political debate in here, but he does need a political debate topic for his class. Besides I did try to stay fairly neutral and avoid the really hothead causing press debate topics. So please remain calm.

The SpaceNuts always return.

Just thought of another suggestion: Manned aircraft vs UAV. (aka Lockheed Martin vs Boeing)
On the up sides, manned aircraft have the advantage of having an on site target identification and discretion capacity, along with not having to worry nearly as much if telemetry is lost. UAVs are smaller and don't put pilots at risk. Manned aircraft can process more information from visual and just simple "feel" of the aircraft. UAVs can be put to more applications, like scouting out an area without being noticed for troops on the ground.
On the down sides, manned aircraft have an on site target identification and discretion capacity and the pilot can be at risk. If a UAV loses telemetry, the most likely result is a crash. Manned aircraft require more fuel because of the need of a pilot and thier life support. UAVs generally can't carry remotely as much payload.
Please don't even go into the idea of putting an AI on the UAV. Think of it this way, do you really want a self aware, probably suicidal (it is going into a war zone where it knows it isn't as important enough to protect as a human), and possibly ticked off over being put at risk, intelligence at the helm of an armed aircraft? Not to mention the moral aspects of it. I'm personally against creating an AI but if it was already there in front of me I wouldn't just say kill it unless it were a clear threat. The same goes for a human being.
On a side note you might be able to claim the movie Stealth as a reference. Heh.

The SpaceNuts always return.

For another one take a look at the X3 thread in here. It goes into copy protection.

The SpaceNuts always return.

The essay is supposed to be historiographical. Let me give you an example or two: "Was Thomas Cromwell responsible for the effective and strong government we have today?" or "Who won the war of 1812?"

You might look into the debate between Alexander Hamilton ( the destroyer of American freedom- ref the Federalist Papers) and Thomas Paine- who smelled a rat at Alex's steamroller derby..

Or, the Whiskey Rebellion, in which we traded 'One Tyrant George for another.."

Death penalty? Destruction of the environment for advancement in industry and technology?

How far back does the reference point have to be? Would something like the change from longbows and crossbows over to muskets (Remember, BEFORE rifling) and the pros and cons of each at the time work? You would even get to research weapons and tactics with that one. Good for a page maybe on just that. How long does this paper have to be, anyway? BTW what time zone are you in? I'm in Ohio in the US so I kind of want to know what the response time is (so I know when to check this thread again).
PS. I tried to respond yesterday but the computer I'm on was screwball, sorry.

The SpaceNuts always return.