The Mongol Trial

I enjoyed the Mongol trial. I thought it was funny seeing my peers be questioned and how they reacted under pressure. The preparation for it was easy but time consuming. It required a lot of research and we had to anticipate what the prosecution was going to say so we would have a rebuttal argument ready. This I felt was the hardest part because we couldn't be 100% confident in our preparation because we couldn't predict everything the prosecution was going to say. I felt my role required the most preparation because I had to deliver two formal statements that reflected directly what was going to happen or what happened in the trial. I still have yet to deliver the closing statement, but I feel that it was much harder to write than the opening statement. This is because you are just introducing the case in the beginning and arguing your point alone. But with the closing statement you have to still support your argument while disproving the opposing sides argument. I think my opening statement was a little long but i was happy with the way that it was structured because I feel like it flowed from one topic to the other easily and introduced all necessary aspects to the case.
My view on the Mongols is that they were simply well trained warriors and not murdering psychos. I feel that any successful empire has had a similar story in that their militaries conquered a bunch of lands and killed opposing soldiers in the heat of battle. I think we should admire them for what they built. It was the largest empire in history basically stretching for all of Europe and asia. Why should they not be praised? Completely aside from this trial I would say that the Mongols are innocent and did not commit the charges of genocide, terrorism, or kidnapping.