  Humans engage in informal debates on a daily basis. By expressing their
opinions and ideas in an argumentative fashion, they are able to gain a deeper
understanding of a given problem and in some cases, find the best possible
course of actions towards resolving it. In this paper, we develop a methodology
to verify debates formalised as abstract argumentation frameworks. We first
present a translation from debates to transition systems. Such transition
systems can model debates and represent their evolution over time using a
finite set of states. We then formalise relevant debate properties using
temporal and strategy logics. These formalisations, along with a debate
transition system, allow us to verify whether a given debate satisfies certain
properties. The verification process can be automated using model checkers.
Therefore, we also measure their performance when verifying debates, and use
the results to discuss the feasibility of model checking debates.
