[eDebate] FINAL REPORT-the ballot
Sat Jun 14 10:37:32 CDT 2003
Yeah, it's really too bad. I think the "list" resolutions have some sub-
sections that are more interesting than NATO but they sound like a grab bag
of somewhat unrelated issues. I would have liked to see either fewer
sections or atleast an attempt at an encompasing resolution that covers
multiple trade areas.
Some particular thoughts:
REZ 1: "new military operations" sounds like pick any plan you want. As
long as the US committs to it and NATO acts you could do almost anything.
Looking up "operations" in my dictionary I find "a specific plan". That
means the rez is like "the us must commit to NATO doing a plan".
REZ 2: 8 parts? Sounds like a mighty burden for the neg.
REZ 4: These subsections are huge. Look at this subsection for example:
> - Removal of its barriers to and encouragement of European Union
> peacekeeping force and/or North Atlantic Treaty Organization
> substantially increased participation in military peace enforcement
> operations in the Middle East, Iraq, South Eastern Europe and/or Africa;
Too wordy for my taste, add four more and it sounds insanely large. It
will be extremely hard to get a community standard on such a large
paragraph considering you would only debate it once out of 5 times.
btw I didn't mean this to come out so negative. Sorry.
More information about the Mailman