[eDebate] ans Korcok
Tue Aug 7 12:22:35 CDT 2007
Mike always does a better job at these debates than I do, but I do have this one little theoretical question.
Right, which is why I said: "But let's give MK the benefit of the doubt and disregard the "lift sanctions" CP." Personally, I think the sanctions argument is pretty devastating, but to be fair to the debate that occurred I went past that and looked to other parts of the debate. Also, to be fair, JL presented lifting sanctions and looking into possibilities for anti-Saddam movements in Iraq as an alternative to your defence of the invasion. This is another reason to look beyond the sanctions arg; true or false, neither of you is willing to defend the sanctions.
Why should Mike be answering the "lift sanctions" CP at all??? I know that I differ from others on this theory, but a CP must have some possibility of being enacted before it is an opportunity cost of the plan.
I should NOT forego buying the Nissan Maxima because the Natalia SLS 2 sport luxury sedan would be a better car. That is an unreasonable opprtunity cost because no one would give me the 2 million dollars required to buy the thing. If that WERE the standard, then all other options would pale by comparison and I would still be using my feet.
So, the question still remains... Is Iraq better off after the invasion then it was pre-invasion. Lewis and Bach don't get to counterplan with sanctions removed since Bush had ZERO intention of doing that. You don't get to counterplan with Saddam and sons would have become peaceful and loving leaders who always cared for their people (utopian CPs bad). You are stuck with defending the past 4 years of more Saddam murders AND the sanctions.
The real world sucks don't it....
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Mailman