[eDebate] List of things to prep for on just one Affirmative case.

Danielle Verney daisy_verney
Thu May 24 13:01:46 CDT 2007


Golan Heights is a pretty core aff for any conceivable ME engagement topic - 
so you have to be able to do it - did you want a ME engagement topic that 
didn't let you work on the peace process?

All of the problems you list (which are minimal) are functions of the topic, 
not the rez.  How would you write a rez that lets the U.S. engage and avoid 
these arguments?

These are not serious problems; yes you have to get cards that say target 
nations accept (or as you pointed out claim advantages off the offer), yes 
you have to get cards that say the U.S. is key, and cards that say your 
mechanism is key.  This is true of any aff any year.  Consult CPs are around 
any Foreign Policy year, etc., etc.

Tom O'Gorman
tomogorman at gmail.com

Pre-empt - there is nothing wrong with the Aff flex to claim advantages off 
the offer and claim the target nation doesn't accept.  Those advantages are 
going to be weaker and less direct than the core case --- and they will be 
more easily CPed and o/wed by the neg.  Also the neg could argue target 
accepts and screw you that way.



>From: scottelliott at grandecom.net
>To: edebate at ndtceda.com
>Subject: [eDebate] List of things to prep for on just one Affirmative case.
>Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 12:52:56 -0500
>
>Sitting here thinking about it. Here is one example of what I am going to 
>have
>to do for just one case. It is really quite manageable now that I have 
>thoguht
>about it. I am sure you will agree after reading this list.
>
>To use Kelly's most middle of the road "Golan Heights" Affirmative case 
>example:
>
>C-Plans to prep against:
>
>No U.S. troops-just observers.
>No troops, just survellance flights using predator drones with sweet 
>hellfire
>missles.
>No Troops, but promises to keep the 5th or 6th fleet on the doorstep for 
>bombing
>raids if either one of the countries attacks.
>No troops, but lots of confidence building measures.
>Technology-landmines or a big fense, or sensors
>Technology-work with Israel to create a missle defense shield for small 
>rockets.
>
>NATO Troops instead of U.S. Troops
>EU troops instead of U.S. Troops
>Russian Troops instead of U.S. Troops
>
>Different mechanisms--almost a plan-plan style of debate.
>
>Consult Turkey (huge) (all of those bilateral and tri-lateral resolutions 
>make
>these competitive and non-topical)
>Consult Turkey and Greece
>Consult the new government of Iraq
>Consult Iran
>Consult Saudi Arabia
>Consult Oman
>Consult Jordon
>Consult with UAE
>Consult Russia
>Consult with Afghanstan
>Consult with Pakistan
>Consult with India
>Consult with China
>Consult with Japan
>Consult via a Pan-Arabic conference
>Consult the PLO
>Consult with Hamas
>Consult with Hezbollah
>Consult with the PLA
>Consult with NATO
>Consult with the EU
>Consult with U.S. NGO's
>Consult with Oil Corporations
>Consult with any other coutnry--Venezuela and Cuba comes to mind.
>
>Agent of Action C-plans:
>
>Russia
>China
>EU
>NATO  (the resolutions, in my opinion opens the door for multiple agent of
>action c-plans)
>Congress enacts
>Executive Order
>United Nations with real troops and U.S. logistical support.
>
>
>Disads:
>
>Turkey-Water wars
>Turkey-Invade the Kurds
>Turkey-Civil War
>Turkey-Shift to radical Islam
>Turkish Elections
>Turkey EU Relations
>Collapse of Turkey's secular government
>Turkey wars with Syria
>Turkey wars with Israel
>
>Syrian civil war
>Syria reinvades Lebanon
>Syrian government collapse
>Syrian government bolsterd witha shunning impact
>Syrian proliferation of the CBW's is is holding over from the Iraq regime 
>change
>Syrian water conflicts
>Syrian Encirclement (damn! U.S. Troops to the west of Syria and now U.S. 
>troops
>to the South of Syria. Better reinvade Lebanon so we can have a bigger 
>power
>base.
>
>
>Strengthen Hamas
>Strengthen Hezbollah
>Strengthen the PLO
>Strengthen the PLA
>Strengthen Al Queda
>
>Weaken Hamas
>Weaken Hezbollah (weakness will cause them to want to do a spectacular 
>terror
>strike)
>Weaken the PLO
>Weaken the PLA
>Weaken Al Queda
>
>Weaken/Strengthen the Pan-Islamic movements
>
>Israel:
>
>Israeli Elections
>Israeli Civil War (I guess there are at least five different link stories 
>to
>have to work through)
>Israeli hard-liner coup
>Isreali crackdown on the PLA
>Isreali crackdown on Hezbollah
>Israeli crackdown on Hamas
>Isreali crackdown on the PLO
>Israeli Proliferation--vertical and horizontal, including CBW's and new
>generation nukes.
>Undermine negotiations with Hezbollah
>Undermine negotiations with the PLA
>Undermine engotiations with the PLO
>Messiahism
>
>Iran:
>Iranian Elections
>Iran hardliner crack down
>Iran civl war
>Iran links up with Al Queda even more
>Iran and Hezbollah relations--Al Queda
>Destruction of the Iranian Green/Environmental movement (oops! Meant to 
>save
>that one for myself)
>Crush Pro-Democracy movement in Iran.
>Iranian Proliferation with a nice Israeli First strike scenario
>Iranian interference in Iraq
>
>Iraq
>
>Iraq elections
>Iraq overstretch
>Iraq Civil War
>Iranian take over of Iraq
>Shiite take over of Iraq
>Shia take over of Iraq
>
>Jordan:
>
>Jordanian transition to democracy crushed
>Overthrow of the King
>Palestian revolt within Jordon
>
>Saudi Arabia
>
>Saudi democracy effort crushed
>Saudi Credibility in the Arab world
>
>UAE problems with a natural gas cut off scenario.
>
>United States:
>
>Presidential Elections
>Congressional Elections
>Military overstretch
>No such thing as a fair broker
>Hegemony
>Soft power
>Hard power
>
>
>Midle East Overpopulation/Water scarcity/ and environmental problems
>
>Oil shocks
>Caucus Region Oil shocks
>Bosphorus region oil shock
>
>Russian Encirclement (link U.S. influence greater in the Arab world)
>China Encirclement (link U.S. influence greater in the Arab world)
>Russia and China alliance
>Russian oil interests
>CHinese Oil Interests
>
>
>Kritiks;
>
>Feminism and IR
>Realism bad
>Relaims good
>Socialism
>Marxism
>Pan-Arabism
>Pan-Islamism
>
>
>Solvency:
>
>Syria will nevers agree
>Israel will never agree because of all the stuff that would happen if it 
>did
>(Which is why if I ran the Gloan as a case, i would never claim to solve, I
>would only claim advanatges from the "offer" to negotiate)
>
>Mere existence of the infidel Israel in Islamic lands of Palestine 
>guarantee
>global conflict inevitable.
>
>Makes U.S troops an easy target for terroists.
>Hatred of U.S. occupiers in Iran will translate over to presence on Syrian
>border. In other words, all of the Islamic hatred toward the U.S. occupying
>Arab lands will only get worse because now the U.S, troops will be in Iraq.
>
>
>
>
>
>That's all my feeble, uninformed on the subject area, mind can generate as
>research assignments in one hour for just the Golan Hieghts case.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>eDebate mailing list
>eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
>http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate

_________________________________________________________________
More photos, more messages, more storage?get 2GB with Windows Live Hotmail. 
http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM_mini_2G_0507




More information about the Mailman mailing list