[eDebate] South America?
Andrew Michael-Don Casey
Sat Apr 5 12:36:43 CDT 2008
1.) I also agree with the call to leave the resolutional wording open.
Although yes a lot of K teams will disregard most of the resolution, if
the wording is open most of us are more likely to be topical. A lot of
us defended that an overrule happen on the courts topic because (so
long as we got to pick the grounds for overrule) it allowed for a lot
of aff diversity, as compared to china where we were forced to defend
economic and diplomatic pressure.
2.) I disagree with the idea that South America won?t have big diverse
impacts. There are tons of environment, trade, oil, terror, and
democratization debates to be had. I also think this has a bigger
diversity of impact areas than an intelligence topic would.
3.) If the resolutional wording was staying the way it has been I would
be quite concerned with an intelligence topic. Noah is probably right
that there could be a couple of decent impact areas, but if the wording
goes sour then anything good about those impact areas will be devolved
back into terrorism advantage debates. (note, i understand this concern
is easily applicable to south america)
**CONFIDENTIALITY** -This email (including any attachments) may
contain confidential, proprietary and privileged information. Any
unauthorized disclosure or use of this information is prohibited.
More information about the Mailman