[eDebate] New Proposed version of the nuclear weapons topic.

Judson Eldredge eldredge_edebate
Mon May 18 12:15:12 CDT 2009

The Yeats topic paper did cite this as the excellent must read that it is, which is how I found it :)


> Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 11:57:33 -0500
> From: scottelliott at grandecom.net
> To: edebate at ndtceda.com
> Subject: [eDebate] New Proposed version of the nuclear weapons topic.
> First, credit, where credit is due, Jud Eldredge turned my to the 
> source from t he Carnegie Endowment. This source provides the 
> blueprint for the version of the debate topic I propose. And, if you 
> take the time to read it, you will see why this is a pretty good 
> idea...at least a good starting point. I do not see how member sof the 
> Topic Committee can draft an adequate nuclear weapons topic without 
> first reading this tome: 
> http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/abolishing_nuclear_weapons_debate.pdf
> Regradless of the Topic COmmittee's decsion, this article will become 
> the textbook for my introduction to debate class this year. I think 
> this, and the orginal topic paper, can serve as a touchstone for the 
> entire debate community.
> Based on my reading of the Delphi Paper, here is my suggested topic wording.
> Resolved: The United States Federal Government should substanitally 
> increase its efforts to abolish all nuclear weapons.
> I think this provides affirmatives with enough flexibility and 
> provides the negative with stable ground.
> Here are some relevant excerpts of the Carnegie Foundation's Debate 
> over the abolition of nuclear weapons:
> "In the past few years, horizontal and vertical proliferation have collided.
> That is, the need for significant strengthening of the nonproliferation regime
> in the wake of nuclear developments in North Korea, Iran, Iraq, and Pakistan
> is now absolutely clear. So too, however, is growing unwillingness
> among non?nuclear-weapon states to even consider additional measures
> in what they see as the absence of serious progress by the nuclear-armed
> states toward disarmament....
> ...Few, if any, top-tier issues attract as much simplistic analysis, as many
> verbal red herrings, and as little serious work by governments as does
> the feasibility of nuclear disarmament. As was pointed out in Abolishing
> Nuclear Weapons, none of the nuclear-weapon states ?has an employee,
> let alone an inter-agency group, tasked full time with figuring out what
> would be required to verifiably decommission all its nuclear weapons.?
> Our endeavor, launched with Abolishing Nuclear Weapons, advanced in
> this volume, and continuing into the future, is to jump-start a broad and
> deep international debate, based on serious analysis, of what it would take
> to achieve the immensely important and equally difficult goal of nuclear
> disarmament. Like this volume, that debate will have to include active
> participation by all states ? non-nuclear as well as nuclear armed."
> "What appears to have motivated much of this interest is the belief
> that it will be impossible to curtail nuclear-weapons proliferation without
> serious progress towards nuclear disarmament. In the absence of sufficient
> action on disarmament by the nuclear-weapons states, leaders of
> many non-nuclear-weapons states are increasingly resistant to efforts to
> strengthen the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) system.... 
> They also insist that they will not accept
> any new discriminatory constraints on their access to nuclear technology.
> Resistance to stronger non-proliferation measures is especially worrying
> given the expectation of a significant global expansion in nuclear-energy
> production. Ultimately, if it is to be sustainable and acceptable to 
> the majority
> of states, any new nuclear order must be equitable and not perpetuate
> the disparity between the states that possess nuclear weapons and those
> that do not."
> "The need for non-nuclear-weapons states to join a debate over the
> details of nuclear disarmament is great. The global diffusion of the 
> technology
> and know-how to produce fissile materials threatens to overwhelm
> the existing regime to prevent the ?diversion of nuclear energy from peaceful
> uses to nuclear weapons?.6 Fear of nuclear proliferation is motivating
> some nuclear-weapons states to take nuclear disarmament more seriously,
> 7 but neither non-proliferation nor the abolition of nuclear weapons
> can be achieved without the active cooperation of non-nuclear-weapons
> states. Nuclear abolition would require much more than the dismantling
> of all nuclear weapons in the nine states that now possess them. To make
> abolition feasible and to enable the detection of rearmament,....."
> Just a thought.
> _______________________________________________
> eDebate mailing list
> eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
> http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate

Insert movie times and more without leaving Hotmail?.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20090518/0247daa0/attachment.htm 

More information about the Mailman mailing list