Tournament: NDT | Round: 1 | Opponent: George Mason KM | Judge: Leah Moczulski, Mikaela Malsin, Austin Layton

1NC

Off-Case

1NC DA

Obama’s continued use of political capital is critical to prevent a renewed push for sanctions that will destroy fragile negotiations —- impact is a nuclear Iran and conflict involving Israel and Saudi Arabia

Glass, 3/25 —- completed a Truman-Albright Fellowship at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars’ Environmental Change and Security Program (3/25/2014, Jacob, "As Iran Nuclear Negotiations Begin, Threat of Increased Sanctions Looms Large," http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jacob-glass/as-iran-nuclear-negotiati_b_5024604.html))
Last week Iran and the so-called P5+1 countries — Russia,
AND
threaten to scuttle progress, and underscore the fragility of the negotiating process.
Over the past three decades, Iran has faced crippling sanctions imposed by America and the international community. Trade restrictions have steadily increased to block Iran’s lucrative petroleum export market as well as the country’s participation in the global banking system. All told, international sanctions have cost Iran over 24100 billion in lost oil profits alone.
So called "carrot and stick" policies have long been fundamental to international diplomacy. The "stick" has been a sharp one, and has finally brought the Iranians to the negotiating table.
During his September visit to the UN General Assembly in New York, Iranian President
AND
, all but ensuring that negotiations cannot be used as a delay tactic.
Yet amid these positive signs that diplomacy is working, members of Congress have advocated for even more sanctions to be levied against Iran, specifically in the form of Senate Bill 1881, sponsored by Illinois Republican Mark Kirk and New Jersey Democrat Robert Menendez.
New sanctions would torpedo the Vienna talks and reverse the diplomatic progress that has been made.
Iranian officials have already promised to abandon negotiations if new sanctions are passed. Even our own allies, along with Russia and China, have opposed the move. Passing unilateral sanctions will splinter the fragile international coalition, needlessly antagonize Iranian negotiators, and make a violent conflict with Iran more likely. Diplomatic victory will only be achieved if the international community stands united before Iran.
To this point, the Obama administration has avoided a vote on SB 1881 by threatening a veto of the bill, and the administration’s full court press to prevent Senate Democrats from supporting new sanctions has bought international negotiators time. Several influential Democrats, including Senator Richard Blumenthal from Connecticut, have agreed to postpone a vote on the bill, contingent on productive negotiations.
Although legislation imposing new sanctions has been avoided thus far, the pressure on Congressional Democrats to act will intensify as talks in Vienna move forward. This round of negotiations is widely projected to be more difficult than the November deal, and inflammatory rhetoric from Tehran is likely. Nevertheless, sanctions are not the answer. Instead, we must continue to let diplomacy run its course.
Sanctions have done their job by bringing Iran to the table. In return, Iran expects to be rewarded with sanctions relief. The passage of new trade restrictions would effectively withdraw the carrot, and hit Iran with another stick. Consider the negotiations over.
The risks of delaying new sanctions is slight. The sanctions relief Iran is receiving
AND
to prevent Tehran from racing towards a nuclear weapon while negotiations are ongoing.
At the same time, the benefits of successful diplomacy are immense, as a comprehensive deal would be a dramatic victory for U.S. non-proliferation efforts. Further, the dismantling of Iran’s nuclear program would significantly ease tensions between its two biggest rivals in the region, Israel and Saudi Arabia.
Our congressional leaders must not be so confident as to think Iran is desperate for
AND
policy dominated by isolation from the West and an aggressive nuclear development program.
Our senators are facing significant political pressure to resist multilateralism and pursue increased sanctions based on an uncompromising mistrust of Iran. But history judges leaders not upon their conformity with party politics, but upon the ultimate results they achieve. It’s time to negotiate with the Iranians on good faith, and begin the serious work of establishing a meaningful nuclear agreement that could signal the beginning of a new era in Iranian-Western relations.

====Plan triggers defection of democratic allies====
Loomis, 7 —- Department of Government at Georgetown
(3/2/2007, Dr. Andrew J. Loomis is a Visiting Fellow at the Center for a New American Security, "Leveraging legitimacy in the crafting of U.S. foreign policy," pg 35-36, http://citation.allacademic.com//meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/7/9/4/8/pages179487/p179487-36.php)
Declining political authority encourages defection. American political analyst Norman Ornstein writes of the domestic context,
In a system where a President has limited formal power, perception matters. The
AND
In simple terms, winners win and losers lose more often than not.
Failure begets failure. In short, a president experiencing declining amounts of political capital
AND
feedback loop accelerates decay both in leadership capacity and defection by key allies.
The central point of this review of the presidential literature is that the sources of
AND
affects the character of U.S. policy, foreign and domestic.
This brief review of the literature suggests how legitimacy norms enhance presidential influence in ways
AND
influences infiltrate policy-making processes and affect the character of policy decisions.

Causes Israel strikes

Perr, 12/24/13 – B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University; technology marketing consultant based in Portland, Oregon. Jon has long been active in Democratic politics and public policy as an organizer and advisor in California and Massachusetts. His past roles include field staffer for Gary Hart for President (1984), organizer of Silicon Valley tech executives backing President Clinton’s call for national education standards (1997), recruiter of tech executives for Al Gore’s and John Kerry’s presidential campaigns, and co-coordinator of MassTech for Robert Reich (2002). (Jon, "Senate sanctions bill could let Israel take U.S. to war against Iran" Daily Kos, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/12/24/1265184/-Senate-sanctions-bill-could-let-Israel-take-U-S-to-war-against-Iran~~23
As 2013 draws to close, the negotiations over the Iranian nuclear program have entered
AND
Israel to decide whether the United States will go to war against Tehran.
On their own, the tough new sanctions imposed automatically if a final deal isn’t completed in six months pose a daunting enough challenge for President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry. But it is the legislation’s commitment to support an Israeli preventive strike against Iranian nuclear facilities that almost ensures the U.S. and Iran will come to blows. As Section 2b, part 5 of the draft mandates:
If the Government of Israel is compelled to take military action in legitimate self-defense against Iran’s nuclear weapon program, the United States Government should stand with Israel and provide, in accordance with the law of the United States and the constitutional responsibility of Congress to authorize the use of military force, diplomatic, military, and economic support to the Government of Israel in its defense of its territory, people, and existence.
Now, the legislation being pushed by Senators Mark Kirk (R-IL),
AND
March told a Christians United for Israel (CUFI) conference in July:
"If nothing changes in Iran, come September, October, I will present a resolution that will authorize the use of military force to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear bomb."
Graham would have plenty of company from the hardest of hard liners in his party. In August 2012, Romney national security adviser and pardoned Iran-Contra architect Elliott Abrams called for a war authorization in the pages of the Weekly Standard. And just two weeks ago, Norman Podhoretz used his Wall Street Journal op-ed to urge the Obama administration to "strike Iran now" to avoid "the nuclear war sure to come."
But at the end of the day, the lack of an explicit AUMF in the Nuclear Weapon Free Iran Act doesn’t mean its supporters aren’t giving Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu de facto carte blanche to hit Iranian nuclear facilities. The ensuing Iranian retaliation against to Israeli and American interests would almost certainly trigger the commitment of U.S. forces anyway.
Even if the Israelis alone launched a strike against Iran’s atomic sites, Tehran will almost certainly hit back against U.S. targets in the Straits of Hormuz, in the region, possibly in Europe and even potentially in the American homeland. Israel would face certain retaliation from Hezbollah rockets launched from Lebanon and Hamas missiles raining down from Gaza.
That’s why former Bush Defense Secretary Bob Gates and CIA head Michael Hayden raising the
AND
10 years in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined.") The anticipated blowback?
Serious costs to U.S. interests would also be felt over the longer term, we believe, with problematic consequences for global and regional stability, including economic stability. A dynamic of escalation, action, and counteraction could produce serious unintended consequences that would significantly increase all of these costs and lead, potentially, to all-out regional war.

Israeli strikes cause great power war and collapse global economy

Rafael Reuveny 10, PhD, Professor in the School of Public and Environmental Affairs at Indiana University, "Unilateral Strike on Iran could trigger world Depression", Op-ed distributed through McClatchy Newspaper Co, http://www.indiana.edu/~~spea/news/speaking_out/reuveny_on_unilateral_strike_Iran.shtml
A unilateral Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities would likely have dire consequences, including
AND
likely protest and send weapons, but would probably not risk using force.
¶ While no one has a crystal ball, leaders should be risk-averse when choosing war as a foreign policy tool. If attacking Iran is deemed necessary, Israel must wait for an American green light. A unilateral Israeli strike could ultimately spark World War III.

1NC T

Interpretation—Targeted killings are strikes carried about against pre-meditated, individually designated targets—signature strikes are distinct—differentiating between the two is key to education

Anderson 11—Kenneth Anderson, Professor of International Law at American University ~August 29, 2011, "Distinguishing High Value Targeted Killing and "Signature" Attacks on Taliban Fighters," http://www.volokh.com/2011/08/29/distinguishing-high-value-targeted-killing-and-signature-attacks-on-taliban-fighters/~~

The CIA carries out two different types of drone strikes in the tribal areas of
AND
will not tell one very much without knowing what mission is at issue.

Vote neg—signature strikes and targeted killings are distinct operations with entirely separate lit bases and advantages—they kill precision and limits

Anderson 11—Kenneth Anderson, Professor of International Law at American University ~September 23, 2011, "Efficiency in Bello and ad Bellum: Targeted Killing Through Drone Warfare," http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1812124~~

Although targeted killing and drone warfare are often closely connected, they are not the
AND
than individualized "high value" targets, whether Taliban or Al Qaeda.

1NC CP 1

The Executive branch of the United States federal government should ban signature strikes carried out by remotely-piloted vehicles and implement this through self-binding mechanisms including, but not limited to independent commissions to review and ensure compliance with the order and transparency measures that gives journalists access to White House decisionmaking.

Including self-binding mechanisms ensures effective constraints and executive credibility

Posner 26 Vermeule, 6 —- *Prof of Law at U Chicago, AND  Prof of Law at Harvard (9/19/2006, Eric A. Posner 26 Adrian Vermeule, "The Credible Executive," http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=931501))

We suggest that the executive’s credibility problem can be solved by second-order mechanisms
AND
in signaling in the present through (the threat of) future transparency.

1NC CP 2

The United States federal government should restrict the President’s war powers authority for signatures strikes carried out by remotely-piloted vehicles to geographic locations where the government has given consent.

The United States federal government should ban signatures strikes carried out by remotely-piloted vehicles in Yemen.

Consent solves the norms advantage – respects sovereignty, creates an international precedent of drone restraint, and assures allies. And allows for strikes in Somalia.

ADAM ENTOUS, SIOBHAN GORMAN and EVAN PEREZ, 9/26/12, WSJ, U.S. Unease Over Drone Strikes, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444100404577641520858011452.html

About once a month, the Central Intelligence Agency sends a fax to a general
AND
officials have begun to express concerns privately about the extent of Pakistan’s consent. 

The net benefit is Somalia

The plan prevents drones strikes against key targets in Somalia, the CP allows them as long as there is consent –strikes in Somalia key to containing al-Shabaab – impacts are trade, terrorism, and African stability

Roach and Walser – 12
Morgan Lorraine Roach is a Research Associate, and Ray Walser, PhD, is Senior Policy Analyst for Latin America, in the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies, a division of the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies, at The Heritage Foundation, Saving Somalia: The Next Steps for the Obama Administration, May 18, 2012, http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/05/saving-somalia-the-next-steps-for-the-obama-administration
In the past twenty years, the African continent has made progress toward democratic governance
AND
the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) leader Anwar al-Awlaki.~32~ 

Trade solves war

Michael J. Panzner 8, faculty at the New York Institute of Finance, 25-year veteran of the global stock, bond, and currency markets who has worked in New York and London for HSBC, Soros Funds, ABN Amro, Dresdner Bank, and JPMorgan Chase, Financial Armageddon: Protect Your Future from Economic Collapse, Revised and Updated Edition, p. 136-138
Continuing calls for curbs on the flow of finance and trade will inspire the United
AND
between Muslims and Western societies as the beginnings of a new world war.

Case

1NC Yemen

Signature strikes aren’t worse for civilian casualties – makes the impact inevitable

Taylor 2013 - Senior Fellow at the Center for Policy 26 Research (July 24, Paul, "Signature Strikes are as Old as War" http://transparentpolicy.org/2013/07/signature-strikes-are-as-old-as-war/)

Signature strikes may not be new, but our new techniques are helping reduce civilian
AND
but these same folks never seem to be willing to offer workable alternatives.

Terror risk is low

Mueller, 14 —- Professor of Poli Sci at Ohio State
(1/8/2014, John, "Has the threat from terrorism been exaggerated?" http://www.thecommentator.com/article/4579/has_the_threat_from_terrorism_been_exaggerated))
Two years after the raid on Osama bin Laden’s hideaway, terrorism alarmists remain in
AND
wildly disproportionate to the limited hazard terrorism presents are neither wise nor responsible.

1NC Norms

No drone prolif—their evidence reflects hype and state posturing

Zenko and Kreps 3/10
~3/10/14, Sarah Kreps is an assistant professor in the Department of Government, the co-director of the Cornell Law School International Law-International Relations Colloquium, and an affiliate of the Einaudi Center for International Studies’ Foreign Policy Initiative and Micah Zenko is the Douglas Dillon Fellow in the Center for Preventive Action (CPA) at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), "The Drone Invasion Has Been Greatly Exaggerated", http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/03/10/drone_invasion_greatly_exaggerated_us_exports~~

A casual observer of recent reporting and analysis of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs)
AND
the Pentagon’s budget is bigger than the next 10 largest defense budgets combined.

EU power is incapable of solving global problems

Maleski 1 (Denko, pg. http://www.newbalkanpolitics.org.mk/OldSite/Issue_5/denko.eu.eng.asp)**
The lesson that we learned ten years ago is that the European Union lacks a
AND
in Macedonia: Greece, France and Spain. What are their interests?

Turkish conflict won’t escalate—Syria proves their restrained in their use in military

Hurriyet Daily News, 10-7
~Hurriyet Daily News, "Is there a military intervention in Syria?," October 7th 2011, http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/n.php?n=is-there-a-military-intervention-in-syria-2011-10-07~~
Foreign Minister Ahmet Davuto?lu was my guest on my 32.Gün (32nd Day
AND
as I understand, military measures are more toward obstructing this possible immigration. 

Global drone norms are impossible

McGinnis, senior professor – Northwestern Law, ’10
(John O. 104 Nw. U. L. Rev. Colloquy 366)

It is hard to overstate the extent to which advances in robotics, which are
AND
tions no richer than colleges and perhaps would require even less substantial resources.

Long timeframe – their author

Zenko 2013 (Micah Zenko is the Douglas Dillon fellow in the Center for Preventive Action (CPA) at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). Previously, he worked for five years at the Harvard Kennedy School and in Washington, DC, at the Brookings Institution, Congressional Research Service, and State Department’s Office of Policy Planning, Council Special Report No. 65, January 2013, "U.S. Drone Strike Policies", i.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/Drones_CSR65.pdf?)

Much like policies governing the use of nuclear weapons, offensive cyber capabilities, and
AND
the future, the United States should undertake the following specific policy recommendations. 

U.S. drone use doesn’t set a precedent, restraint doesn’t solve it, and norms don’t apply to drones at all in the first place

Amitai Etzioni 13, professor of international relations at George Washington University, March/April 2013, "The Great Drone Debate," Military Review, http://usacac.army.mil/CAC2/MilitaryReview/Archives/English/MilitaryReview_20130430_art004.pdf
Other critics contend that by the United States using drones, it leads other countries
AND
have had to use bombs that would have caused much greater collateral damage.
Further, the record shows that even when the United States did not develop a
AND
terrorist group Y—if the United States refrains from employing that technology.
I am not arguing that there are no natural norms that restrain behavior. There
AND
). In such circumstances, the role of norms is much more limited.

1NC Solvency

Signature strikes are already banned

Schmitt 2012 – has shared two Pulitzer prizes (Eric, August 25, "U.S. to Step Up Drone Strikes Inside Yemen" http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/26/world/middleeast/us-to-step-up-drone-strikes-inside-yemen.html?pagewanted=print)

The White House has given the Central Intelligence Agency and the Pentagon broader authority to
AND
— because of the administration’s concern about civilian casualties, the official said.

2NC

XO

Cards

the exec will change definitions to circumvent

Hafetz, 11/5 —- law professor at Seton Hall
(11/5/2013, Jonathan, "Outrage Fatigue: The Danger of Getting Used to Gitmo," http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/13311/outrage-fatigue-the-danger-of-getting-used-to-gitmo))
The Obama administration has shown no shortage of creative lawyering in justifying U.S
AND
the urgency tends to dissipate once the public pressure and media attention fades.

A network of national security officials actually determines policy —- enacting external checks just legitimates them without providing any constraint

Glennon, 14 —- Professor of International Law at Tufts (Michael, Harvard National Security Journal, "National Security and Double Government," http://harvardnsj.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Glennon-Final.pdf))
VI. Conclusion
U.S. national security policy has scarcely changed from the Bush to the
AND
more in military and intelligence terms rather than in political or diplomatic ones.
Enough examples exist to persuade the public that the network is subject to judicial,
AND
encourages the public to become less, not more, informed and engaged.

The affirmative focuses on the wrong area of government —- U.S. national security decisions are made by executive officials, separate from even the President.

Glennon, 14 —- Professor of International Law at Tufts (Michael, Harvard National Security Journal, "National Security and Double Government," http://harvardnsj.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Glennon-Final.pdf))
As it did in the early days of Britain’s monarchy, power in the United
AND
opposite direction, toward greater centralization, less accountability, and emergent autocracy.

CP

Sig Strikes Key

Byman is about sig strikes

US uses sig strikes in Somalia to counter al-Shabaab’s influence

Currier ’13
(Cora-, "Everything We Know So Far About Drone Strikes", http://www.propublica.org/article/everything-we-know-so-far-about-drone-strikes)
The drone war is carried out remotely, from the U.S. and
AND
. drone and the complex web of allegiances and politics surrounding his death.

Solvency

Obtaining consent solves rule of law and respect for sovereignty – it’s a core principle of international law

Rosa Brooks – 1ac author – 2013, Drones and Cognitive Dissonance, Rosa Brooks is a law professor at Georgetown University and a Schwartz senior fellow at the New America Foundation. She served as a counselor to the U.S. defense undersecretary for policy from 2009 to 2011 and previously served as a senior advisor at the U.S. State Department, http://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=226626context=facpub
Right now, the United States has a decided technological advantage when it comes to
AND
unwilling or unable to suppress the threat posed by the individual being targeted."

NB

====Trade solves all conflict, inequality, and is a decision rule====
Palmer 02 – senior fellow¶ at the Cato and director of Cato¶ University (Tom G., Fall 2002, "Globalization Is Grrrreat21," http://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/catosletterv1n2.pdf)
Globalization Leads to Peace by ¶ Diminishing the Incentives for ¶ Conflict. Protectionism is
AND
war, because it is immoral, and¶ because it is uncivilized.

Africa impact

Glick 7, Middle East fellow at the Center for Security Policy, Condi’s African holiday,http://www.carolineglick.com/e/2007/12/condis-african-holiday.php?pf=yes
The Horn of Africa is a dangerous and strategically vital place. Small wars, which rage continuously, can easily escalate into big wars. Local conflicts have regional and global aspects. All of the conflicts in this tinderbox, which controls shipping lanes from the Indian Ocean into the Red Sea, can potentially give rise to regional, and indeed global conflagrations between competing regional actors and global powers

1NR

T

2NC AT W/M

Targeting and signature strikes are distinct—each has a different process which affects both aff and neg ground

Greenberg and Leiter 13—*Karen J. Greenberg, Director, Center on National Security, Fordham Law School AND Michael E. Leiter, Senior Counsel to the Chief Executive Officer, Palantir Technologies; Former Director, National Counterterrorism Center ~March 1, 2013, "Assessing U.S. Drone Strike Policies," http://www.cfr.org/counterterrorism/assessing-us-drone-strike-policies/p30144~~

GREENBERG: Mike, can you just clarify a question that I think is underlying
AND
collateral damage. And I just — can you clarify that for people?
LEITER: I can clarify some of it. Some of it is appropriately still classified and I don’t talk about that stuff because I don’t want to go to jail. But you really have three things. As you described, you have targeting individuals. This is something that we’ve been quite open about in the Bush administration and the Obama administration. It’s knowing who the person is and going after that individual.
You then have signature strikes, which are not targeting an area, as you
AND
not know the person’s name at all. That is a signature strike.
And then you have collateral damage. And collateral damage can occur in either one
AND
, and are — (custom or ?) international law and treaty obligations.

2NC AT C/I

Their interp turns the targeted killing area into regulating any type of drone use—massively expands both the amount of topical affs and the lit base we have to research

Mellor 13—Ewan E. Mellor – European University Institute ~"Why policy relevance is a moral necessity: Just war theory, impact, and UAVs," Paper Prepared for BISA Conference 2013~

Despite some of the problems with the specific figures, an impressive amount of research
AND
are carried out, as they have different implications and raise different questions.
The first, and perhaps best known, types of strike are the personality strikes
AND
the laws of armed conflict questions arise regarding the proportionality of such strikes.
The second type of attack is the signature strike. These strikes target unknown and
AND
were concerns within the administration that the criteria were not discriminating enough.27
The third type of attack is the double-tap strike. In these attacks
AND
justified or what the decision making procedure is for authorising such a strike.

Generics don’t check—signature strikes and targeted killings are different strategies with different literature bases.  The distinction is important because it allows the aff to regulate a less controversial area—this bypasses core negative ground which means there are no generics to check against new affs

Dunn and Wolff 13—*David Hastings Dunn, Reader in International Politics and Head of Department in the Department of Political Science and International Studies at the University of Birmingham, UK, AND Stefan Wolff, Professor of International Security at the University of Birmingham in the UK ~March 2013, "Drone Use in Counter-Insurgency and Counter-Terrorism: Policy or Policy Component?," in Hitting the Target?: How New Capabilities are Shaping International Intervention, ed. Aaronson 26 Johnson, http://www.rusi.org/downloads/assets/Hitting_the_Target.pdf~~

Yet an important distinction needs to be drawn here between acting on operational intelligence that
AND
remote pilot of a drone – so-called ’signature strikes’.6
Targeted strikes rely on corroborating pre-existing intelligence: they serve the particular purpose
AND
targeted strikes – has been less pronounced than in Pakistan and Afghanistan.7
Signature strikes, in contrast, can still be effective in diminishing operational, tactical
AND
of a car identified as belonging to an Al-Qa’ida member.9
The kind of persistent and intimidating presence of a drone policy geared towards signature strikes
AND
, do anything but help to disentangle the links between insurgents and terrorists.

Framing issue—precision frames the quality of the limit—even if you think their definition is reasonable and provides some valuable education, it’s not predictable because it blurs an important distinction grounded in the lit base—our 1NC Andersen evidence indicates that targeted killings work with a CT doctrine, but signature strikes are counterinsurgency—this means they are under distinct strategies and areas of literature—that causes topic explosion

Sebastian Jose Silva, 2003. University of Montreal Master’s candidate. "Death for life : a study of targeted killing by States in international law," https://papyrus.bib.umontreal.ca/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1866/2372/11474222.PDF;jsessionid=4D1530E8E8F2DEE3B4C68BA4B7997F3B?sequence=1.

As defined by Steven R. David, targeted killing is the "intentional slaying
AND
their very suggestion. David’s definition is essentially correct but over-inclusive.

AT: Zilinskas

====Goes negative====
Zilinskas 8 Justinas Žilinskas is Member at International Humanitarian Fact-Finding Commission Lithuania Education Management, "TARGETED KILLING UNDER INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW," DOA: 9-18-13, y2k

2.3.3. Definition
Literature does not provide a commonly accepted definition. For instance, it has been
AND
/persons) suspected of terrorism, with explicit or implicit governmental approval’.

AT Heller

Pakistan

Brown 2013 (July 25, Hayes, "Report: U.S. Drops Signature Strikes In Pakistan" http://thinkprogress.org/security/2013/07/25/2356391/pakistan-drones-signature-strikes/)

The United States has ended the use of so-called signature drone strikes in
AND
reports surfaced that control of most drones would be transferred to the Pentagon.

AT Sell

Their Sell card concludes negative

Sell 12 Daniel Sell, B.A. in History, Capital University, 2004; M.A. in Slavic and East European Studies, The Ohio State
University, 2008; J.D. Candidate, Capital University Law School, May 2013, "The United States’ Policy of Targeted Killing and the Use of Force: Another Exception to the United Nation’s Use of Force Regime, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2167770, DOA: 9-16-13, y2k

Additionally, another issue to consider in defining targeted killing is that the policy is
AND
gunships, drones, the use of car bombs, and poison."33
——GMU’S CARD ENDS—-
Nonetheless, despite the various methods employed when conducting targeted killings, there is a
AND
lack of physical custody;45 and (5) attributability to a su

Tournament: NDT | Round: 3 | Opponent: Oklahoma CL | Judge: Michael Eisenstadt, Sam Maurer, Ryan Cheek

1NC

1nc k

====the affirmative’s performance turns black suffering into a spectacle, something to be easily packaged up and consumed by judges as part of a libidinal racialized economy of enjoyment from portrayals of suffering. this performing before the master fixes and naturalizes the conditions of pained embodiment. ====
Hartman 97 – ass. prof of english @ UC Berkeley (21)
Saidiya V.- "SCENCES OF SUBJECTION:  Terror, Slavery, and Self-Making in Nineteenth-Century America"; pp. 20-21
 As well, we need ask why the site of suffering so readily lends
AND
the auction block, performing before the master, and other popular amusements.

====this politics of naming pain generates portraits of abuse that lock in an exploitative system where one only earns recognition from judges when the body is portrayed as violated. recognition becomes predicated on the displaying of abjection and pain. in order to gain the ballot, the curious, intrigued judge requests that you show your scars.====
Tuck 26 Yang 14 – prof of nat am studies @ suny 26 prof of ethnic studies @ cal
(E. 26 K., R-words: Refusing research)
The costs of a politics of recognition that is rooted in naming pain have been
AND
merely a reinscription of subjugation and pained existence?" (p. 55).

====far from wanting to silence their performance, the debate community is waiting to watch it with bated breath. white settler colonialism has always thought that scars make your body more interesting, that pain is more compelling than privilege, and that struggling hard in life makes you "real" and "authentic." academics perversely fetishize suffering vicariously. they will never experience it, but love to valorize it. judges happily gobble up this easily-consumable narrative of black suffering and dysfunction. this feeds the colonialism inherent in the academy.====
Tuck 26 Yang 14 – prof of nat am studies @ suny 26 prof of ethnic studies @ cal
(E. 26 K., R-words: Refusing research)
We are struck by the pervasive silence on questions regarding the contemporary rationale(s
AND
doing so, recirculate common tropes of dysfunction, abuse, and neglect.

whether they know it or not, the aff is performing to satisfy white subconscious fantasies of black abjection – this puts white people at a comfortable distance from suffering and satisfies their hidden desire to see blacks in pain

Hook 13 – prof @ birkbeck college, university of london
(Derek, The racist bodily imaginary: The image of the body-in-pieces in (post)apartheid culture, Subjectivity Vol. 6, No. 3, 254–271)
One of the great strengths of Fanon’s (1952/1986) Black Skin White
AND
wish in a dream, albeit in a literal and unusually undisguised manner.

our alternative is a politics of refusal that refuses the affirmative in favor of desire-centered research.

Our alternative has several components

First, the politics of refusal –

Refusal is not just a "no," it is a redirection. Our alternative is perhaps best described by Ken Gonzalez-Day’s Erased Lynchings Series, in which he edits photographs of lynchings and removes the lynch victim from the tree. it is clear to any observer that a murder has taken place, but his work refuses to display the spectacle of suffering to the gaze of the audience. refusal is an active choice to remove the depiction of the body from the site of bodily violence. this redirects our attention and research efforts to the violating instruments, not the violated body. this adequately portrays and represents suffering in a way such that we can study it and work against it, but it refuses to satisfy the fascination with suffering, it refuses to satiate the morbid curiosity of the spectator, it refuses to play by the representational rules of White settler colonialism, and it de-spectaclizes suffering.

Tuck 26 Yang 14 – prof of nat am studies @ suny 26 prof of ethnic studies @ cal
(E. 26 K., R-words: Refusing research)
For the purposes of our discussion, the most important insight to draw from Simpson’s
AND
connects our conversation back to desire as a counterlogic to settler colonial knowledge.

====a politics of refusal restricts what academics are allowed to have access to, marks some things as off limits, as not up for discussion. there are some types of knowledge that the academy does not deserve. the affirmative gives the colonial academy the right to know, and thus the right to conquer====
Tuck 26 Yang 14 – prof of nat am studies @ suny 26 prof of ethnic studies @ cal
(E. 26 K., R-words: Refusing research)
Under coloniality, Descartes’ formulation, cognito ergo sum ("I think, therefore I
AND
of justice and truth. (Simpson, 2007, p. 74)

these two parts of our alternative are connected. desire is a mode for refusal, a counterlogic to the gaze that wants to see damaged, pained bodies. our alternative flips the script on the academy by forcing it to study itself, by making the spectator into a spectacle to be considered critically. it provides a method that can solve the case, but avoid our disadvantages.

Tuck 26 Yang 14 – prof of nat am studies @ suny 26 prof of ethnic studies @ cal
(E. 26 K., R-words: Refusing research)
One way to think about refusal is how desire can be a framework, mode
AND
the draw to traffic theories that cast communities as in need of salvation.

2NC

2nc uq

====there is no uniqueness to the affirmative – the onus is on them to prove why this representation of suffering will do something that the flood of other representations haven’t done====
Tuck 9 – prof @ SUNY
(Eve, Suspending Damage)
I want to recognize that, particularly in Native communities, there was a need
AND
of these elders, they agree that a time for a shift has come

, that damage-centered narratives are no longer sufficient. We are in a new historical moment—so much so that even Margaret Mead probably would not do research like Margaret Mead these days.1

2nc link threshold

====any risk of a link demands a neg ballot – if you think that you can "reasonably" parse out the valuable parts of the aff to sever our links and still vote for them, you’re wrong. cognitive neuroscience proves that depictions of suffering trigger affective gut responses of disgust and fear that influence our thoughts and actions. all of our thoughts and opinions stem from this affective register, and depictions of suffering lodge themselves squarely into the subconscious of the judges.====
Livingston 12 – Assistant prof of Government @ Cornell, post-doctoral fellow in the department of Political Science @ Johns Hopkins University, doctoral fellow at the Centre for Ethics at the University of Toronto (Alexander, Avoiding Deliberative Democracy? Micropolitics, Manipulation, and the Public Sphere, Philosophy 26 Rhetoric, Vol. 45, No. 3 (2012), pp. 269-294, Project MUSE)
Intellectualism and the Visceral Register The first step in exploring the potential of William Connolly’s
AND
potentially dangerous or hateful "culturally preorganized charges" points to its undoing. 

====our author explicitly says we need a full moratorium on damage narratives – a politics of refusal does not include compromise====
Tuck 9 – prof @ SUNY
(Eve, Suspending Damage)
To forward our survivance, to deepen our sovereignty, I believe it is time
AND
ways we can carve out the future legacy of our relationships to research.

1NR

Phelan

increasing visibility of marginalized groups only creates a screen for hegemonic bodies to project their desires upon – representation is on the side of the one who looks, not the one who is looked at – our arguments about the gaze should come first and only the alt challenges the substitutional economy of visual representations of suffering

Peggy Phelan 96, chair of New York University’s Department of Performance Studies, Unmarked: the politics of performance, 26-7
Representation is almost always on the side of the one who looks and almost never
AND
will do nothing to improve the quality of our political or psychic imaginations.

Tournament: NDT | Round: 5 | Opponent: UGA CS | Judge: Eric Forslund, Scott Phillips, John Warden

1nc

1NC T

Interpretation – affs must restrict an entire topic list area

"In the area" means all of the activities

United Nations 13
(United Nations Law of the Sea Treaty, http://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/part1.htm)
PART I¶ INTRODUCTION¶ Article 1
Use of terms and scope¶ 1. For the purposes of this Convention:¶ (1) "Area" means the seabed and ocean floor and subsoil thereof, beyond the limits of national jurisdiction;¶ (2) "Authority" means the International Seabed Authority;¶ (3) "activities in the Area" means all activities of exploration for, and exploitation of, the resources of the Area;

Violation –

Vote neg –

Limits – any other interp allows every single type of restriction to be applied to every single country or geographic area in the world – creates hundreds of small tiny affs

Predictable Neg Ground – core topic literature about restrictions are in the context of restrictions that apply to entire areas – disads flexibility, war fighting, terrorism only link if it constrains overall force area – also guts neg counterplan ground because all of the net benefits besides politics require disad links

new 1nc shell

====aff’s use of the law is a militaristic tactic that creates legal legitimacy to propel more frequent, more deadly violent interventions that ensure infrastructural violence that maims civilians – they actively displace moral questions in favor of a pathologically detached question of legality====
Emphasizing the distinction between legal/legitimate and illegitimate violence causes legal violence to seem more appealing
Smith 2 – prof of phil @ U of South Florida
(Thomas, International Studies Quarterly 46, The New Law of War: Legitimizing Hi-Tech and Infrastructural Violence)

The role of military lawyers in all this has, according to one study,
AND
and construed, hopes of rescuing law from politics will be dim indeed.

====militarism is a fundamentally unsustainable system that is the root cause of all extinction threats and ensures mass structural violence – non-violence is the only possible response====
Kovel 2
(Joel, "The United States Military Machine", http://www.joelkovel.org/americanmilitary.htm; Jacob)

I want to talk to you this evening about war - not the immediate threat
AND
military machine is about to plunge, dragging us all down with it.

====the aff’s certain calculations about war are an impossibly arrogant form of mechanical, sterile analysis that eases the path towards war. their language is coopted to provide rhetorical ammunition for militarists. our alternative is not pure pacifism, but rather a pacifist analysis that injects moral and epistemic doubt into our decisionmaking about war – this is the only way to formulate better policies that address structural causes of war and avoids inevitable cycles of violence====
Neu 13 – prof @ U of Brighton
(Michael, International Relations 27(4), December, The Tragedy of Justified War)

Just war theory is not concerned with millions of starving people who could be saved
AND
otherwise deprive themselves, today, of the possibility of not wronging tomorrow. 

1NC Politics

Obama’s continued use of political capital is critical to prevent a renewed push for sanctions that will destroy fragile negotiations —- impact is a nuclear Iran and conflict involving Israel and Saudi Arabia

Glass, 3/25 —- completed a Truman-Albright Fellowship at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars’ Environmental Change and Security Program (3/25/2014, Jacob, "As Iran Nuclear Negotiations Begin, Threat of Increased Sanctions Looms Large," http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jacob-glass/as-iran-nuclear-negotiati_b_5024604.html))
Last week Iran and the so-called P5+1 countries — Russia,
AND
threaten to scuttle progress, and underscore the fragility of the negotiating process.
Over the past three decades, Iran has faced crippling sanctions imposed by America and the international community. Trade restrictions have steadily increased to block Iran’s lucrative petroleum export market as well as the country’s participation in the global banking system. All told, international sanctions have cost Iran over 24100 billion in lost oil profits alone.
So called "carrot and stick" policies have long been fundamental to international diplomacy. The "stick" has been a sharp one, and has finally brought the Iranians to the negotiating table.
During his September visit to the UN General Assembly in New York, Iranian President
AND
, all but ensuring that negotiations cannot be used as a delay tactic.
Yet amid these positive signs that diplomacy is working, members of Congress have advocated for even more sanctions to be levied against Iran, specifically in the form of Senate Bill 1881, sponsored by Illinois Republican Mark Kirk and New Jersey Democrat Robert Menendez.
New sanctions would torpedo the Vienna talks and reverse the diplomatic progress that has been made.
Iranian officials have already promised to abandon negotiations if new sanctions are passed. Even our own allies, along with Russia and China, have opposed the move. Passing unilateral sanctions will splinter the fragile international coalition, needlessly antagonize Iranian negotiators, and make a violent conflict with Iran more likely. Diplomatic victory will only be achieved if the international community stands united before Iran.
To this point, the Obama administration has avoided a vote on SB 1881 by threatening a veto of the bill, and the administration’s full court press to prevent Senate Democrats from supporting new sanctions has bought international negotiators time. Several influential Democrats, including Senator Richard Blumenthal from Connecticut, have agreed to postpone a vote on the bill, contingent on productive negotiations.
Although legislation imposing new sanctions has been avoided thus far, the pressure on Congressional Democrats to act will intensify as talks in Vienna move forward. This round of negotiations is widely projected to be more difficult than the November deal, and inflammatory rhetoric from Tehran is likely. Nevertheless, sanctions are not the answer. Instead, we must continue to let diplomacy run its course.
Sanctions have done their job by bringing Iran to the table. In return, Iran expects to be rewarded with sanctions relief. The passage of new trade restrictions would effectively withdraw the carrot, and hit Iran with another stick. Consider the negotiations over.
The risks of delaying new sanctions is slight. The sanctions relief Iran is receiving
AND
to prevent Tehran from racing towards a nuclear weapon while negotiations are ongoing.
At the same time, the benefits of successful diplomacy are immense, as a comprehensive deal would be a dramatic victory for U.S. non-proliferation efforts. Further, the dismantling of Iran’s nuclear program would significantly ease tensions between its two biggest rivals in the region, Israel and Saudi Arabia.
Our congressional leaders must not be so confident as to think Iran is desperate for
AND
policy dominated by isolation from the West and an aggressive nuclear development program.
Our senators are facing significant political pressure to resist multilateralism and pursue increased sanctions based on an uncompromising mistrust of Iran. But history judges leaders not upon their conformity with party politics, but upon the ultimate results they achieve. It’s time to negotiate with the Iranians on good faith, and begin the serious work of establishing a meaningful nuclear agreement that could signal the beginning of a new era in Iranian-Western relations.

====Plan triggers defection of democratic allies====
Loomis, 7 —- Department of Government at Georgetown
(3/2/2007, Dr. Andrew J. Loomis is a Visiting Fellow at the Center for a New American Security, "Leveraging legitimacy in the crafting of U.S. foreign policy," pg 35-36, http://citation.allacademic.com//meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/7/9/4/8/pages179487/p179487-36.php)
Declining political authority encourages defection. American political analyst Norman Ornstein writes of the domestic context,
In a system where a President has limited formal power, perception matters. The
AND
In simple terms, winners win and losers lose more often than not.
Failure begets failure. In short, a president experiencing declining amounts of political capital
AND
feedback loop accelerates decay both in leadership capacity and defection by key allies.
The central point of this review of the presidential literature is that the sources of
AND
affects the character of U.S. policy, foreign and domestic.
This brief review of the literature suggests how legitimacy norms enhance presidential influence in ways
AND
influences infiltrate policy-making processes and affect the character of policy decisions.

Causes Israel strikes

Perr, 12/24/13 – B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University; technology marketing consultant based in Portland, Oregon. Jon has long been active in Democratic politics and public policy as an organizer and advisor in California and Massachusetts. His past roles include field staffer for Gary Hart for President (1984), organizer of Silicon Valley tech executives backing President Clinton’s call for national education standards (1997), recruiter of tech executives for Al Gore’s and John Kerry’s presidential campaigns, and co-coordinator of MassTech for Robert Reich (2002). (Jon, "Senate sanctions bill could let Israel take U.S. to war against Iran" Daily Kos, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/12/24/1265184/-Senate-sanctions-bill-could-let-Israel-take-U-S-to-war-against-Iran~~23
As 2013 draws to close, the negotiations over the Iranian nuclear program have entered
AND
Israel to decide whether the United States will go to war against Tehran.
On their own, the tough new sanctions imposed automatically if a final deal isn’t completed in six months pose a daunting enough challenge for President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry. But it is the legislation’s commitment to support an Israeli preventive strike against Iranian nuclear facilities that almost ensures the U.S. and Iran will come to blows. As Section 2b, part 5 of the draft mandates:
If the Government of Israel is compelled to take military action in legitimate self-defense against Iran’s nuclear weapon program, the United States Government should stand with Israel and provide, in accordance with the law of the United States and the constitutional responsibility of Congress to authorize the use of military force, diplomatic, military, and economic support to the Government of Israel in its defense of its territory, people, and existence.
Now, the legislation being pushed by Senators Mark Kirk (R-IL),
AND
March told a Christians United for Israel (CUFI) conference in July:
"If nothing changes in Iran, come September, October, I will present a resolution that will authorize the use of military force to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear bomb."
Graham would have plenty of company from the hardest of hard liners in his party. In August 2012, Romney national security adviser and pardoned Iran-Contra architect Elliott Abrams called for a war authorization in the pages of the Weekly Standard. And just two weeks ago, Norman Podhoretz used his Wall Street Journal op-ed to urge the Obama administration to "strike Iran now" to avoid "the nuclear war sure to come."
But at the end of the day, the lack of an explicit AUMF in the Nuclear Weapon Free Iran Act doesn’t mean its supporters aren’t giving Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu de facto carte blanche to hit Iranian nuclear facilities. The ensuing Iranian retaliation against to Israeli and American interests would almost certainly trigger the commitment of U.S. forces anyway.
Even if the Israelis alone launched a strike against Iran’s atomic sites, Tehran will almost certainly hit back against U.S. targets in the Straits of Hormuz, in the region, possibly in Europe and even potentially in the American homeland. Israel would face certain retaliation from Hezbollah rockets launched from Lebanon and Hamas missiles raining down from Gaza.
That’s why former Bush Defense Secretary Bob Gates and CIA head Michael Hayden raising the
AND
10 years in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined.") The anticipated blowback?
Serious costs to U.S. interests would also be felt over the longer term, we believe, with problematic consequences for global and regional stability, including economic stability. A dynamic of escalation, action, and counteraction could produce serious unintended consequences that would significantly increase all of these costs and lead, potentially, to all-out regional war.

Israeli strikes cause great power war and collapse global economy

Rafael Reuveny 10, PhD, Professor in the School of Public and Environmental Affairs at Indiana University, "Unilateral Strike on Iran could trigger world Depression", Op-ed distributed through McClatchy Newspaper Co, http://www.indiana.edu/~~spea/news/speaking_out/reuveny_on_unilateral_strike_Iran.shtml
A unilateral Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities would likely have dire consequences, including
AND
likely protest and send weapons, but would probably not risk using force.
¶ While no one has a crystal ball, leaders should be risk-averse when choosing war as a foreign policy tool. If attacking Iran is deemed necessary, Israel must wait for an American green light. A unilateral Israeli strike could ultimately spark World War III.

1NC PIC

The United States federal government should substantially increase restrictions on the President’s authority to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities between the Republic of China and the People’s Republic of China unless to prevent imminent attacks on the United States that may arise from said hostilities. 

The plan would allow the US to absorb a first strike in the event that Chinese-Taiwan hostilities involve the US

Natalia Ochoa-Ruiz and Esther Salamanca-Aguado (Doctors of Law, Complutense of Madrid) – 2005, Exploring the Limits of International Law Relating to the Use of Force  in Self-Defence, The European Journal of International Law Vol. 16 no.3 , http://www.ejil.org/pdfs/16/3/306.pdf
Ultimately, these questions point to the issue of what is the aim and purpose
AND
armed attacks by Iranian forces on United States naval and commercial vessels.104

That destroys deterrence – "repel only" encourages quick "blitz" attacks that conclude before the President can order an execute a "repelling" attack

Yoram Dinstein – Professor Emeritus and former President, Tel Aviv University – 2011, War, Aggression and Self-Defence, kindlebook
667. At bottom, the issue is whether the unlawful use of force by
AND
Blitz attacks, each ending before effective counter-force can be deployed.

Quick and credible conventional responses are key to deterrence – that prevents nuclear escalation and supports power projection

Michael S. Gerson – Research analyst, Center for Naval Analysis – Fall 2009, Conventional Deterrence in the Second Nuclear Age, Parameters, http://strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/parameters/articles/09autumn/gerson.pdf
In the current international security environment, conventional de terrence can be useful against nonnuclear
AND
regimes from believing that nuclear possession provides opportunities for conventional aggression and coercion.

1NC XO CP

The Executive branch of the United States federal government should ban the and implement this through self-binding mechanisms including, but not limited to independent commissions to review and ensure compliance with the order and transparency measures that gives journalists access to White House decisionmaking.

1NC Solvency

Even if there’s no statutory wiggle room, Obama will change definitions to create it

Hafetz, 11/5 —- law professor at Seton Hall
(11/5/2013, Jonathan, "Outrage Fatigue: The Danger of Getting Used to Gitmo," http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/13311/outrage-fatigue-the-danger-of-getting-used-to-gitmo))
The Obama administration has shown no shortage of creative lawyering in justifying U.S
AND
the urgency tends to dissipate once the public pressure and media attention fades.

A network of national security officials actually determines policy —- enacting external checks just legitimates them without providing any constraint

Glennon, 14 —- Professor of International Law at Tufts (Michael, Harvard National Security Journal, "National Security and Double Government," http://harvardnsj.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Glennon-Final.pdf))
VI. Conclusion
U.S. national security policy has scarcely changed from the Bush to the
AND
more in military and intelligence terms rather than in political or diplomatic ones.
Enough examples exist to persuade the public that the network is subject to judicial,
AND
encourages the public to become less, not more, informed and engaged.

1NC Relations

NO IMPACT – INEVITABLE RELATIONS CONFLICTS DON’T ESCALATE

MEDEIROS 2006 – RAND RESEARCHER, STRATEGIC HEDGING, WASHINGTON QUARTERLY, VOL 29 NO 1, WINTER
The United States and China are shadowboxing each other for influence and status in the
AND
country. The prospect of armed conflict over Taiwan’s status exacerbates these challenges.

1NC China War

====Their authors presume and utilize western identities to describe China—that makes conflict inevitable====
Pan, ’04 ~Chengxin, PhD Poli. Sci. and Int’l Relations @ Australian Nat’l U, "The "China Threat" in American Self-Imagination: The Discursive Construction of Other as Power Politics," in Alternatives: Global, Local, Political, Vol. 29~
Having examined how the "China threat" literature is enabled by and serves the
AND
character, China would now automatically constitute a threat to the United States.

China does not want a war over Taiwan- unification is only a long-term goal

John F. COPPER- Prof International Studies @ Rhodes College, 6 August 2010, THE CHINA-TAIWAN ECONOMIC COOPERATION FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT: POLITICS, NOT JUST ECONOMICS, EAI Background Brief No. 548 , http://www.eai.nus.edu.sg/BB548.pdf**
Along with relations with the United States, China’s foreign policy makers have long given
AND
ECFA would be "strictly an economic agreement, not a political one."

Chinese modernization is measured and limited- at worst the U.S. just won’t be able to threaten it with war

Bandow Sr. Fellow Cato ’10
(Doug-, former Special Assistant to Reagan, Feb. 2, Huffington Post, "China: The Next ’Necessary’ Enemy?", Lexis)
Which leaves China. For some, the Yellow Peril is the latest excuse for
AND
assume America must defend every state against every possible adversary under every circumstance.

2nc

cp solvency

Obama can renounce unilateral military action

Lobel, 9 —- Professor of Law at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law (Jules, Journal of National Security Law 26 Policy, "Preventive Detention and Preventive Warfare: U.S. National Security Policies Obama Should Abandon," 3 J. Nat’l Security L. 26 Pol’y 341))

Obama’s position on the use of preventive military force is unclear. He clearly opposed
AND
Obama administration foreign policy advisor and Middle East diplomat under Bill Clinton. n30
~*346~  At the risk of being labeled naive, I would advise Obama
AND
Charter and customary international law and not in response to potential gathering threats.
There are two basic reasons that the new Administration should forswear a unilateral preemptive military strike against Iran or North Korea. First, virtually all experts agree that such a military strike would accomplish little and undoubtedly prove to be counterproductive. Second, it would also violate international law and undermine Obama’s determination to restore American credibility, legitimacy, and leadership in the world community.

President more perceived than Congress or Courts

Marshall, 8 —- Professor of Law at the University of North Carolina
(April 2008, William P., Boston University Law Review, "THE ROLE OF THE PRESIDENT IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY: ARTICLE: ELEVEN REASONS WHY PRESIDENTIAL POWER INEVITABLY EXPANDS AND WHY IT MATTERS," 88 B.U.L. Rev. 505))

7. The Media and the Presidency
As Justice Jackson recognized in Youngstown, the power of the Presidency has also been
AND
an extent that no other individual, or institution, can even approximate.

That plank solves

Ackerman, 9 —- professor of law at Yale 
(3/25/2009, Bruce, "Why We Need a Commission on Presidential Power," http://prospect.org/article/why-we-need-commission-presidential-power))

We should not look upon presidential lawlessness as if it were an odd aberration of the Bush years.
President Barack Obama started strong by announcing the end of torture and the closing of
AND
a few provisions of the stimulus package as unconstitutionally limiting his executive prerogatives.
These decisions have unleashed a flood of anxious commentary about Obama’s ultimate intentions. But
AND
Bush years as a springboard for even more extreme assertions of executive authority.
Anything Obama does through executive order can be reversed by the next president through a countervailing executive order. The president’s real challenge is to design a thoughtful process through which he could lead Congress to pass landmark legislation that would decisively repudiate the unilateralism of the Bush years.
The first step is to create a presidential commission on presidential power. Like great
AND
and Congress to enact realistic limitations into law before the next presidential election.
We have been here before. During the 1970s, Congress responded to the abuses
AND
move beyond partisanship and confront the serious problem left to us by history.
We should not look upon presidential lawlessness as if it were an odd aberration of
AND
cures for the systematic tendency of the modern presidency to abuse its powers.
I am not calling for a truth commission that is primarily concerned with establishing the sordid facts about past abuses of power. The commission should be resolutely forward-looking, mining the past only to understand why existing statutes failed to effectively restrain presidential power. The challenge is to learn from experience and design better systems of checks and balances for the future.
This can only be accomplished by creating a special commission in which members of Congress
AND
landmark legislation would serve as one of Obama’s great legacies to future generations.

Executive orders facilitate the legislative process

Mayer and Price, 02 (Kenneth, Kevin, Professor @ U of Wisconsin-Madison, Graduate Student @ U of Wisconsin-Madison, Presidential Studies Quarterly, "Unilateral presidential powers: significant executive orders", 6/1/2002, lexis)

If presidents may use the rhetorical, personal, and persuasive resources of the office
AND
the legislative process, codify ideological, commitments, and drive social change.

At: links

CP is not a loss for Obama

Balkin, 9/3 —- Professor of Constitutional Law and the First Amendment at Yale (9/3/2013, Jack M., "What Congressional Approval Won’t Do: Trim Obama’s Power or Make War Legal; Critics think Obama has boxed himself in and surrendered executive-branch power to Congress. They’re in for a big surprise," http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/09/what-congressional-approval-wont-do-trim-obamas-power-or-make-war-legal/279298/))
If Congress turns him down, won’t Obama be undermined at home, as other critics claim? In what sense? It is hard to see how the Republicans could be less cooperative than they already are. And it’s not in the interest of Democrats to fault a president of their own party for acceding to what Congress wants instead of acting unilaterally.
 

AT: XOs Overturned (Future Presidents)

Won’t be overturned by future presidents

Branum, 02 —- Associate, Fulbright 26 Jaworski L.L.P., Houston, Texas. J.D. University of Texas; Austin (Tara L., Journal of Legislation, "PRESIDENT OR KING? THE USE AND ABUSE OF EXECUTIVE ORDERS IN MODERN-DAY AMERICA," 28 J. Legis. 1)

Congressmen and private citizens besiege the President with demands  ~*58~  that action be
AND
own peril. This is not the way it is supposed to be.

circumvention

The affirmative focuses on the wrong area of government —- U.S. national security decisions are made by executive officials, separate from even the President.

Glennon, 14 —- Professor of International Law at Tufts (Michael, Harvard National Security Journal, "National Security and Double Government," http://harvardnsj.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Glennon-Final.pdf))
As it did in the early days of Britain’s monarchy, power in the United
AND
opposite direction, toward greater centralization, less accountability, and emergent autocracy.

Even if there’s no statutory wiggle room, Obama will change definitions to create it

Hafetz, 11/5 —- law professor at Seton Hall
(11/5/2013, Jonathan, "Outrage Fatigue: The Danger of Getting Used to Gitmo," http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/13311/outrage-fatigue-the-danger-of-getting-used-to-gitmo))
The Obama administration has shown no shortage of creative lawyering in justifying U.S
AND
the urgency tends to dissipate once the public pressure and media attention fades.

1nr

1NR Politics Ev

New sanctions will cause war – prefer newest comprehensive study

ARMBRUSTER 2/18/14—National Security Editor for ThinkProgress.org at the Center for American Progress Action Fund ~Ben Armbruster, Bipartisan Expert Group Says New Iran Sanctions Will Undermine Diplomacy, http://thinkprogress.org/world/2014/02/18/3300741/iran-project-sanctions-diplomacy/~~
A new report from a bipartisan group of experts at the Iran Project released on Tuesday finds that opponents of new sanctions on Iran at this time are largely correct in that they would lead to a break-down of diplomacy, isolate the U.S. from its negotiating partners and embolden hard-liners in Tehran.
The Iran sanctions battle in the Senate has stalled for now, but it’s unclear if the House will take up the matter again, as Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) is reportedly working on language with other House leaders.
The Iran Project’s report analyzes arguments for and against the Senate Iran sanctions bill that was introduced last December by Sens. Mark Kirk (R-IL) and Robert Menendez (D-NJ), who have argued that new sanctions will give the U.S. more leverage in nuclear talks with Iran.
But, the report says, "It is di?cult to argue that a new sanctions bill is intended to support the negotiations when all the countries doing the negotiating oppose it."
Kirk, Menendez and other supporters of the bill say the sanctions have a delayed
AND
United States in violation of the interim nuclear agreement reached in Geneva in November
On whether new sanctions will weaken the international coalition on imposing existing sanctions, "
AND
S. can’t live up to its promises and is an unreliable partner.
Many, like Sen. Patrick Murphy (D-CT), have argued that
AND
which has concluded that Rouhani may represent a fundamental shift in Iranian politics."
"~I~t is difficult to escape the conclusion that a new sanctions bill would increase the probability of war, even if it does not guarantee such an outcome," the report says.
The bipartisan Iran Project has issued several reports on the Iran nuclear issue. In 2012, the group concluded that attacking Iran would risk an "all out regional war" lasting "several years" and that In order to achieve regime change, the report says, "the occupation of Iran would require a commitment of resources and personnel greater than what the U.S. has expended over the past 10 years in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined."

Even if the deal is likely to fail it is still a good idea to test Iranian intentions —- it will make hardline options more credible

Ereli, 2/17 —- former deputy spokesman of the State Department (2/17/2014, "The Iranian Nuclear Deal: A Foreign Policy ’Hail Mary’" http://www.ibtimes.com/iranian-nuclear-deal-foreign-policy-hail-mary-1556004))
So where does that leave us? America is right to put Iran’s stated intention
AND
table that the rest of the international community will find serious and plausible."

Obama’s PC is key to prevent renewed sanctions push —- the issue is not settled

Leverett 26 Leverett, 1/20 —- *professor at Pennsylvania State University’s School of International Affairs, AND Senior Professorial Lecturer at the American University in Washington (1/20/2014, Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett, "Iran, Syria and the Tragicomedy of U.S. Foreign Policy," http://goingtotehran.com/iran-syria-and-the-tragicomedy-of-u-s-foreign-policy)
Regarding President Obama’s ongoing struggle with the Senate over Iran policy, Hillary cautions against
AND
March.  There’s still a lot that can be pushed and played here."
To be sure, President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry "have put
AND
to lose, and by no means is the fight anywhere near over."

Disagreements over authority trigger constitutional showdowns – even if the executive wants the plan – it’s about who decides, not the decision itself

Posner and Vermeule, 10 - *professor of law at the University of Chicago AND professor of law at Harvard (Eric and Adrian,The Executive Unbound, p. 75-77)

Showdowns occur when the location of constitutional authority for making an important policy decision is
AND
important policy decisions, at least with respect to the issue under dispute.
We begin by examining a simplified version of our problem, one involving just two
AND
problem and for Congress to make decisions about the second type ofproblem.40
Suppose, for example, that the nation is at war and the government must
AND
the president prefers an indefinite extension, while Congress prefers an immediate termination.
So far, we have explained why the president and Congress might disagree about when
AND
when the two branches agree both about authority and policy—for example,
that the president decides, and Congress agrees with his decision (cell 1). The first column represents the domain of normal politics.
Showdowns can arise only when Congress and the president disagree about who decides. Here
AND
resolving the question of authority. We focus on this case for now.

Tournament: NA | Round: 1 | Opponent: NA | Judge: NA
For convenience, I will put all cites from NDT neg rounds under separately labelled cite headers. I will also put the individual arguments under their own cite headers using the old navigation system, but only if the argument is new.

1 - Topicality / Procedurals
2 - Disadvantages
3 - Counterplans
4 - Case Arguments
5 - Kritiks

Tournament: UMKC | Round: 2 | Opponent: KCKCC CG | Judge: Donny Peters

1NC F/W

A – Interpretation:

Topical affirmatives must affirm the resolution through instrumental defense of action by the United States Federal Government.

B – Definitions

Should denotes an expectation of enacting a plan

American Heritage Dictionary 2000 (Dictionary.com)

should. The will to do something or have something take place: I shall go out if I feel like it.  

Federal government is the central government in Washington DC

Encarta Online 2005, 
http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_1741500781_6/United_States_(Government).html~~23howtocite**
United States (Government), the combination of federal, state, and local laws, bodies, and agencies that is responsible for carrying out the operations of the United States. The federal government of the United States is centered in Washington, D.C.-http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761576320/Washington_D_C.html

Resolved implies a policy

Louisiana House 3-8-2005, http://house.louisiana.gov/house-glossary.htm-http://house.louisiana.gov/house-glossary.htm**
Resolution  A legislative instrument that generally is used for making declarations,  stating policies, and making decisions where some other form is not  required. A bill includes the constitutionally required enacting clause; a  resolution uses the term and#34;resolvedand#34;. Not subject to a time limit for  introduction nor to governor’s veto. ( Const. Art. III, §17(B) and House  Rules 8.11 , 13.1 , 6.8 , and 7.4) 

C – Vote neg –

First is Decisionmaking

The primary purpose of debate should be to improve our skills as decision-makers.   We are all individual policy-makers who make choices every day that affect us and those around us.  We have an obligation to the people affected by our decisions to use debate as a method for honing these critical thinking and information processing abilities.

Austin J. Freeley and David L. Steinberg – John Carroll University / U Miami – 2009, Argumentation and Debate: Critical Thinking for Reasoned Decision Making, p. 1-4, googlebooks
After several days of intense debate, first the United States House of Representatives and
AND
customer for out product, or a vote for our favored political candidate.

Specifically, through discussing paths of government action, debate teaches us to be better organizational decision makers. Learning about the uniquely different considerations of organizations is necessary to affecting change in a world overwhelmingly dominated by institutions.

Algoso 2011 – Masters in Public Administration (May 31, Dave, and#34;Why I got an MPA: Because organizations matterand#34; http://findwhatworks.wordpress.com/2011/05/31/why-i-got-an-mpa-because-organizations-matter/-http://findwhatworks.wordpress.com/2011/05/31/why-i-got-an-mpa-because-organizations-matter/)

Because organizations matter. Forget the stories of heroic individuals written in your middle school
AND
right program for you and use your time well, can do both.

Participating in organizations checks impulses to care about short-term personal issues

Cole 2011 - Professor, Georgetown University Law Center (Winter, David, and#34;WHERE LIBERTY LIES: CIVIL SOCIETY AND INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AFTER 9/11,and#34; 57 Wayne L. Rev. 1203, Lexis)

But the engagement that and#34;civil society constitutionalismand#34; identifies as essential has a more
AND
Constitution, or you may find it wanting when it is needed most.

Organizations like friendships, families, and neighborhoods are the foundation of larger organizations – they are foundational and inescapable

The Barefoot Collective 2012 (November 13, and#34;The Barefoot Guide to Working with Organisations and Social Changeand#34; http://www.barefootguide.org/index.php/download/the-barefoot-guide-1-http://www.barefootguide.org/index.php/download/the-barefoot-guide-1)

Community is an organisation made up of many other organisations, formal and informal,
AND
nature and quality of human society. and#34;Weand#34; are and#34;organisationsand#34;.

Organizations direct grassroots campaigns – technical knowledge of how the government operates is key

Cole 2011 - Professor, Georgetown University Law Center (Winter, David, and#34;WHERE LIBERTY LIES: CIVIL SOCIETY AND INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AFTER 9/11,and#34; 57 Wayne L. Rev. 1203, Lexis)

The Center for Constitutional Rights brought the first lawsuit seeking habeas review at Guantanamo,
AND
, and to portray the initiatives as contrary to constitutional and human rights.

Understanding the law is key to effective organizational constraints on the executive

Cole 2011 - Professor, Georgetown University Law Center (Winter, David, and#34;WHERE LIBERTY LIES: CIVIL SOCIETY AND INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AFTER 9/11,and#34; 57 Wayne L. Rev. 1203, Lexis)

Unlike the majoritarian electoral politics Posner and Vermeule imagine, the work of civil society
AND
litigation’s outcome, which in turn contributed to a broader impetus for reform.

====It’s not just war powers – organizations have protected rights for many different groups for decades ====
Cole 2011 - Professor, Georgetown University Law Center (Winter, David, and#34;WHERE LIBERTY LIES: CIVIL SOCIETY AND INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AFTER 9/11,and#34; 57 Wayne L. Rev. 1203, Lexis)

Nor is the role of civil society organizations in formulating, shaping, and helping
AND
organizations have played in formulating, developing, and enforcing constitutional rights claims.

Additionally, The best route to improving decision-making is through discussion about public policy

Mutually accessible information – There is a wide swath of literature on governmental policy topics – that ensures there will be informed, predictable, and in-depth debate over the aff’s decision.  Individual policymaking is highly variable depending on the person and inaccessible to outsiders.

Harder decisions make better decisionmakers – The problems facing public policymakers are a magnitude greater than private decisions.  We all know plans don’t actually happen, but practicing imagining the consequences of our decisions in the high-stakes games of public policymaking makes other decisionmaking easier.

External actors – the decisions we make should be analyzed not in a vacuum but in the complex social field that surrounds us

Second is Predictable Limits - The resolution proposes the question the negative is prepared to answer and creates a bounded list of potential affs for us to think about.  Debate has unique potential to change attitudes and grow critical thinking skills because it forces pre-round internal deliberation on a of a focused, common ground of debate

Robert E. Goodin and Simon J. Niemeyer- Australian National University- 2003,
When Does Deliberation Begin? Internal Reflection versus Public Discussion in Deliberative Democracy, POLITICAL STUDIES: 2003 VOL 51, 627–649, http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.0032-3217.2003.00450.x/pdf
What happened in this particular case, as in any particular case, was in
AND
least one possible way of doing that for each of those key features.

Third is Dogmatism – Most problems are not black and white but have complex, uncertain interactions.  By declaring that _ is always bad, they prevent us from understanding the nuances of an incredibly important and complex issue.  This is the epitome of dogmatism

Keller, et. al,– Asst. professor School of Social Service Administration U. of Chicago - 2001
(Thomas E., James K., and Tracly K., Asst. professor School of Social Service Administration U. of Chicago, professor of Social Work, and doctoral student School of Social Work, and#34;Student debates in policy courses: promoting policy practice skills and knowledge through active learning,and#34; Journal of Social Work Education, Spr/Summer 2001, EBSCOhost)
John Dewey, the philosopher and educational reformer, suggested that the initial advance in
AND
systems, the learning process will be facilitatedand#34; (p. 28).
The authors believe that involving students in substantive debates challenges them to learn and grow
AND
yield a reevaluation and reconstruction of knowledge and beliefs pertaining to the issue.

Our method solves – Even if the resolution is wrong, having a devil’s advocate in deliberation is vitally important to critical thinking skills and avoiding groupthink

Hugo Mercier and Hélène Landemore- 2011 
(Philosophy, Politics and Economics prof @ U of Penn, Poli Sci prof @  Yale), Reasoning is for arguing: Understanding the successes and failures of deliberation, Political Psychology, http://sites.google.com/site/hugomercier/publications**
Reasoning can function outside of its normal conditions when it is used purely internally.
AND
suggestions have been made in the past (e.g., Bohman,
 2007; Sunstein, 2003, 2006), the present theory provides additional arguments
AND
(e.g. Schweiger, Sandberg, 26 Ragan, 1986).

Objectivity is essential to avoiding propaganda and dogmatism – switch side debate allows us to de-center ourselves and produce better, more inclusive debate

Haskell, Professor History Rice, 90
(Professor of History at Rice, and#34;Objectivity is not neutrality: Rhetoric vs. practice in Peter Novick’s That noble dream,and#34; History and Theory 29, no. 2: 129–157)
I regard Nietzsche’s attack on asceticism as a cultural calamity, all the more regrettable
AND
but the product of extending and elaborating these priceless and fundamentally ascetic virtues.

Tournament: NDT | Round: 7 | Opponent: UMKC AF | Judge: Ryan Wash, Scott Harris, Calum Matheson

Only our type of debate leads to consideration of unintended consequences

Consideration of external actors only happens when there’s a connection to action – this is key to applying decision making skills to our own lives because we exist in a complex social field, not a vacuum. Their argument remains self-contained because only analyzing concrete effects allows us to imagine what a policy does to the larger world

This matters—institutional practices exist independent of individual consciousness and decisionmaking—altering those institutions matters

Wight – Professor of IR @ University of Sydney – 6
(Colin, Agents, Structures and International Relations: Politics as Ontology, pgs. 48-50 

One important aspect of this relational ontology is that these relations constitute our identity as
AND
upon it, upon its specific characteristics, its constants and its variables’.

Second, Formally organized structures are a better training ground for understanding unintended consequences

Merton 1936 (December, Robert K., "The Unanticipated Consequences of Purposive Social Action" American Sociological Review, Volume One, Issue Six, 894-904)

Turning now to action, we may differentiate this into two types: (a
AND
process of formal organization ordinarly involves an explicit statement of purpose and procedure.

Tournament: Texas | Round: Doubles | Opponent: Houston LR | Judge: Andrea Reed, Geoff Lundeen, David Cram Helwich

1NC T

A – Interpretation:

The only topical justification for an affirmative ballot can be the advantages of the hypothetical enactment of a statutory or judicial restriction of the presidents war powers in the area of targeting killing

B – Definitions

Should denotes an expectation of enacting a plan

American Heritage Dictionary 2000 (Dictionary.com)

should. The will to do something or have something take place: I shall go out if I feel like it.  

Federal government is the central government in Washington DC

Encarta Online 2005, 
http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_1741500781_6/United_States_(Government).html~~23howtocite**
United States (Government), the combination of federal, state, and local laws, bodies, and agencies that is responsible for carrying out the operations of the United States. The federal government of the United States is centered in Washington, D.C.

Resolved implies a policy

Louisiana House 3-8-2005, http://house.louisiana.gov/house-glossary.htm**
Resolution  A legislative instrument that generally is used for making declarations,  stating policies, and making decisions where some other form is not  required. A bill includes the constitutionally required enacting clause; a  resolution uses the term "resolved". Not subject to a time limit for  introduction nor to governor’s veto. ( Const. Art. III, §17(B) and House  Rules 8.11 , 13.1 , 6.8 , and 7.4) 

"Statutory restrictions" require statutory language - Congress

Kershner 10 (Joshua, Articles Editor, Cardozo Law Review. J.D. Candidate (June 2011), Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, "Political Party Restrictions and the Appointments Clause: The Federal Election Commission’s Appointments Process Is Constitutional" Cardozo Law Review de novo 2010 Cardozo L. Rev. De Novo 615) 

n17 The phrase "statutory restrictions" is used hereinafter to mean statutory language that restricts the President’s powers of nomination and appointment to those individuals meeting specific criteria. Examples include gender, state of residence, and most importantly political party. n18 Since 1980, more than one hundred Presidential signing statements have specifically mentioned the Appointments Clause. See The Public Papers of the Presidents, AM. PRESIDENCY PROJECT, http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws (search for "Appointments Clause"). n19 These signing statements typically invoke the authority of the Appointments Clause to argue that statutory restrictions on appointment or removal of Officers of the United States are merely advisory. For numerous examples, see id. See also infra note 175. n20 The phrase "hyper-partisan atmosphere" has been frequently used by the news media and commentators to describe the political gridlock in Washington during the first years of the Obama administration. See, e.g., Eric Moskowitz, Hundreds Brave Cold to Hear From Scott Brown, THE BOSTON GLOBE, Jan. 29, 2010, http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2010/01/scores_wait_for.html (reporting on then Senator-Elect Scott Brown explaining that "he felt the hyper-partisan atmosphere in Washington was already changing as a result of his election" ten days earlier); Editorial, Bayh Bailout No Cause to Mourn Moderation, ORANGE COUNTY REG., Feb. 17, 2010, at H, available at http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/bayh-234673-sen-one.html (describing Senator Bayh’s verbal attacks on the operation of the Senate after announcing his decision not to run for reelection as "using the occasion to decry the hyperpartisan atmosphere in Washington"). n21 As political battles over delays in approving Presidential nominations continue to be the norm, it is progressively more likely that Presidents will seek to bypass the Senate in the nomination process. This could include recess appointments bypassing both the "advice and consent" of the Senate, as well as any statutory restrictions. See, e.g., Scott Wilson, Obama Considers Recess Appointments, WASH. POST, Feb. 9, 2010 ("President Obama is considering recess appointments to fill some or all of the nominations held up in the Senate. President Bush used a recess appointment to make John Bolton the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations bypassing Democrats."). n22 Statutory restrictions date back to the first Congress and continue today. See infra notes 116, 118, 122. n23 See discussion infra Part I.D and note 128. n24 The phrase "political party restrictions" is used hereinafter to mean statutory restrictions on the President’s powers of nomination and appointment by political party.

Judicial restrictions are limits imposed by the courts

Charles Grove Haines – PhD, Fellow @ Columbia University – 2001, The Conflict over Judicial Powers, googlebooks
The political theories of the time favored judicial restriction of state laws to the point
AND
a short step, therefore, to Mar- bury vs. Madison.

Targeted killing is the killing of an individual or group of individuals exclusively for reasons of self-defence – that’s distinct from assassinations, which are the premeditated killing of a prominent person for political or ideological reasons

Thomas B. Hunter – 2009, Targeted Killing: Self-Defense, Preemption, and the War on Terrorism, Mr. Hunter holds a Master’s Degree in Unconventional Warfare from the American Military University, a Master’s Degree in International Security Studies from the University of St. Andrews, Scotland, and an undergraduate degree in English and American Literature from the University of Southern California, googlebooks
Before proceeding with an examination of targeted killing as a method of state self-
AND
or ideology, but rather exclusively for reasons of state self-defence.

Tournament: Harvard | Round: 2 | Opponent: Minnesota CE | Judge: Seth Gannon

1NC T

Next off is T War Powers

War power is the power to conduct war

HIRABAYASHI v. UNITED STATES - SUPREME COURT - June 21, 1943, Decided, 320 U.S. 81; 63 S. Ct. 1375; 87 L. Ed. 1774; 1943 U.S. LEXIS 1109
The war power of the national government is "the power to wage war successfully
AND
review of the wisdom of their action or substitute its judgment for theirs.

The plan only deals with immigration powers not war powers

Goldsmith 09, Chair of European and Asian Litigation at Debevoise and Plimpton
(Lord Peter, Amici Curaie in support of petitioners, Kiyemba v. Obama, www.oyez.org/sites/default/files/cases/briefs/pdf/brief08-12347.pdf)
From the 17th century onwards the writ of habeas corpus was conceived and used as
AND
is in effect to suspend the operation of habeas corpus for these Petitioners.

Vote neg – limits – affirmative interpretation opens the topic up to include all immigration issues like detention and asylum centers – also allows all affirmatives that deal with any executive power, not just war powers

Tournament: Harvard | Round: Octas | Opponent: Wayne State JS | Judge: Jonathan Paul, Geoff Lundeen, Scott Harris

1NC T

Interpretation – "war powers authority of the President" is the power to conduct war.

War powers authority of the Congress is the power to declare war

Gerald G. Howard - Spring, 2001, Senior Notes and Comments Editor for the Houston Law Review, COMMENT: COMBAT IN KOSOVO: IGNORING THE WAR POWERS RESOLUTION, 38 Hous. L. Rev. 261, LexisNexis
 ~*270~  The issue, then, becomes one of defining and monitoring
AND
of authority to properly assess the legality of the combat operations in Kosovo.

Violation – the aff restricts Congress’s war power by limiting its ability to declare war to jus ad bellum principles

Michael Stokes Paulsen – June 2009, Distinguished University Chair and Professor of Law, The University of St. Thomas School of Law, Feature: The Constitutional Power To Interpret International Law, THE YALE LAW JOURNAL, 118 Yale L.J. 1762
A. The Power To Initiate War - Jus ad Bellum
Congress’s constitutional power to initiate ("declare") war by legislative act, and the
AND
and international relations, not one of binding U.S. law.

Vote Neg

Predictable limits – There are 100s of caveats the aff could have Congress declare about its willingness to authorize or fund wars in the future

Ground – restrictions on Congress are a relative increase in presidential power – flips all our DAs and justifies bidirectional affs – also allows affs to get perception-based advantages on changes in the power to declare war without linking to DA about the conduct of war

Extra T is a voter – still explodes limits and constrains negative ground – severing the aff isn’t a remedy because it forces us to go for T for 6 minutes to get back to zero

Tournament: Wake | Round: 4 | Opponent: USC PV | Judge: Erika Jensen

1NC T

Interpretation –

Restriction means prohibition of action – it’s distinct from supervision/oversight

Jean Schiedler-Brown 12, Attorney, Jean Schiedler-Brown 26 Associates, Appellant Brief of Randall Kinchloe v. States Dept of Health, Washington,  The Court of Appeals of the State of Washington, Division 1, http://www.courts.wa.gov/content/Briefs/A01/68642920Appellant20Randall20Kincheloe27s.pdf
3. The ordinary definition of the term "restrictions" also does not include
AND
some supervision conditions, but he did not agree to restrict his license.

War power is the power to conduct war successfully

HIRABAYASHI v. UNITED STATES - SUPREME COURT - June 21, 1943, Decided, 320 U.S. 81; 63 S. Ct. 1375; 87 L. Ed. 1774; 1943 U.S. LEXIS 1109
The war power of the national government is "the power to wage war successfully
AND
review of the wisdom of their action or substitute its judgment for theirs.

Authority is the power to act

COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE, EASTERN SECTION - October 31, 1925, Decided, RACY CREAM COMPANY v. MARY BELLE WALDEN., 1 Tenn. App. 653; 1925 Tenn. App. LEXIS 85
While the circumstances in and of themselves do not necessarily show that the driver was
AND
. Jurisdiction. The word is generally used to express a derivative power."

Violation – The plan creates a supervisory, ex post review – that’s not a limitation on action

Vote Neg

Predictable limits – There are 1000s of procedural steps Congress could ask the president to take – minimum page requirements, specific military officials to notify, filling out the right TPS report – and 1000s of different aspects of a mission they could review after the fact – Impossible for the neg to keep up with all the boxes they could have the President or Congress check

Ground – "Presidential flexibility bad" is core negative ground – ex post review leaves every presidential power on the table – aff can claim a perception advantage without touching core questions of presidential power

Tournament: Kentucky | Round: 5 | Opponent: Dartmouth ChMa | Judge: Nick Miller

1NC Topicality

Interpretation –

Increase means

Increase:
in•crease verb \in-?kr?s, ?in-?\
intransitive verb
1: to become progressively greater (as in size, amount, number, or intensity)
2: to multiply by the production of young
That’s Merriam-Webster 12, http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/increase?show=026t=1348112715

A restriction is a law or rule that limits allowable action

Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary – 2013, http://oald8.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/dictionary/restriction
restriction NOUN
1 ~countable~
a rule or law that limits what you can do or what can happen
import/speed/travel, etc. restrictions
restriction on something to impose/place a restriction on something
The government has agreed to lift restrictions on press freedom.
There are no restrictions on the amount of money you can withdraw.
2 ~uncountable~
the act of limiting or controlling somebody/something
sports clothes that prevent any restriction of movement
A diet to lose weight relies on calorie restriction in order to obtain results.
3 ~countable~
a thing that limits the amount of freedom you have
the restrictions of a prison

The President’s "war powers" authority is his ability to conduct war

Gerald G. Howard - Spring, 2001, Senior Notes and Comments Editor for the Houston Law Review, COMMENT: COMBAT IN KOSOVO: IGNORING THE WAR POWERS RESOLUTION, 38 Hous. L. Rev. 261, LexisNexis
 ~*270~  The issue, then, becomes one of defining and monitoring
AND
of authority to properly assess the legality of the combat operations in Kosovo.

Authority is legally granted permission

Taylor, 1996  (Ellen, 21 Del. J. Corp. L. 870 (1996), Hein Online)
The term authority is commonly thought of in the context of the law of agency
AND
is between what the agent can do and what the agent may do.

Violation – The affirmative does not determine his authority to conduct war, it just enforces how he conducts that war

Vote Neg

Limits – There are 1000s of potential enforcement mechanisms: threatening to hold up legislation, shutting down the government, redistricting, press conferences, etc. – they include any mechanism Congress has for giving the President hassles - neg can never predict them or have the time to cut answers to them all

Ground – Enforcing existing restrictions mean all the perception DAs are non-unique.  It also allows the aff to create advantages based on threatening the mechanism or enforcing the threat by winning the president says no.

Effects T – At best, they are effectually topical because they need to win the enforcement results in a function restriction –that forces the neg to concede solvency to win a DA and still links to all our limits and ground offense

Tournament: USC | Round: 5 | Opponent: Stanford GR | Judge: Dallas Perkins

1NC

T

Restriction means prohibition of action

Jean Schiedler-Brown 12, Attorney, Jean Schiedler-Brown 26 Associates, Appellant Brief of Randall Kinchloe v. States Dept of Health, Washington,  The Court of Appeals of the State of Washington, Division 1, http://www.courts.wa.gov/content/Briefs/A01/68642920Appellant20Randall20Kincheloe27s.pdf
3. The ordinary definition of the term "restrictions" also does not include
AND
some supervision conditions, but he did not agree to restrict his license.

Authority is the power that an agent has been delegated

Kelly, 2003  (judge for the State of Michigan, JOSEPH ELEZOVIC, Plaintiff, and LULA ELEZOVIC, Plaintiff-Appellant/Cross-Appellee, v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY and DANIEL P. BENNETT, Defendants-Appellees/Cross-Appellants., No. 236749, COURT OF APPEALS OF MICHIGAN, 259 Mich. App. 187; 673 N.W.2d 776; 2003 Mich. App. LEXIS 2649; 93 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 244; 92 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1557, lexis)
Applying agency principles, a principal is responsible for the acts of its agents done
AND
be delegated in carrying out the principal’s business." Id. at 1348.

The AUMF only authorized force against those involved in the 9/11 attacks

Cronogue 12, JD Duke Law
(Graham, A NEW AUMF: DEFINING COMBATANTS IN THE WAR ON TERROR, scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=129426context=djcil)
The AUMF authorized the President to use "all necessary and appropriate force" against
AND
the 9/11 attacks, these groups are necessarily outside of Congress’s authorization

The affirmative authorizes force against those who enjoy close and well established collaboration with Al-Qaeda or the Taliban, even if they were not involved in 9/11.  This is an expansion of authority, not a restriction

Cronogue 12, JD Duke Law
(Graham, A NEW AUMF: DEFINING COMBATANTS IN THE WAR ON TERROR, scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=129426context=djcil)
My proposal for the new AUMF would appear as follows: AFFIRMATION OF ARMED CONFLICT
AND
it does a better job than Representative McKeon’s of heeding President Lincoln’s warning.

Vote Neg

Limits – Their aff justifies any aff that has the judiciary or Congress clarify in ways that expand war powers - 1000s of ways to do that

Ground – Increasing restrictions is key to stable neg link and cp ground – clarifications to authority make all DA links non-unique – bidirectional affs are especially bad because they are reading neg ground on the aff

1NR

AT "He Determines"

Authority is only the reasonable power that an agent has been delegated, that’s our 1NC Kelly evidence.  "He determines" does not mean that the AUMF gave Obama unlimited authorization.  Obama has gone rogue - Congress has not authorized the President to make determinations outside of the nexus requirement - the plan restricts illegitimate presidential action not war powers authority

Cronogue 12, JD Duke Law
(Graham, A NEW AUMF: DEFINING COMBATANTS IN THE WAR ON TERROR, scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=129426context=djcil)
Removing the 9/11 nexus to reflect the current reality of war without writing
AND
the authorization and has simply acquiesced to the President’s exercise of broad authority.

Obama’s AUMF determinations are wrong – congress has not authorized force outside of 9/11 connections

Barnes 12, JD Boston University
(Beau, REAUTHORIZING THE "WAR ON TERROR": THE LEGAL AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS OF THE AUMF’S COMING OBSOLESCENCE, Military Law Review, Vol. 211)
This article, prompted by Congress’s recent failed efforts to revisit and refine the September
AND
authority for the U.S. military’s global anti-terrorist operations.

Even if they win that they limit AUMF authorization, they still don’t meet our restrict means to prohibit definition from the 1NC Scheidler-Brown evidence

a) Limitations on authorization are not prohibitions – the President can site other means to claim authority

Goldsmith 13, Law Prof at Harvard
(9/3, Jack, It is Hard to Write an AUMF, www.lawfareblog.com/2013/09/it-is-hard-to-write-an-aumf/
First, Congress needs to pay attention to the distinction between an authorization and a
AND
. Writing an AUMF that adequately empowers and constraints the President is hard.

b) That’s especially true in the context of the AUMF – the President will just site Article II instead

Chesney et al 13, Law Prof at Texas
(Robert, A Statutory Framework for Next-Generation Terrorist Threats, media.hoover.org/sites/default/files/documents/Statutory-Framework-for-Next-Generation-Terrorist-Threats.pdf)
Consider first the option of Congress doing nothing. This is, at bottom,
AND
measures and Article II powers, which in combination are far from ideal.

5) The aff is extra-topical – the AUMF applies to things outside the resolution like wiretapping

Justice.gov 2006 (January 27, "THE NSA PROGRAM TO DETECT AND PREVENT TERRORIST ATTACKS
MYTH V. REALITY" http://www.justice.gov/opa/documents/nsa_myth_v_reality.pdf)
Myth: The NSA program is illegal. Reality: The President’s authority to authorize
AND
of the enemy is a fundamental incident to the use of military force. 

AT Retail Approach

The plan is not a retail approach because it doesn’t specify terrorist groups, countries or geographic areas outside of Al Qaeda and the Taliban

Chesney et al 13, Law Prof at Texas
(Robert, A Statutory Framework for Next-Generation Terrorist Threats, media.hoover.org/sites/default/files/documents/Statutory-Framework-for-Next-Generation-Terrorist-Threats.pdf)
Congress could instead authorize the president to use force against specified terrorist groups and/
AND
emerge; it must debate and approve any significant expansions of the conflict.

Tournament: Wake | Round: Doubles | Opponent: Harvard DT | Judge: Carly Wunderlich, Casey Harrigan, Jonathan Paul, John Warden, Kevin Kallmeyer

1NC

1NC T

Interpretation –

Introduction of "United States Armed Forces" only means personnel

Eric Lorber – January 2013, EXECUTIVE WARMAKING AUTHORITY AND OFFENSIVE CYBER OPERATIONS: CAN EXISTING LEGISLATION SUCCESSFULLY CONSTRAIN PRESIDENTIAL POWER?, J.D. Candidate, University of Pennsylvania Law School, Ph.D Candidate, Duke University Department of Political Science, JOURNAL OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW Vol. 15:3 , https://www.law.upenn.edu/live/files/1773-lorber15upajconstl9612013

As discussed above, critical to the application of the War Powers Resolution—especially
AND
human members of the armed forces, such a conclusion is not determinative. 

Violation – the Aff includes weapons systems / other non-human capabilities

Vote Neg –

Predictable limits – The United States has hundreds of different weapons systems that could be deployed by any of the 4 services across over 200 countries – These include nukes, which was its own entire topic 4 years ago

Ground – Deploying troops is the core question of the president’s war power because it puts troops in harm’s way – there’s no disadvantage to repositioning a forward-deployed systems

1NR

T

2NC AT We Meet

The soldier who presses the button to launch the nuke isn’t in hostilities —- NDAA proves

Healey 26 Wilson 13 – Jason Healey is the director of the Cyber Statecraft Initiative at the Atlantic Council. AND* A.J. Wilson is a visiting fellow at the
Atlantic Council, 2013, "Cyber Conflict and the War Powers
Resolution: Congressional Oversight
of Hostilities in the Fifth Domain," jnslp.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/11_Dycus.pdf?
War Powers and Offensive Cyber Operations¶ In a report submitted to Congress in November
AND
the ground, no active exchanges of fire, and no body bags.

AT: USAF

USAF

 regular components of DOD====
Farlex 13 The Free Dictionary By Farlex, "United States Armed Forces," Accessed 7-23, http://www.thefreedictionary.com/United+States+Armed+Forces
Used to denote collectively only the regular components of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard. See also Armed Forces of the United States.

US Code excludes weapons from the air force

US Code No Date – "10 USC § 8062 - Policy; composition; aircraft authorization" www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/8062
(a) It is the intent of Congress to provide an Air Force that
AND
"combat-coded aircraft" means aircraft assigned to meet the primary.

Violation 2NC

Prefer our interpretation:

Legal precision – The War Powers Resolution applies to the phrase "introduction of United States Armed Forces into hostilities" – it’s a legal term of art.  The legislative history and legal interpretation of the WPR is the authoritative source on what armed forces means in the context of war powers.

Chesney 8/29/13, Law Professor at UT and Senior Fellow at Brookings
Robert, "The War Powers Resolution and Using Force in Syria," Lawfare Blog, http://www.lawfareblog.com/2013/08/the-war-powers-resolution-and-using-force-in-syria/
So, any problems here? Probably not. The WPR does not define what
AND
on the credibility of claiming that we are not deployed into "hostilities."

Topic coherence – If "armed forces" includes weapons and capabilities, then the OCO and Targeted Killing parts of the topic would be redundant with introduction of armed forces.  The only predicable interpretation of the topic is one that preserves internal coherence.

Both branches agree

Congress

Eric Lorber – January 2013, EXECUTIVE WARMAKING AUTHORITY AND OFFENSIVE CYBER OPERATIONS: CAN EXISTING LEGISLATION SUCCESSFULLY CONSTRAIN PRESIDENTIAL POWER?, J.D. Candidate, University of Pennsylvania Law School, Ph.D Candidate, Duke University Department of Political Science, JOURNAL OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW Vol. 15:3 , https://www.law.upenn.edu/live/files/1773-lorber15upajconstl9612013
An examination of the legislative history also suggests that Congress clearly conceptualized "armed forces
AND
conceptualized "armed forces" to mean U.S. combat troops. 

The President

JULIA L. CHEN – November 2012, Boston College Law Review, NOTE: RESTORING CONSTITUTIONAL BALANCE: ACCOMMODATING THE EVOLUTION OF WAR, 53 B.C. L. Rev 1767
Harold Koh, a legal advisor to the U.S. Department of State
AND
means," the "hostilities" are not covered by the Resolution. n263
Mr. Koh, like Senator Kerry, differentiated the action from those envisioned by
AND
a large hole in the Resolution for combat activities employing unmanned weaponry. n269

2NC Ground

Nuclear weapons are in an entirely different class than the conventional force in the resolution –

Nukes are political weapons we never plan to use – means the aff is primarily a change in political, not military flexibility – guts neg DAs about the use of force.  Threats and use are entirely different.

Gurmeet Kanwal – 2005, Pakistan’s Nuclear Threshold and India’s Options,
Brigadier Gurmeet Kanwal (Ret’d.) is a Delhi-based adjunct fellow with the Wadhwani Chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), http://www.observerindia.com/cms/export/orfonline/modules/analysis/attachments/A355_1199862929995.pdf
The use of tactical nuclear weapons can be a rational option only if it does
AND
tactically’ against ground troops, a brief look at their efficacy is merited.

AT: Hostilities

This is also about hostilities, not armed forces.  They are two separate requirements

Eric Lorber – January 2013, EXECUTIVE WARMAKING AUTHORITY AND OFFENSIVE CYBER OPERATIONS: CAN EXISTING LEGISLATION SUCCESSFULLY CONSTRAIN PRESIDENTIAL POWER?, J.D. Candidate, University of Pennsylvania Law School, Ph.D Candidate, Duke University Department of Political Science, JOURNAL OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW Vol. 15:3 , https://www.law.upenn.edu/live/files/1773-lorber15upajconstl9612013
As discussed above, critical to the application of the War Powers Resolution—especially
AND
it only becomes important if "armed forces" exist in the situation.

AT: Fisher

The WPR was not meant to apply to nuclear weapons –

Historical record

EUGENE V. ROSTOW - Professor of Law and Public Affairs Emeritus, Yale Law School - September, 1988, SYMPOSIUM: FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND THE CONSTITUTION: THE ROLES OF CONGRESS, THE PRESIDENT, AND THE COURTS: What the Constitution Means by Executive Power, 43 U. Miami L. Rev. 165
There are a lot of things that the President should not report. Perhaps the
AND
, therefore, that the President has to be allowed to use them.

It would make the resolutions nonsensical

Paul A. Hemesath - J.D./M.S.F.S. Georgetown University Law Center - August, 2000, NOTE: Who’s Got the Button? Nuclear War Powers Uncertainty in the Post-Cold War Era, 88 Geo. L.J. 2473
Congressional opposition via the War Powers Resolution has thus far failed to provide definitive resolution
AND
the military apparatus. The root constitutional question has thus remained unanswered. n60
FOOTNOTE 57: n57 The War Powers Resolution requires a report to Congress within 48
AND
usage for the same reason because nuclear war is likely to be short.

AT: War Has Changed

Congress didn’t intend for the definition of "Armed Forces" to apply to all kinds of war – didn’t even encompass what they knew about in the 70s

JULIA L. CHEN – November 2012, Boston College Law Review, NOTE: RESTORING CONSTITUTIONAL BALANCE: ACCOMMODATING THE EVOLUTION OF WAR, 53 B.C. L. Rev 1767
Although there is no definition section in the War Powers Resolution or explanation of its
AND
situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances." n110

Tournament: USC | Round: Semis | Opponent: Michigan AP | Judge: Sean Kennedy, Patrick Kennedy, Dylan Quigley, Alyssa Lucas-Bolin, Michael Antonucci

1NC DA

Passage of immigration reform is likely, both sides agree it is a top priority and congress is willing to cooperate

Clifford, 12/30 (Mike, 12/30/2013, "Immigration Reform Supporters: "Positive Signs" Headed into 2014," http://www.publicnewsservice.org/2013-12-30/immigrant-issues/immigration-reform-supporters-positive-signs-headed-into-2014/a36538-1))
NEW YORK - Supporters of comprehensive immigration reform fell short of their goal in 2013
AND
Speaker Boehner has said he won’t bring that version up for a vote.

====Congressional drone proposals sap capital====
Munoz 13
(Carlo Munoz, National Security writer, "Turf battle builds quietly in Congress over control of armed drone program", The Hill, 4/9/13, http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/292501-turf-battle-builds-quietly-over-control-of-armed-drone-program)**
A turf war is quietly building between congressional defense and intelligence committees over who will
AND
Langley and intelligence lawmakers was bound to spark a fight, he said.

Obama’s capital key to ensuring passage

Orlando Sentinel, 11/1 (11/1/2013, "What we think: It’ll take both parties to clear immigration logjam," http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2013-11-01/news/os-ed-immigration-reform-congress-20131031_1_immigration-reform-comprehensive-reform-house-republicans, JMP)
For those who thought the end of the government shutdown would provide a break from
AND
earn citizenship. House Democratic leaders will have to underscore the president’s message.

Reform key to the economy – immigrants are key to several critical sectors

West, ’09 – Director of Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution (7/22/09, Darrell M., "The Path to a New Immigration Reform," http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2009/0721_immigration_reform_west.aspx)
Skeptics need to understand how important a new immigration policy is to American competitiveness and
AND
we recognize their majority role in our workforce as the next generation rises.

Extinction

Harris and Burrows, ’09 ~Mathew, PhD European History at Cambridge, counselor in the National Intelligence Council (NIC) and Jennifer, member of the NIC’s Long Range Analysis Unit "Revisiting the Future: Geopolitical Effects of the Financial Crisis" http://www.ciaonet.org/journals/twq/v32i2/f_0016178_13952.pdf~~
Increased Potential for Global Conflict Of course, the report encompasses more than economics and
AND
within and between states in a more dog-eat-dog world.

Tournament: Harvard | Round: 2 | Opponent: Minnesota CE | Judge: Seth Gannon

1NC DA

First is the Immigration Reform Good DA

Immigration reform will pass —- top priority and political capital is key

Matthews, 10/16 (Laura, 10/16/2013, "2013 Immigration Reform Bill: ’I’m Going To Push To Call A Vote,’ Says Obama," http://www.ibtimes.com/2013-immigration-reform-bill-im-going-push-call-vote-says-obama-1429220))
When Congress finally passes a bipartisan bill that kicks the fiscal battles over to early
AND
can get immigration reform legislation passed in the House and signed into law."

Releasing Gitmo detainees into the US will provoke massive backlash

NYT 09 
(Chinese Inmates at Guantánamo Pose a Dilemma, www.nytimes.com/2009/04/01/us/politics/01gitmo.html?pagewanted=all26_r=0)
The Uighurs have become something of a Guantánamo Rorschach test: hapless refugees to some
AND
United States," said Representative J. Randy Forbes, Republican of Virginia.

Reform key to the economy – immigrants are key to several critical sectors

West, ’09 – Director of Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution (7/22/09, Darrell M., "The Path to a New Immigration Reform," http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2009/0721_immigration_reform_west.aspx)
Skeptics need to understand how important a new immigration policy is to American competitiveness and
AND
we recognize their majority role in our workforce as the next generation rises.

Extinction

Harris and Burrows, ’09 ~Mathew, PhD European History at Cambridge, counselor in the National Intelligence Council (NIC) and Jennifer, member of the NIC’s Long Range Analysis Unit "Revisiting the Future: Geopolitical Effects of the Financial Crisis" http://www.ciaonet.org/journals/twq/v32i2/f_0016178_13952.pdf~~
Increased Potential for Global Conflict Of course, the report encompasses more than economics and
AND
within and between states in a more dog-eat-dog world.

Tournament: Harvard | Round: 2 | Opponent: Minnesota CE | Judge: Seth Gannon

1NC DA

Next off is the China Relations DA

US diplomatic advances have convinced China that the pivot is not a threat – maintaining supportive action key to sustain good relations

Smith 9/14, NBC News Contributor
(13, Analysis: Superpower rivalry between US, China shows signs of softening, behindthewall.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/14/20476425-analysis-superpower-rivalry-between-us-china-shows-signs-of-softening?lite)
The superpower rivalry between the U.S. and China is showing signs of
AND
U.S. but in China it was front-page news."

Mandating release means letting Uighur’s into the United States

Kagan 10, Solicitor General US DOJ
(2/19, Elena, www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/SG-Kiyemba-letter-2-19-10.pdf)
Petitioners are members of the Uighur ethnic minority group in China who were previously held
AND
but somewhere else in the world requires the cooperation of a foreign sovereign."). 

Releasing Uigher’s into the US wrecks US/China relations

Black 10, Former Judge Advocate General of the US Army
(Lt. Gen. Scott C., Amici Curaie in support of Respondents, Kiyemba v. Obama, www.oyez.org/sites/default/files/cases/briefs/pdf/brief08-12348.pdf)
The potential national security concerns at issue range far beyond how the Uighurs may conduct
AND
against whatever benefits might come from the Uighurs’ release into the United States.

US/China relations key to the global economy and preventing Korean war

Carpenter 9/5, Senior fellow for defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute
(13, Ted Galen, Don’t Wreck Relations with Russia and China over Syria, www.cato.org/blog/dont-wreck-relations-russia-china-over-syria)
Conversely, we need cooperation from Moscow and Beijing on a host of important issues
AND
tramples on Beijing’s interests in Syria and the rest of the Middle East.

Korean war goes nuclear - extinction

Hamel-Green 09, Dean of and Professor in the Faculty of Arts, Education and Human Development, Victoria University
(Michael, The Path Not Taken, The Way Still Open: Denuclearizing the Korean Peninsula and Northeast Asia, www.japanfocus.org/-Michael-Hamel_Green/3267
The international community is increasingly aware that cooperative diplomacy is the most productive way to
AND
into the stratosphere would cause a huge reduction in the Earth’s protective ozone.

1NR

DA

Impacts

Relations are a prerequisite to global peace

Zhou 8— Assistant Professor in the Department of Asian Languages and Cultures at Hobart and William Smith Colleges – NY — Dr. Jinghao, Does China’s Rise Threaten the United States? Asian Perspective, Vol. 32, No. 3, 2008, pp. 171-182
Third, there are many common interests between China and the United States.26On
AND
can focus on shared interests such as fighting terrorism and promoting world peace. 

Chinese relations solve peace and bioweapons—solves their Russia impact

Wenzhong 04, PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2-7-2K4 (Zhou, "Vigorously Pushing Forward the Constructive and Cooperative Relationship Between China and the United States," http://china-japan21.org/eng/zxxx/t64286.htm)
China’s development needs a peaceful international environment, particularly in its periphery. We will
AND
countries, we will see even greater accomplishments in China-US relations.

Relations solve terrorism

Xinbo 4, Wu Xinbo, Professor, Center for American Studies, Fudan University, Shanghai, 2004
("The Promise and Limitations of a Sino-US Partnership," The Washington Quarterly, Vol. 27, No. 4)
The primary perceived threat to U.S. national security then changed, as
AND
mood of Sino-U.S. relations from negative to positive. 

1NR AT Harding

Letting Uighurs into the US is a game changer for US/China relations – it’s of huge importance to them

LA Times 09 
(Uighur detainees at Guantanamo pose a problem for Obama, articles.latimes.com/2009/feb/18/world/fg-uighurs-gitmo18)
But freed to where? China is insisting that the Uighurs be sent home to
AND
closer to China’s borders as the administration shifts focus from Iraq to Afghanistan.

US support for Uighurs trades off with Chinese pressure on North Korea

Kirk 09, Reporter covering Korea for over 30 years
(Donald, Asia Times Online, Washington funds its Uyghur ’friends’, www.atimes.com/atimes/China/KG18Ad01.html)
For now, the question is how is China likely to view the NED support
AND
sense into the North Koreans at a time when Chinese pressure is needed. 

1NR AT China Fails

North Korea concessions prove China working with the US now

China Times 10/3 
(China and US should forge new ties on trust and pragmatism, www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?id=2013100300000926cid=1701)
Senior Chinese and US officials have increased their level of interaction over the course of
AND
security, on top of initiating a joint cultivation program for Afghan diplomats.

China pressuring North Korea to return to talks now – key to success

CBS News 13 
(9/24, China ups pressure on North Korea by detailing list of weapons-related items it won’t sell to ally, www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57604314/)
China has tightened restrictions on North Korea by issuing a long list of weapons-
AND
percent of its imports, from heavy machinery to grain and consumer goods.

AT Impact Defense

?

North Korea will attack—-they think their nuclear capability is strong enough

Garnaut 10 (John, Correspondent for The Age, " Eyes on China as nuclear factor shifts Korean stand-off", http://www.theage.com.au/world/eyes-on-china-as-nuclear-factor-shifts-korean-standoff-20100528-wlia.html) ZParks
While many residents in the South have become numb to the tantrums of their northern
AND
which is little different from ineffective US responses to previous provocations from Pyongyang. 

Just the existence of nukes themselves causes extinction

Straits Times, 09 ("North Korea Set to Undermine Asia’s Peace and Stability", The Straits Times, June 1st 2009, June 27th 2010, Lexis Nexis, KONTOPOULOS)
HAVING tested a nuclear device, the next strategic and logical move for North Korea
AND
territory is attacked. This is the apocalypse of nuclear war Asia faces.

Tournament: Texas | Round: 7 | Opponent: Oklahoma LW | Judge: Em Parker

1NC Cyber Deterrence Good

Cyber capabilities key to prevent cyber war

Kramer et. al 12 (Franklin D. Kramer is a distinguished research fellow
AND
National Defense University., "Cyberpower and National Security", p. 318)

No cyber deterrence strategy can hope to be airtight to prevent all minor attacks.
AND
-preservation, nor because the logic of deterrence had lost its relevance.

Escalation of conflict is inevitable without speedy OCOs

Gjetlen 13 (Tom Gjelten is a correspondent for NPR., January / February, "First Strike: US Cyber Warriors Seize the Offensive", http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/article/first-strike-us-cyber-warriors-seize-offensive) 

In the aftermath of the Stuxnet revelations, discussions about cyber war became more realistic
AND
neither did the Internet or GPS when DARPA researchers first dreamed of it.

Cyber deterrence is the only way to tranition away from nuclear deterrence

Kallberg 26 Lowther 12 (Jan Kallberg phD University of Texas at Dallas, Adam Lowther is a defense analyst at the Air Force Research Institute. "The Return of Dr. Strangelove: How austerity makes us stop worrying and love the bomb…and cyber war" International Affairs Forum online (2012). http://works.bepress.com/jan_kallberg/3)

Throughout history, adversaries have taken steps toward each other that escalated quickly because they
AND
is likely to lead to a greater reliance on nuclear and cyber arms.

Deterrence based off of nuclear weapons makes nuclear war inevitable

Beljac 09 ~Dr Marko Beljac, ’9. PhD at Monash University and he has taught at the University of Melbourne. "The Case for Minimum Nuclear Deterrence," Science and Global Security, 7-24-09,http://scisec.net/?p=154**.~~

Nuclear war can best be seen as a form of risk externality. Nuclear weapon
AND
nuclear weapons are to deter everything then anything can escalate to nuclear war. 

WILL and INTENT to use cyber ops can solves a china war

Gompert 26 Saunders 11 (David C. Gompert, bachelor’s degree in engineering from the U.S. Naval Academy, where he once served on the faculty, and a master of public affairs degree from Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Gompert most recently worked as a senior fellow at the RAND Corp, and Phillip C. Saunders, phD in IR from Princeton, Distinguished Research Fellow Director of Studies, Center for Strategic Research Director, Center for Study of Chinese Military Affairs, "The Paradox of Power Sino-American Strategic Restraint in an Age of Vulnerability", http://www.ndu.edu/inss/docuploaded/Paradox20of20Power.pdf)

That said, the ambiguities that characterize cyberspace do not argue against exploring how deeper
AND
retaliation will prevent cyber attack does not argue against a cyber deterrence strategy.

Miscalc alone causes Extinction

Gompert 26 Saunders 11 (David C. Gompert, bachelor’s degree in engineering from the U.S. Naval Academy, where he once served on the faculty, and a master of public affairs degree from Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Gompert most recently worked as a senior fellow at the RAND Corp, and Phillip C. Saunders, phD in IR from Princeton, Distinguished Research Fellow Director of Studies, Center for Strategic Research Director, Center for Study of Chinese Military Affairs, "The Paradox of Power Sino-American Strategic Restraint in an Age of Vulnerability", http://www.ndu.edu/inss/docuploaded/Paradox20of20Power.pdf)

Cyber war capabilities can contribute to crisis instability. Cyber attacks have little or no
AND
conclusion that limiting cyber war to the tactical military level would be hard.

Tournament: UMKC | Round: 6 | Opponent: MO State HM | Judge: Kendall Kaut

1NC 4

Obama has the upper hand on debt limit now but GOP demands could create a complicated battle

Kapur, 9/9 —- TPM’s senior congressional reporter and Supreme Court correspondent
(9/9/2013, Sahil, and#34;Is House GOP Backing Down In Debt Limit Fight?and#34; http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/09/house-gop-cantor-memo-debt-ceiling-cr-sequester-immigration.php-http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/09/house-gop-cantor-memo-debt-ceiling-cr-sequester-immigration.php)

House Republicans are taming members’ expectations ahead of the debt limit showdown, signaling that
AND
challenges in rounding up 218 votes to pass any conceivable debt limit hike.

The plan will ignite a huge political fight and tradeoff with other administration priorities

Hansen, 13 —- associate editor at America (was first published in Italian in the January 2013 issue of Popoli magazine, Luke, and#34;A Permanent Prison? Why Guantánamo might outlast the Obama presidency,and#34; http://americamagazine.org/issue/article/permanent-prison)-http://americamagazine.org/issue/article/permanent-prison))

Growing Opposition In and#34;The Fall of Greg Craig, Obama’s Top Lawyerand#34; (
AND
to follow through on his promise to close Guantánamo, he would have.

Political capital is finite —- the plan burns up limited leverage with House Republicans

Moore, 9/10 —- Guardian’s US finance and economics editor
(Heidi, 9/10/2013, and#34;Syria: the great distraction; Obama is focused on a conflict abroad, but the fight he should be gearing up for is with Congress on America’s economic security,and#34; http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/10/obama-syria-what-about-sequester)-http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/10/obama-syria-what-about-sequester))

The country will crash into the debt ceiling in mid-October, which would
AND
better. As it is, he should now judge his actions better.

This will destroy the U.S. and global economy and collapse trade

Davidson, 9/10 (Adam - co-founder of NPR’s and#34;Planet Moneyand#34; 9/10/2013, and#34;Our Debt to Society,and#34; http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/15/magazine/our-debt-to-society.html?pagewanted=all26_r=0)-http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/15/magazine/our-debt-to-society.html?pagewanted=all26_r=0))

This is the definition of a deficit, and it illustrates why the government needs
AND
free asset more risky, the entire global economy becomes riskier and costlier.

The impact is global nuclear war

Freidberg 26 Schonfeld, 8 —- *Professor of Politics and IR at Princeton’s Woodrow Wilson School, AND senior editor of Commentary and a visiting scholar at the Witherspoon Institute in Princeton (10/21/2008, Aaron and Gabriel, and#34;The Dangers of a Diminished Americaand#34;, Wall Street Journal, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122455074012352571.html?mod=googlenews_wsj-http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122455074012352571.html?mod=googlenews_wsj)

With the global financial system in serious trouble, is America’s geostrategic dominance likely to
AND
disastrous effects of disengagement and the stiff price tag of continued American leadership.

1NR

2NC O/V

Economic decline crushes relations with all countries
Sanders, ’90 ~Jerry W. Sanders 90, Prof. Peace and Conflict Studies, UC, Berkeley ~and#34;Global Ecology and World Economy: Collision Course or Sustainable Futureand#34;, Bulletin of Peace Proposals Vol. 21 (4)  p. 395-401~

Circumstances of looming catastrophe like these call for a maximum of world order and international
AND
, with one nation after another forced into escalating confrontation along several fronts.

Economic collapse kills soft power
Nye, Gov Professor at Harvard, ’6 (Joseph, and#34;Think again: soft powerand#34; Yale Global)
No. In a recent article on options for dealing with Iran, Peter Brookes
AND
others are attracted to the European model of human rights and economic freedom.

Decline in globalization turns the case – 
Seita, Law Professor at Albany, ’97 (Alex, and#34;Globalization and the Convergence of Valuesand#34; Cornell International Law Journal, lexis)
Law has been important in managing economic globalization and may become as important with respect to political globalization. 7 The ideology of globalization can be broadly divided into substantive and procedural components. The most important procedural element is the rule of law - the idea that disputes will be settled and agreements negotiated through the observance of established principles rather than the use of force or the intimidation of power. 8 In turn, the substantive principles, what the rule of law seeks to enforce, are those that nations have selected to settle disputes and negotiate agreements. The rule of law can be a way of resolving conflicts effectively, peacefully, and cooperatively. Furthermore, globalization enhances the perceived importance of distant international problems relative to local problems. Thus, protection of the environment beyond national borders has attracted strong international support, and the conflict between environment protection and economic development created the global issue of sustainable development. 9  ~*431~  On the downside, technology together with economic and political globalization can facilitate the movement of criminal and terrorist activities across national boundaries and help criminals and terrorists to operate like efficient international businesses. 10 Most significantly for this Article, however, globalization is an important source of common economic and political values for humanity. Globalization is simultaneously a cause and a consequence of the convergence of basic economic and political systems among nations. As the activities of globalization help to converge economic and political systems, their existence reciprocally facilitates the expansion of globalization. Momentously, the convergence of these systems is leading to the convergence of fundamental values - deeply held beliefs about what is right and wrong. 11 There is a widespread, though not universal, acceptance among nations of the basic values of liberal democracy: a market economy (or free markets), a democratic government, and the protection of human rights.  Although particular details may differ from country to country, the general nature of these values is the same. The convergence of basic economic and political values among nations is a pivotal event because it is a necessary, though not sufficient, condition for the eventual emergence of a consensus among human beings that there is but one human race. 12 This Article argues that the United States and the other industrialized democracies (e.g., the members of the European Union, Japan, and Canada), collectively referred to as the and#34;West,and#34; 13 should vigorously support and substantially guide the process of globalization. As it is currently emerging, globalization fosters desirable common national values by advancing general forms of market economies, democracy, and human rights. 14 It is precisely those general characteristics of liberal democracy that constitute the foundational pillars and shared values of the United States and the other industrialized democracies. 15 Because the exact form of globalization is not a fixed certainty, the United States and the other industrialized democracies should aggressively configure globalization to be consistent with and to promote the values of  liberal democracy. The industrialized democracies must also ensure that the path of globalization fairly balances the values of free market economics, democracy, and human rights, while accommodating such vital concerns as the protection of the environment, concerns that do not yet generate as strong a global consensus as the three convergent values. 16 The mechanism for configuring globalization to conform to and to balance the values of liberal democracy consists of events and policies that, while difficult to achieve, are not unrealistic and have, to a degree, already been occurring. 17 A particularly useful event might be a catharsis that would place the world into the next millennium without the baggage of the past. Perhaps by the year 2001, the representatives of oppressors, victims, victors, losers, and adversaries could assemble on a world stage in a therapeutic ceremony to put the past behind. 18 Given their economic preeminence in the world, by acting in unison the industrialized democracies should be able to determine the specific content of globalization. Action from the industrialized democracies is needed because a humane globalization will increase human wealth and reduce human suffering. 19 Morally, the promotion of liberal democratic values and the perspective of a single human race would serve to repay the historic debts that the industrialized countries have incurred over the past centuries. 20 At the same time, the industrialized democracies must be careful to use their influence responsibly and sensitively, for the wisest ideas pursued for the best motives may be rejected when unilaterally imposed upon the rest of the world. Perceived economic and political and#34;imperialism,and#34; though much less malevolent than military imperialism, will not be warmly greeted. The primary vehicle for the industrialized democracies should be the and#34;rule of lawand#34; - assuming that they have a substantial, if not commanding voice in determining its underlying principles. An enlightened globalization will not lead to the establishment of a world government. It could, however, create a new attitude among human beings and serve the interests of the United States. 21 More profoundly, advancing globalization will facilitate an event barely begun that holds the great potential of constructing, in the distant future, the perspective that the human race matters more than its component divisions along race, religion, or ethnicity. The vision of a common humanity is reason enough to embrace globalization. I. The Background of Globalization Today, more than ever, the events of foreign lands have important economic and political consequences for local inhabitants. To be sure, foreign events have had significant ramifications in the past. Centuries ago, seminal inventions in China revolutionized the culture, science, and warfare of Europeans; the opening of American borders to European immigrants from the 19th through the mid-20th centuries gave millions a new home; and the conflicts in Europe during WorldWarI eventually brought the United States onto the European battleground. 23 But these events were of sporadic importance. For example, after World War I ended, the United States isolated itself in a number of respects from international politics and trade; America declined membership in the League of Nations and enacted the Smoot-Hawley tariffs in 1931 which drastically reduced imports. 24 By contrast, transnational activities and affairs now have continuous importance, repeatedly affecting not just distant countries, but also the entire global community at times. The continuous importance of international events is a defining characteristic of globalization. Another feature of globalization with potentially profound implications is the convergence of basic economic and political values among nations towards the liberal democratic values of the industrialized democracies, the and#34;West.and#34; 25 For the West, the liberal, democratic values of market  ~*434~  economies, democracy, and human rights are fundamental. 26 Given the arguably shallow roots of liberal democratic values in a number of countries and the absence of democracy and human rights in many others, this process may perhaps be too incomplete to be described as a convergence of  ~*435~  fundamental values. Nevertheless, today there are greater similarities between the economic and political systems of nations than at any other time in the short history of globalization. 27 With careful and generous support from the West, this similarity of systems may evolve into a similarity of fundamental values. A. Globalization’s Beginning Identifying the birth of globalization is an elusive task, but one possible date is the year 1945, when the United States led the Allied powers in creating the United Nations and its companion international organizations, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (World Bank). 28 Later in 1948, the United States and its democratic allies established the General Agreement on Tar-  ~*436~  iffs and Trade (GATT), another important economic institution for globalization along with the IMF and the World Bank. 29 The motivations for creating these international institutions were at once noble and selfish. After the devastating experience of World War II, the victorious Allies were determined to prevent any reoccurrence of similar world wars. Their motivating hope was that a collegial body of nations would ensure the peaceful resolution of conflicts and provide a collective defense against wrongful aggression. 30 Thus, the United Nations was the focus of political attempts to prevent future acts of aggression. Further, unlike the League of Nations, the United Nations made the promotion of human rights one of its basic purposes. 31 Toward that end, the United Nations created various human rights institutions and generated human rights conventions and  ~*437~  declarations. 32 At the same time, the Allies thought it critical to lay the foundations for the economic prosperity of the international community. 33 Prosperous countries, it was thought, would be less inclined to wage wars. Thus, the Allies promoted activities that would raise the standard of living among peaceful countries. For example, the Allies established international economic institutions which were in part created to promote international monetary cooperation (the IMF), to foster economic development in less developed countries (the World Bank), and to increase international trade (the GATT). 34  ~*438~  The creation of the United Nations, the IMF, the World Bank, and the GATT were key moments in globalization. These institutions signaled the start of an era of cooperative behavior, however imperfect, among nations. While the number of nations involved was limited, their cooperation required the development and formal recognition of common interests. The GATT and the United Nations, in particular, were critical components in the genesis of globalization. 35 In seeking to reduce barriers to trade of goods, the GATT contained free market principles that favored lower tariffs, banned quotas, and prohibited discrimination against foreign goods. 36 The United Nations, at least on paper, championed the principles of human rights and democratic forms of government. 37 As these principles  ~*439~  gained international acceptance, economic and political norms developed. That is, common values emerged. B. Economic Globalization In current usage, the term globalization refers primarily to economic globalization. As barriers to trade, investment, financial flows, and technology transfers have fallen, there has been an expansion of markets for goods, services, financial capital, and intellectual property to transnational, regional, and even global dimensions. 38 There are several hallmarks of economic globalization. First, it increases opportunities for sellers as well as buyers. Second, economic globalization simultaneously creates new competition. Third, it develops interdependency among nations. Finally, economic globalization spreads the ideology of the free market economy model because the industrialized nations, the major promoters of globalization, advocate free market policies. The enlargement of markets beyond national boundaries means that both sellers and buyers have greater choices. More firms issue equity  ~*440~  securities in, or obtain financing from, international markets. 39 They also find it profitable to sell their goods and services in, or buy their raw materials or components from, international markets. Worldwide trade now amounts to an astonishingly large figure, six trillion dollars in 1995, more than 80 the size of the gross domestic product of the United States, the world’s largest economy. 40 The existence of greater choice also extends to investment opportunities. Companies are investing in foreign countries, buying assets such as securities, businesses, facilities, and land, and have shifted production to  ~*441~  foreign factories. 41 Concurrently, sellers of such domestic assets now have  ~*442~  more buyers to choose from. The liberalization of investment opportunities - the removal of barriers - contributes to the liberalization of trade, and vice versa. 42 Expanding markets simultaneously generates more competition along with more opportunities; 43 domestic firms must compete not only with domestic but also foreign rivals. While benefiting domestic consumers, foreign competition may threaten domestic businesses and employees. 44 Whether the foreign competition comes from imports or the local subsidiaries of foreign corporations, employees of domestic firms may lose their jobs as these firms lay off surplus employees in order to become more competitive. 45 Where local subsidiaries of foreign corporations provide competition, however, these subsidiaries will create new jobs that replace, in  ~*443~  part, jobs lost at domestic firms. 46 One of the major consequences of increased foreign competition and the domestic drive for efficiency is that countries have become more willing to privatize and deregulate. 47 By making foreign countries important sources of consumers, investors, and suppliers, globalization creates interdependence. When domestic businesses buy from and sell to foreign markets, their financial welfare becomes linked to those markets. More domestic companies have evolved into multinational corporations, firms that have economic interests in several countries. Businesses set up partnerships with foreign firms, to share technology and risk, in order to create new products. 48 Because customers as well as suppliers are foreign, firms in one country become economically dependent upon firms in other countries. When foreign firms likewise become dependent upon domestic markets, interdependence is established as the economic prosperity of one nation becomes connected to that of other countries. For virtually all countries, transnational trade is important, if not vital, to their economic prosperity. 49 As economic globalization integrates various national markets into regional or world-wide markets, it also promotes general free market prin-  ~*444~  ciples, such as the quintessential concept of the market mechanism to allocate resources, 50 reduce protectionism in international trade, 51 and  ~*445~  privatize and deregulate. 52 Well before the collapse of the Soviet Union or even the end of the Cold War, the market economy (free market) paradigm of the West emerged as the decisive winner in the economic contest with the command (or planned) economy paradigm of the Soviet bloc. 53 Since globalization is being led by the corporations and governments in the capitalist economies of the industrialized democracies, it naturally advocates the ideology of the winners rather than the losers. Thus, the rules underlying globalization seek to expand markets among market economy rather than command economy principles. 54 For example, the WTO espouses the implementation of free-market ground rules to cover international trade and trade-related aspects of  ~*446~  investment and intellectual property. 55  n55. The IMF and the World Bank, too, have promoted market economy principles. See, e.g., James supra note 28, at 323 (IMF conditionality, the terms on which it will lend, has often required budgetary and domestic credit restraints, as well as trade liberalization); World Bank, The East Asian Miracle: Economic Growth and Public Policy 10 (1993) ~hereinafter East Asian Miracle~ (advocating a and#34;market friendlyand#34; strategy in which and#34;the appropriate role of government is to ensure adequate investments in people, provide a competitive climate for private enterprise, keep the economy open to international trade, and maintain a stable macroeconomyand#34; Barend A. de Vries, Remaking the World Bank 6, 56-58 (1987) (describing how the World Bank has encouraged decentralized planning rather than command-type central planning, and has made substantial loans to help borrowing nations increase their economies’ efficiency and competitiveness, such as by liberalizing trade); cf. John Williamson, Introduction, in IMF Conditionality, supra note 34, at xiii (stating that one complaint of borrowing countries is that the IMF is and#34;ideologically biased in favor of free markets and against socialismand#34. At this time, however, the WTO is the most important of the international economic institutions in carrying out the implementation of free market principles, primarily the idea of opening markets (liberalizing trade) among countries. The WTO agreements have gone beyond the GATT in covering trade in services as well as trade-related aspects of intellectual property and trade-related investment measures. See General Agreement on Trade in Services, Apr. 15, 1994, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1B, 33 I.L.M. 44 (1994); Agreement on The Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property, Including Trade in Counterfeit Goods, Apr. 15, 1994, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1C, 33 I.L.M. 81 (1994); Agreement on Trade-Related Investment Measures, Agreements on Trade in Goods, Apr. 15, 1994, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1A, available in http://itl.irv.uit.no/trade law/documents/freetrade (visited Mar. 29, 1997). Further, the WTO agreements address more meaningfully the subjects of agriculture, textiles, and apparel. See Agreement on Agriculture, Agreements on Trade in Goods, Apr. 15, 1994, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1A, available in http://itl.irv.uit.no/trade law/documents/freetrade (visited Mar. 29, 1997); Agreement on Textiles and Clothing, Agreements on Trade in Goods, Apr. 15, 1994, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1A, available in http://itl.irv.uit.no/trade law/documents/freetrade (visited Mar. 29, 1997). Its rules go further than those of the GATT, its predecessor in carrying out the free market principle of comparative advantage by stamping out protectionism among nations. 56 When tools of protectionism - such as tariffs, quotas, or domestic subsidies - are reduced, foreign imports can better enter a domestic market, creating more competition for local firms.  n56. For instance, the WTO makes a member’s subsidy to its domestic industry actionable by another member if its effect and#34;is to displace or impede the imports of a like product of another Member into the market of the subsidizing Member.and#34; Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, Agreements on Trade in Goods, Apr. 15, 1994, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1A, art. 6.3(a), available in http://itl.irv.uit.no/trade law/documents/freetrade (visited Mar. 29, 1997). The presence of increased competition contributes to the development of more efficient local firms as only the fittest firms will survive in a competitive marketplace. The use of a market and consumer choice, rather than a bureaucracy, to determine the survival of firms and products is the essence of a free market. 57 Not surprisingly, the various WTO agreements are expected to substantially  ~*447~  increase global income. 58 C. Political Globalization As economic globalization expands, it has been accompanied by a somewhat lesser degree of political globalization in that there are now substantial numbers of elected governments. 59 Also, the rhetoric of human rights has gained universal acceptance, and more nations than ever before have pledged to protect human rights. 60 With political globalization, there is  ~*448~  more than just the existence of elected governments and the recognition of human rights by governments. Political globalization has also tended to cause a convergence in political values, with the genuine acceptance of democracy and human rights in a greater number of countries. Compared to the convergence in economic values, the convergence of political values has had a more difficult path. The growth of economic globalization was championed by countries that realized they would gain economically by increased foreign trade. Even the command-economy communist nations sought trade with the capitalist economies of the West. 61 Well before the end of the Cold War, some communist nations even embraced capitalism to an extent. As events in China have clearly shown, dictatorship and a dismal human rights record have not been incompatible with free market policies. 62 Unlike economic globalization, the support for political globalization historically has been weak, perhaps because its benefits were not as obvious or immediate. Despite their long history predating free market principles, the political values of democracy and human rights have been more dishonored by breach than honored by observance. 63 Most countries did  ~*449~  not espouse them, and those that did applied these concepts selectively. 64 For decades after the end of World WarII, the spread of humanitarian political values had to contend with severe obstacles. 65 For much of the  ~*450~  existence of the United Nations, the most important international organization devoted to the promotion of democracy and human rights, many of its leading members either did not observe democratic values or human rights domestically, or subordinated these values to other priorities in foreign affairs. 66 Despite initial obstacles, however, these political values slowly developed roots in non-western countries. Even before the end of the Cold War, the past two decades saw the emergence of a greater number of countries with democratic governments and protective of human rights. 67 These countries offer political rights and  ~*451~  civil liberties that make them different in kind from past authoritarian regimes. With the end of the Cold War, many of the former Soviet-allied countries established popularly elected governments. Earlier, elected governments emerged from dictatorships in Latin America, Asia, and Africa. 68 As the transformation of South Africa - the former bastion of apartheid - into a democratic country shows, the unbelievable can happen. The outlook today is promising for the values of democracy and, to a lesser extent, human rights. First, with the triumph of liberal democracy over communism in the Cold War, 69 the United States and its allies can now more vigorously pursue humanitarian rather than security objectives. Second, the commonality of democracy and human rights in nations has provided more reason for these nations to cooperate among themselves in trade, humanitarian, and security matters, as well as in trying to nurture the qualities of democracy and human rights in authoritarian countries. The remaining authoritarian strongholds face pressures to democratize, and to recognize some level of human rights. 70 Democracy has been easier to achieve than the protection of human rights, perhaps because the implementation of democracy is technically more easily accomplished (e.g., a popularly elected government), while there may be disagreement over which rights are basic human rights and how these basic rights are to be protected. 71 Furthermore, elected governments need not necessarily protect human rights, especially in nascent  ~*452~  democracies which may have problems of illiteracy, corruption, authoritarian traditions, ethnic or religious conflicts, and a winner-takes-all political system. 72 The value of democratic governments is that their actions reflect the desires of a majority of the people rather than the wishes of a tyrant or a select few. Democracy is arguably the most basic human right because it recognizes the sovereignty of the people in that a government pursues policies which the majority of the people support through their freely elected representatives. The preferences of at least a majority of its population, rather than the desires of a select few, influence democratic governments. Democratic governments are much more likely to respect human rights, at least those of the majority, than authoritarian regimes which are unaccountable to an electorate. Of course, democracy is not itself a sufficient condition for a humane society, since a majority may persecute or subjugate a minority in a democratic society. 73 A practical benefit of mature democracies, those having democratic governments for a long period of time, is that they substantially protect a wide variety of human rights and are much less likely to use military force to resolve conflicts. 74  ~*453~  Despite disagreement over the extent to which human rights should be protected, some level of human rights protection exists for a substantial percentage, if not the majority, of the world’s population. 75 For an increasing number of countries, there seems to be a real, as opposed to a rhetorical, acceptance of some form of human rights. While inadequate and imperfect, this is an enormous improvement over the past. While outrageous examples of inhumanity still occur, such as in Rwanda, they are universally condemned.  In an indirect way, the cultural impact of economic globalization stimulates political globalization. Economic globalization has long introduced aspects of foreign cultures - especially American culture - either directly by the sale of merchandise such as movies and musical recordings, or indirectly through exposure to foreigners. 77 More than in the past,  the opening of new markets through economic globalization has brought a flood of people and companies into foreign lands. Personal contact, always so important in understanding other human beings, has made foreigners less inscrutable. More business personnel are assigned to overseas offices, more consumers travel abroad as tourists, and more students study in foreign countries. 78 Local residents are more likely than ever before to work for, do business with, or personally know foreigners. In some cases, this transnational encounter may lead to a personal affinity with or an in-depth understanding of foreign cultures. 79  ~*455~  Further, economic globalization has generated an interest in learning foreign languages, primarily English. Perhaps irreversibly, English has become the international language of business and science, with a broader usage than any other language. 80 At the same time, the ability to speak a foreign language other than English gives one a competitive advantage in doing business in nonEnglish-speaking countries. 81 Doing business with foreigners, in their country or in one’s own, requires that one communicate with them, cooperate with them, and be exposed to their political and business values. 82 The political values of democracy and human rights, as well as aspects of foreign cultures, are often inseparable (though secondary) components of economic globalization. Thus, countries that seek to benefit from economic globalization must frequently tolerate political globalization and exposure to foreign cultures. As people know more about foreign cultures, some familiarity with foreign political values is bound to arise. II. Technology’s Vital Role in Converging Values The advanced communication technology that links much of the world together continues to be crucial to the convergence of economic and political values. This technology is utilized primarily by business entities to facilitate economic globalization. 83 Modern technology has also tended to promote democracy and human rights by making it easier and cheaper for  ~*456~  people to communicate without censorship across national boundaries. Communication technology not only exposes a national population to foreign ideas, but also concurrently exposes domestic conditions to a global audience. qThis has occurred because economic globalization involves communication technologies with multiple uses. The same technology that transmits a business proposal may also communicate politically embarrassing or other non-business information. These multiple uses of advanced technology cannot easily be separated from each other, making it difficult to restrict the technology to purely business purposes. A country that wishes to participate in international business cannot isolate itself from all uses of communication technologies unrelated to business dealings. 84 The internet 85 is a recent communication medium with tremendous potential for linking people across national boundaries, furthering mutual interests of the international community, and a myriad of other uses. 86 The internet will become, or may already be, an important or even critical technological medium for business, as well as for scientific research and consumer enjoyment. 87 The internet is the essential part of the and#34;informa-  ~*457~  tion superhighway,and#34; a source of information that promises to change fundamentally human lives. 88 E-mail and computer file transmission on the internet can potentially provide a more powerful (e.g., faster, cheaper, more convenient) business tool than such conventional devices as the postal service, telephones, and faxes. Internet users can transmit and download data, articles, images, movies, speeches, sound recordings, and other information. 89 By providing a forum for the transfer of such information, the internet will help protect the freedoms of expression and choice for followers of any ideological persuasion. 90 Unfortunately, however, it may shield criminal, obscene,  ~*458~  racist, and terrorist activities as well. 91 A government might attempt to control the content of information transfers. It could screen large numbers of telephone calls, faxes, or computer data; it could restrict access to or intercept messages on the internet. Total censorship, however, would bring a halt to international business. 92 Firms might object if government surveillance is too pervasive. For example, companies might not want government officials to be privy to proprietary information. 93 A certain amount of freedom of communication is therefore assured if a country wishes to be part of a global economy: international firms will leave a nation if censorship prohibitively increases the cost of doing business. This will remain true even if governments attempt to censor communications using the most advanced and cost-effective surveillance technology available. 94  ~*459~  Communication technologies not essential to international business transactions also serve to bolster humanitarian political values. International news reporting utilizes communication technologies to broadcast major domestic events of all types on a worldwide screen. There are numerous journalists, broadcasters, and commentators whose professional livelihood depends upon bringing newsworthy stories to a foreign, if not international, audience. While most publicized stories may not involve political events, many do. The competitive members of the news media are unlikely to let stories of outrageous acts completely escape the attention of the international public. Furthermore, these news articles may be read by anyone in the world who has access to the internet. 95 At the same time, news stories alone would not generate international repercussions against repressive governments if purely theoretical political values were involved. There must be influential constituencies that place high priority on the existence of democracy and human rights, that seek to spread those values, and that are galvanized into action upon news of deplorable political conditions. Neither value would flourish unless there were constituencies, either domestic or abroad, that strongly supported it. The presence of democratic governments and strong protections for human rights in the industrialized countries means that these values are expressed to some degree in their business transactions with other countries. 96 Sizable populations in the industrialized countries also attempt to support democracy and human rights abroad through private means. 97 Moreover, as the living standards of developing countries improve, the citizenry of these countries seem to expect more democratization (first) and  ~*460~  human rights (later). 98 III. The Importance of Globalization Because globalization promotes common values across nations and can make foreign problems, conditions, issues, and debates as vivid and captivating as national, state, and local ones, it contributes to a sense of world community. 99 It develops a feeling of empathy for the conditions of people abroad, enlarging the group of human beings that an individual will identify with. Globalization thus helps to bring alive persons in foreign lands, making them fellow human beings who simply live in different parts of the world rather than abstract statistics of deaths, poverty, and suffering. The convergence of basic political and economic values is thus fundamentally important because it helps to establish a common bond among people in different countries, facilitating understanding and encouraging cooperation. All other things being equal, the commonality among countries - whether in the form of basic values, culture, or language - enhances their attractiveness to each other. 100 In addition, convergence increases the possibility that a transformation of attitude will take place for those who participate in transnational activities. People will begin to regard foreigners in distant lands with the same concern that they have for their fellow citizens. 101 They will endeavor to help these foreigners obtain basic political rights even though the status of political rights in other countries will have no tangible beneficial impact at home. 102 Convergence does not mean that there is a single model of a market economy, a single type of democracy, or a single platform of human rights. They exist in different forms, and nations may have different combinations of these forms. 103  ~*462~  A. The Perspective of One Human Race The convergence of fundamental values through globalization has profound consequences because it increases the chance that a new perspective will develop, one which views membership in the human race as the most significant societal relationship, except for nationality. 104 A person owes his or her strongest collective loyalties to the various societies with which he or she most intensely identifies. Today, this societal identification can be based on numerous factors, including nationality, race, religion, and ethnic group. 105 While it is unlikely that nationality will be surpassed as the most significant societal relationship, globalization and the convergence of values may eventually convince people in different countries that the second most important social group is the human race, and not a person’s racial, religious, or ethnic group. 106 One of the first steps in the formation of a society is the recognition by prospective members that they have common interests and bonds. An essential commonality is that they share some fundamental values. A second is that they identify themselves as members belonging to the same community on the basis of a number of common ties, including shared fundamental values. A third commonality is the universality of rights - the active application of the and#34;golden ruleand#34; - by which members expect that all must be entitled to the same rights as well as charged with the same responsibilities to ensure that these rights are protected. Globalization promotes these three types of commonalities. Globalization establishes common ground by facilitating the almost universal acceptance of market economies, the widespread emergence of democratic governments, and the extensive approval of human rights. The most visible example is economic. With the end of the Cold War, the free market economy has clearly triumphed over the command economy in the battle of the  ~*463~  economic paradigms. Because some variant of a market economy has taken root in virtually all countries, there has been a convergence of sorts in economic systems. 107 Further, because it often requires exposure to and pervasive interaction with foreigners - many of whom share the same fundamental values - globalization can enlarge the group that one normally identifies with. Globalization makes many of its participants empathize with the conditions and problems of people who in earlier years would have been ignored as unknown residents of remote locations. This empathy often leads to sympathy and support when these people suffer unfairly. Finally, the combination of shared values and identification produce the third commonality, universality of rights. 108 Citizens of one country will often expect, and work actively to achieve, the same basic values in other countries. They will treat nationals of other nations as they would wish to be treated. The effects of shared values, identification, and universality of rights in globalization could have a pivotal long-term effect - the possibility that a majority of human beings will begin to believe that they are truly part of a single global society - the human race. This is not to say that people disbelieve the idea that the human race encompasses all human beings. Of course, they realize that there is only one human species. Rather, the human race does not usually rank high on the hierarchy of societies for most people. Smaller societies, especially those based on nationality, race, religion, or ethnicity, command more loyalty. 109 The idea of the human race, the broadest and all-inclusive category of the human species, is abstract and has little, if any, impact on the lives of human beings. To believe in the singular importance of the human race requires an attitudinal shift in which a person views the human race seriously.  ~*464~  This may occur because the convergence of values does not only mean that the people of different countries will share the same basic values. It may also lead to the greater promotion of these values for the people of other countries. Historically and certainly today, America and the other industrial democracies have attempted to foster democracy and human rights in other countries. 110 While some part of this effort has been attributable to and#34;self interest,and#34; it has also been due to the empathy that the industrialized democracies have had for other countries. 111 The magnitude of these efforts in the future, as in the past, will depend not solely upon the available financial and human resources of the industrialized democracies. It will also depend upon their national will - a factor undoubtedly influenced by the intensity with which the people of the industrialized democracies identify with people in foreign lands. The perspective that the human race matters more than its component divisions would accelerate cooperative efforts among nations to attack global problems that adversely affect human rights and the quality of human life. 112 Obviously, there is no shortage of such problems. Great suffering still occurs in so many parts of the world, not just from internal armed conflicts, 113 but also from conditions of poverty. 114 There are severe health problems in much of the world which can be mitigated with relatively little cost. 115 There are the lives lost to the AIDS epidemic, and  ~*465~  the deaths and disabilities caused by land mines. 116 Russia, a nuclear superpower that could end life on this planet, has severe social, economic, and political problems. 117 Making the human race important would not just promote liberal democratic values but would also reduce human suffering and perhaps eliminate completely the risk of nuclear war..  B. General Convergence of Values   Assuming that the formation of a single human society is a possible outcome, two broad questions should be answered: what kind of human society is being created, and is this society desirable. The answer to the latter question will depend on an evaluator’s subjective judgment of the society that is being formed. Undoubtedly, the great majority of human beings would abhor a world society that was being created by the conquests of a totalitarian government. Presumably, most Americans (and many citizens of other countries) would reject even a benevolent, democratic global society in which a world government dominated by other countries dictated laws that governed the lives of all human beings. If either outcome were present, many would call for a halt to globalization. Thus the direction that globalization follows is critical for assessing its appeal.  What globalization has brought is a general convergence of fundamental economic and political systems among many nations. These systems are not identical. There are still innumerable differences among countries with market economies, democratic governments, and respectful of human rights. n118 The practices of one country may be intolerable to another coun-  ~*466~  try. n119 Furthermore, it is unlikely and probably undesirable that economic and political systems will ever exactly converge. Nor is it foreseeable that the nations of the world will coalesce into one.  Even among the industrialized democracies, there are enough dissimilarities in market economies, democratic governments, and attitudes towards human rights that make some believe that the differences between these nations outweigh the similarities. For example, Japan is frequently characterized as having a producer-oriented market economy, as compared with the consumer-oriented market economy of the United States. n120 In general, the members of the European Union more extensively regulate their economies than the United States, engaging at times in social engineering that seems contrary to market principles as interpreted by Americans. n121 In the area of criminal justice, the United States is virtually alone in permitting the death penalty and imprisons a much higher percentage  ~*467~  of its population than other industrialized democracies. n122  Nonetheless, the basic economic and political systems of different countries clearly share more similarities than ever before. When asked to characterize their existing economic and political systems, more people in more countries than ever before will respond that they have a and#34;marketand#34; economy, that their government is and#34;democratic,and#34; and that they protect and#34;human rights.and#34; Importantly, the convergence of values seems to be accompanying the convergence of systems. Certainly, most people in the industrialized democracies would view their existing economic and political systems as expressing the foundational values of their societies - the values that define their society. n123 The convergence of values along liberal demo-  ~*468~  cratic lines means that nations are better situated to negotiate wealth-maximizing trade  agreements and to resolve political disputes peacefully.  But in countries in transition from authoritarian to liberal democracy, many people may not yet fully accept their newly established economic and political systems as reflecting fundamental values of what is correct, proper, or right. Whether these transitional countries continue to establish or possess liberal democracies will depend upon how well the systems of liberal democracy work, an outcome that the industrialized democracies should strive vigorously to achieve. Workable systems can evolve into entrenched values.  Obviously, the implantation of the values of liberal democracy in Russia is of paramount concern. n124 Nurturing a democratic Russia is in the vital national interest of the United States (and the rest of the world) for very practical reasons - only Russia and the United States possess sufficient nuclear weapons to end human civilization. n125 Whether by unilateral or multilateral extensions of financial assistance or political inclusion, the industrialized democracies should do their utmost to make Russia a strong liberal democracy. Economic aid should be generous, and Russia should be incorporated into the activities of the industrialized democracies as much as possible. n126  Not all basic values are converging and nor, perhaps, should they. Religious values are not converging in the sense that the same general religion, such as Christianity, is taking root in a preponderance of countries. n127 Nevertheless, the convergence of economic and political values means that there is a greater basis for cooperation. For that reason, the  ~*469~  and#34;Westand#34; n128 - that is, the United States and the other industrialized democracies - should support the process of value convergence.  Sharing the same values creates similar expectations and a common ground for understanding. The more prevalent reliance upon market forces to direct production and consumption means that nations are more likely to trade with and invest in each other. The relative sameness of political values, for example, the prevelant use of negotiation rather than military force in settling disputes, means that nations can have greater trust in and less to fear from each other.The similarity of basic values also means that the different peoples of humanity are one step closer to viewing themselves primarily as part of one human society - the human race - though represented by different governments.   

2NC AT Impact Defense

Broad studies prove our argument
Royal, ’10 ~2010, Jedediah Royal is the Director of Cooperative Threat Reduction at the U.S. Department of Defense, and#34;Economic Integration, Economic Signaling and the Problem of Economic Crises, Economics of War and Peace: Economic, Legal and Political Perspectivesand#34;, ed. By Goldsmith and Brauer, p. 213-215~
Less intuitive is how periods of economic decline may increase the likelihood of external conflict
AND
such, the view presented here should be considered ancillary to those views.

2NC UQ WAll

Obama’s pivot away from Syria preserves his political capital for debt ceiling resolution

~* Also Answers Syria Thumper~
Bohan, 9/11 (Caren, 9/11/2013, and#34;Delay in Syria vote frees Obama to shift to hefty domestic agenda,and#34; http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/11/usa-obama-agenda-idUSL2N0H716N20130911-http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/11/usa-obama-agenda-idUSL2N0H716N20130911))

WASHINGTON, Sept 11 (Reuters) - Putting off a decision on military strikes on Syria allows President Barack Obama to shift his attention back to a weighty domestic agenda for the fall that includes budget fights, immigration and selecting a new chairman of the Federal Reserve.
Obama and his aides have immersed themselves for a week and a half in an intensive effort to win support in Congress for U.S. military action in Syria after a suspected chemical weapons attack last month killed more than 1,400 people.
But the effort, which included meetings by Obama on Capitol Hill on Tuesday followed by his televised speech to Americans, seemed headed for an embarrassing defeat, with large numbers of both Democrats and Republicans expressing opposition.
The push for a vote on Syria - which has now been delayed - had threatened to crowd out the busy legislative agenda for the final three months of 2013 and drain Obama’s political clout, making it harder for him to press his priorities.
But analysts said a proposal floated by Russia, which the Obama administration is now exploring, to place Syria’s weapons under international control may allow Obama to emerge from a difficult dilemma with minimal political damage.
and#34;He dodges a tough political situation this way,and#34; said John Pitney, professor of politics at Claremont McKenna College in California.
Pitney said the delay in the Syria vote removes a big burden for Obama, given that Americans, who overwhelmingly opposed military intervention in Syria, will now be able to shift their attention to other matters.
He said Obama could suffer some weakening of his leverage with Congress. The administration’s and#34;full court pressand#34; to try to persuade lawmakers to approve military force on Syria was heavily criticized and did not yield much success.
and#34;He probably has suffered some damage in Congress because there are probably many people on (Capitol Hill) who have increasing doubts about the basic competence of the administration and that’s a disadvantage in any kind of negotiation,and#34; Pitney said.
BUDGET BATTLES
Among Obama’s most immediate challenges are two looming budget fights. By Sept. 30, Congress and the president must agree on legislation to keep federal agencies funded or face a government shutdown.
Two weeks later, Congress must raise the limit on the country’s ability to borrow or risk a possible debt default that could cause chaos in financial markets.
On the first budget showdown, Obama may be at a strategic advantage because of divisions among opposition Republicans about whether to use the spending bill to provoke a fight over Obama’s signature health care law, known as Obamacare.
House Republican leaders are trying to rally the party around a temporary spending measure that would keep the government funded until Dec. 15 but are facing resistance within their own caucus from some conservatives who want to cut off funding for Obamacare, even if it means a government shutdown.
The debt limit fight could end up going down to the wire and unnerving financial markets. Republicans want to use that standoff to extract concessions from the Democratic president, such as spending cuts and a delay in the health law. But Obama has said he has no intention of negotiating over the borrowing limit.
Another challenge for Obama will be reviving momentum for immigration reform. Sweeping legislation that would grant a path to citizenship for 11 million undocumented immigrants has passed the Democratic-led Senate but has been stalled in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives.
Over the past week and half, lobbyists and other supporters of immigration reform have become worried that the Syria issue could doom the legislation in the House by limiting the amount of time lawmakers have to consider it.
But lobbyists are not ready to give up and have continued meeting with lawmakers to press the issue.
Some activists believe Obama could create pressure on Republicans to act by making greater use of the bully pulpit. The White House has sought to strike a balance between calling for action and giving Congress space to consider the issue.
Another pressing domestic matter will be picking a candidate to succeed Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, whose term expires in January. Obama has been leaning toward Lawrence Summers, a former top White House aide and Treasury secretary, who is controversial within his own Democratic Party.
Any candidate for Fed chairman will require confirmation by the U.S. Senate.
On issues like the budget battles in which Obama will go toe-to-toe with Republicans, the Syria push will have little fallout for Obama, predicted Matt Bennett, senior vice president at Third Way, a center-left think tank.
Republicans showed a huge resistance to Obama’s agenda well before the administration’s effort to win congressional backing on Syria began to falter, Bennett noted. He said the time focused on Syria over the last week and half did nothing to change that dynamic.
and#34;I certainly don’t think the situation he’s in today is markedly different from the one he faced a
few weeks ago,and#34; Bennett said.

Obama has leverage to increase debt ceiling now —- his capital is key

Khunhenn, 9/8 (Jim, The Associated Press, and#34;Issues test Obama’s persuasion, mobilizing skills,and#34; Lexis))

The tasks stacking up before President Barack Obama over the coming weeks will test his persuasion powers and his mobilizing skills more than any other time in his presidency.
How well Obama handles the challenges in the concentrated amount of time before him could determine whether he leads the nation from a position of strength or whether he becomes a lame duck one year into his second term.
Between now and the end of October, Obama must convince wary lawmakers that they should grant him authority to take military action against Syria; take on Congress in an economy-rattling debate over spending and the nation’s borrowing limit; and oversee a crucial step in the putting in place his prized health care law.
The Syria vote looms as his first, biggest and perhaps most defining challenge. His mission is persuading Congress and bringing the public along to approve armed action against the Syrian government in response to a chemical attack that Obama blames on President Bashar Assad’s government.
and#34;It’s conceivable that, at the end of the day, I don’t persuade a majority of the American people that it’s the right thing to do,and#34; Obama acknowledged in a news conference Friday.
His chief of staff, Denis McDonough, was asked on and#34;Fox News Sundayand#34; whether a congressional rejection might endanger Obama’s presidency, and he responded: and#34;Politics is somebody else’s concern. The president is not interested in the politics of this.and#34;
Presidents tend to have an advantage on issues of national security, a tradition demonstrated by the support Obama has won for action in Syria from the bipartisan leadership of the House. But that has not translated so far into firm support among the rank and file.
and#34;Congress can look presidents in the eye on a level gaze regarding the budget,and#34; the presidential historian H.W. Brands said. and#34;But on war and peace they have to look up to the president, he’s the commander in chief.
and#34;If he does lose, even if the loss comes about partly as a result from negative Democratic votes, the Republicans are going to get the bit in their teeth and say `We’re not going to give this guy anything,’and#34; said Brands, a professor at the University of Texas at Austin, said.
By that reasoning, success on Syria could give Obama some momentum.
and#34;If he gets the authority it shows that he’s not a lame duck, that he still has some power,and#34; said John Feehery, a Republican strategist and former House GOP leadership aide. and#34;If he doesn’t get the authority, it’s devastating. People see him as the lamest of lame ducks.and#34;
The Syria vote, however, is unusual and probably will not break along traditional partisan or ideological lines. Democrats and Republicans have voiced support and opposition to a military intervention. As a result, some White House officials believe their ability to influence issues that split along party lines is limited.
and#34;It becomes more of a stand-alone,and#34; said Republican pollster David Winston, who advises House Republican leaders. and#34;This is a decision distinct from internal domestic politics.and#34;
At the White House, Syria for now has eclipsed all other matters.
Obama spent the last two days in St. Petersburg, Russia, trying to build a coalition of support from among the members of the Group of 20 largest economies. Back home, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and Secretary of State John Kerry made their case to lawmakers in public and in private while Obama lobbied individual members by telephone.
On Tuesday, Obama will speak to the nation during an evening address from the
AND
week. The House would likely take the measure up the following week.
Win or lose, Obama and lawmakers then would run headlong into a debate over the budget.
Congress will have a limited window to continue government operations before the new budget year begins Oct. 1.
Congressional leaders probably will agree to hold spending at current budget levels for about two months or three months. That would delay a confrontation with the White House and pair a debate over 2014 spending levels with the government’s need to raise its current 2416.7 trillion borrowing limit. The Treasury says the government will hit that ceiling in mid-October.
Obama has been adamant that he will not negotiate over the debt limit. He says a similar faceoff in 2011 hurt the economy and caused Standard 26 Poors to lower its rating of the nation’s debt, which made it more expensive to borrow.
White House officials say they ultimately have leverage because they believe Republicans would be punished politically for playing brinkmanship and threatening the nation with a default.
The White House is counting on pressure from traditional Republican allies, particularly in the business sector. and#34;It is insane not to raise the debt ceiling,and#34; U.S. Chamber of Commerce President Thomas Donohue said last week on C-SPAN. Donohue pledged to find primary challengers against lawmakers who threaten a default.

Obama sticking to his guns now to not negotiate over the debt limit

AP, 9/10 (and#34;US could default on its debt obligations by mid-October, thinktank warns,and#34; 9/10/2013, http://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/sep/10/us-default-debt-obligations-october-thinktank-http://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/sep/10/us-default-debt-obligations-october-thinktank))

The United States could default on its obligations as early as October 18 if Washington fails to agree on legislation to raise the government’s borrowing cap, a new study predicted Tuesday.
The Bipartisan Policy Center analysis says the default date would come no later than November 5, and that the government would quickly fall behind on its payments, including social security benefits and military pensions.
The thinktank’s estimate is in line with a warning last month by Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew that the government would exhaust its borrowing authority by mid-October and be left with just 2450bn cash on hand.
The government has never defaulted on its obligations. Raising the 2416.7tn borrowing cap promises to be a major struggle for House Republicans and President Obama.
Two years ago Obama agreed to pair a 242.1tn increase in the debt limit with an equivalent amount in spending cuts spread over 10 years. But the president now says that he won’t negotiate over the debt limit and is asking Congress to send him a straightforward increase that would ensure the government can pay its bills.
In January, House Republicans permitted an increase in the debt ceiling without demanding offsetting spending cuts.

2nc Trade Off / Political Capital Key

Obama’s capital is key to raise debt ceiling

Bull 26 Younglai, 9/5 (Alister Bull and Rachelle Younglai, 9/5/2013, and#34;Analysis: Battle over Fed - Summers’ opponents seek to sway Obama,and#34; http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/05/us-usa-fed-summers-analysis-idUSBRE98414R20130905)-http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/05/us-usa-fed-summers-analysis-idUSBRE98414R20130905))

Still, some Washington veterans are perplexed that Obama is apparently willing to bypass Yellen, who is also viewed as well qualified, and are concerned that Obama risks an unnecessary congressional fight at a time when he could spend his political capital more wisely.
As well as battling for authorization to punish the use of chemical weapons by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, the White House must currently also persuade lawmakers to raise the U.S. debt ceiling and forge an agreement to fund the federal government for the fiscal year beginning in October.
and#34;Does Barack Obama want to play political football with the Congress on everything all fall?and#34; asked David Rothkopf, a former Clinton administration official who is now president of Garten Rothkopf, an international advisory firm.

AT: Thumpers

The issue of  has already been priced in to Obama’s political calculations but the plan hasn’t —- making it a unique link.

Economic issues are now Obama’s top priority

Sink, 9/12 (Justin, and#34;Obama signals shift back to economic focus,and#34; http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/economy/321793-obama-signals-shift-back-to-focus-on-the-economy-http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/economy/321793-obama-signals-shift-back-to-focus-on-the-economy))

The White House is signaling it wants to shift back to the economy after two weeks in which the Syrian crisis has dominated President Obama’s schedule and workload.
Obama will be and#34;focusingand#34; on issues related to the economy in the coming weeks, White House press secretary Jay Carney said Wednesday at his daily briefing.
He said the president wants to push forward with economic policies that the White House believes will grow the middle class.
Obama himself in his prime-time address to the nation Tuesday on Syria said voters wanted him focused on the economy and not on Syria. Public support for a military intervention in Syria is low.
and#34;I know Americans want all of us in Washington — especially me — to concentrate on the task of building our nation here at home: putting people back to work, educating our kids, growing our middle class,and#34; Obama said.
The president had wanted to use the beginning of September to press forward on his economic policies ahead of fights with Congress on government spending and debt.
Lawmakers must agree on a continuing resolution to fund the federal government by the end of September, which also marks the end of the fiscal year. If they fail to do so, the government would shut down, except for essential services.
The nation is also rapidly approaching the drop-dead date for hitting the debt ceiling, which restricts Washington’s ability to loan money and cover its payment obligations. An analysis released Tuesday by the Bipartisan Policy Center estimated the country would hit the debt ceiling sometime between Oct. 18 and Nov. 5.
Obama had hoped to enter those battles with momentum from a mid-August campaign-style tour that included a college bus trip through the Northeast, a visit to an Amazon shipping facility in Tennessee and a discussion of mortgage reform in Arizona.
The president had planned to continue that push this week, but that plan was knocked aside by the alleged use of chemical weapons by Syria’s government on Aug. 21.  
Obama’s scheduled travel to Los Angeles, where he was slated to speak before union members at the AFL-CIO convention, was canceled so he could make his case for military strikes on Syria.
Vice President Biden pressed the administration’s economic message with a Monday trip to Baltimore that highlighted a new 2410 million federal grant to widen the city’s port and better connect the shipping center to nearby rail lines.
But that trip was overshadowed by a dinner he hosted the previous night at the Naval Observatory, where he and Obama lobbied a group of Republican senators to back air strikes against Syria.
Carney acknowledged Wednesday that and#34;there is no question that Syria has consumed a lot of attention here in Washington, around the country, around the world.and#34;
But the White House spokesman refused to make a and#34;political assessmentand#34; about whether the situation in Syria had affected Obama’s domestic policy hand.
The administration and its allies seem ready to return to the economy.
On Monday, Organizing for Action, the political advocacy group born from the president’s reelection campaign, asked supporters to sign a petition demanding that Congress avert a government shutdown.
Rep. Gene Green (D-Texas) emerged Tuesday from a Syria briefing with White House chief of staff Denis McDonough predicting that Congress would now and#34;go back to our typical things, like the debt limit,and#34; according to Reuters.?
Indeed, attention on Capitol Hill seemed to have already shifted to the looming budget battle on Wednesday. House Republican leaders announced they would delay a vote on a continuing resolution that would have kept the government funded through Dec. 15, a move that highlighted the danger of a shutdown.
GOP leaders are struggling to win support for their plan to keep the government funded at current levels while forcing the Senate to vote on a measure defunding ObamaCare.

2NC AT LT

Plan will require tremendous political capital

Waxman, 13 —- law professor at Columbia  
(7/30/2013, Matthew, and#34;Closing Guantanamo Would Still Leave Some Toughest Decisions for the Next President,and#34; http://www.lawfareblog.com/2013/07/closing-guantanamo-would-still-leave-some-toughest-decisions-for-the-next-president/)-http://www.lawfareblog.com/2013/07/closing-guantanamo-would-still-leave-some-toughest-decisions-for-the-next-president/))

At last week’s Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing, advocates of closing Guantanamo, such as
AND
this seems to me to be the only realistic approach to closing Guantanamo.
Although pulling this off will require that President Obama spend tremendous political capital, it would actually push some very difficult decisions onto his successor’s shoulders, too.
Even if it closes Guantanamo along the lines laid out above, it’s very unlikely that the Obama administration will have prosecuted or found alternative security solutions abroad for some number of the most dangerous detainees (by most credible estimates, at least a few dozen).  It’s also very unlikely that they’ll simply release them – especially because whatever political deal Obama strikes to close Guantanamo will probably include assurances that he won’t do that.

Despite abstract support the plan will still empirically spur a backlash

Corcoran, 11 —- Professor of Law and Director at University of New Hampshire School of Law (March 2011, Erin M., University of New Hampshire Law Review, and#34;Obama’s Failed Attempt to Close Gitmo: Why Executive Orders Can’t Bring About Systemic Change,and#34; 9 U.N.H. L. Rev. 207))

With the public backing its shutdown, prominent Republicans and Democrats alike calling for its closure, and the President’s executive orders creating the framework and timeline for implementation, the end of U.S. detentions at Guantanamo Bay seemed a fait accompli. Yet, in 2011, Guantanamo Bay continues to operate and currently houses approximately 180 post-9/11 detainees who have  ~*209~  not been tried for any crimes. n10 This essay asks: Why, what happened?
The world watched in January 2009 as Obama delivered his promise to close Guantanamo Bay
AND
that resulted in the President failing to deliver on a key campaign promise?

Obama will get drawn into an escalation over the NDAA

National Journal 11 
(11/17, Obama Threatens Veto of Defense Authorization Bill, www.nationaljournal.com/nationalsecurity/obama-threatens-veto-of-defense-authorization-bill-20111117)
The debate over terrorism suspects on Thursday divided Democrats, with Senate Armed Services Committee
AND
its battle with Congress over the future course of the war on terror.

Political Capital Key to Agenda

Loss of capital prevents president from successfully passing legislation

Anderson, 5 —- Phd candidate in Philosophy at Ohio State (William David, THE PRESIDENT’S AGENDA: POSITION-TAKING, LEGISLATIVE SUPPORT, AND THE PERSISTENCE OF TIME, DISSERTATION, Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University, http://etd.ohiolink.edu/view.cgi/Anderson20William20David.pdf?osu1123169358-http://etd.ohiolink.edu/view.cgi/Anderson William David.pdf?osu1123169358)

Summary: The Importance of Political Time
Presidential capital wavers over time and is difficult to maintain after the honeymoon period subsides
AND
terms will take positions on votes and succeed in that activity less frequently.

Insiders believe political capital is true —- should be treated as such

Schier, 11 —- Professor of Political Science at Carleton College (December 2011, Steven E., Presidential Studies Quarterly, and#34;The Contemporary Presidency: The Presidential Authority Problem and the Political Power Trap,and#34; vol. 41, no. 4, Wiley Online Library)

The concept of political capital captures many of the aspects of a president’s political authority
AND
, a trend that is at the heart of their political authority problem.

2NR

AT: Syria Thumper

Syria won’t hurt Obama on other issues

Lerer, 9/12 (Lisa, and#34;Obama Syria Reversal Sets Stage for Fights With Congress,and#34; http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-12/obama-syria-reversal-sets-stage-for-fights-with-congress.html-http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-12/obama-syria-reversal-sets-stage-for-fights-with-congress.html))

No Effect
The White House and its allies argue that the debate over Syria won’t hurt Obama
AND
its chances of passage if there had been a vote in the House.
Those Democrats, Obama supporters say, will stick with the president on economic issues, while many of those Republicans will always be lined up against him.

Obama is pivoting back to domestic issues

Epstein, 9/12 (Reid J., and#34;After Syria crisis, Obama seeks pivot to domestic issues,and#34; http://www.politico.com/politico44/2013/09/after-syria-crisis-obama-seeks-pivot-to-domestic-issues-172494.html-http://www.politico.com/politico44/2013/09/after-syria-crisis-obama-seeks-pivot-to-domestic-issues-172494.html))

After three weeks of focusing on Syria, President Barack Obama still has a domestic agenda, he reminded a White House meeting of his Cabinet secretaries Thursday.
With Syria no longer consuming all of the White House energy, Obama said that and#34;it is still important to recognize that we have a lot of things left to do here in this government.and#34;

Tournament: Kentucky | Round: 2 | Opponent: Michigan AP | Judge: Tom Glinecki

1NC

1NC DA 1

Obama will prevail in the debt ceiling battle by maintaining a focused message and strong political image

Dovere and Epstein, 10/1 (EDWARD-ISAAC DOVERE and REID J. EPSTEIN, 10/1/2013, "Government shutdown: President Obama holds the line," http://www.politico.com/story/2013/10/government-shutdown-president-obama-holds-the-line-97646.html?hp=f3)
President Barack Obama started September in an agonizing, extended display of how little sway he had in Congress. He ended the month with a display of resolve and strength that could redefine his presidency.
All it took was a government shutdown.
This was less a White House strategy than simply staying in the corner the House GOP had painted them into — to the White House’s surprise, Obama was forced to do what he so rarely has as president: he said no, and he didn’t stop saying no.
For two weeks ahead of Monday night’s deadline, Obama and aides rebuffed the efforts
AND
of the cameras about Democratic priorities he might sacrifice to score a deal.
After five years of what’s often seen as Obama’s desperation to negotiate — to the fury of his liberal base and the frustration of party leaders who argue that he negotiates against himself. Even his signature health care law came with significant compromises in Congress.
Instead, over and over and over again, Obama delivered the simple line: Republicans want to repeal a law that was passed and upheld by the Supreme Court — to give people health insurance — or they’ll do something that everyone outside the GOP caucus meetings, including Wall Street bankers, seems to agree would be a ridiculous risk.
"If we lock these Americans out of affordable health care for one more year," Obama said Monday afternoon as he listed examples of people who would enjoy better treatment under Obamacare, "if we sacrifice the health care of millions of Americans — then they’ll fund the government for a couple more months. Does anybody truly believe that we won’t have this fight again in a couple more months? Even at Christmas?"
The president and his advisers weren’t expecting this level of Republican melee, a White
AND
until Saturday night, when the House voted again to strip Obamacare funding.
This wasn’t a credible position, Obama said again Monday afternoon, but rather, bowing to "extraneous and controversial demands" which are "all to save face after making some impossible promises to the extreme right wing of their political party."
Obama and aides have said repeatedly that they’re not thinking about the shutdown in terms of political gain, but the situation’s is taking shape for them. Congress’s approval on dealing with the shutdown was at 10 percent even before the shutters started coming down on Monday according to a new CNN/ORC poll, with 69 percent of people saying the House Republicans are acting like "spoiled children."
"The Republicans are making themselves so radioactive that the president and Democrats can win this debate in the court of public opinion" by waiting them out, said Jim Manley, a Democratic strategist and former aide to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid who has previously been critical of Obama’s tactics.
Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg said the Obama White House learned from the 2011 debt ceiling standoff, when it demoralized fellow Democrats, deflated Obama’s approval ratings and got nothing substantive from the negotiations.
"They didn’t gain anything from that approach," Greenberg said. "I think that there’s a lot they learned from what happened the last time they ran up against the debt ceiling."
While the Republicans have been at war with each other, the White House has proceeded calmly — a breakthrough phone call with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani Friday that showed him getting things done (with the conveniently implied juxtaposition that Tehran is easier to negotiate with than the GOP conference), his regular golf game Saturday and a cordial meeting Monday with his old sparring partner Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
White House press secretary Jay Carney said Monday that the shutdown wasn’t really affecting much of anything.
"It’s busy, but it’s always busy here," Carney said. "It’s busy for most of you covering this White House, any White House. We’re very much focused on making sure that the implementation of the Affordable Care Act continues."
Obama called all four congressional leaders Monday evening — including Boehner, whose staff spent Friday needling reporters to point out that the president hadn’t called for a week. According to both the White House and Boehner’s office, the call was an exchange of well-worn talking points, and changed nothing.
Manley advised Obama to make sure people continue to see Boehner and the House Republicans as the problem and not rush into any more negotiations until public outrage forces them to bend.
"He may want to do a little outreach, but not until the House drives the country over the cliff," Manley said Monday, before the shutdown. "Once the House has driven the country over the cliff and failed to fund the government, then it might be time to make a move."
The White House believes Obama will take less than half the blame for a shutdown – with the rest heaped on congressional Republicans.
The divide is clear in a Gallup poll also out Monday: over 70 percent of self-identifying Republicans and Democrats each say their guys are the ones acting responsibly, while just 9 percent for both say the other side is.
If Obama is able to turn public opinion against Republicans, the GOP won’t be able to turn the blame back on Obama, Greenberg said. "Things only get worse once things begin to move in a particular direction," he said. "They don’t suddenly start going the other way as people rethink this."

Despite Democratic opposition, attempts to control targeted killing will undermine Obama’s agenda

Hughes, 13 (2/6/2013, Brian, "Obama’s base increasingly wary of drone program," http://washingtonexaminer.com/obamas-base-increasingly-wary-of-drone-program/article/2520787)
The heightened focus on President Obama’s targeted killings of American terror suspects overseas has rattled members of his progressive base who have stayed mostly silent during an unprecedented use of secret drone strikes in recent years.
During the presidency of George W. Bush, Democrats, including then-Sen. Obama, hammered the administration for employing enhanced interrogation techniques, which critics labeled torture.
Liberals have hardly championed the president’s drone campaign but have done little to force changes in the practice, even as the White House touts the growing number al Qaeda casualties in the covert war.
The issue grates on some Democrats who backed Obama over Hillary Clinton because of her vote in favor of the war in Iraq, only to see the president ignore a campaign promise to close the detainee holding camp in Guantanamo, Cuba, and mount a troop surge in Afghanistan.
Sign Up for the Politics Today newsletter21
With the confirmation hearing Thursday for John Brennan, Obama’s nominee for CIA director — and the architect of the drone program — Democrats will have a high-profile opportunity to air their concerns over the controversial killings.
"You watch and see — the left wing of the party will start targeting Obama over this," said Larry Sabato, a political scientist at the University of Virginia. "It’s inevitable. The drumbeat will increase as time goes on, especially with each passing drone strike."
Obama late Wednesday decided to share with Congress’ intelligence committees the government’s legal reasoning for conducting drones strikes against suspected American terrorists abroad, the Associated Press reported. Lawmakers have long demanded to see the full document, accusing the Obama administration of stonewalling oversight efforts.
Earlier in the day, one Democrat even hinted at a possible filibuster of Brennan if given unsatisfactory answers about the drone program.
"I am going to pull out all the stops to get the actual legal analysis, because with out it, in effect, the administration is practicing secret law," said Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., a member of the Senate Select Intelligence Committee. "This position is no different ~than~ that the Bush administration adhered to in this area, which is largely ’Trust us, we’ll make the right judgments.’ "
In a Justice Department memo released this week, the administration argued it could order the killing of a suspected American terrorist even with no imminent threat to the homeland.
White House press secretary Jay Carney insisted on Wednesday that the administration had provided an "unprecedented level of information to the public" about the drone operations. Yet, questions remain about who exactly orders the killings, or even how many operations have been conducted.
"There’s been more noise from senators expressing increased discomfort ~with the drone program~," said Joshua Foust, a fellow at the American Security Project. "For Brennan, there’s going to be more opposition from Democrats than Republicans. It’s not just drones but the issue of torture."
Facing concerns from liberals, Brennan had to withdraw his name from the running for the top CIA post in 2008 over his connections to waterboarding during the Bush administration.
Since becoming president, Obama has championed and expanded most of the Bush-era terror practices that he decried while running for the White House in 2008.
It’s estimated that roughly 2,500 people have died in drone strikes conducted by the Obama administration.
However, most voters have embraced the president’s expanded use of drone strikes. A recent Pew survey found 62 percent of Americans approved of the U.S. government’s drone campaign against extremist leaders. And some analysts doubted whether Democratic lawmakers would challenged Obama and risk undermining his second-term agenda.
"Democrats, they’re going to want the president to succeed on domestic priorities and don’t want to do anything to erode his political capital," said Christopher Preble, vice president for defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute. "It’s just so partisan right now. An awful lot of ~lawmakers~ think the president should be able to do whatever he wants."

Obama’s hardline position against GOP negotiating demands key to prevent the GOP from dragging the process out and triggering economic collapse

Lobello, 8/27 —- business editor at TheWeek.com (Carmel, 8/27/2013, "How the looming debt ceiling fight could screw up the U.S. economy; Yup, this is happening — again," http://theweek.com/article/index/248775/how-the-looming-debt-ceiling-fight-could-screw-up-the-us-economy))

Having two big deadlines fall two weeks apart could be a recipe for disaster. Republicans, led by Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), have been musing about the possibility of using the debt ceiling, instead of a government shutdown, as leverage to delay the implementation of ObamaCare.
But as Ezra Klein put it in The Washington Post, "Trading a government shutdown for a debt-ceiling breach is like trading the flu for septic shock":
Anything Republicans might fear about a government shutdown is far more terrifying amidst a debt-ceiling breach. The former is an inconvenience. The latter is a global financial crisis. It’s the difference between what happened in 1995, when the government did shutdown, and what happened in 2008, when global markets realized a bedrock investment they thought was safe (housing in that case, U.S. treasuries in this one) was full of risk. ~The Washington Post~
Indeed, a debt ceiling debate in 2011 that went on to the last possible minute had real economic consequences, leading Standard 26 Poor’s to downgrade the United States’ credit rating. The move "left a clear and deep dent in US economic and market data," said Matt Phillips at Quartz.
Investors pulled huge amounts of cash from the stock market, and consumer confidence was hurt as well. When the same problem cropped up again in May 2012, because Congress failed to reach a long-term deal, Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers in Bloomberg explained how confidence plummeted the first time around:
~Confidence~ went into freefall as the political stalemate worsened through July. Over the entire episode, confidence declined more than it did following the collapse of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. in 2008. After July 31, when the deal to break the impasse was announced, consumer confidence stabilized and began a long, slow climb that brought it back to its starting point almost a year later. ~Bloomberg~
This morning, Wolfers had this to say:
Treasury Secretary Jack Lew visited CNBC Tuesday morning to reiterate President Obama’s promise not to go down he same road. "The president has made it clear: We’re not going to negotiate over the debt limit," Lew said.

This will destroy the U.S. and global economy and collapse trade

Davidson, 9/10 (Adam - co-founder of NPR’s "Planet Money" 9/10/2013, "Our Debt to Society," http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/15/magazine/our-debt-to-society.html?pagewanted=all26_r=0))

This is the definition of a deficit, and it illustrates why the government needs
AND
they raise the debt ceiling — if they even raise it at all.
If the debt ceiling isn’t lifted again this fall, some serious financial decisions will
AND
by most accounts, the largest self-imposed financial disaster in history.
Nearly everyone involved predicts that someone will blink before this disaster occurs. Yet a
AND
record of that happening to the country that controls the global reserve currency.
Like many, I assumed a self-imposed U.S. debt crisis
AND
would collapse far worse than anything we’ve seen in the past several years.
Instead, Robert Auwaerter, head of bond investing for Vanguard, the world’s largest
AND
. Indeed, interest rates would fall and the bond markets would soar.
While this possibility might not sound so bad, it’s really far more damaging than
AND
U.S. would lose its unique role in the global economy.
The U.S. benefits enormously from its status as global reserve currency and
AND
free asset more risky, the entire global economy becomes riskier and costlier.

The impact is global nuclear war

Freidberg 26 Schonfeld, 8 —- *Professor of Politics and IR at Princeton’s Woodrow Wilson School, AND senior editor of Commentary and a visiting scholar at the Witherspoon Institute in Princeton (10/21/2008, Aaron and Gabriel, "The Dangers of a Diminished America", Wall Street Journal, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122455074012352571.html?mod=googlenews_wsj)

With the global financial system in serious trouble, is America’s geostrategic dominance likely to diminish? If so, what would that mean?
One immediate implication of the crisis that began on Wall Street and spread across the
AND
hurting, there will be calls for various and expensive domestic relief programs.
In the face of this onrushing river of red ink, both Barack Obama and
AND
role, and perhaps even a new era of financially-induced isolationism.
Pressures to cut defense spending, and to dodge the cost of waging two wars, already intense before this crisis, are likely to mount. Despite the success of the surge, the war in Iraq remains deeply unpopular. Precipitous withdrawal — attractive to a sizable swath of the electorate before the financial implosion — might well become even more popular with annual war bills running in the hundreds of billions.
Protectionist sentiments are sure to grow stronger as jobs disappear in the coming slowdown. Even before our current woes, calls to save jobs by restricting imports had begun to gather support among many Democrats and some Republicans. In a prolonged recession, gale-force winds of protectionism will blow.
Then there are the dolorous consequences of a potential collapse of the world’s financial architecture
AND
assets as a safe haven. Will this be possible in the future?
Meanwhile, traditional foreign-policy challenges are multiplying. The threat from al Qaeda and Islamic terrorist affiliates has not been extinguished. Iran and North Korea are continuing on their bellicose paths, while Pakistan and Afghanistan are progressing smartly down the road to chaos. Russia’s new militancy and China’s seemingly relentless rise also give cause for concern.
If America now tries to pull back from the world stage, it will leave a dangerous power vacuum. The stabilizing effects of our presence in Asia, our continuing commitment to Europe, and our position as defender of last resort for Middle East energy sources and supply lines could all be placed at risk.
In such a scenario there are shades of the 1930s, when global trade and finance ground nearly to a halt, the peaceful democracies failed to cooperate, and aggressive powers led by the remorseless fanatics who rose up on the crest of economic disaster exploited their divisions. Today we run the risk that rogue states may choose to become ever more reckless with their nuclear toys, just at our moment of maximum vulnerability.
The aftershocks of the financial crisis will almost certainly rock our principal strategic competitors even
AND
country where political legitimacy rests on progress in the long march to prosperity.
None of this is good news if the authoritarian leaders of these countries seek to divert attention from internal travails with external adventures.
As for our democratic friends, the present crisis comes when many European nations are struggling to deal with decades of anemic growth, sclerotic governance and an impending demographic crisis. Despite its past dynamism, Japan faces similar challenges. India is still in the early stages of its emergence as a world economic and geopolitical power.
What does this all mean? There is no substitute for America on the world stage. The choice we have before us is between the potentially disastrous effects of disengagement and the stiff price tag of continued American leadership.

1NR

2NC O/V

Economic collapse causes explosive global conflict with China and Russia.
Auslin, History Professor at Yale, ’9 (Michael, March 6, "The Global Economy Unravels" http://www.forbes.com/2009/03/06/global-economy-unravels-opinions-contributors-g20.html)
Conversely, global policymakers do not seem to have grasped the downside risks to the
AND
may be a series of small explosions that coalesce into a big bang.

Economic decline crushes relations 
Sanders, ’90 ~Jerry W. Sanders 90, Prof. Peace and Conflict Studies, UC, Berkeley ~"Global Ecology and World Economy: Collision Course or Sustainable Future", Bulletin of Peace Proposals Vol. 21 (4)  p. 395-401~

Circumstances of looming catastrophe like these call for a maximum of world order and international
AND
, with one nation after another forced into escalating confrontation along several fronts.

Turns democracy
Seita, Law Professor at Albany, ’97 (Alex, "Globalization and the Convergence of Values" Cornell International Law Journal, lexis)
Law has been important in managing economic globalization and may become as important with respect to political globalization. 7 The ideology of globalization can be broadly divided into substantive and procedural components. The most important procedural element is the rule of law - the idea that disputes will be settled and agreements negotiated through the observance of established principles rather than the use of force or the intimidation of power. 8 In turn, the substantive principles, what the rule of law seeks to enforce, are those that nations have selected to settle disputes and negotiate agreements. The rule of law can be a way of resolving conflicts effectively, peacefully, and cooperatively. Furthermore, globalization enhances the perceived importance of distant international problems relative to local problems. Thus, protection of the environment beyond national borders has attracted strong international support, and the conflict between environment protection and economic development created the global issue of sustainable development. 9  ~*431~  On the downside, technology together with economic and political globalization can facilitate the movement of criminal and terrorist activities across national boundaries and help criminals and terrorists to operate like efficient international businesses. 10 Most significantly for this Article, however, globalization is an important source of common economic and political values for humanity. Globalization is simultaneously a cause and a consequence of the convergence of basic economic and political systems among nations. As the activities of globalization help to converge economic and political systems, their existence reciprocally facilitates the expansion of globalization. Momentously, the convergence of these systems is leading to the convergence of fundamental values - deeply held beliefs about what is right and wrong. 11 There is a widespread, though not universal, acceptance among nations of the basic values of liberal democracy: a market economy (or free markets), a democratic government, and the protection of human rights.  Although particular details may differ from country to country, the general nature of these values is the same. The convergence of basic economic and political values among nations is a pivotal event because it is a necessary, though not sufficient, condition for the eventual emergence of a consensus among human beings that there is but one human race. 12 This Article argues that the United States and the other industrialized democracies (e.g., the members of the European Union, Japan, and Canada), collectively referred to as the "West," 13 should vigorously support and substantially guide the process of globalization. As it is currently emerging, globalization fosters desirable common national values by advancing general forms of market economies, democracy, and human rights. 14 It is precisely those general characteristics of liberal democracy that constitute the foundational pillars and shared values of the United States and the other industrialized democracies. 15 Because the exact form of globalization is not a fixed certainty, the United States and the other industrialized democracies should aggressively configure globalization to be consistent with and to promote the values of  liberal democracy. The industrialized democracies must also ensure that the path of globalization fairly balances the values of free market economics, democracy, and human rights, while accommodating such vital concerns as the protection of the environment, concerns that do not yet generate as strong a global consensus as the three convergent values. 16 The mechanism for configuring globalization to conform to and to balance the values of liberal democracy consists of events and policies that, while difficult to achieve, are not unrealistic and have, to a degree, already been occurring. 17 A particularly useful event might be a catharsis that would place the world into the next millennium without the baggage of the past. Perhaps by the year 2001, the representatives of oppressors, victims, victors, losers, and adversaries could assemble on a world stage in a therapeutic ceremony to put the past behind. 18 Given their economic preeminence in the world, by acting in unison the industrialized democracies should be able to determine the specific content of globalization. Action from the industrialized democracies is needed because a humane globalization will increase human wealth and reduce human suffering. 19 Morally, the promotion of liberal democratic values and the perspective of a single human race would serve to repay the historic debts that the industrialized countries have incurred over the past centuries. 20 At the same time, the industrialized democracies must be careful to use their influence responsibly and sensitively, for the wisest ideas pursued for the best motives may be rejected when unilaterally imposed upon the rest of the world. Perceived economic and political "imperialism," though much less malevolent than military imperialism, will not be warmly greeted. The primary vehicle for the industrialized democracies should be the "rule of law" - assuming that they have a substantial, if not commanding voice in determining its underlying principles. An enlightened globalization will not lead to the establishment of a world government. It could, however, create a new attitude among human beings and serve the interests of the United States. 21 More profoundly, advancing globalization will facilitate an event barely begun that holds the great potential of constructing, in the distant future, the perspective that the human race matters more than its component divisions along race, religion, or ethnicity. The vision of a common humanity is reason enough to embrace globalization. I. The Background of Globalization Today, more than ever, the events of foreign lands have important economic and political consequences for local inhabitants. To be sure, foreign events have had significant ramifications in the past. Centuries ago, seminal inventions in China revolutionized the culture, science, and warfare of Europeans; the opening of American borders to European immigrants from the 19th through the mid-20th centuries gave millions a new home; and the conflicts in Europe during WorldWarI eventually brought the United States onto the European battleground. 23 But these events were of sporadic importance. For example, after World War I ended, the United States isolated itself in a number of respects from international politics and trade; America declined membership in the League of Nations and enacted the Smoot-Hawley tariffs in 1931 which drastically reduced imports. 24 By contrast, transnational activities and affairs now have continuous importance, repeatedly affecting not just distant countries, but also the entire global community at times. The continuous importance of international events is a defining characteristic of globalization. Another feature of globalization with potentially profound implications is the convergence of basic economic and political values among nations towards the liberal democratic values of the industrialized democracies, the "West." 25 For the West, the liberal, democratic values of market  ~*434~  economies, democracy, and human rights are fundamental. 26 Given the arguably shallow roots of liberal democratic values in a number of countries and the absence of democracy and human rights in many others, this process may perhaps be too incomplete to be described as a convergence of  ~*435~  fundamental values. Nevertheless, today there are greater similarities between the economic and political systems of nations than at any other time in the short history of globalization. 27 With careful and generous support from the West, this similarity of systems may evolve into a similarity of fundamental values. A. Globalization’s Beginning Identifying the birth of globalization is an elusive task, but one possible date is the year 1945, when the United States led the Allied powers in creating the United Nations and its companion international organizations, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (World Bank). 28 Later in 1948, the United States and its democratic allies established the General Agreement on Tar-  ~*436~  iffs and Trade (GATT), another important economic institution for globalization along with the IMF and the World Bank. 29 The motivations for creating these international institutions were at once noble and selfish. After the devastating experience of World War II, the victorious Allies were determined to prevent any reoccurrence of similar world wars. Their motivating hope was that a collegial body of nations would ensure the peaceful resolution of conflicts and provide a collective defense against wrongful aggression. 30 Thus, the United Nations was the focus of political attempts to prevent future acts of aggression. Further, unlike the League of Nations, the United Nations made the promotion of human rights one of its basic purposes. 31 Toward that end, the United Nations created various human rights institutions and generated human rights conventions and  ~*437~  declarations. 32 At the same time, the Allies thought it critical to lay the foundations for the economic prosperity of the international community. 33 Prosperous countries, it was thought, would be less inclined to wage wars. Thus, the Allies promoted activities that would raise the standard of living among peaceful countries. For example, the Allies established international economic institutions which were in part created to promote international monetary cooperation (the IMF), to foster economic development in less developed countries (the World Bank), and to increase international trade (the GATT). 34  ~*438~  The creation of the United Nations, the IMF, the World Bank, and the GATT were key moments in globalization. These institutions signaled the start of an era of cooperative behavior, however imperfect, among nations. While the number of nations involved was limited, their cooperation required the development and formal recognition of common interests. The GATT and the United Nations, in particular, were critical components in the genesis of globalization. 35 In seeking to reduce barriers to trade of goods, the GATT contained free market principles that favored lower tariffs, banned quotas, and prohibited discrimination against foreign goods. 36 The United Nations, at least on paper, championed the principles of human rights and democratic forms of government. 37 As these principles  ~*439~  gained international acceptance, economic and political norms developed. That is, common values emerged. B. Economic Globalization In current usage, the term globalization refers primarily to economic globalization. As barriers to trade, investment, financial flows, and technology transfers have fallen, there has been an expansion of markets for goods, services, financial capital, and intellectual property to transnational, regional, and even global dimensions. 38 There are several hallmarks of economic globalization. First, it increases opportunities for sellers as well as buyers. Second, economic globalization simultaneously creates new competition. Third, it develops interdependency among nations. Finally, economic globalization spreads the ideology of the free market economy model because the industrialized nations, the major promoters of globalization, advocate free market policies. The enlargement of markets beyond national boundaries means that both sellers and buyers have greater choices. More firms issue equity  ~*440~  securities in, or obtain financing from, international markets. 39 They also find it profitable to sell their goods and services in, or buy their raw materials or components from, international markets. Worldwide trade now amounts to an astonishingly large figure, six trillion dollars in 1995, more than 80 the size of the gross domestic product of the United States, the world’s largest economy. 40 The existence of greater choice also extends to investment opportunities. Companies are investing in foreign countries, buying assets such as securities, businesses, facilities, and land, and have shifted production to  ~*441~  foreign factories. 41 Concurrently, sellers of such domestic assets now have  ~*442~  more buyers to choose from. The liberalization of investment opportunities - the removal of barriers - contributes to the liberalization of trade, and vice versa. 42 Expanding markets simultaneously generates more competition along with more opportunities; 43 domestic firms must compete not only with domestic but also foreign rivals. While benefiting domestic consumers, foreign competition may threaten domestic businesses and employees. 44 Whether the foreign competition comes from imports or the local subsidiaries of foreign corporations, employees of domestic firms may lose their jobs as these firms lay off surplus employees in order to become more competitive. 45 Where local subsidiaries of foreign corporations provide competition, however, these subsidiaries will create new jobs that replace, in  ~*443~  part, jobs lost at domestic firms. 46 One of the major consequences of increased foreign competition and the domestic drive for efficiency is that countries have become more willing to privatize and deregulate. 47 By making foreign countries important sources of consumers, investors, and suppliers, globalization creates interdependence. When domestic businesses buy from and sell to foreign markets, their financial welfare becomes linked to those markets. More domestic companies have evolved into multinational corporations, firms that have economic interests in several countries. Businesses set up partnerships with foreign firms, to share technology and risk, in order to create new products. 48 Because customers as well as suppliers are foreign, firms in one country become economically dependent upon firms in other countries. When foreign firms likewise become dependent upon domestic markets, interdependence is established as the economic prosperity of one nation becomes connected to that of other countries. For virtually all countries, transnational trade is important, if not vital, to their economic prosperity. 49 As economic globalization integrates various national markets into regional or world-wide markets, it also promotes general free market prin-  ~*444~  ciples, such as the quintessential concept of the market mechanism to allocate resources, 50 reduce protectionism in international trade, 51 and  ~*445~  privatize and deregulate. 52 Well before the collapse of the Soviet Union or even the end of the Cold War, the market economy (free market) paradigm of the West emerged as the decisive winner in the economic contest with the command (or planned) economy paradigm of the Soviet bloc. 53 Since globalization is being led by the corporations and governments in the capitalist economies of the industrialized democracies, it naturally advocates the ideology of the winners rather than the losers. Thus, the rules underlying globalization seek to expand markets among market economy rather than command economy principles. 54 For example, the WTO espouses the implementation of free-market ground rules to cover international trade and trade-related aspects of  ~*446~  investment and intellectual property. 55  n55. The IMF and the World Bank, too, have promoted market economy principles. See, e.g., James supra note 28, at 323 (IMF conditionality, the terms on which it will lend, has often required budgetary and domestic credit restraints, as well as trade liberalization); World Bank, The East Asian Miracle: Economic Growth and Public Policy 10 (1993) ~hereinafter East Asian Miracle~ (advocating a "market friendly" strategy in which "the appropriate role of government is to ensure adequate investments in people, provide a competitive climate for private enterprise, keep the economy open to international trade, and maintain a stable macroeconomy"); Barend A. de Vries, Remaking the World Bank 6, 56-58 (1987) (describing how the World Bank has encouraged decentralized planning rather than command-type central planning, and has made substantial loans to help borrowing nations increase their economies’ efficiency and competitiveness, such as by liberalizing trade); cf. John Williamson, Introduction, in IMF Conditionality, supra note 34, at xiii (stating that one complaint of borrowing countries is that the IMF is "ideologically biased in favor of free markets and against socialism"). At this time, however, the WTO is the most important of the international economic institutions in carrying out the implementation of free market principles, primarily the idea of opening markets (liberalizing trade) among countries. The WTO agreements have gone beyond the GATT in covering trade in services as well as trade-related aspects of intellectual property and trade-related investment measures. See General Agreement on Trade in Services, Apr. 15, 1994, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1B, 33 I.L.M. 44 (1994); Agreement on The Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property, Including Trade in Counterfeit Goods, Apr. 15, 1994, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1C, 33 I.L.M. 81 (1994); Agreement on Trade-Related Investment Measures, Agreements on Trade in Goods, Apr. 15, 1994, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1A, available in http://itl.irv.uit.no/trade law/documents/freetrade (visited Mar. 29, 1997). Further, the WTO agreements address more meaningfully the subjects of agriculture, textiles, and apparel. See Agreement on Agriculture, Agreements on Trade in Goods, Apr. 15, 1994, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1A, available in http://itl.irv.uit.no/trade law/documents/freetrade (visited Mar. 29, 1997); Agreement on Textiles and Clothing, Agreements on Trade in Goods, Apr. 15, 1994, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1A, available in http://itl.irv.uit.no/trade law/documents/freetrade (visited Mar. 29, 1997). Its rules go further than those of the GATT, its predecessor in carrying out the free market principle of comparative advantage by stamping out protectionism among nations. 56 When tools of protectionism - such as tariffs, quotas, or domestic subsidies - are reduced, foreign imports can better enter a domestic market, creating more competition for local firms.  n56. For instance, the WTO makes a member’s subsidy to its domestic industry actionable by another member if its effect "is to displace or impede the imports of a like product of another Member into the market of the subsidizing Member." Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, Agreements on Trade in Goods, Apr. 15, 1994, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1A, art. 6.3(a), available in http://itl.irv.uit.no/trade law/documents/freetrade (visited Mar. 29, 1997). The presence of increased competition contributes to the development of more efficient local firms as only the fittest firms will survive in a competitive marketplace. The use of a market and consumer choice, rather than a bureaucracy, to determine the survival of firms and products is the essence of a free market. 57 Not surprisingly, the various WTO agreements are expected to substantially  ~*447~  increase global income. 58 C. Political Globalization As economic globalization expands, it has been accompanied by a somewhat lesser degree of political globalization in that there are now substantial numbers of elected governments. 59 Also, the rhetoric of human rights has gained universal acceptance, and more nations than ever before have pledged to protect human rights. 60 With political globalization, there is  ~*448~  more than just the existence of elected governments and the recognition of human rights by governments. Political globalization has also tended to cause a convergence in political values, with the genuine acceptance of democracy and human rights in a greater number of countries. Compared to the convergence in economic values, the convergence of political values has had a more difficult path. The growth of economic globalization was championed by countries that realized they would gain economically by increased foreign trade. Even the command-economy communist nations sought trade with the capitalist economies of the West. 61 Well before the end of the Cold War, some communist nations even embraced capitalism to an extent. As events in China have clearly shown, dictatorship and a dismal human rights record have not been incompatible with free market policies. 62 Unlike economic globalization, the support for political globalization historically has been weak, perhaps because its benefits were not as obvious or immediate. Despite their long history predating free market principles, the political values of democracy and human rights have been more dishonored by breach than honored by observance. 63 Most countries did  ~*449~  not espouse them, and those that did applied these concepts selectively. 64 For decades after the end of World WarII, the spread of humanitarian political values had to contend with severe obstacles. 65 For much of the  ~*450~  existence of the United Nations, the most important international organization devoted to the promotion of democracy and human rights, many of its leading members either did not observe democratic values or human rights domestically, or subordinated these values to other priorities in foreign affairs. 66 Despite initial obstacles, however, these political values slowly developed roots in non-western countries. Even before the end of the Cold War, the past two decades saw the emergence of a greater number of countries with democratic governments and protective of human rights. 67 These countries offer political rights and  ~*451~  civil liberties that make them different in kind from past authoritarian regimes. With the end of the Cold War, many of the former Soviet-allied countries established popularly elected governments. Earlier, elected governments emerged from dictatorships in Latin America, Asia, and Africa. 68 As the transformation of South Africa - the former bastion of apartheid - into a democratic country shows, the unbelievable can happen. The outlook today is promising for the values of democracy and, to a lesser extent, human rights. First, with the triumph of liberal democracy over communism in the Cold War, 69 the United States and its allies can now more vigorously pursue humanitarian rather than security objectives. Second, the commonality of democracy and human rights in nations has provided more reason for these nations to cooperate among themselves in trade, humanitarian, and security matters, as well as in trying to nurture the qualities of democracy and human rights in authoritarian countries. The remaining authoritarian strongholds face pressures to democratize, and to recognize some level of human rights. 70 Democracy has been easier to achieve than the protection of human rights, perhaps because the implementation of democracy is technically more easily accomplished (e.g., a popularly elected government), while there may be disagreement over which rights are basic human rights and how these basic rights are to be protected. 71 Furthermore, elected governments need not necessarily protect human rights, especially in nascent  ~*452~  democracies which may have problems of illiteracy, corruption, authoritarian traditions, ethnic or religious conflicts, and a winner-takes-all political system. 72 The value of democratic governments is that their actions reflect the desires of a majority of the people rather than the wishes of a tyrant or a select few. Democracy is arguably the most basic human right because it recognizes the sovereignty of the people in that a government pursues policies which the majority of the people support through their freely elected representatives. The preferences of at least a majority of its population, rather than the desires of a select few, influence democratic governments. Democratic governments are much more likely to respect human rights, at least those of the majority, than authoritarian regimes which are unaccountable to an electorate. Of course, democracy is not itself a sufficient condition for a humane society, since a majority may persecute or subjugate a minority in a democratic society. 73 A practical benefit of mature democracies, those having democratic governments for a long period of time, is that they substantially protect a wide variety of human rights and are much less likely to use military force to resolve conflicts. 74  ~*453~  Despite disagreement over the extent to which human rights should be protected, some level of human rights protection exists for a substantial percentage, if not the majority, of the world’s population. 75 For an increasing number of countries, there seems to be a real, as opposed to a rhetorical, acceptance of some form of human rights. While inadequate and imperfect, this is an enormous improvement over the past. While outrageous examples of inhumanity still occur, such as in Rwanda, they are universally condemned.  In an indirect way, the cultural impact of economic globalization stimulates political globalization. Economic globalization has long introduced aspects of foreign cultures - especially American culture - either directly by the sale of merchandise such as movies and musical recordings, or indirectly through exposure to foreigners. 77 More than in the past,  the opening of new markets through economic globalization has brought a flood of people and companies into foreign lands. Personal contact, always so important in understanding other human beings, has made foreigners less inscrutable. More business personnel are assigned to overseas offices, more consumers travel abroad as tourists, and more students study in foreign countries. 78 Local residents are more likely than ever before to work for, do business with, or personally know foreigners. In some cases, this transnational encounter may lead to a personal affinity with or an in-depth understanding of foreign cultures. 79  ~*455~  Further, economic globalization has generated an interest in learning foreign languages, primarily English. Perhaps irreversibly, English has become the international language of business and science, with a broader usage than any other language. 80 At the same time, the ability to speak a foreign language other than English gives one a competitive advantage in doing business in nonEnglish-speaking countries. 81 Doing business with foreigners, in their country or in one’s own, requires that one communicate with them, cooperate with them, and be exposed to their political and business values. 82 The political values of democracy and human rights, as well as aspects of foreign cultures, are often inseparable (though secondary) components of economic globalization. Thus, countries that seek to benefit from economic globalization must frequently tolerate political globalization and exposure to foreign cultures. As people know more about foreign cultures, some familiarity with foreign political values is bound to arise. II. Technology’s Vital Role in Converging Values The advanced communication technology that links much of the world together continues to be crucial to the convergence of economic and political values. This technology is utilized primarily by business entities to facilitate economic globalization. 83 Modern technology has also tended to promote democracy and human rights by making it easier and cheaper for  ~*456~  people to communicate without censorship across national boundaries. Communication technology not only exposes a national population to foreign ideas, but also concurrently exposes domestic conditions to a global audience. qThis has occurred because economic globalization involves communication technologies with multiple uses. The same technology that transmits a business proposal may also communicate politically embarrassing or other non-business information. These multiple uses of advanced technology cannot easily be separated from each other, making it difficult to restrict the technology to purely business purposes. A country that wishes to participate in international business cannot isolate itself from all uses of communication technologies unrelated to business dealings. 84 The internet 85 is a recent communication medium with tremendous potential for linking people across national boundaries, furthering mutual interests of the international community, and a myriad of other uses. 86 The internet will become, or may already be, an important or even critical technological medium for business, as well as for scientific research and consumer enjoyment. 87 The internet is the essential part of the "informa-  ~*457~  tion superhighway," a source of information that promises to change fundamentally human lives. 88 E-mail and computer file transmission on the internet can potentially provide a more powerful (e.g., faster, cheaper, more convenient) business tool than such conventional devices as the postal service, telephones, and faxes. Internet users can transmit and download data, articles, images, movies, speeches, sound recordings, and other information. 89 By providing a forum for the transfer of such information, the internet will help protect the freedoms of expression and choice for followers of any ideological persuasion. 90 Unfortunately, however, it may shield criminal, obscene,  ~*458~  racist, and terrorist activities as well. 91 A government might attempt to control the content of information transfers. It could screen large numbers of telephone calls, faxes, or computer data; it could restrict access to or intercept messages on the internet. Total censorship, however, would bring a halt to international business. 92 Firms might object if government surveillance is too pervasive. For example, companies might not want government officials to be privy to proprietary information. 93 A certain amount of freedom of communication is therefore assured if a country wishes to be part of a global economy: international firms will leave a nation if censorship prohibitively increases the cost of doing business. This will remain true even if governments attempt to censor communications using the most advanced and cost-effective surveillance technology available. 94  ~*459~  Communication technologies not essential to international business transactions also serve to bolster humanitarian political values. International news reporting utilizes communication technologies to broadcast major domestic events of all types on a worldwide screen. There are numerous journalists, broadcasters, and commentators whose professional livelihood depends upon bringing newsworthy stories to a foreign, if not international, audience. While most publicized stories may not involve political events, many do. The competitive members of the news media are unlikely to let stories of outrageous acts completely escape the attention of the international public. Furthermore, these news articles may be read by anyone in the world who has access to the internet. 95 At the same time, news stories alone would not generate international repercussions against repressive governments if purely theoretical political values were involved. There must be influential constituencies that place high priority on the existence of democracy and human rights, that seek to spread those values, and that are galvanized into action upon news of deplorable political conditions. Neither value would flourish unless there were constituencies, either domestic or abroad, that strongly supported it. The presence of democratic governments and strong protections for human rights in the industrialized countries means that these values are expressed to some degree in their business transactions with other countries. 96 Sizable populations in the industrialized countries also attempt to support democracy and human rights abroad through private means. 97 Moreover, as the living standards of developing countries improve, the citizenry of these countries seem to expect more democratization (first) and  ~*460~  human rights (later). 98 III. The Importance of Globalization Because globalization promotes common values across nations and can make foreign problems, conditions, issues, and debates as vivid and captivating as national, state, and local ones, it contributes to a sense of world community. 99 It develops a feeling of empathy for the conditions of people abroad, enlarging the group of human beings that an individual will identify with. Globalization thus helps to bring alive persons in foreign lands, making them fellow human beings who simply live in different parts of the world rather than abstract statistics of deaths, poverty, and suffering. The convergence of basic political and economic values is thus fundamentally important because it helps to establish a common bond among people in different countries, facilitating understanding and encouraging cooperation. All other things being equal, the commonality among countries - whether in the form of basic values, culture, or language - enhances their attractiveness to each other. 100 In addition, convergence increases the possibility that a transformation of attitude will take place for those who participate in transnational activities. People will begin to regard foreigners in distant lands with the same concern that they have for their fellow citizens. 101 They will endeavor to help these foreigners obtain basic political rights even though the status of political rights in other countries will have no tangible beneficial impact at home. 102 Convergence does not mean that there is a single model of a market economy, a single type of democracy, or a single platform of human rights. They exist in different forms, and nations may have different combinations of these forms. 103  ~*462~  A. The Perspective of One Human Race The convergence of fundamental values through globalization has profound consequences because it increases the chance that a new perspective will develop, one which views membership in the human race as the most significant societal relationship, except for nationality. 104 A person owes his or her strongest collective loyalties to the various societies with which he or she most intensely identifies. Today, this societal identification can be based on numerous factors, including nationality, race, religion, and ethnic group. 105 While it is unlikely that nationality will be surpassed as the most significant societal relationship, globalization and the convergence of values may eventually convince people in different countries that the second most important social group is the human race, and not a person’s racial, religious, or ethnic group. 106 One of the first steps in the formation of a society is the recognition by prospective members that they have common interests and bonds. An essential commonality is that they share some fundamental values. A second is that they identify themselves as members belonging to the same community on the basis of a number of common ties, including shared fundamental values. A third commonality is the universality of rights - the active application of the "golden rule" - by which members expect that all must be entitled to the same rights as well as charged with the same responsibilities to ensure that these rights are protected. Globalization promotes these three types of commonalities. Globalization establishes common ground by facilitating the almost universal acceptance of market economies, the widespread emergence of democratic governments, and the extensive approval of human rights. The most visible example is economic. With the end of the Cold War, the free market economy has clearly triumphed over the command economy in the battle of the  ~*463~  economic paradigms. Because some variant of a market economy has taken root in virtually all countries, there has been a convergence of sorts in economic systems. 107 Further, because it often requires exposure to and pervasive interaction with foreigners - many of whom share the same fundamental values - globalization can enlarge the group that one normally identifies with. Globalization makes many of its participants empathize with the conditions and problems of people who in earlier years would have been ignored as unknown residents of remote locations. This empathy often leads to sympathy and support when these people suffer unfairly. Finally, the combination of shared values and identification produce the third commonality, universality of rights. 108 Citizens of one country will often expect, and work actively to achieve, the same basic values in other countries. They will treat nationals of other nations as they would wish to be treated. The effects of shared values, identification, and universality of rights in globalization could have a pivotal long-term effect - the possibility that a majority of human beings will begin to believe that they are truly part of a single global society - the human race. This is not to say that people disbelieve the idea that the human race encompasses all human beings. Of course, they realize that there is only one human species. Rather, the human race does not usually rank high on the hierarchy of societies for most people. Smaller societies, especially those based on nationality, race, religion, or ethnicity, command more loyalty. 109 The idea of the human race, the broadest and all-inclusive category of the human species, is abstract and has little, if any, impact on the lives of human beings. To believe in the singular importance of the human race requires an attitudinal shift in which a person views the human race seriously.  ~*464~  This may occur because the convergence of values does not only mean that the people of different countries will share the same basic values. It may also lead to the greater promotion of these values for the people of other countries. Historically and certainly today, America and the other industrial democracies have attempted to foster democracy and human rights in other countries. 110 While some part of this effort has been attributable to "self interest," it has also been due to the empathy that the industrialized democracies have had for other countries. 111 The magnitude of these efforts in the future, as in the past, will depend not solely upon the available financial and human resources of the industrialized democracies. It will also depend upon their national will - a factor undoubtedly influenced by the intensity with which the people of the industrialized democracies identify with people in foreign lands. The perspective that the human race matters more than its component divisions would accelerate cooperative efforts among nations to attack global problems that adversely affect human rights and the quality of human life. 112 Obviously, there is no shortage of such problems. Great suffering still occurs in so many parts of the world, not just from internal armed conflicts, 113 but also from conditions of poverty. 114 There are severe health problems in much of the world which can be mitigated with relatively little cost. 115 There are the lives lost to the AIDS epidemic, and  ~*465~  the deaths and disabilities caused by land mines. 116 Russia, a nuclear superpower that could end life on this planet, has severe social, economic, and political problems. 117 Making the human race important would not just promote liberal democratic values but would also reduce human suffering and perhaps eliminate completely the risk of nuclear war..  B. General Convergence of Values   Assuming that the formation of a single human society is a possible outcome, two broad questions should be answered: what kind of human society is being created, and is this society desirable. The answer to the latter question will depend on an evaluator’s subjective judgment of the society that is being formed. Undoubtedly, the great majority of human beings would abhor a world society that was being created by the conquests of a totalitarian government. Presumably, most Americans (and many citizens of other countries) would reject even a benevolent, democratic global society in which a world government dominated by other countries dictated laws that governed the lives of all human beings. If either outcome were present, many would call for a halt to globalization. Thus the direction that globalization follows is critical for assessing its appeal.  What globalization has brought is a general convergence of fundamental economic and political systems among many nations. These systems are not identical. There are still innumerable differences among countries with market economies, democratic governments, and respectful of human rights. n118 The practices of one country may be intolerable to another coun-  ~*466~  try. n119 Furthermore, it is unlikely and probably undesirable that economic and political systems will ever exactly converge. Nor is it foreseeable that the nations of the world will coalesce into one.  Even among the industrialized democracies, there are enough dissimilarities in market economies, democratic governments, and attitudes towards human rights that make some believe that the differences between these nations outweigh the similarities. For example, Japan is frequently characterized as having a producer-oriented market economy, as compared with the consumer-oriented market economy of the United States. n120 In general, the members of the European Union more extensively regulate their economies than the United States, engaging at times in social engineering that seems contrary to market principles as interpreted by Americans. n121 In the area of criminal justice, the United States is virtually alone in permitting the death penalty and imprisons a much higher percentage  ~*467~  of its population than other industrialized democracies. n122  Nonetheless, the basic economic and political systems of different countries clearly share more similarities than ever before. When asked to characterize their existing economic and political systems, more people in more countries than ever before will respond that they have a "market" economy, that their government is "democratic," and that they protect "human rights." Importantly, the convergence of values seems to be accompanying the convergence of systems. Certainly, most people in the industrialized democracies would view their existing economic and political systems as expressing the foundational values of their societies - the values that define their society. n123 The convergence of values along liberal demo-  ~*468~  cratic lines means that nations are better situated to negotiate wealth-maximizing trade  agreements and to resolve political disputes peacefully.  But in countries in transition from authoritarian to liberal democracy, many people may not yet fully accept their newly established economic and political systems as reflecting fundamental values of what is correct, proper, or right. Whether these transitional countries continue to establish or possess liberal democracies will depend upon how well the systems of liberal democracy work, an outcome that the industrialized democracies should strive vigorously to achieve. Workable systems can evolve into entrenched values.  Obviously, the implantation of the values of liberal democracy in Russia is of paramount concern. n124 Nurturing a democratic Russia is in the vital national interest of the United States (and the rest of the world) for very practical reasons - only Russia and the United States possess sufficient nuclear weapons to end human civilization. n125 Whether by unilateral or multilateral extensions of financial assistance or political inclusion, the industrialized democracies should do their utmost to make Russia a strong liberal democracy. Economic aid should be generous, and Russia should be incorporated into the activities of the industrialized democracies as much as possible. n126  Not all basic values are converging and nor, perhaps, should they. Religious values are not converging in the sense that the same general religion, such as Christianity, is taking root in a preponderance of countries. n127 Nevertheless, the convergence of economic and political values means that there is a greater basis for cooperation. For that reason, the  ~*469~  "West" n128 - that is, the United States and the other industrialized democracies - should support the process of value convergence.  Sharing the same values creates similar expectations and a common ground for understanding. The more prevalent reliance upon market forces to direct production and consumption means that nations are more likely to trade with and invest in each other. The relative sameness of political values, for example, the prevelant use of negotiation rather than military force in settling disputes, means that nations can have greater trust in and less to fear from each other.The similarity of basic values also means that the different peoples of humanity are one step closer to viewing themselves primarily as part of one human society - the human race - though represented by different governments.   

Turns U.S. Leadership

Guts U.S. leadership

Bhat, 9/29 (Devika, 9/29/2013, thetimes.co.uk, "US Government shutdown looms: Pentagon warns of national security threat," Factiva))
Chuck Hagel slammed the congressional impasse as "an astoundingly irresponsible way to govern".
AND
ability to meet its debts on October 17 unless the limit is increased.

AT: Obama Will Raise Debt Ceiling Unilaterally

Constitutional experts disagree

Market Watch, 9/25 ("If all else fails, Obama will raise debt ceiling himself: analyst," 9/25/2013, http://blogs.marketwatch.com/capitolreport/2013/09/25/if-all-else-fails-obama-will-raise-debt-ceiling-himself-analyst/))
Laurence Tribe, a noted professor of constitutional law at Harvard, tried at the
AND
the risk that the government might refuse to honor those debts as legitimate.

Will still wreck U.S. economic leadership

Drum, 9/25 —- political blogger for Mother Jones (9/25/2013, Kevin, "If We Reach the Debt Limit, Obama Will Probably Just Break Through It Anyway," http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/09/obama-debt-ceiling-bond-auction))

What laws does the executive branch follow and which does it break? What litigation
AND
. It’s long past time for the business community to stage an intervention.

Obama won’t act unilaterally

Boak, 9/23 —- the Washington Deputy Bureau Chief (Josh, 9/23/2013, "Obama Could Raise the Debt Ceiling…But He Won’t," http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2013/09/23/Obama-Could-Raise-Debt-Ceiling-He-Won-t))
Here’s the hot new idea: President Obama raises the 2416.7 trillion
AND
hostage to Congress. This could be a way to enshrine that philosophy.

2NC AT Impact D

Studies prove21
Royal 10 Director of Cooperative Threat Reduction at the U.S. Department of Defense (Jedediah, 2010, Economic Integration, Economic Signaling and the Problem of Economic Crises, in Economics of War and Peace: Economic, Legal and Political Perspectives, ed. Goldsmith and Brauer, p. 213-215)
Less intuitive is how periods of economic decline may increase the likelihood of external conflict
AND
popularity, are statistically linked lo an increase in the use of force. 

2nc Uniqueness / 2nc Focus Tradeoff Link *

Obama will prevail in the debt ceiling battle because he emerged from the shutdown with the political upper hand and he is maintaining focus –this ratchets up PUBLIC PRESSURE making it IMPOSSIBLE for the GOP to continue – that’s Dovore – this is an independent ~conceded~ focus link

Maintaining a CONSTANT FOCUS on his fiscal battles with Republicans will ensure a successful outcome

Millbank, 9/27 (Dana, 9/27/2013, "Obama should pivot to Dubya’s playbook," http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-09-27/opinions/42446718_1_president-obama-house-republicans-debt-limit))
If President Obama can stick to his guns, he will win his October standoff with Republicans.
That’s an awfully big "if."
This president has been consistently inconsistent, predictably unpredictable and reliably erratic. Consider the events of Thursday morning:
Obama gave a rousing speech in suburban Washington, in defense of Obamacare, on the eve of its implementation. "We’re now only five days away from finishing the job," he told the crowd.
But before he had even left the room, his administration let slip that it was delaying by a month the sign-up for the health-care exchanges for small businesses. It wasn’t a huge deal, but it was enough to trample on the message the president had just delivered.
Throughout his presidency, Obama has had great difficulty delivering a consistent message. Supporters
AND
they fear that Obama will change his mind and leave them standing alone.
Now come the budget showdowns, which could define the rest of his presidency. Republican leaders are trying to shift the party’s emphasis from the fight over a government shutdown to the fight over the debt-limit increase, where they have more support. A new Bloomberg poll found that Americans, by a 2-to-1 margin, disagree with Obama’s view that Congress should raise the debt limit without any conditions.
But Obama has a path to victory. That poll also found that Americans think lawmakers should stop trying to repeal Obamacare. And that was before House Republicans dramatically overplayed their hand by suggesting that they’ll allow the nation to default if Obama doesn’t agree to their laundry list of demands, including suspending Obamacare, repealing banking reforms, building a new oil pipeline, easing environmental regulations, limiting malpractice lawsuits and restricting access to Medicare.
To beat the Republicans, Obama might follow the example of a Republican, George W. Bush. Whatever you think of what he did, he knew how to get it done: by simplifying his message and repeating it, ad nauseam, until he got the result he was after.
Obama instead tends to give a speech and move along to the next topic. This is why he is forever making "pivots" back to the economy, or to health care. But the way to pressure Congress is to be President One Note.
In the debt-limit fight, Obama already has his note: He will not negotiate over the full faith and credit of the United States. That’s as good a theme as any; it matters less what the message is than that he delivers it consistently.
The idea, White House officials explained to me, is to avoid getting into a back-and-forth over taxes, spending and entitlement programs. "We’re right on the merits, but I don’t think we want to argue on the merits," one said. "Our argument is not that our argument is better than theirs; it’s that theirs is stupid."
This is a clean message: Republicans are threatening to tank the economy — through a shutdown or, more likely, through a default on the debt — and Obama isn’t going to negotiate with these hostage-takers.
Happily for Obama, Republicans are helping him to make the case by being publicly
AND
to snicker" as his colleague spoke — more smug teenager than legislator.
Even if his opponents are making things easier for him, Obama still needs to stick to his message. As in Syria, the president has drawn a "red line" by saying he won’t negotiate with those who would put the United States into default. If he retreats, he will embolden his opponents and demoralize his supporters.

Cancelled Asia trip proves the uniqueness and importance of focus

Cohen, et. al, 10/4 (Tom Cohen. Deirdre Walsh and Ed Payne, 10/4/2013, CNN Wire, "Hope for debt limit deal rises while shutdown standoff remains mired," Factiva))
Obama out of APEC meeting
Meanwhile, with his focus on the brewing domestic crisis, Obama canceled his trip to the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Bali, Indonesia.
"The president made this decision based on the difficulty in moving forward with foreign travel in the face of a shutdown, and his determination to continue pressing his case that Republicans should immediately allow a vote to reopen the government," a statement from the White House said.
Instead, Secretary of State John Kerry will lead the U.S. delegation in Asia.

AT: Boehner Doesn’t Really Want to Cooperate

Key indicators prove Boehner’s flexible

Sargent, 10/4 (Greg, 10/4/2013, Washington Post.com, "John Boehner gives away the game (a bit)," Factiva))
Multiple reports today inform us that John Boehner is privately telling colleagues that in the end, he won’t allow default and will even let a debt ceiling hike pass with mostly Dem votes if it comes down to it. Plenty of folks are rightly skeptical about this development. But it’s not entirely without significance.
The Post’s account points out that this may be a trial balloon designed to gauge how this will play with conservatives. Meanwhile, a spokesman for Boehner has been reiterating that Boehner does not intend to allow default, even as that spokesman is simultaneously reiterating that he will expect concessions in exchange for raising the debt limit, anyway. Why? Because a "clean" debt limit cannot pass the House.
This is a variation on the glaring absurdity that’s been at the heart of Boehner’s
AND
in his caucus will need some goodies to get them to go along.
Note these details from the Post’s write up:
In a series of small-group meetings in his office suite, Boehner has
AND
than a majority of Republicans — to pass a debt-ceiling increase.
What still needs to be nailed down is whether Boehner is prepared to allow a vote on a "clean" debt ceiling increase. Quotes from his spokespeople suggest not, but on the other hand, if a debt ceiling increase is going to pass with mostly Dems, it would have to be clean. More clarification here would be useful.
More broadly, what seems to be going on here is that this is Boehner’s
AND
in exchange for GOP cooperation in returning us to something resembling governing normalcy.
So in one sense, this isn’t much of a concession. On the other
AND
that’s always been at the heart of his position even more glaringly absurd.
The twin warnings came from a Treasury Department report and a muscularly worded speech from President Obama, who said that unless Congress acted soon, ’’the whole world will have problems.’’

AT: PC Fails

Not responsive to our DA —- the only way for Obama to win the debt ceiling battle is to stay on message —- the plan clearly diverts his attention and makes him look weak by having his authority stripped away.

Obama using time and influence to get business groups to help build support with GOP

Sink, 9/17 (Justin, 9/17/2013, "Amid fiscal fights, Obama courting business leaders," http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/322883-amid-fiscal-fights-obama-courting-business-leaders))
President Obama will address the Business Roundtable (BRT) on Wednesday as he works
AND
said. "It enables Obama to pit business against the Republican Party."

2NC Link Wall

====Congressional drone proposals causes massive fights.====
Munoz 13
(Carlo Munoz, National Security writer, "Turf battle builds quietly in Congress over control of armed drone program", The Hill, 4/9/13, http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/292501-turf-battle-builds-quietly-over-control-of-armed-drone-program)**
A turf war is quietly building between congressional defense and intelligence committees over who will
AND
Langley and intelligence lawmakers was bound to spark a fight, he said.

AT: No PC / Low Approval Ratings

Even if approval’s low, Obama will win THIS FIGHT by staying on message – that’s Dovere

Obama’s approval ratings still comparatively higher than Congress

Steinhauser, 9/26 —- CNN Political Editor (Paul, 9/26/2013, "Obama’s support slips; controversies, sluggish economy cited," http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/26/politics/cnn-poll-of-polls-obama/?hpt=po_c2))
The president’s numbers may be nothing to brag about, but his polling still soars over that of Congress. The approval rating Congress ranges from 13 to 24 in five national polls conducted earlier this month, with the approval for congressional Democrats slightly higher than their GOP counterparts.
While the president’s approval rating doesn’t afford him much leverage, as Crowley points out, "it’s not anything Congressional Republicans can take to the bargaining table. Their approval ratings are consistently far worse than anything the president has posted."
The new CNN Poll of Polls averages four non-partisan, live operator, national surveys that asked the approval rating question: Gallup daily tracking poll (September 22-24); Bloomberg National Poll (September 20-23); CBS News/New York Times (September 19-23); and American Research Group (September 17-20). Since it is an average of multiple surveys, the Poll of Polls does not have a sampling error.

Obama still has comparatively more capital than Congress

Koring, 9/16 (Paul, 9/16/2013, The Globe and Mail, "Obama faces fall showdown with Congress; Despite averting military action in Syria, U.S. President fights plunging approval ratings and hostility on Capitol Hill," Factiva))
But even as Mr. Obama’s approval ratings have dropped sharply, they still remain well above the abysmal levels recorded by Congress.
Karlyn Bowman, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, said Mr. Obama added to the public disaffection with Washington with his handling of Syria. "Nobody in Washington," she added, "looks very good these days."

2NR

GOP will cave

Cohen, et. al, 10/4 (Tom Cohen. Deirdre Walsh and Ed Payne, 10/4/2013, CNN Wire, "Hope for debt limit deal rises while shutdown standoff remains mired," Factiva))
WASHINGTON (CNN) — House Speaker John Boehner and fellow GOP lawmakers meet to discuss the government shutdown Friday, a day after the Republican leader reportedly told fellow legislators that he won’t allow the United States to default on its debt.
Congressional Republicans remain divided over how to structure legislation to raise the nation’s borrowing level, and with only two weeks before the debt ceiling deadline, there is still no plan to avoid a default.
But at a meeting Wednesday with House GOP members, Boehner said he would not allow a default to happen, even if it means getting help from Democrats, according to a Republican House member who requested anonymity to talk about the private meeting.
A Boehner aide said Thursday that the speaker "has always said the United States will not default on its debt, so that’s not news."
Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer of New York cheered the prospect of the GOP leader refusing to block at least this measure, which President Barack Obama and his fellow Democrats strongly support.
"This could be the beginnings of a significant breakthrough," Schumer said in a statement. "Even coming close to the edge of default is very dangerous, and putting this issue to rest significantly ahead of the default date would allow everyone in the country to breathe a huge sigh of relief."

Boehner is willing to compromise

Lowrey 26 Parker, 10/4 (Annie Lowrey and Ashley Parker, 10/4/2013, International Herald Tribune, "Republican said to soften stance on debt limit; Speaker signals openness to deal as Obama steps up push for resolution," Factiva))
As the Obama administration on Thursday sharply stepped up the volume in its tense fiscal battle with Republicans, with warnings from the president and the Treasury that a debt default could have a catastrophic global impact, a key Republican sent a message that he would not let that happen.
The twin warnings came from a Treasury Department report and a muscularly worded speech from President Obama, who said that unless Congress acted soon, ’’the whole world will have problems.’’
But in a potentially critical development, the speaker of the House, Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, told colleagues in a closed-door meeting that he was determined to prevent a federal default and was willing to pass a measure through a combination of Republican and Democratic votes, according to a lawmaker who was there. Other Republicans said they had the same sense of his intentions.

Tournament: Kentucky | Round: Octas | Opponent: Wayne State LM | Judge: Brendon Bankey, Paul Johnson, JV Reed, Brian McBride, Geoff Lundeen
Changing drones just causes the military to maintain power by using worse alternatives—the elimination of drones just causes a shift to the Pakistani military which fuels violence as well
Anderson 2013 - senior fellow in Governance Studies at Brookings and a professor of law at American University (May 24, Kenneth, "The Case for Drones" http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/05/24/the_case_for_drones_118548.html)

Yet irrespective of what numbers one accepts as the best estimate of harms of drone warfare, or the legal proportionality of the drone strikes, the moral question is simply, What’s the alternative? One way to answer this is to start from the proposition that if you believe the use of force in these circumstances is lawful and ethical, then all things being equal as an ethical matter, the method of force used should be the one that spares the most civilians while achieving its lawful aims. If that is the comparison of moral alternatives, there is simply no serious way to dispute that drone warfare is the best method available. It is more discriminating and more precise than other available means of air warfare, including manned aircraft—as France and Britain, lacking their own drones and forced to rely on far less precise manned jet strikes, found over Libya and Mali—and Tomahawk cruise missiles. A second observation is to look across the history of precision weapons in the past several decades. I started my career as a human-rights campaigner, kicking off the campaign to ban landmines for leading organizations. Around 1990, I had many conversations with military planners, asking them to develop more accurate and discriminating weapons—ones with smaller kinetic force and greater ability to put the force where sought. Although every civilian death is a tragedy, and drone warfare is very far from being the perfect tool the Obama administration sometimes suggests, for someone who has watched weapons development over a quarter century, the drone represents a steady advance in precision that has cut zeroes off collateral-damage figures. Those who see only the snapshot of civilian harm today are angered by civilian deaths. But barring an outbreak of world peace, it is foolish and immoral not to encourage the development and use of more sparing and exact weapons. One has only to look at the campaigns of the Pakistani army to see the alternatives in action. The Pakistani military for many years has been in a running war with its own Taliban and has regularly attacked villages in the tribal areas with heavy and imprecise airstrikes. A few years ago, it thought it had reached an accommodation with an advancing Taliban, but when the enemy decided it wanted not just the Swat Valley but Islamabad, the Pakistani government decided it had no choice but to drive it back. And it did, with a punishing campaign of airstrikes and rolling artillery barrages that leveled whole villages, left hundreds of thousands without homes, and killed hundreds. But critics do not typically evaluate drones against the standards of the artillery barrage of manned airstrikes, because their assumption, explicit or implicit, is that there is no call to use force at all. And of course, if the assumption is that you don’t need or should not use force, then any civilian death by drones is excessive. That cannot be blamed on drone warfare, its ethics or effectiveness, but on a much bigger question of whether one ought to use force in counterterrorism at all.

The alternatives to drones in Pakistan are way worse

Fair 2010 - Assistant Professor, Georgetown  (August 2, C. Christine, "Drones Over Pakistan — Menace or Best Viable Option?" http://www.huffingtonpost.com/c-christine-fair/drones-over-pakistan——m_b_666721.html)

While American opponents of the policy cling to empirically specious claims about the drones and their purported "civilian casualties," within Pakistan itself the debate is far more sophisticated. Since April 2009, many changes have occurred across the Pakistani social landscape albeit with variation across the expanse of its territory. First, the Pakistani Taliban (Tehreek-e-Taliban-e-Pakistan, TTP) made an enormous strategic blunder. Throughout the early months of 2009, the provincial officials of Khyber Pakhtoonkhwa as well as the central government were negotiating a so-called peace deal with the militants associated with the TTP operating in the settled area of Swat. By most accounts, Pakistanis as well as Swatis themselves embraced this as a viable option to diminish the violence and restore peace to this territory that had been riven by TTP violence. As the ink on the deal was drying, the TTP breached the agreement in April 2009 and overran the town of Buner, sitting to the immediate west of the Indus River. This had two effects. First, it persuaded those in Swat and elsewhere, who had previously supported the Taliban’s self-proclaimed campaign to restore good governance and provide access to justice, that the Taliban were not interested in peaceful coexistence and were in fact committed to violence and expansion of power. Second, the onslaught against Buner had a powerful impact upon Pakistani opinion about the intentions of the TTP militant. Pakistanis have long viewed the Indus as an important barrier dividing the Pakistani heartland, comprised primarily of the Punjab and which lies to the east of the Indus, and the "uncontrollable" land of the Pashtuns lying to the east of the Indus. For Pakistanis the unruliness of this area increases as you move from the so-called "settled" Pashtun areas of Khyber-Pakhtoonkhwa towards the west where the "unsettled" tribal belt abuts Afghanistan. When the TTP militants came to the border of the Indus, many Pakistanis who were confident that the TTP only wanted the "Pashtun areas," came to believed the TTP militants want of all of Pakistan. These apprehensions were confirmed and even intensified when Sufi Mohammad — a local leader of the TTP in Swat — convened a congregation in the Swat city of Mingora and denounced the Pakistani constitution, declaring that Islam cannot accommodate democracy and that western democracy in particular was a system of infidels that has divided Pakistani society. Robust military operations began thereafter, this time with the significant degree of support of the public and diminished opposition to the same. Some four million persons were displaced from Swat once the operation began. (The army encouraged this displacement to permit it freedom of action against the militants; although the exodus was ill-planned with only a few days notice.) During my recent two trips to Swat, the Swatis I met from the Mingora area are generally pleased with the army’s operation and are — for now — glad the army is in place. These Swatis see the army as the one organization that gets things done in contrast to the civil administration which has yet to re-establish itself after the militants drove out civil authorities. Amidst allegations that the army was indiscriminate in its use of force, some Pakistanis began arguing that Pakistan should have its own drones to allow Pakistani forces to have the same accuracy as US forces. Increasingly Pakistani officials are requesting that the United States provide drones or at least let them have a role in pulling the trigger. Advocates of Pakistani drones or increased command and control over U.S. drones note that armed drones have neither displaced millions of Pakistanis nor resulted in the destruction of homes on a large scale. Killing Whose Enemies? Killing Our Enemies The August 2009 killing of Baitullah Mehsud catalyzed another shift in the Pakistani discourse. This was the first drone strike that killed a Pakistani militant who was exclusively an enemy of Pakistan. As Baitullah Mehsud had no operational import for the U.S. mission in Afghanistan, Pakistan understood that the United States was finally employing its use of force to contend with Pakistan’s own internal foes. This shift in the drone debate is an important shift that few American interlocutors appreciate as they sustain a baseless narrative that is deaf to the realities across Pakistan. Drones went from being universally dismissed among Pakistanis as a horrific menace to an instrument of significantly and comparatively humane lethality relative to other options. American analysts would be better served by appreciating the developing nuances in the drone debate in Pakistan before seeking to undermine the best program that the United States and Pakistan have in their mutual war on terror. Both American and Pakistani governments can help foster a more constructive debate by owning the program and disclosing Pakistan’s ever-increasing cooperation to shape the debate by providing empirical data about the drones’ victims and their operational significance. Few Pakistanis in the FATA, Khyber Pakhtoonkhwa or elsewhere in Pakistan would disagree that the world is a better place without Baitullah Mehsud in it.

Tournament: Wake | Round: 1 | Opponent: ASU RV | Judge: Sam Allen

1NC Politics

Obama is aggressively pushing completion of a farm bill —- it’s his top priority and passage is possible

Dreiling, 11/15 (Larry, 11/15/2013, "Branches jockey for farm bill positions," http://www.hpj.com/archives/2013/nov13/nov18/1112FarmBillLDsr.cfm))
While the House-Senate farm bill discussions continue, the White House staked out
AND
listed immigration reform and a responsible budget as his second and third priorities.

Plan is a perceived loss for Obama that saps his capital

Loomis, 7 —- Department of Government at Georgetown
(3/2/2007, Dr. Andrew J. Loomis is a Visiting Fellow at the Center for a New American Security, "Leveraging legitimacy in the crafting of U.S. foreign policy," pg 35-36, http://citation.allacademic.com//meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/7/9/4/8/pages179487/p179487-36.php)

In a system where a President has limited formal power, perception matters. The
AND
influences infiltrate policy-making processes and affect the character of policy decisions.

Obama’s involvement key to broker a deal on SNAP —- it will be the last crucial item in negotiations

Hagstrom, 11/3 —- founder and executive editor of The Hagstrom Report (11/3/2013, Jerry, "Compromise Is the Key to a New Farm Bill; It is time for House and Senate conferees to stop listening to the lobbyists and finish the bill," http://www.nationaljournal.com/outside-influences/compromise-is-the-key-to-a-new-farm-bill-20131103))
It was a good question because the bill’s overlong development period has given all the
AND
passed bill would cut it by 2439 billion over the same period.

New farm bill key to prevent a food price spike – massive economic damage

NELSON 10 – 17 – 13 Staff Writer ~Joe Nelson, Obama, ag industry waiting for new Farm bill, http://www.weau.com/home/headlines/Obama-ag-industry-waiting-for-new-Farm-Bill-228259521.html~~
With the government shutdown over, farmers are still waiting for a deal to be made.
President Obama listed the farm bill as one of his top priorities to address, which could protect farmers and low income families.
"We should pass a farm bill, one that American farmers and ranchers can
AND
What are we waiting for? Let’s get this done," Obama said.
Farmers said if they struggle without a farm bill, it could cause food prices to spike, force some out of the industry and damage the economy.
"If the milk price falls below a certain level, the Farm bill does help support farmers during a time of an economic crisis when prices drop too low," Chippewa County U.W. Extension Crops and Soils Educator, Jerry Clark
The current, five-year Farm bill was temporarily extended, but both farmers and Clark said with much to lose, a new one is needed.
"Any time we can get the new bill passed, it’s definitely going to help because there’s always new changes in agriculture, as far as commodities or practices that need to be implemented," Clark said. "So those types of things should be passed to keep up with the current trends in agriculture.
Durand corn and soybean farmer and Value Implement dealer TJ Poeschel says not having a new farm bill and reverting to a bill from 1949 could cut down profits or even force some farmers to quit or retire.

High food prices cause Russian instability —— forces the Kremlin to force dietary changes which was at the core of past revolutions

Stratfor in ’8
("Russia: Problems in the Winners’ Circle", 6-13, http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/russia_problems_winners_circle, Google Cache)
As an energy and grain exporter, Russia is one of the clear winners in
AND
Europe, though Moscow wants to be the dominant partner in that relationship. 

The impact is nuclear war

David in ’99
(Steven, Prof. Pol. Sci. @ Johns Hopkins, Foreign Affairs, "Saving America from the coming civil wars", Vol. 28, Iss. 1, Proquest)
AT NO TIME since the civil war of 1918-Zo has Russia been closer
AND
this threat more than the chaos that would follow a Russian civil war.

Tournament: Fullerton | Round: 1 | Opponent: Whitman LT | Judge: Aaron Hardy

Restricting drone use causes a shift to ground operations which increases civilian casualties

Bowden, 13 —- national correspondent for The Atlantic (8/14/2013, Mark, "The Killing Machines; How to think about drones," http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/09/the-killing-machines-how-to-think-about-drones/309434/?single_page=true)
No civilian death is acceptable, of course. Each one is tragic. But
AND
are led, as Obama was, to the logic of the drone.

Shift to ground assaults causes net more civilian casualties, collapses the Pakistani government and increases support for the Taliban

Weitz, 11 —- Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Political-Military Analysis at the Hudson Institute (1/2/2011, Dr. Richard, "Why UAVs Have Become the Anti-Terror Weapon of Choice in the Afghan-Pak Border," http://www.sldinfo.com/why-uavs-have-become-the-anti-terror-weapon-of-choice-in-the-afghan-pak-border/)
In recent years, the main form of U.S. military operation in
AND
giving sanctuary to terrorists striking US and coalition forces in Afghanistan and beyond.

Tournament: NDT | Round: 1 | Opponent: George Mason KM | Judge: Leah Moczulski, Mikaela Malsin, Austin Layton

1NC DA

Obama’s continued use of political capital is critical to prevent a renewed push for sanctions that will destroy fragile negotiations —- impact is a nuclear Iran and conflict involving Israel and Saudi Arabia

Glass, 3/25 —- completed a Truman-Albright Fellowship at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars’ Environmental Change and Security Program (3/25/2014, Jacob, "As Iran Nuclear Negotiations Begin, Threat of Increased Sanctions Looms Large," http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jacob-glass/as-iran-nuclear-negotiati_b_5024604.html))
Last week Iran and the so-called P5+1 countries — Russia,
AND
threaten to scuttle progress, and underscore the fragility of the negotiating process.
Over the past three decades, Iran has faced crippling sanctions imposed by America and the international community. Trade restrictions have steadily increased to block Iran’s lucrative petroleum export market as well as the country’s participation in the global banking system. All told, international sanctions have cost Iran over 24100 billion in lost oil profits alone.
So called "carrot and stick" policies have long been fundamental to international diplomacy. The "stick" has been a sharp one, and has finally brought the Iranians to the negotiating table.
During his September visit to the UN General Assembly in New York, Iranian President
AND
, all but ensuring that negotiations cannot be used as a delay tactic.
Yet amid these positive signs that diplomacy is working, members of Congress have advocated for even more sanctions to be levied against Iran, specifically in the form of Senate Bill 1881, sponsored by Illinois Republican Mark Kirk and New Jersey Democrat Robert Menendez.
New sanctions would torpedo the Vienna talks and reverse the diplomatic progress that has been made.
Iranian officials have already promised to abandon negotiations if new sanctions are passed. Even our own allies, along with Russia and China, have opposed the move. Passing unilateral sanctions will splinter the fragile international coalition, needlessly antagonize Iranian negotiators, and make a violent conflict with Iran more likely. Diplomatic victory will only be achieved if the international community stands united before Iran.
To this point, the Obama administration has avoided a vote on SB 1881 by threatening a veto of the bill, and the administration’s full court press to prevent Senate Democrats from supporting new sanctions has bought international negotiators time. Several influential Democrats, including Senator Richard Blumenthal from Connecticut, have agreed to postpone a vote on the bill, contingent on productive negotiations.
Although legislation imposing new sanctions has been avoided thus far, the pressure on Congressional Democrats to act will intensify as talks in Vienna move forward. This round of negotiations is widely projected to be more difficult than the November deal, and inflammatory rhetoric from Tehran is likely. Nevertheless, sanctions are not the answer. Instead, we must continue to let diplomacy run its course.
Sanctions have done their job by bringing Iran to the table. In return, Iran expects to be rewarded with sanctions relief. The passage of new trade restrictions would effectively withdraw the carrot, and hit Iran with another stick. Consider the negotiations over.
The risks of delaying new sanctions is slight. The sanctions relief Iran is receiving
AND
to prevent Tehran from racing towards a nuclear weapon while negotiations are ongoing.
At the same time, the benefits of successful diplomacy are immense, as a comprehensive deal would be a dramatic victory for U.S. non-proliferation efforts. Further, the dismantling of Iran’s nuclear program would significantly ease tensions between its two biggest rivals in the region, Israel and Saudi Arabia.
Our congressional leaders must not be so confident as to think Iran is desperate for
AND
policy dominated by isolation from the West and an aggressive nuclear development program.
Our senators are facing significant political pressure to resist multilateralism and pursue increased sanctions based on an uncompromising mistrust of Iran. But history judges leaders not upon their conformity with party politics, but upon the ultimate results they achieve. It’s time to negotiate with the Iranians on good faith, and begin the serious work of establishing a meaningful nuclear agreement that could signal the beginning of a new era in Iranian-Western relations.

====Plan triggers defection of democratic allies====
Loomis, 7 —- Department of Government at Georgetown
(3/2/2007, Dr. Andrew J. Loomis is a Visiting Fellow at the Center for a New American Security, "Leveraging legitimacy in the crafting of U.S. foreign policy," pg 35-36, http://citation.allacademic.com//meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/7/9/4/8/pages179487/p179487-36.php)
Declining political authority encourages defection. American political analyst Norman Ornstein writes of the domestic context,
In a system where a President has limited formal power, perception matters. The
AND
In simple terms, winners win and losers lose more often than not.
Failure begets failure. In short, a president experiencing declining amounts of political capital
AND
feedback loop accelerates decay both in leadership capacity and defection by key allies.
The central point of this review of the presidential literature is that the sources of
AND
affects the character of U.S. policy, foreign and domestic.
This brief review of the literature suggests how legitimacy norms enhance presidential influence in ways
AND
influences infiltrate policy-making processes and affect the character of policy decisions.

Causes Israel strikes

Perr, 12/24/13 – B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University; technology marketing consultant based in Portland, Oregon. Jon has long been active in Democratic politics and public policy as an organizer and advisor in California and Massachusetts. His past roles include field staffer for Gary Hart for President (1984), organizer of Silicon Valley tech executives backing President Clinton’s call for national education standards (1997), recruiter of tech executives for Al Gore’s and John Kerry’s presidential campaigns, and co-coordinator of MassTech for Robert Reich (2002). (Jon, "Senate sanctions bill could let Israel take U.S. to war against Iran" Daily Kos, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/12/24/1265184/-Senate-sanctions-bill-could-let-Israel-take-U-S-to-war-against-Iran~~23
As 2013 draws to close, the negotiations over the Iranian nuclear program have entered
AND
Israel to decide whether the United States will go to war against Tehran.
On their own, the tough new sanctions imposed automatically if a final deal isn’t completed in six months pose a daunting enough challenge for President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry. But it is the legislation’s commitment to support an Israeli preventive strike against Iranian nuclear facilities that almost ensures the U.S. and Iran will come to blows. As Section 2b, part 5 of the draft mandates:
If the Government of Israel is compelled to take military action in legitimate self-defense against Iran’s nuclear weapon program, the United States Government should stand with Israel and provide, in accordance with the law of the United States and the constitutional responsibility of Congress to authorize the use of military force, diplomatic, military, and economic support to the Government of Israel in its defense of its territory, people, and existence.
Now, the legislation being pushed by Senators Mark Kirk (R-IL),
AND
March told a Christians United for Israel (CUFI) conference in July:
"If nothing changes in Iran, come September, October, I will present a resolution that will authorize the use of military force to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear bomb."
Graham would have plenty of company from the hardest of hard liners in his party. In August 2012, Romney national security adviser and pardoned Iran-Contra architect Elliott Abrams called for a war authorization in the pages of the Weekly Standard. And just two weeks ago, Norman Podhoretz used his Wall Street Journal op-ed to urge the Obama administration to "strike Iran now" to avoid "the nuclear war sure to come."
But at the end of the day, the lack of an explicit AUMF in the Nuclear Weapon Free Iran Act doesn’t mean its supporters aren’t giving Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu de facto carte blanche to hit Iranian nuclear facilities. The ensuing Iranian retaliation against to Israeli and American interests would almost certainly trigger the commitment of U.S. forces anyway.
Even if the Israelis alone launched a strike against Iran’s atomic sites, Tehran will almost certainly hit back against U.S. targets in the Straits of Hormuz, in the region, possibly in Europe and even potentially in the American homeland. Israel would face certain retaliation from Hezbollah rockets launched from Lebanon and Hamas missiles raining down from Gaza.
That’s why former Bush Defense Secretary Bob Gates and CIA head Michael Hayden raising the
AND
10 years in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined.") The anticipated blowback?
Serious costs to U.S. interests would also be felt over the longer term, we believe, with problematic consequences for global and regional stability, including economic stability. A dynamic of escalation, action, and counteraction could produce serious unintended consequences that would significantly increase all of these costs and lead, potentially, to all-out regional war.

Israeli strikes cause great power war and collapse global economy

Rafael Reuveny 10, PhD, Professor in the School of Public and Environmental Affairs at Indiana University, "Unilateral Strike on Iran could trigger world Depression", Op-ed distributed through McClatchy Newspaper Co, http://www.indiana.edu/~~spea/news/speaking_out/reuveny_on_unilateral_strike_Iran.shtml
A unilateral Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities would likely have dire consequences, including
AND
likely protest and send weapons, but would probably not risk using force.
¶ While no one has a crystal ball, leaders should be risk-averse when choosing war as a foreign policy tool. If attacking Iran is deemed necessary, Israel must wait for an American green light. A unilateral Israeli strike could ultimately spark World War III.

Tournament: USC | Round: 1 | Opponent: MSU FN | Judge: Jeff Buntin

North Korea DA

1NC Shell

Korea is the most volatile hotspot in the world and risk of North Korean miscalc is high – US deterrence across the DMZ is key

MARTHA RADDATZ and LUIS MARTINEZ – 4/2/13, U.S. General Says North Korea Situation Is ’Volatile’ and ’Dangerous’, http://abcnews.go.com/International/us-general-north-korea-situation-volatile-dangerous/story?id=1886386426singlePage=true
Gen. James Thurman, the top U.S. commander in South Korea
AND
during the farming season "so that they can have a good harvest."

Changes in US defense commitments below the nuclear threshold collapse extended deterrence in Korea

Linton Brooks and Mira Rapp-Hooper - Oct 2013, Extended Deterrence, Assurance, and Reassurance in the Pacific during the Second Nuclear Age, Brooks = badass, former nuclear sub commander, and nonresident senior adviser at CSIS, http://www.nbr.org/publications/element.aspx?id=706~~23.Uoi1Mfl1ySo
The need to simultaneously deter China and North Korea, assure multiple allies, and
AND
fact of life and by working to implement modest confidence-building measures.

Extinction

Hayes 26 Hamel-Green, 10 – *Executive Director of the Nautilus Institute for Security and Sustainable Development, AND  Executive Dean of the Faculty of Arts, Education and Human Development act Victoria University (1/5/10, Executive Dean at Victoria, "The Path Not Taken, the Way Still Open: Denuclearizing the Korean Peninsula and Northeast Asia," http://www.nautilus.org/fora/security/10001HayesHamalGreen.pdf)

The international community is increasingly aware that cooperative diplomacy is the most productive way to
AND
threat but a global one that warrants priority consideration from the international community.

Tournament: UMKC | Round: 6 | Opponent: MO State HM | Judge: Kendall Kaut

1NC

1NC 1

Obama’s Syria maneuver has maximized presidential war powers because it’s on his terms

Posner 9/3, Law Prof at University of Chicago
(Eric, Obama Is Only Making His War Powers Mightier, www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/view_from_chicago/2013/09/obama_going_to_congress_on_syria_he_s_actually_strengthening_the_war_powers.html)
President Obama’s surprise announcement that he will ask Congress for approval of a military attack
AND
and avoid it when he knows that it will stand in his way.

====Statutory restriction of Presidential War Powers makes warfighting impossible====
Yoo 12 – prof of law @ UC Berkeley
(John, War Powers Belong to the President, ABA Journal February 2012 Issue, http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/war_powers_belong_to_the_president) we do not endorse the ableist language used in this card, but have left it in to preserve the author’s intent. we apologize for the author’s inappropriate use of the word and#34;paralyzeand#34;
The framers realized the obvious. Foreign affairs are unpredictable and involve the highest of
AND
time to introduce sweeping, untested changes in the way we make war.

Loss of warfighting effectiveness ensures nuclear war in every hotspot

Kagan and O’Hanlon 07,  resident scholar at AEI and senior fellow in foreign policy at Brookings
(Frederick and Michael, The Case for Larger Ground Forces, April, http://www.aei.org/files/2007/04/24/20070424_Kagan20070424.pdf)
We live at a time when wars not only rage in nearly every region but
AND
intensive missions such as the ones now under way in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Tournament: USC | Round: Doubles | Opponent: Northwestern MV | Judge: Adrienne Brovero, Mikaela Malsin, David Heidt

Separation Principle DA

1NC Shell

The affirmative breaks down the separation principle by using regulations on conduct to make particular uses of force more desirable – targeted killing in zones of active hostilities becomes easier than outside of zones.  This causes a shift away from humanitarian justifications for the use of force towards security based rationales

Goodman 10, Law Prof at NYU
(Ryan, CONTROLLING THE RECOURSE TO WAR BY MODIFYING JUS IN BELLO, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1666198)
According to a bedrock principle of international law, the rules regulating the recourse to
AND
consider this wider framework would overlook fundamental challenges to the existing global regime.

The affirmatives geographically differentiated law of war framework spillsover to shape the Law of Armed Conflict writ large

Blank 13, Director of the International Humanitarian Law Clinic at Emory 
(Laurie, LEARNING TO LIVE WITH (A LITTLE) UNCERTAINTY: THE OPERATIONAL ASPECTS AND CONSEQUENCES OF THE GEOGRAPHY OF CONFLICT DEBATE, University of Pennsylvania Law Review Online, Vol. 16¬1:347)
In the context of a specific legal framework for one particular type of conflict,
AND
and may well be a better option than it appears at first blush.

The impact is uncontrolled escalation and warfare – our internal link is more likely than the affirmatives because the most recent studies prove rationale for force is the greatest predictor of warfare

Goodman 10, Law Prof at NYU
(Ryan, CONTROLLING THE RECOURSE TO WAR BY MODIFYING JUS IN BELLO, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1666198)
The developments regulating jus ad bellum through jus in bello also threaten to make ’
AND
public demands for increased bellicosity, unintended security spirals, and military violence. 

A breakdown of the separation principle ensures global WMD use – it gives justification for any actor who thinks they have good reason to use extreme force

Sloane 09, Law Prof at Boston U 
(Robert, The Cost of Conflation: Preserving the Dualism of Jus ad Bellum and Jus in Bello in the Contemporary Law of War, www.yale.edu/yjil/files_PDFs/vol34/Sloane)
The former sentence, it seems, declares nuclear weapons "generally" illegal under
AND
Qaeda, that espouse some collective, sacred value higher than the individual.

1NR

AT: Zone Limitations Aren’t Jus Ad Bellum

Using "active hostilities" as a means to separate classifications of the use of force is an application of jus ad bellum criteria

Welsh 13, IR Prof at Oxford
(Jennifer, Moral 26 Legal Challenges of Drone Warfare, peacepolicy.nd.edu/2013/03/28/moral-legal-challenges-of-drone-warfare/)
Under jus ad bellum criteria, Jennifer Welsh (Oxford University) argued, military
AND
, drone strikes re-conceptualize and weaken the principle of last resort.

Zone based restrictions are jus ad bellum limits

Daskal 13, Law Prof at Georgetown 
(Jennifer, THE GEOGRAPHY OF THE BATTLEFIELD: A FRAMEWORK FOR DETENTION AND TARGETING OUTSIDE THE "HOT" CONFLICT ZONE, www.pennlawreview.com/print/Daskal-U-Pa-L-Rev-1165.pdf)
Respect for the state system and its embodiment of Westphalian notions of state sovereignty provides
AND
threat posed by terrorists on their soil, albeit through law enforcement mechanisms.

2NC Uniqueness

1) The separation principle is currently being upheld – rules are applied uniformly

Corn 12, Law Prof at South Texas
(Geoffrey, "Blurring the Line Between the Jus ad Bellum and the Jus in Bello," in Non-International Armed Conflict in the Twenty-First Century)
At the core of the self-defense targeting theory is the assumption that the
AND
as irrelevant when deciding what rules apply to regulate operational and tactical execution.

3) Their argument at best proves a brink - the war taboo is strong and effective now so the separation principle has not been sufficiently eroded

Beehner, 12, Council on Foreign Relations senior writer; Truman National Security Project fellow
(Lionel, "Is There An Emerging ’Taboo’ Against Retaliation?" The Smoke Filled Room, 7-13-12, thesmokefilledroomblog.com/2012/07/13/is-there-an-emerging-taboo-against-retaliation/)
The biggest international news in the quiet months before 9/11 was the collision
AND
hostilities. To do otherwise would be a violation of this existing norm.

2NC Link Block

The affirmative erodes the separation principle – a couple ways to conceptualize the link:

A) Independence - The affirmative breaks it by tying restrictions on conduct to the legal status under which force is used.  Force can be used one way outside of the zone of active hostilities and a different way in the zone of active hostilities

Goodman 10, Law Prof at NYU
(Ryan, CONTROLLING THE RECOURSE TO WAR BY MODIFYING JUS IN BELLO, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1666198)
I begin with a standard understanding of jus ad bellum. This regime refers to
AND
conflict should not affect the legal status of the decision to wage war.

B) Incentives – The affirmative should be viewed as a tax which tries to funnel the use of force into zones of armed conflict by making it less restricted there

Goodman 10, Law Prof at NYU
(Ryan, CONTROLLING THE RECOURSE TO WAR BY MODIFYING JUS IN BELLO, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1666198)
This essay explores a series of developments that threaten to erode the grand design of
AND
reckon with the dangerous, even if unintended, consequences of such approaches.

Spillover

The plan sets a precedent that will become the dominant law of war framework

Blank 13, Director of the International Humanitarian Law Clinic at Emory 
(Laurie, LEARNING TO LIVE WITH (A LITTLE) UNCERTAINTY: THE OPERATIONAL ASPECTS AND CONSEQUENCES OF THE GEOGRAPHY OF CONFLICT DEBATE, University of Pennsylvania Law Review Online, Vol. 16¬1:347)
As Daskal aptly describes, the primary contours of the debate over the scope of
AND
operating? Here the consequences for clarity and predictability are quite simply enormous.

Tournament: Pitt RR | Round: 7 | Opponent: Wayne State JS | Judge: Jim Schultz

1NC DA

Obama is prioritizing TPA —- he is leveraging capital to get it passed

Parnes, 1/21 (Amie, 1/21/2014, "Obama: Give me fast track trade," http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/195858-white-house-works-to-convince-dems-to-give-obama-fast-track-on-trade))
The White House is making a major push to convince Congress to give the president
AND
White House carries the weight on this," one senior House aide said.

Fighting to defend his war power will sap Obama’s capital, trading off with rest of agenda

Kriner, 10 —- assistant professor of political science at Boston University
(Douglas L. Kriner, "After the Rubicon: Congress, Presidents, and the Politics of Waging War", University of Chicago Press, Dec 1, 2010, page 68-69)

While congressional support leaves the president’s reserve of political capital intact, congressional criticism saps
AND
to its costs than if Congress stood behind him in the international arena.

Obama’s prioritization and capital are key to ensure passage

Business Times Singapore, 12/17 ("Obama must make the case for freer trade," 12/17/2013, Factiva))
The TPA bill, which is expected to be introduced in January, will face
AND
- by creating new jobs and investments, while strengthening US global leadership.

TPA key to finalize critical free trade deals

Hughes, 1/9 (Krista, 1/9/2014, Reuters News, "UPDATE 1-U.S. lawmakers propose fast-track bill for trade agreements," Factiva))
WASHINGTON, Jan 9 (Reuters) - U.S. lawmakers on Thursday
AND
would encompass nearly two-thirds of the global economy and trade flows.

A new wave of protectionism would erupt into nuclear conflict

Spicer 96, The Challenge from the East and the Rebirth of the West, 1996, p. 121
The choice facing the West today is much the same as that which faced the
AND
a penny, stability will be at a premium in the years ahead.

Tournament: Kentucky | Round: 2 | Opponent: Michigan AP | Judge: Tom Glinecki

1NC DA 2

Obama’s Syria maneuver has maximized presidential war powers because it’s on his terms

Posner 9/3, Law Prof at University of Chicago
(Eric, Obama Is Only Making His War Powers Mightier, www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/view_from_chicago/2013/09/obama_going_to_congress_on_syria_he_s_actually_strengthening_the_war_powers.html)
President Obama’s surprise announcement that he will ask Congress for approval of a military attack
AND
and avoid it when he knows that it will stand in his way.

====Statutory restriction of Presidential War Powers makes warfighting impossible====
Yoo 12 – prof of law @ UC Berkeley
(John, War Powers Belong to the President, ABA Journal February 2012 Issue, http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/war_powers_belong_to_the_president) we do not endorse the ableist language used in this card, but have left it in to preserve the author’s intent. we apologize for the author’s inappropriate use of the word "paralyze"
The framers realized the obvious. Foreign affairs are unpredictable and involve the highest of
AND
time to introduce sweeping, untested changes in the way we make war.

The plan spills over to broader Congressional decisionmaking

Paul 2008 - Senior Social Scientist; Professor, Pardee RAND Graduate School Pittsburgh Office Education Ph.D., M.A., and B.A. in sociology, University of California, Los Angeles (September, Christopher, "US Presidential War Powers: Legacy Chains in Military Intervention Decisionmaking* ," Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 45, No. 5 (Sep., 2008), pp. 665-679)

Finegold 26 Skocpol (1995: 222) describe policy legacies: Past and present
AND
law (see the extended ex ample presented later in the article).1 

Executive control of warmaking is key to avoiding nuclear war and terrorism

Li 2009 - J.D. candidate, Georgetown University Law Center, 2009; B.A., political science and history, Yale University (Zheyao, "War Powers for the Fourth Generation: Constitutional Interpretation in the Age of Asymmetric Warfare," 7 Geo. J.L. 26 Pub. Pol’y 373 2009 WAR POWERS IN THE FOURTH GENERATION OF WARFARE)

A. The Emergence of Non-State Actors
Even as the quantity of nation-states in the world has increased dramatically since
AND
and action necessary to prevail in fourth-generational conflicts against fourthgenerational opponents.

Tournament: Harvard | Round: Octas | Opponent: Wayne State JS | Judge: Jonathan Paul, Geoff Lundeen, Scott Harris

1NC CP

Text: The United States Congress should require a declaration of war that is consistent with jus ad bellum principles of self-defense under international law for any decision to use or deploy armed forces against a nation-state in circumstances likely to lead to an armed attack.

Congress should define "armed attack" as: The use of force of a magnitude that is likely to produce serious consequences, epitomized by territorial intrusions, human casualties, or considerable destruction of property.

Congress should allow an exception in the event of an armed attack against the United States, or members of U.S. alliances or alignments making prior approval impractical.  Congress should require immediate notice of such a determination, and shall require approval within 14 days.

The text of the plan signals an abandonment of Israel- they are not a U.S. ally

Morrow 2K, Hoover Institute
(James D.-, June, Annual Review of Political Science, "Alliances: Why Write Them Down?", Vol. 3, http://arjournals. annualreviews.org/doi/full/10.1146/annurev.polisci.3.1.63?amp;searchHistoryKey=24~{searchHistoryKey~}26cookieSet=1)
Alliances should be differentiated from alignments (Dingman 1979). Alignments are not written down
AND
. Historically, few sovereign states have voluntarily formed tighter relationships than alliances.

Consistent statements in support of U.S. security assurances that the US will come to the defense of Israel if they are under attack are key to prevent Israeli lashout

Murdock 09, Sr Advisor CSIS 
(Clark A.-, Jessica M. Yeats, Linton F. Brooks, M. Elaine Bunn, Franklin C. Miller, James L. Schoff, CSIS Workshop Proceeding and Key Takeaways, "Exploring the Nuclear Posture Implications of Extended Deterrence and Assurance", http://csis.org/files/publication/091218_nuclear_posture.pdf)
U.S. security assurances to Israel probably have their greatest impact on Israel’s
AND
bases and military facilities would survive a first strike to retaliate effectively."147

An Israeli strike collapses the global economy, heg, and sparks war with China and Russia

Reuveny 10, Public Affairs Professor at Indiana
(Rafael, Guest Opinion: Unilateral strike on Iran could trigger world depression, www.indiana.edu/~spea/news/speaking_out/reuveny_on_unilateral_strike_Iran.shtml)
A unilateral Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities would likely have dire consequences, including
AND
green light. A unilateral Israeli strike could ultimately spark World War III.

2NC

Cp

impact

Israeli feelings of vulnerability will cause them to adopt a launch on warning posture- risks miscalc, war, and nuclear escaltion

Schoenfeld 98 – SENIOR EDITOR COMMENTARY
THINKING ABOUT THE UNTHINKABLE, COMMENTARY, DECEMBER
If preemption is largely ruled out as an option, what then? To reduce
AND
military movement, and take a no less heavy toll on civilian morale.

AT: Lots of Alignments

No solvency deficit- the plan already includes a slew of commitments indistinguishable from the CP

The plan allows for 2^nd strikes to defend allies- that includes almost half of the world

Campbell 04, VP 26 Direction International Security Program CSIS
(Kurt M.-, Spring, The Washington Quarterly, "The End of Alliances? Not So Fast", Vol. 27 ~232, Ebsco
The more relevant question then is not whether alliances are dead but rather how they are adapting to new exigencies and conditions. Many traditional alliances were created over the last 50 years or more as vehicles to provide a formal security guarantee by the United States and to facilitate rapid U.S. intervention in the face of foreign aggression, which at various times threatened to come from the Soviet Union and/or the People’s Republic of China.
During that time, the United States assembled important, formalized security relationships with virtually
AND
arrangements between the United States and countries in all regions throughout the globe.

AT: Permutation – CP

Restrict means the aff must define the conditions in which use of armed forces is allowed

Cambridge Dictionary of American English 09
(http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=restrict*1+026dict=A;)
restrict verb ~T~ to limit (an intended action) esp. by setting the conditions under which it is allowed to happen

Israel Isn’t an Ally

Israel isn’t an ally of the United States because there’s no security pact - that’s our Morrow evidence

The fact that some refer to Israel as an ally means nothing- they’re not

Mark 2K
(Clyde R.-, Oct. 17, Adapted from a report by Congressional Research Service, "Israeli-United States Relations",
http://www.policyalmanac.org/world/archive/crs_israeli-us_relations.shtml)
Strategic Cooperation  Although Israel frequently is referred to as an ally of the United States
AND
" of the MOU in reaction to Israel’s annexing the Syrian Golan Heights.)

It is incorrect to label Israel as an ally

Cristol 2k
(Jay-, May. 27, History News Network, "When Did the U.S. and Israel Become Allies?", http://hnn.us/articles/ 751.html)
There has never been a treaty between Israel and the United States. Both countries
AND
are guilty of an anachronism and display a lack of knowledge of history.

Allies require treaties – Israel isn’t an ally

Wortzel 05, Former Professor of Asian Studies and director of the Strategic Studies Institute at the U.S. Army War College
(Larry, Change Partners: Who Are America’s Military and Economic Allies in the 21st Century?, www.heritage.org/research/lecture/change-partners-who-are-americas-military-and-economic-allies-in-the-21st-century
In the international system, a strict understanding of a formal ally is a nation
AND
Janeiro, Brazil, in 1947. It actually pre-dates NATO.

AT: Syria Caused Link

Israel is comfortable with Syria developments – it doesn’t cross the threshold of our link because it doesn’t involve an attack against their homeland

Washington Post 2013 (September 12, "Israel divided over best course on Syria" http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-09-12/world/41992570_1_israel-s-israeli-embassy-iran)
Israel’s diplomatic and defense establishment appears to be divided over the best course of action
AND
chemical weapon stockpiles." Ziv said it took guts not to attack Syria.

2NC Link Wall

We’ll isolate several links

1) Paranoia - Israeli insecurity and dependence forces them to carefully monitor changes in the U.S.’s military posture and roles - the plan will be vetted for clues about the future direction of American policy.  They’ll be left asking why the U.S. crafts a policy that specifies who it defends and leaves them out

Steinberg 98
(Gerald-, Bar Ilan, Professor of Political Studies, Dec, MERIA, Vol. 2 ~234)
Given the intensity of the relationship with the United States and degree of dependence,
AND
difficult to discern a direct impact on American policy with respect to Israel.

3. Crisis – geographic proximity increases the need for a timely response by the US in the case of an attack on Israel.  After the plan Israel would be unsure whether congress would declare war so the US could deploy troops in time if they are attacked.  That increases preemptive pressures

Kramer 13, President of Shalem College
(Martin, 9/17, Israel Likes Its U.S. Presidents Strong, www.commentarymagazine.com/2013/09/17/israel-likes-its-u-s-presidents-strong-2/
Why was Obama’s recourse to Congress so alarming? Israel has long favored strong presidential
AND
, and set the stage for Israel’s decision to launch a preemptive war.

Kramer 13, President of Shalem College
(Martin, 9/17, Israel Likes Its U.S. Presidents Strong, www.commentarymagazine.com/2013/09/17/israel-likes-its-u-s-presidents-strong-2/
In light of this history, it’s not hard to see why Israel would view
AND
Israel takes to the White House—Israel needs presidents who are decisive.

AT: Israel Will Never Strike

They underestimate Netanyahu – Israel will strike if they perceive US abandonment

Tobin 10/22, Senior Online Editor of Commentary
(Jonathan, Will Israel Strike Iran? Iraq is No Precedent, www.commentarymagazine.com/2013/10/22/will-israel-strike-iran-iraq-is-no-precedent-nuclear/
Given the fact that Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has been rattling his rhetorical sabers in
AND
Forces in Iran or the diplomatic obstacles to such a decision by Netanyahu.

Tournament: Pitt RR | Round: 7 | Opponent: Wayne State JS | Judge: Jim Schultz

1NC CP

Text

The United States Congress should require a joint resolution of authorization for any decision to use or deploy armed forces in circumstances likely to lead to an armed attack.

Congress should define "armed attack" as: The use of force of a magnitude that is likely to produce serious consequences, epitomized by territorial intrusions, human casualties, or considerable destruction of property.

Congress should allow an exception in the event of an armed attack against the United States requiring the urgent use of armed forces making prior approval from the legislature impractical.  Congress should require immediate notice of such a determination, and shall require a declaration of war within 14 days or the executive shall cease such use of armed force.

It competes – The CP is less restrictive because it allows the president to introduce armed forces based on EITHER a declaration of war or a joint resolution – any perm severs the "declaration of war" restriction

The net benefit is a case turn – declarations of war cause comparatively more wars with more executive authority than authorizations do

HAROLD HONGJU KOH - Professor, Yale Law School - September, 1991, COMMENT: THE COASE THEOREM AND THE WAR POWER: A RESPONSE., 41 Duke L.J. 122, LexisNexis
Sidak chides our "willingness to settle for a legislative action less formal than a
AND
mindless originalism, the charge that some mistakenly leveled against our memorandum. n34

AND those wars are more likely to escalate

William C. Banks and Peter Raven-Hansen – American Law Professor @ Syracuse University/ Co-director, National Security and U.S. Foreign Relations Law Program @ The George Washington University Law School – 1994, National Security Law and the Power of the Purse, 124-126, googlebooks
Finally, any practical accounting of principles of constitutional governance must take into account the
AND
by Hamilton) voiced to President Adams regarding the naval war with France:

Solvency – A2: Declaration K Law of War

Formal declaration is obsolete – jus ad bellum and jus in bello apply to "armed conflict" regardless

Curtis A. Bradley and Jack L. Goldsmith – Law Profs, UVA and Harvard - May, 2005, ARTICLE: CONGRESSIONAL AUTHORIZATION AND THE WAR ON TERRORISM, Harvard Law Review, 118 Harv. L. Rev. 2047
Another reason why almost no one argues that Congress’s authorization of war must take the
AND
it appears that no nation has declared war since the late 1940s. n55

Case Turn NB 2NC

Declarations of war are worse for a few reasons:

Circumvention – Only the CP prevents circumvention by lowering costs of Congressional involvement.  Fiat can’t solve because the plan text has Congress identify uses of force "likely to produce serious consequences" – Congress will use this opportunity for discretion to totally abdicate its role in decision-making

HAROLD HONGJU KOH - Professor, Yale Law School - September, 1991, COMMENT: THE COASE THEOREM AND THE WAR POWER: A RESPONSE., 41 Duke L.J. 122, LexisNexis
Why argue, then, that a formal declaration of war is constitutionally necessary?
AND
and the meat cleaver left in the kitchen drawer, where it belongs.

History proves they are wrong – declarations of war are hasty and don’t cause better planning

William C. Banks and Peter Raven-Hansen – American Law Professor @ Syracuse University/ Co-director, National Security and U.S. Foreign Relations Law Program @ The George Washington University Law School – 1994, National Security Law and the Power of the Purse, 124-126, googlebooks
The case against a rule of formal declaration is so strong that it is little
AND
Johnson’s request for the May 1965 supplemental appropriation for military activities in Vietnam.

Tournament: Kentucky | Round: Doubles | Opponent: Wake Forest MQ | Judge: Dallas Perkins, David Heidt, Kevin Kallmyer, James Herndon, Jeff Buntin

1NC CP

The United States Congress should restrict the use of remote controlled aerial vehicle targeted killings outside of geographic locations housing active American combat troops and geographic locations where the government has given consent to purposes only justifiable under self-defense.

The United States federal government should place aerial vehicle targeted killings under control of the U.S. military.

The United States federal government should discontinue the use of drones in Yemen and Pakistan.

The United States federal government should offer to increase aerial vehicle targeted killings against to the nominal government of Somalia.

Consent solves – respects sovereignty, creates an international precedent of drone restraint, and assures allies.  And drone shift to the military solves transparency.

ADAM ENTOUS, SIOBHAN GORMAN and EVAN PEREZ, 9/26/12, WSJ, U.S. Unease Over Drone Strikes, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444100404577641520858011452.html

About once a month, the Central Intelligence Agency sends a fax to a general
AND
with the Pakistanis, according to U.S. and Pakistani officials. 

Drones strikes in Somalia key to containing al-Shabaab – turns trade and solves terrorism and African stability

Roach and Walser – 12
Morgan Lorraine Roach is a Research Associate, and Ray Walser, PhD, is Senior Policy Analyst for Latin America, in the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies, a division of the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies, at The Heritage Foundation, Saving Somalia: The Next Steps for the Obama Administration, May 18, 2012, http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/05/saving-somalia-the-next-steps-for-the-obama-administration

In the past twenty years, the African continent has made progress toward democratic governance
AND
the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) leader Anwar al-Awlaki.~32~ 

Terrorism risks global nuclear war

Ayson 10, Professor of Strategic Studies
~Robert Ayson, Professor of Strategic Studies and Director of the Centre for Strategic Studies: New Zealand at the Victoria University of Wellington, 2010 ("After a Terrorist Nuclear Attack: Envisaging Catalytic Effects", Studies in Conflict 26 Terrorism, Vol. 33, Issue 7, July 2010, Available Online on InformaWorld~

A terrorist nuclear attack, and even the use of nuclear weapons in response by the country attacked in the first place, would not necessarily represent the worst of the nuclear worlds imaginable. Indeed, there are reasons to wonder whether nuclear terrorism should ever be regarded as belonging in the category of truly existential threats. A contrast can be drawn here with the global catastrophe that would come from a massive nuclear exchange between two or more of the sovereign states that possess these weapons in significant numbers. Even the worst terrorism that the twenty-first century might bring would fade into insignificance alongside considerations of what a general nuclear war would have wrought in the Cold War period. And it must be admitted that as long as the major nuclear weapons states have hundreds and even thousands of nuclear weapons at their disposal, there is always the possibility of a truly awful nuclear exchange taking place precipitated entirely by state possessors themselves. But these two nuclear worlds—a non-state actor nuclear attack and a catastrophic interstate nuclear exchange—are not necessarily separable. It is just possible that some sort of terrorist attack, and especially an act of nuclear terrorism, could precipitate a chain of events leading to a massive exchange of nuclear weapons between two or more of the states that possess them. In this context, today’s and tomorrow’s terrorist groups might assume the place allotted during the early Cold War years to new state possessors of small nuclear arsenals who were seen as raising the risks of a catalytic nuclear war between the superpowers started by third parties. These risks were considered in the late 1950s and early 1960s as concerns grew about nuclear proliferation, the so-called n+1 problem. It may require a considerable amount of imagination to depict an especially plausible situation where an act of nuclear terrorism could lead to such a massive inter-state nuclear war. For example, in the event of a terrorist nuclear attack on the United States, it might well be wondered just how Russia and/or China could plausibly be brought into the picture, not least because they seem unlikely to be fingered as the most obvious state sponsors or encouragers of terrorist groups. They would seem far too responsible to be involved in supporting that sort of terrorist behavior that could just as easily threaten them as well. Some possibilities, however remote, do suggest themselves. For example, how might the United States react if it was thought or discovered that the fissile material used in the act of nuclear terrorism had come from Russian stocks, FN 40 and if for some reason Moscow denied any responsibility for nuclear laxity? The correct attribution of that nuclear material to a particular country might not be a case of science fiction given the observation by Michael May et al. that while the debris resulting from a nuclear explosion would be "spread over a wide area in tiny fragments, its radioactivity makes it detectable, identifiable and collectable, and a wealth of information can be obtained from its analysis: the efficiency of the explosion, the materials used and, most important … some indication of where the nuclear material came from."41 Alternatively, if the act of nuclear terrorism came as a complete surprise, and American officials refused to believe that a terrorist group was fully responsible (or responsible at all) suspicion would shift immediately to state possessors. Ruling out Western ally countries like the United Kingdom and France, and probably Israel and India as well, authorities in Washington would be left with a very short list consisting of North Korea, perhaps Iran if its program continues, and possibly Pakistan. But at what stage would Russia and China be definitely ruled out in this high stakes game of nuclear Cluedo? In particular, if the act of nuclear terrorism occurred against a backdrop of existing tension in Washington’s relations with Russia and/or China, and at a time when threats had already been traded between these major powers, would officials and political leaders not be tempted to assume the worst? Of course, the chances of this occurring would only seem to increase if the United States was already involved in some sort of limited armed conflict with Russia and/or China, or if they were confronting each other from a distance in a proxy war, as unlikely as these developments may seem at the present time. The reverse might well apply too: should a nuclear terrorist attack occur in Russia or China during a period of heightened tension or even limited conflict with the United States, could Moscow and Beijing resist the pressures that might rise domestically to consider the United States as a possible perpetrator or encourager of the attack? Washington’s early response to a terrorist nuclear attack on its own soil might also raise the possibility of an unwanted (and nuclear aided) confrontation with Russia and/or China. For example, in the noise and confusion during the immediate aftermath of the terrorist nuclear attack, the U.S. president might be expected to place the country’s armed forces, including its nuclear arsenal, on a higher stage of alert. In such a tense environment, when careful planning runs up against the friction of reality, it is just possible that Moscow and/or China might mistakenly read this as a sign of U.S. intentions to use force (and possibly nuclear force) against them. In that situation, the temptations to preempt such actions might grow, although it must be admitted that any preemption would probably still meet with a devastating response. As part of its initial response to the act of nuclear terrorism (as discussed earlier) Washington might decide to order a significant conventional (or nuclear) retaliatory or disarming attack against the leadership of the terrorist group and/or states seen to support that group. Depending on the identity and especially the location of these targets, Russia and/or China might interpret such action as being far too close for their comfort, and potentially as an infringement on their spheres of influence and even on their sovereignty. One far-fetched but perhaps not impossible scenario might stem from a judgment in Washington that some of the main aiders and a betters of the terrorist action resided somewhere such as Chechnya, perhaps in connection with what Allison claims is the "Chechen insurgents’ … long-standing interest in all things nuclear."42 American pressure on that part of the world would almost certainly raise alarms in Moscow that might require a degree of advanced consultation from Washington that the latter found itself unable or unwilling to provide. There is also the question of how other nuclear-armed states respond to the act of nuclear terrorism on another member of that special club. It could reasonably be expected that following a nuclear terrorist attack on the United States, both Russia and China would extend immediate sympathy and support to Washington and would work alongside the United States in the Security Council. But there is just a chance, albeit a slim one, where the support of Russia and/or China is less automatic in some cases than in others. For example, what would happen if the United States wished to discuss its right to retaliate against groups based in their territory? If, for some reason, Washington found the responses of Russia and China deeply underwhelming, (neither "for us or against us") might it also suspect that they secretly were in cahoots with the group, increasing (again perhaps ever so slightly) the chances of a major exchange. If the terrorist group had some connections to groups in Russia and China, or existed in areas of the world over which Russia and China held sway, and if Washington felt that Moscow or Beijing were placing a curiously modest level of pressure on them, what conclusions might it then draw about their culpability? If Washington decided to use, or decided to threaten the use of, nuclear weapons, the responses of Russia and China would be crucial to the chances of avoiding a more serious nuclear exchange. They might surmise, for example, that while the act of nuclear terrorism was especially heinous and demanded a strong response, the response simply had to remain below the nuclear threshold. It would be one thing for a non-state actor to have broken the nuclear use taboo, but an entirely different thing for a state actor, and indeed the leading state in the international system, to do so. If Russia and China felt sufficiently strongly about that prospect, there is then the question of what options would lie open to them to dissuade the United States from such action: and as has been seen over the last several decades, the central dissuader of the use of nuclear weapons by states has been the threat of nuclear retaliation. If some readers find this simply too fanciful, and perhaps even offensive to contemplate, it may be informative to reverse the tables. Russia, which possesses an arsenal of thousands of nuclear warheads and that has been one of the two most important trustees of the non-use taboo, is subjected to an attack of nuclear terrorism. In response, Moscow places its nuclear forces very visibly on a higher state of alert and declares that it is considering the use of nuclear retaliation against the group and any of its state supporters. How would Washington view such a possibility? Would it really be keen to support Russia’s use of nuclear weapons, including outside Russia’s traditional sphere of influence? And if not, which seems quite plausible, what options would Washington have to communicate that displeasure? If China had been the victim of the nuclear terrorism and seemed likely to retaliate in kind, would the United States and Russia be happy to sit back and let this occur? In the charged atmosphere immediately after a nuclear terrorist attack, how would the attacked country respond to pressure from other major nuclear powers not to respond in kind? The phrase "how dare they tell us what to do" immediately springs to mind. Some might even go so far as to interpret this concern as a tacit form of sympathy or support for the terrorists. This might not help the chances of nuclear restraint. FN 40. One way of reducing, but probably not eliminating, such a prospect, is further international cooperation on the control of existing fissile material holdings.

African instability will escalate

Glick 7, Middle East fellow at the Center for Security Policy, Condi’s African holiday,http://www.carolineglick.com/e/2007/12/condis-african-holiday.php?pf=yes
The Horn of Africa is a dangerous and strategically vital place. Small wars, which rage continuously, can easily escalate into big wars. Local conflicts have regional and global aspects. All of the conflicts in this tinderbox, which controls shipping lanes from the Indian Ocean into the Red Sea, can potentially give rise to regional, and indeed global conflagrations between competing regional actors and global powers

1NR

CP

Solves Adv 2

Obtaining consent solves rule of law and sovereignty – its core principle of international law on par with aff’s "self defense" exception – solves modeling

Rosa Brooks – 1ac author – 2013, Drones and Cognitive Dissonance, Rosa Brooks is a law professor at Georgetown University and a Schwartz senior fellow at the New America Foundation. She served as a counselor to the U.S. defense undersecretary for policy from 2009 to 2011 and previously served as a senior advisor at the U.S. State Department, http://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=226626context=facpub
Right now, the United States has a decided technological advantage when it comes to
AND
unwilling or unable to suppress the threat posed by the individual being targeted."

2NC AT Drones Fail

Somalia says yes to the CP.  Failure to act causes terrorism an instability – turns the aff

Yemen Times (Editorial) – 2/25/12, KEY TO SOMALIA’S STABILITY, http://www.yementimes.com/en/1551/opinion/504/Key-to-SomaliaE28099s-stability.htm
The International Conference on Somalia held recently in London succeeded in bringing the impoverished and
AND
government is in place and more areas are regained from the militants’ control.

Drones get the job done in Somalia

Daniel L. Byman - Research Director, Saban Center for Middle East Policy, Brookings - July/August 2013, Why Drones Work: The Case for Washington’s Weapon of Choice, http://www.brookings.edu/research/articles/2013/06/17-drones-obama-weapon-choice-us-counterterrorism-byman

Despite President Barack Obama’s recent call to reduce the United States’ reliance on drones,
AND
forcing the group to choose between having no leaders and risking dead leaders. 

2NC AT BLOWBACK

Drones cause backlash when it looks like we don’t have permission – cp solves – 1ac author agrees

Boyle ’13 ~Michael J. Boyle, PhD, is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at La Salle University in Philadelphia. He was previously a Lecturer in International Relations and Research Fellow at the Centre for the Study of Terrorism and Political Violence at the University of St. Andrews. He is also an alumnus of the Political Science Department at La Salle, research interests are on terrorism and political violence, with particular reference to the strategic use of violence in insurgencies and civil wars, "The costs and consequences of drone warfare," International Affairs 89: 1 (2013) 1–29, http://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/public/International20Affairs/2013/89_1/89_1Boyle.pdf, 2013~

The escalation of drone strikes in Pakistan to its current tempo—one every few
AND
tempo and scale of drone attacks than it was during the Bush administration.

2NC AT Aff Better

WE’LL STRAIGHT TURN THIS ARG TROOPS ON THE GROUND AND THE OPERATIONS THEIR EV SAYS THEY WOULD DO UNDERMINES SOVREIGNTY

Daniel L. Byman - Research Director, Saban Center for Middle East Policy, Brookings - July/August 2013, Why Drones Work: The Case for Washington’s Weapon of Choice, http://www.brookings.edu/research/articles/2013/06/17-drones-obama-weapon-choice-us-counterterrorism-byman

Critics of drone strikes often fail to take into account the fact that the alternatives
AND
the data show that drones are more discriminate than other types of force.

2NC AT Perm : CP

Adding more exceptions after "only" changes the word’s meaning as of the 1ac.  Only means exclusively the thing it modifies:

Macmillan Dictionary – 2013, http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/only
Only can be used in the following ways: as an adverb: It’s only
AND
a conjunction: You can come, only make sure you’re on time.
1 used for showing that a statement does not apply to anything or anyone else
AND
didn’t want to hurt his feelings. Thesaurus entry for this meaning of only
2used for showing that there are no other things or people of the same kind as the one or ones that you are mentioning
the/someone’s only: David’s the only one of us who has a computer.
This is the only letter my father ever wrote to me.
My only reason for coming here was to see you.
Johnson was born in Aberdeen in 1942, the only son in a family of six children.
The only people who understand the problem are the scientists.
The only thing we can do is wait and see.
3used for emphasizing that an amount, number, size, age, percentage etc is small or smaller than expected
The police station was only 150 metres away.
The company was established in Lanarkshire only eight months ago.
She was only 18, but she was as smart as someone twice her age.
The mobile phone market makes up only a small part of Scottish Telecom’s business.
The two men spoke with each other only briefly.
Thesaurus entry for this meaning of only
4used for emphasizing that something must happen before something else can happen
You pay the agent only if you sell the house.
A further statement will be issued only when the investigation has been concluded.
5used for saying that something is not better, worse, more important, more difficult etc than you are saying it is
Don’t get upset – I was only joking.
We are only trying to help.
’What was that noise?’ ’Don’t worry – it’s only the wind.’
6no earlier than a particular time, day, week etc
I met him for the first time only last week.
only now/then: It is only now that the technology exists to transmit high quality images.
I picked some roses and only then did I notice that my mother’s favourite vase was missing.
only when: Only when the government stops interfering will we see any improvement in our schools.
Thesaurus entry for this meaning of only
7used for adding a comment to something that you have just said which makes it less true or correct
Fiction is like real life, only better.
Her car is like mine, only it has four doors.
Thesaurus entry for this meaning of only
a.
SPOKEN used when you are going to mention a problem or a reason why something is not possible
I would offer to baby-sit, only I’m going out myself.
the only thing is...: I’d really like to come to the party. The only thing is, my sister is coming to town that day.
8used for saying that the result or effect of something is bad or not wanted and has no positive qualities
His failure to respond to the criticism only made matters worse.
I never complain – it only causes more trouble.
9used for showing that something or someone is the best
You should get a motorbike. Believe me, it’s the only way to travel.
In my opinion, Bond is the only man for the job.

AT: Impact D

Nuclear terrorism is possible – theft and black market uranium

Vladimir Z. Dvorkin ’12 Major General (retired), doctor of technical sciences, professor, and senior fellow at the Center for International Security of the Institute of World Economy and International Relations of the Russian Academy of Sciences.  The Center participates in the working group of the U.S.-Russia Initiative to Prevent Nuclear Terrorism, 9/21/12, "What Can Destroy Strategic Stability: Nuclear Terrorism is a Real Threat," belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/publication/22333/what_can_destroy_strategic_stability.html

Hundreds of scientific papers and reports have been published on nuclear terrorism. International conferences
AND
damage. There will also be long-term sociopsychological and political consequences.¶

Tournament: UMKC | Round: 6 | Opponent: MO State HM | Judge: Kendall Kaut

1NC 2

The United States federal judiciary should order the release of individuals in military detention who have won their habeas corpus hearing.

The CP solves soft power

Sidhu 11 
~2011, Dawinder S. Sidhu, J.D., The George Washington University; M.A., Johns Hopkins University; B.A., University of Pennsylvania, Judicial Review as Soft Power: How the Courts Can Help Us Win the Post-9/11 Conflictand#34;, NATIONAL SECURITY LAW BRIEF, Vol. 1, Issue 1 http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=100326context=nslb~~
The and#34;Great Walland#34; The writ of habeas corpus enables an individual to challenge
AND
unique and modern circumstances of the post-9/11 con? ict.

The plan solves the judicial legitimacy advantage

Vaughn and Williams, Professors of Law, 13
~2013, Katherine L. Vaughns B.A. (Political Science), J.D., University of California at Berkeley. Professor of Law, University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law, and Heather L. Williams, B.A. (French), B.A. (Political Science), University of Rochester, J.D., cum laude, University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law, and#34;OF CIVIL WRONGS AND RIGHTS: 1 KIYEMBA V. OBAMA AND THE MEANING OF FREEDOM, SEPARATION OF POWERS, AND THE RULE OF LAW TEN YEARS AFTER 9/11and#34;, Asian American Law Journal, Vol. 20, 2013, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2148404~~
Just as significant as what Boumediene does do, is what it does not.
AND
important 2005 article, Cass Sunstein termed this phenomenon and#34;National Security Fundamentalism.and#34;

2NC

Court shields and pacifies the base

Stimson 9
~09/25/09, Cully Stimson is a senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation and an instructor at the Naval Justice School former American career appointee at the Pentagon. Stimson was the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Detainee Affairs., and#34;Punting National Security To The Judiciaryand#34;, http://blog.heritage.org/2009/09/25/punting-national-security-to-the-judiciary/~~
So what is really going on here? To those of us who have either
AND
the administration close Gitmo without taking the heat for actually releasing detainees themselves.

The CP saves Obama political capital and generates base support

Goldsmith and Wittes 9, Prof at Law School ex-assistant attorney general and senior fellow at Brookings 
~12/22/09, Jack Goldsmith teaches at Harvard Law School and served as an assistant attorney general in the Bush administration. Benjamin Wittes, a former Post editorial writer, is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and the editor of and#34;Legislating the War on Terror: An Agenda for Reform.and#34; Both are members of the Hoover Institution’s Task Force on National Security and Law, and#34;A role judges should not have to playand#34;, http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2009-12-22/opinions/36890191_1_detention-policy-judges-judicial-system~~
Congress has avoided these issues for a number of reasons. Initially, it was
AND
— to any effort to write detention rules and limitations into statutory law.

Structural factors mean shield

Legislators can shift blame

Keith E. Whittington- Prof of Politics @ Princeton- Nov., 2005, and#34;Interpose Your Friendly Handand#34;: Political Supports for the Exercise of Judicial Review by theUnited States Supreme Court, The American Political Science Review, Vol. 99, No. 4
There are some issues that politicians cannot easily handle. For individual legislators, their
AND
polit- ical leaders want taken, as illustrated in the following case.

Tournament: Kentucky | Round: 2 | Opponent: Michigan AP | Judge: Tom Glinecki

1NC CP

The United States federal judiciary should prohibit targeted killing against United States citizens on the grounds that citizens are not provided due process rights, including but not limited to, being afforded notice and opportunity as well as defense from an independent public advocate, and a requirement of proof that the target is not a senior member of Al Qaeda or associated force.

The United States federal judiciary should rule that all habeas corpus hearings of persons detained under the War Powers Authority of the President of the United States be subject to due process guarantees and that such individuals who have won their habeas corpus hearing be released.

====Judiciary can apply due process to detainees which solves their aff====
Pereira 8 ~Spring 2008, Marcia Pereira is a Civil Litigation 26Transactional Attorney and University of Miami School of Law Graduate, "THE "WAR ON TERROR" SLIPPERY SLOPE POLICY: GUANTANAMO BAY AND THE ABUSE OF EXECUTIVE POWER", 15 U. Miami Int’l 26 Comp. L. Rev. 389~

Ideally, principles of equality should apply to detainees. Irrespective of their status,
AND
than to the other depending on how much power each side holds. n150

2NC

2NC CP Solvency

Solvency

Ordering habeas release key to meeting international human rights law commitments and legitimacy

Hathaway 09, International Law Prof at Yale
(Oona, BRIEF OF INTERNATIONAL LAW EXPERTS AS AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS, www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publishing/preview/publiced_preview_briefs_pdfs_09_10_08_1234_PetitionerAmCuIntlLawExperts.authcheckdam.pdf)
The United States has accepted two international legal obligations that require that the court reviewing
AND
District Court’s order of release is the appropriate remedy for this unlawful detention.
The United States has repeatedly criticized other countries for failing to release detainees whose detention
AND
encourage other countries to follow basic principles of international law in the future.

2NC AT: Perm – CP

Only congress can setup a new court

Engdahl 99, Law Prof at Seattle (www.heritage.org/constitution/~2321/articles/1/essays/47/inferior-courts)
The latter vote was very close, however; James Madison moved as a compromise
AND
, which provides that judgments may be excluded by Congress from Supreme Court review

2NC Doesn’t Link to Politics

Doesn’t link
Stimson 9
~09/25/09, Cully Stimson is a senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation and an instructor at the Naval Justice School former American career appointee at the Pentagon. Stimson was the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Detainee Affairs., "Punting National Security To The Judiciary", http://blog.heritage.org/2009/09/25/punting-national-security-to-the-judiciary/~~
So what is really going on here? To those of us who have either
AND
the administration close Gitmo without taking the heat for actually releasing detainees themselves.

More ev
Keith E. Whittington- Prof of Politics @ Princeton- Nov., 2005, "Interpose Your Friendly Hand": Political Supports for the Exercise of Judicial Review by theUnited States Supreme Court, The American Political Science Review, Vol. 99, No. 4
The establishment and maintenance of judicial review is a way of delegating some kinds of
AND
support the Court and help build a reservoir of public goodwill when it behaves

2NC AT: PQD DA

The Zivotofsky case killed PQD

Skinner 8/23, Professor of Law at Willamette
(13, Gwynne, Misunderstood, Misconstrued, and Now Clearly Dead: The ’Political Question Doctrine’ in Cases Arising in the Context of Foreign Affairs, papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2315237)
In case there was any doubt, the Supreme Court in 2012 once and for
AND
the judiciary, even where those cases affect national security or foreign policy.

Tournament: Kentucky | Round: 2 | Opponent: Michigan AP | Judge: Tom Glinecki

1NC CP

The Executive Branch of the United States federal government should issue an executive order publishing clear guidelines for targeting to be carried out by nonpoliticians, making assassination truly a last resort, stipulating that an outside court review the evidence before placing Americans on a kill list, releasing the legal briefs upon which the targeted killing was based, and prohibiting uninhabited aerial vehicle targeted killings of individual United States citizens when, after being afforded notice and opportunity as well as defense from an independent public advocate, it is proven that the target is not a senior member of Al Qaeda or associated force.

The Executive branch of the United States federal government should implement this through self-binding mechanisms including, but not limited to independent commissions to review and ensure compliance with the order and transparency measures that gives journalists access to White House decisionmaking.

The Executive branch of the United States federal government should issue a Fact Sheet explaining that the order is designed to make U.S. targeted killing policy consistent with international law.

Obama administration should make provisions for an outside court to review evidence before using targeted killing – also making assassination a last resort and publishing legal briefs solves

~—- Court should only review if Americans are placed on a kill list~
NYT, 12 (Editorial, 5/30/2012, "Too Much Power for a President," http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/31/opinion/too-much-power-for-a-president.html?_r=0))

It has been clear for years that the Obama administration believes the shadow war on
AND
it should release the legal briefs upon which the targeted killing was based.

Including self-binding mechanisms ensures effective constraints and executive credibility

Posner 26 Vermeule, 6 —- *Prof of Law at U Chicago, AND  Prof of Law at Harvard (9/19/2006, Eric A. Posner 26 Adrian Vermeule, "The Credible Executive," http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=931501))

We suggest that the executive’s credibility problem can be solved by second-order mechanisms
AND
given an ill-motivated executive an excuse not to use those mechanisms.

Executive can use fact sheet to signal and codify commitment to international law – solves modelling and perception

Nachber, 13 —- Law Professor at Virginia
(Spring, Executive Branch Policy Meets International Law in the Evolution of the Domestic Law of Detention, Virginia Journal of International Law, 53 Va. J. Int’l L. 201, Lexis)

This paper considers the role that the executive branch can play in modifying international law
AND
in litigation within U.S. courts and in international legal circles.

Tournament: UMKC | Round: 7 | Opponent: Wyoming DM | Judge: Richard Tews

1NC 2

Text: The Executive branch of the United States federal government should establish an executive advisory committee with jurisdiction over targeted killing orders and implement this through self-binding mechanisms including, but not limited to independent commissions to review and ensure compliance with the order and transparency measures that gives journalists access to White House decisionmaking.

The order should also

publish clear guidelines for targeting to be carried out by nonpoliticians and make assassination truly a last resort,

release the legal briefs upon which the targeted killing was based

The Executive branch of the United States federal government should give a speech explaining the rationale for the proposal.

The executive should also sign a directive that consolidates lead executive authority for planning and conducting nonbattlefield targeted killings under the Department of Defense.

The President should issues an executive order creating a Task Force on Civilian Protection that includes independent, transparent investigations and the participation of relevant non-governmental organizations.

Including self-binding mechanisms ensures effective constraints and executive credibility – solves the aff

Posner 26 Vermeule, 6 —- *Prof of Law at U Chicago, AND  Prof of Law at Harvard (9/19/2006, Eric A. Posner 26 Adrian Vermeule, and#34;The Credible Executive,and#34; http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=931501)-http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=931501))

IV. Executive Signaling: Law and Mechanisms
We suggest that the executive’s credibility problem can be solved by second-order mechanisms
AND
-motivated actors. Commitments themselves have value as signals of benign motivations.
This departs from the usual approach in legal scholarship. Legal theory has often discussed
AND
he can generate support from the public and other members of the government.
Furthermore, our question is subconstitutional; it is whether a well-motivated executive
AND
in actions that are less costly for good types than for bad types.
We begin with some relevant law; then examine a set of possible mechanisms, emphasizing both the conditions under which they might succeed and the conditions under which they might not; and then examine the costs of credibility.
A. A Preliminary Note on Law and Self-Binding
Many of our mechanisms are unproblematic from a legal perspective, as they involve presidential
AND
new political coalitions that will act to defend the new rules or policies.
More schematically, we may speak of formal and informal means of self-binding:
(1) The president might use formal means to bind himself. This is possible in the sense that an executive order, if otherwise valid, legally binds the president while it is in effect and may be enforced by the courts. It is not possible in the sense that the president can always repeal the executive order if he can bear the political and reputational costs of doing so.
(2) The president might use informal means to bind himself. This is
AND
as a breach of faith even if no other institution ever enforces it.
In what follows, we will invoke both formal and informal mechanisms. For our
AND
ones, it does not matter whether the constraint is formal or informal.
B. Mechanisms
What signaling mechanisms might a well-motivated executive adopt to credibly assure voters,
AND
– but it is not explained why the constitutional order should be fractal.
Second, Katyal’s proposals for internal separation of powers are self-defeating: the
AND
ensures that the proposals are not self-defeating, whatever their costs.
The contrast here must not be drawn too simply. A well-motivated executive
AND
have no incentive to adopt proposals intended to constrain that sort of actor.
Independent commissions. We now turn to some conceptually coherent mechanisms of executive signaling. Somewhat analogously to Katyal’s idea of the internal separation of powers, a well-motivated executive might establish independent commissions to review policy decisions, either before or after the fact. Presidents do this routinely, especially after a policy has had disastrous outcomes, but sometimes beforehand as well. Independent commissions are typically blue-ribbon and bipartisan.82
We add to this familiar process the idea that the President might gain credibility by
AND
the costs of wiggling out even if they do not completely prevent it.
Consider whether George W. Bush’s credibility would have been enhanced had he appointed a
AND
-motivated executive to credibly distinguish himself from the ill-motivated one.
The more common version of this tactic is to appoint commissions after the relevant event
AND
a plausible inference that the president’s future behavior will track his past behavior.
Bipartisan appointments. In examples of the sort just mentioned, the signaling arises from
AND
to commit to giving the agency some autonomy from the president’s preferences.86
Similar mechanisms can work even where no statutes are in the picture. As previously
AND
which in turn encourages broader delegations of discretion from the public and Congress.
A commitment to bipartisanship is only one way in which appointments can generate credibility.
AND
that the president will not deviate (too far) from their preferences.
The Independent Counsel Statute institutionalized the special prosecutor and strengthened it. But the statute
AND
viewpoints is harder to ignore, if the members agree with each other.
More generally, the decision by presidents to bring into their administrations members of other
AND
the existence of the program(s) was revealed to the public.
Counter-partisanship. Related to bipartisanship is what might be called counterpartisanship: presidents
AND
enemy combatants, but not when he creates a massive prescription drug benefit.
Counter-partisanship can powerfully enhance the president’s credibility, but it depends heavily on
AND
who opposed the Mexican War). But a nation is not always lucky.
Transparency. The well-motivated executive might commit to transparency, as a way
AND
first place, and the public can therefore draw an inference to credibility.
Credibility is especially enhanced when transparency is effected through journalists with reputations for integrity or
AND
in signaling in the present through (the threat of) future transparency.
There are complex tradeoffs here, because transparency can have a range of harmful effects
AND
who give them access by portraying their decisionmaking in a favorable light.97
We will take up the costs of credibility shortly.98 In general, however, the existence of costs does not mean that the credibility-generating mechanisms are useless. Quite the contrary: where the executive uses such mechanisms, voters and legislators can draw an inference that the executive is well-motivated, precisely because the existence of costs would have given an ill-motivated executive an excuse not to use those mechanisms.
Multilateralism. Another credibility-generating mechanism for the executive is to enter into alliances
AND
and#34;wag the dogand#34; tactic intended to distract attention from Clinton’s impeachment.
A public commitment to multilateralism can close or narrow the credibility gap.
Suppose that a group of nations have common interests on one dimension – say,
AND
infer that interventions that gain multilateral approval do not rest on disreputable motives.
It follows that multilateralism can be either formal or informal. Action by the United
AND
that there is no nefarious motive behind an intervention, should one occur.
It also follows that multilateralism and bipartisan congressional authorization may be substitutes, in terms
AND
Nations Security Council rather than congressional authorization to prosecute the Korean War.99
The costs of multilateralism are straightforward. Multilateralism increases the costs of reaching decisions,
AND
president who does pursue multilateralism is more likely to be well-motivated.
Strict liability. For completeness, we mention that the well-motivated executive might
AND
is doing, and what the costs and benefits of the alternatives are.
Here the credibility gap might be narrowed by creating a cause of action, for
AND
(even unintentional and non-negligent) surveillance of purely domestic communications.
However, there are legal and practical problems here, perhaps insuperable ones. Legally
AND
not perceive the connection between governmental action and subsequent payouts in any event.
The news conference. Presidents use news conferences to demonstrate their mastery of the details
AND
conferences, resources that might have been better used in other ways.108
and#34;Precommitment politics.and#34;109 We have been surveying mechanisms that the wellmotivated executive can
AND
. Bush discovered when he broke his clear pledge not to raise taxes.

Giving a speech about the action empirically solves transparency

Pearlstein, 13 —- Professor of Public and International Affairs at Princeton
(3/26/2013, Congress Shouldn’t Give the President New Power to Fight Terrorists, www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/03/congress_shouldn_t_give_president_obama_new_power_to_fight_terrorists.html)

This is hardly to say the president’s decision to use force operates under no constraint
AND
the age of drones, Congress should explore strengthening that reporting requirement further.

Obama himself decides drone targeting —- publishing guidelines creates transparency and solves the aff

NYT, 12 (Editorial, 5/30/2012, and#34;Too Much Power for a President,and#34; http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/31/opinion/too-much-power-for-a-president.html?_r=0)-http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/31/opinion/too-much-power-for-a-president.html?_r=0))

It has been clear for years that the Obama administration believes the shadow war on terrorism gives it the power to choose targets for assassination, including Americans, without any oversight. On Tuesday, The New York Times revealed who was actually making the final decision on the biggest killings and drone strikes: President Obama himself. And that is very troubling.
Mr. Obama has demonstrated that he can be thoughtful and farsighted, but, like all occupants of the Oval Office, he is a politician, subject to the pressures of re-election. No one in that position should be able to unilaterally order the killing of American citizens or foreigners located far from a battlefield — depriving Americans of their due-process rights — without the consent of someone outside his political inner circle.
How can the world know whether the targets chosen by this president or his successors
AND
charge of weakness — built up a tough-sounding list of kills?
It is too easy to say that this is a natural power of a commander in chief. The United States cannot be in a perpetual war on terror that allows lethal force against anyone, anywhere, for any perceived threat. That power is too great, and too easily abused, as those who lived through the George W. Bush administration will remember.
Mr. Obama, who campaigned against some of those abuses in 2008, should remember. But the Times article, written by Jo Becker and Scott Shane, depicts him as personally choosing every target, approving every major drone strike in Yemen and Somalia and the riskiest ones in Pakistan, assisted only by his own aides and a group of national security operatives. Mr. Obama relies primarily on his counterterrorism adviser, John Brennan.
To his credit, Mr. Obama believes he should take moral responsibility for these decisions, and he has read the just-war theories of Augustine and Thomas Aquinas.
The Times article points out, however, that the Defense Department is currently killing
AND
an extraordinarily low civilian death rate that smells more of expediency than morality.
In a recent speech, Mr. Brennan said the administration chooses only those who
AND
far lower standards. Without written guidelines, they can be freely reinterpreted.
A unilateral campaign of death is untenable. To provide real assurance, President Obama should publish clear guidelines for targeting to be carried out by nonpoliticians, making assassination truly a last resort, and allow an outside court to review the evidence before placing Americans on a kill list. And it should release the legal briefs upon which the targeted killing was based.

Obama issuing a directive to consolidate authority in the DOD will create transparency

Zenko, 13 —- Douglas Dillon Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations 
(April, Transferring CIA Drone Strikes to the Pentagon, www.cfr.org/drones/transferring-cia-drone-strikes-pentagon/p30434-http://www.cfr.org/drones/transferring-cia-drone-strikes-pentagon/p30434)

The main obstacle to acknowledging the scope, legality, and oversight of U.
AND
consolidates lead executive authority for planning and conducting nonbattlefield targeted killings under DOD.

Presidential creation of a Task force solves foreign blowback from civilian casualties and avoids political backlash

Second Lieutenant Groves, 10 (Brendan —- an educational delay student at Yale Law School, J.D. expected 2010, The Air Force Law Review, and#34;ARTICLE: CIVIL-MILITARY COOPERATION IN CIVILIAN CASUALTY INVESTIGATIONS: LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE AZIZABAD ATTACK,and#34; 65 A.F. L. Rev. 1))

This article recommends that the President create a Task Force on Civilian Protection (Task
AND
the risk that ineffectual responses would inflame Afghan opinion against the coalition. n45
~*8~  A number of other benefits would flow from utilizing the task force
AND
commands, intelligence agencies, criminal investigation agencies, NGOs and foreign governments.
A hallmark of the Task Force on Civilian Protection would be its inclusion of NGOs
AND
as in civilian casualty investigations, calls for the participation of humanitarian organizations.
Involving neutral players in civilian casualty investigations, so long as these organizations are not
AND
Force on Civilian Protection would provide them with a common platform for cooperation.
Section II of this article discusses in detail the Azizabad strike and its aftermath.
AND
improve the accuracy of investigations while showcasing a commitment to follow international law.
Once implemented, the Task Force’s significance would be more than symbolic. Winning counterinsurgencies
AND
government, the United Nations, and human rights organizations reach divergent conclusions.
The Azizabad attack sounds a warning call. No longer can the United States appear indifferent to the needs of the people whose support it needs most. A Task Force on Civilian Protection, like any institution, cannot promise perfection—but it would markedly improve on the flawed infrastructure for casualty investigations in place today.

2NC

AT: Perception

President more perceived than Congress or Courts

Marshall, 8 —- Professor of Law at the University of North Carolina
(April 2008, William P., Boston University Law Review, and#34;THE ROLE OF THE PRESIDENT IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY: ARTICLE: ELEVEN REASONS WHY PRESIDENTIAL POWER INEVITABLY EXPANDS AND WHY IT MATTERS,and#34; 88 B.U.L. Rev. 505))

7. The Media and the Presidency
As Justice Jackson recognized in Youngstown, the power of the Presidency has also been
AND
an extent that no other individual, or institution, can even approximate.

First – their aff author says the CP solves both advantages

Zenko, 13 —- Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations
(January, Reforming U.S.Drone Strike Policies)

Much like policies governing the use of nuclear weapons, offensive cyber capabilities, and
AND
the future, the United States should undertake the following specific policy recommendations.

Executive self-restraint can be used to limit targeted killings – empirics prove CP is realistic and possible

Sales, 12 —- Assistant Professor of Law, George Mason University School of Law (7/3/2012, Nathan Alexander Sales, Journal of National Security Law 26 Policy, and#34;Self-Restraint and National Security,and#34; 6 J. Nat’l Security L. 26 Pol’y 227, Lexis))

B. Targeted Killing
A second example of self-restraint concerns the well known presidential ban on assassinations
AND
government sometimes prevents itself from carrying out operations that it thinks are lawful.
The domestic assassination ban traces its roots to the Church Committee’s disclosure that the CIA
AND
whose terms the executive order reinforces, n92 will help develop the point.

Tournament: Wake | Round: Doubles | Opponent: Harvard DT | Judge: Carly Wunderlich, Casey Harrigan, Jonathan Paul, John Warden, Kevin Kallmeyer

1NC

1NC CP

The United States federal government should build, deploy, and offer to cooperate with Russia on long range low yield nuclear tipped interceptors as a last resort missile defense option. This system should not be designed or sized against the Russia deterrent and the United States federal government should be willing to demonstrate to Russia that this is the case. The United States Congress should prohibit the first use of nuclear forces excluding the use of long range low yield nuclear tipped interceptors as a last resort missile defense option without congressional approval.

CP is competitive—nuclear tipped missile defense is first use

Milne ’2
(Tom-, Nov. 15, Pugwash Meeting Workshop Report, "No First Use of Nuclear Weapons", ~#279, http://www. pugwash.org/reports/nw/milne.htm; Jacob)

Over the years the nuclear weapon states have discussed, hinted at, and planned
AND
the consideration given to the use of nuclear weapons for ballistic missile defence.

NMD inevitable—nuclear tipped key to make it effective
Bruno Staff Writer CFR 09
(Greg-, "National Missile Defense: A Status Report", http://www.cfr.org/publication/18792/; Jacob)

The viability and cost-effectiveness of missile defense in its many forms has sparked
AND
neutralize a ballistic missile threat that employs even simple decoys," he argues.
Perhaps the most often cited limitation of the antiballistic missile program involves testing scenarios that
AND
a test fails and try to plan each test so it won’t fail."
Paul Francis, director of the U.S. Government Accountability Office’s acquisition and
AND
I would say we’ve got to slow that down and properly test it."
?

Only nuclear tips can guarantee interceptors hit the missiles and aren’t confused by decoys

Costa ’6
(Keith J.-, Jan. 5, Inside the Pentagon, "Defense Officials Nix Nuclear-Tipped Interceptor Language from RFP", Lexis; Jacob)

Philip Coyle, the Pentagon’s operational test director during the Clinton administration, said hit-to-kill technology, particularly in the presence of countermeasures, remains an issue of concern for missile defense developers.
MDA officials have looked at ways to deal with near misses of the target by a kill vehicle, he told IMD Dec. 21.
Those officials considered technology such as placing an array of "outriggers" on exoatmospheric kill vehicles. "The idea was that the outriggers would swing out from the EKV extending the reach of the EKV across a wider area of space," he said. "That way, if a conventional EKV would have missed the target by, say, a few yards, the outriggers might still hit the target."
Another option would be an "umbrella-like structure" around the EKV, the former Pentagon official said, adding, "basically, the concept is to turn near misses into hits."
But there are missile defense experts who say the only way for the ground-based missile defense system to work dependably would be to use nuclear-tipped interceptors, according to Coyle. These experts argue that "with pure hit-to-kill, and with little or no advance information about the details in such an attack, the miss distances will always be too large," he continued.
The United States briefly deployed an anti-ballistic missile system in the mid-1970s called Safeguard that used nuclear-armed interceptors.
"Trying to hit an enemy warhead out in space is like trying to hit a hole-in-one in golf, when the hole is going 15,000 miles per hour," Coyle said. "And if the enemy uses countermeasures or decoys, then it’s like hitting a hole-in-one when the hole is going 15,000 ~miles per hour~ and the green is covered with spots that look just like the holes.
"With nuclear-tipped interceptors, the proponents would argue, all you need to do is get close to the golf course," he said.

Effective missile defense is key to prevent terrorism that will limit U.S. leadership and detonate WMD

Kennedy President Missile Threat ’3
(Brian T.-, missilethreat.com a Claremont Institute National Security Project, Jan. 3, Claremont Institute, "Understanding the Need for a National Missile Defense After 9-11", http://missilethreat.eresources.ws/publications/ id.6/puby detail.asp; Jacob)

On September 11, our nation’s enemies attacked us using hijacked airliners. Next time
AND
out its primary constitutional duty: to "provide for the common defense."
The Nature of the Threat
The attack of September 11 should not be seen as a fanatical act of individuals
AND
acquire strategic ballistic missiles with which to attack and blackmail the United States.
Who are these enemy nations, in whose interest it is to press the U
AND
know that only the U.S. can stand in their way.
We should also note that ballistic missiles can be used not only to kill and
AND
aimed at the U.S., such threats must be taken seriously.
The Strategic Terror of Ballistic Missiles
China possesses the DF-5 ballistic missile with a single, four-megaton warhead. Such a warhead could destroy an area of 87.5 square miles, or roughly all of Manhattan, with its daily population of three million people. Even more devastating is the Russian SS-18, which has a range of 7,500 miles and is capable of carrying a single, 24-megaton warhead or multiple warheads ranging from 550 to 750 kilotons.
Imagine a ballistic missile attack on New York or Los Angeles, resulting in the
AND
nearly 1.3 trillion dollars, roughly one-fifth of GNP.
Missile defense critics insist that such an attack could never happen, based on the
AND
but it would also almost certainly guarantee additional ballistic missile attacks from elsewhere.
Consider another scenario. What if a president, in order to avoid the complete
AND
be better to prevent a nuclear attack than to suffer one and retaliate.
Then there is the blackmail scenario. What if Osama Bin Laden were to obtain
AND
nuclear blackmail would be as devastating politically as nuclear war would be physically.
How to Stop Ballistic Missiles
For all the bad news about the ballistic missile threat to the U.S
AND
missiles through direct impact or "hit-to-kill" methods.

Escalates to nuclear war

Speice, ’6 ~Patrick F. Speice, Jr., JD Candidate at The College of William and Mary, "NEGLIGENCE AND NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION: ELIMINATING THE CURRENT LIABILITY BARRIER TO BILATERAL U.S.-RUSSIAN NONPROLIFERATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS," William and Mary Law Review, February 2006, 47 Wm and Mary L. Rev. 1427~
Accordingly, there is a significant and ever-present risk that terrorists could acquire
AND
number of casualties and potentially triggering a full-scale nuclear conflict. 50 

2NC

CP

AT: Congressional Consultation Solves

Missile defense requires quick response

GAO 11
(July, Ballistic Missile Defense)
DOD concurred with our recommendation that DOD issue guidance that designates an entity to be
AND
, we believe that DOD should issue this policy as soon as possible.

Speed of nuclear attack means no time to consult Congress

Torricelli 87 
(Robert G., U.S. Senator, Rutgers Law, MA from Harvard, "The War Powers Resolution after the Libya Crisis", 4-1-1987, Pace Law Review Volume 7, http://digitalcommons.pace.edu/plr/vol7/iss3/5)
Already, Congress’ ability to exercise a direct influence on foreign and defense policy has
AND
when it disagrees with both the substance¶ and method of presidential conduct.

2NC Solvency

Nuclear interceptors key to effective missile defense – doesn’t undermine solvency

Bergner 13, Recent graduate of Georgetown University’s Security Studies Program
(Jonathan, Should the United States Reconsider Nuclear-Tipped Interceptors for Ballistic Missile Defense?, csis.org/files/publication/130214_Spies_NuclearNotes2.2_Web.pdf)
Instead, U.S. national missile defense programs over the last two decades
AND
based, midcourse defense system with low-yield, nuclear kill vehicles.

NMD Deployment Now

Obama fully deploying conventional NMD in the squo

Auslin 13, Resident Scholar at AEI
(Michael, Now We Know Why Obama Reversed Course on Missile Defense, www.nationalreview.com/corner/345408/now-we-know-why-obama-reversed-course-missile-defense-michael-auslin
Last month, the Obama administration abruptly backtracked on cutting continental missile defense, and
AND
on the accuracy of its missiles (or weapons, for that matter). 

US expanding conventional NMD Now

WSJ 13 
(3/19, Obama’s Missile-Defense Reversal, online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887323415304578366370800326406)
Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel chose Friday afternoon to announce one of the biggest switcheroos of
AND
its capabilities and is engaged in a series of irresponsible and reckless provocations."

Impact

Extinction

Ochs, has published articles in the Baltimore Sun, Baltimore Chronicle, Science magazine and the website: www.freefromterror.net, past president of the Aberdeen Proving Ground Superfund Citizens Coalition, member of the Depleted Uranium Task force of the Military Toxics Project and a member of the Chemical Weapons Working Group, 6-9-2K2 (Richard, "BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS MUST BE ABOLISHED IMMEDIATELY," http://www.freefromterror.net/other_articles/abolish.html)====
Of all the weapons of mass destruction, the genetically engineered biological weapons, many
AND
patriotism would extinguish humanity, then patriotism is the highest of all crimes.

Accidents impact
Buffalo News 00
(7/16)

Nonetheless, it does not follow that we should permanently give up the idea of defending against weapons of mass destruction. Rational governments will always be deterred from starting a nuclear war, but by definition, you can’t deter accidents, unauthorized actions, miscalculations or madmen. And as long as defenses are banned, all states will be completely vulnerable to that kind of attack.  
There is an obvious solution to this apparent dilemma: Defenses can be deployed only on a cooperative, negotiated, multilateral basis. Put differently, the paradox of defense in the nuclear age is that you can defend yourself only if your opponent agrees to let you do so.  

NMD is key to devalues WMD and reduce missile proliferation
Kennedy ’1
(Brian T.-, July 23, "America is Worth Defending", Online; Jacob)

I look forward to seeing the final marks for the defense authorization bill, and
AND
colleagues during conference to support our allies in Poland and the Czech Republic.

2NR

CP

AT: Radiation

No sattelites and no radiation—micro nukes solve
Moore ’2
(Mike-, July 1,Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, "Missile defenses, relabeled: those nuclear-tipped defensive ’interceptors’ would make dandy tools for taking out the other guy’s satellites", Lexis; Jacob)

The problem was that radiation from the 1962 explosion fried the electronic circuitry of nearby satellites, which was not good. American spy satellites were becoming increasingly important as the United States tried to ferret out hard data from a closed Soviet Union.
BUT THINGS CHANGE. SCHNEIDER MAY BE THINKING OF arming tomorrow’s interceptors with "micro-nukes" rather than the monster warheads of the 1960s and 1970s. The current administration, after all, seems to have an overweening passion for developing a new generation of mini- and micro-nukes with all manner of wonderfully creative uses. Meanwhile, its enthusiasm for missile defense remains as unbounded as it is unfathomable.
Combine these two enthusiasms and—voila—you might produce a workable system, particularly if you throw tens of billions of dollars at it.
After all, even true-blue believers in arms control like me have to admit that over time the Clinton-Bush missile defense people have demonstrated that they can get interceptors pretty close to incoming warheads, at least part of the time. And they will undoubtedly get better. The problem is that with a hit-to-kill system, close is not goodenough. Miss by an inch, miss by a mile; it makes no difference.
With a micro-nuke, though, a near miss could do the job. A micro-nuke ought to be able to vaporize an entire threat cloud. And because it would produce much less radiation than larger warheads, it might not indiscriminately disable satellites in orbit.

Tournament: NDT | Round: 5 | Opponent: UGA CS | Judge: Eric Forslund, Scott Phillips, John Warden

1NC PIC

The United States federal government should substantially increase restrictions on the President’s authority to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities between the Republic of China and the People’s Republic of China unless to prevent imminent attacks on the United States that may arise from said hostilities. 

The plan would allow the US to absorb a first strike in the event that Chinese-Taiwan hostilities involve the US

Natalia Ochoa-Ruiz and Esther Salamanca-Aguado (Doctors of Law, Complutense of Madrid) – 2005, Exploring the Limits of International Law Relating to the Use of Force  in Self-Defence, The European Journal of International Law Vol. 16 no.3 , http://www.ejil.org/pdfs/16/3/306.pdf
Ultimately, these questions point to the issue of what is the aim and purpose
AND
armed attacks by Iranian forces on United States naval and commercial vessels.104

That destroys deterrence – "repel only" encourages quick "blitz" attacks that conclude before the President can order an execute a "repelling" attack

Yoram Dinstein – Professor Emeritus and former President, Tel Aviv University – 2011, War, Aggression and Self-Defence, kindlebook
667. At bottom, the issue is whether the unlawful use of force by
AND
Blitz attacks, each ending before effective counter-force can be deployed.

Tournament: Harvard | Round: 2 | Opponent: Minnesota CE | Judge: Seth Gannon

1NC CP

Next off is the Release PIC

The United States federal judiciary should rule that all habeas corpus hearings of persons detained under the War Powers Authority of the President of the United States be subject to due process guarantees and that an individual detained by, and pursuant to the power of, the United States is assumed to possess the ability to challenge the legality of the detention by way of the writ of habeas corpus. The United States federal judiciary should not rule that any additional release requirements are necessary for individuals who have won their habeas corpus hearing

A new release requirement isn’t necessary because a court remedy power already exists – detainees are free to leave for another country or apply for immigration to the US – the only additional protection offered by the plan is automatic release into the United States which does not impact rule of law or judicial power concerns

Black 10, Former Judge Advocate General of the US Army
(Lt. Gen. Scott C., Amici Curaie in support of Respondents, Kiyemba v. Obama, www.oyez.org/sites/default/files/cases/briefs/pdf/brief08-12348.pdf)
Petitioners have similarly misconstrued the decision below. The D.C. Circuit did
AND
be released into the U.S. as an alternative to detention.

Counterplan solves the case – extraterritorial application of the writ is key to legitimacy, rule of law, and ending deference

Sidhu 11, JD George Washington 
(Dawinder, SHADOWING THE FLAG: EXTENDING THE HABEAS WRIT BEYOND GUANTÁNAMO, scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=159726context=wmborj)
There is nothing in these foundational principles to indicate that the responsibility of the judiciary
AND
a district court with jurisdiction over the custodian who may produce the petitioner.

2nc

CP

AT: Remedy Key

2) Remedy and release already exists – all detainees who have won their habeas hearing have either left or turned down resettlement offers.  They are free to go

Kagan 10, Solicitor General US DOJ
(2/19, Elena, www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/SG-Kiyemba-letter-2-19-10.pdf)
3. Since well before the district court issued its order that petitioners be brought to and released in the United States, the United States has undertaken extensive diplomatic efforts to resettle the Uighurs at Guantanamo Bay. Before January 20, 2009, Executive Branch officials approached a substantial number of countries concerning the Uighurs’ resettlement, recognizing that those efforts were laying the groundwork for a potentially lengthy dialogue with other nations. Later, consistent with the President’s directives in Executive Order No. 13,492, 74 Fed. Reg. 4897 (2009), the Secretary of State appointed a Special Envoy, Daniel Fried, to intensify diplomatic efforts to repatriate or resettle individuals cleared for transfer from Guantanamo Bay. Since accepting his appointment, Ambassador Fried has regularly traveled abroad to meet with representatives of other nations and discuss transfers of Guantanamo Bay detainees. He has focused his efforts on resettling detainees whom the United States could not send to their home countries because of concerns about possible torture, and has made resettlement of the Uighurs a top diplomatic priority. See U.S. Br. 3-4, 8-10 These diplomatic efforts had met with considerable success even before the Court granted certiorari. In May 2006, the five Uighurs whose CSRTs determined that they should no longer be detained were resettled in Albania. In June 2009, four Uighurs were resettled in Bermuda. And in September 2009, Palau offered to accept 12 of the 13 Uighurs remaining at Guantanamo Bay. Six of those 12 accepted Palau’s offer and were resettled there in October 2009 (after this Court’s grant of certiorari). The remaining six (including the five who will be left at Guantanamo Bay after Mr. Mahmud and Mr. Mahnut go to Switzerland) did not accept that offer. U.S. Br. 5, 9-10. Since the Court granted certiorari, the government of Switzerland agreed to accept the one Uighur detainee who had not previously received an offer, as well as his brother; they have accepted that offer and are expected to be resettled in Switzerland in the near future. U.S. Br. 10. And as noted in the government’s brief (at 10), the five other Uighurs who remain at Guantanamo Bay also received an offer from a country other than Palau; they did not accept that offer, and it was withdrawn after several months. If petitioners were to express interest, the United States would again discuss the matter with the government of Palau. Earlier this month, the President of Palau publicly announced that Palau remains receptive to resettling the Uighurs who remain at Guantanamo Bay, and has reiterated that the Uighur transferees are welcome to stay indefinitely. See Palau Willing to Take Remaining Guantanamo Uighurs (Feb. 8, 2010) http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100209/ wl_asia_afp/uschinaxinjiangguantanamopalaujustice; see U.S. Br. 19 n.24. The United States also continues to work to find other options for resettlement. U.S. Br. 52. The government’s success in obtaining resettlement offers for all of the Uighurs at Guantanamo Bay is part of a broader pattern. Over the past year, 48 individuals have been transferred from Guantanamo Bay to nine different countries. U.S. Br. 4. And just several days ago, Spain agreed to accept five detainees. See Peter Finn, Spain to Accept Five Guantanamo Detainees, Wash. Post, Feb. 16, 2010 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/15/AR2010021501746.html. In particular, all 11 of the detainees in addition to the Uighurs who have obtained habeas orders of release that are final and not subject to appeal have been transferred. U.S. Br. 15. 4. These developments undermine not only the factual premise of the question on which this Court granted review, but the premise of petitioners’ arguments throughout the entirety of the relevant proceedings in this case. As explained above, petitioners consistently have argued that, because no other nation would accept them, their remedy of release from Guantanamo Bay could only be effective if a federal court were to order the Executive to bring them into the United States and release them here. But to the extent this might have appeared to be the case once, it is not the case now. All of the Uighurs who were once in military detention in an enemy status at Guantanamo Bay have either been resettled elsewhere, accepted an offer of resettlement (with resettlement soon to follow), or received two offers of resettlement but chosen not to accept them. And the five in the last category would likely still have the option of resettling in Palau if they expressed sufficient interest for the United States to again approach and engage in substantive discussions with the Palauan government. Or these five may benefit from the United States’ ongoing diplomatic efforts to resettle them elsewhere. In sum, all of the petitioners have had an option for release from custody other than a judicial order of release into the United States. The question upon which the Court granted certiorari is therefore no longer presented as to any petitioner, because release into the United States has not been the "only possible effective remedy." Pet. i

4) Extraterritorial application of habeas key to restoration of the rule of law – solvency is impossible without it because we could just detain outside the US

Sidhu 11, JD George Washington 
(Dawinder, SHADOWING THE FLAG: EXTENDING THE HABEAS WRIT BEYOND GUANTÁNAMO, scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=159726context=wmborj)
This Boumediene standard, although expanding the scope of the habeas writ, is not
AND
law to be coextensive with executive action with respect to detentions of individuals.

Bagram

Extraterritorial application of habeas protections key to strong judicial check on the executive – also bagram

Sidhu 11, JD George Washington 
(Dawinder, SHADOWING THE FLAG: EXTENDING THE HABEAS WRIT BEYOND GUANTÁNAMO, scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=159726context=wmborj)
The writ of habeas corpus activates courts’ duty to check arbitrary or unlawful restraints by
AND
established law—that is, when judicial review is most critically needed.

Tournament: Texas | Round: 6 | Opponent: Emory JS | Judge: Jeff Buntin

1NC PIC

The ongoing legacy of the Korematsu Era war powers authority cases should be distinguished to apply to reparations and redress suits, but not detention or national security law. The Korematsu Era war powers authority cases should not be used as precedents in the future to justify presidential war powers and all racial myths used in the case should be acknowledged as false.

The ongoing legacy of the Korematsu era internment cases is more complex than the affirmative has presented it – the legacy carries the tainted memory of the atrocities of internment, but it also carries the seeds of reparations for the injustices committed against the Japanese – there is redeemable value in the legacy of Korematsu era cases

Yamamoto 12 
(Eric. K., Fred T. Korematsu Professor of Law and Social Justice, William S. Richardson School of Law, University of Hawaii, "The Evolving Legacy of Japanese American Internment Redress: Next Steps We Can (an Should) Take", Seattle Journal for Social Justice, Volume 11   Issue 1 Article 7, http://digitalcommons.law.seattleu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=163126context=sjsj)

The Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality’s conference on Gordon Hirabayashi’s life
AND
reparations claims and reconciliation initiatives in the United States and around the world.

====reparations good – key to racial justice====
Harvey 7
Jennifer, Associate Professor of Religion, Department Chair, Drake University, Whiteness and Morality: Pursuing Racial Justice through Reparations and Sovereignty, p. 142-3)sbl
The theoretical frameworks and historical analysis I have articulated to this point suggest the appropriateness
AND
Haunani-Kay Trask, "must be a precondition for reconciliation."3

2NC Spillover

this is not merely a historical FYI – the multifaceted, complex legacy of the korematsu era cases has provided the modern legal basis for a massive wave of demands for reparations from Blacks, Native Americans, Filipino war veterans, and others – ending the legacy of these cases eviscerates the foundations of a global reparations movement

Yamamoto 12
(Eric. K., Fred T. Korematsu Professor of Law and Social Justice, William S. Richardson School of Law, University of Hawaii, "The Evolving Legacy of Japanese American Internment Redress: Next Steps We Can (an Should) Take", Seattle Journal for Social Justice, Volume 11   Issue 1 Article 7, http://digitalcommons.law.seattleu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=163126context=sjsj)

A. Far-reaching Impacts of Internment Redress¶ First, visualize these dimensions
AND
to play. To illuminate this point I will offer three related stories.

2NC Reform vs. Repudiate

in this sense, we are called to a task more challenging than the repudiation of the korematsu legacy – we are called to productively reform it, to keep parts of the legacy of internment alive as a catalyst for political work towards reparations across the world.

Yamamoto 12
(Eric. K., Fred T. Korematsu Professor of Law and Social Justice, William S. Richardson School of Law, University of Hawaii, "The Evolving Legacy of Japanese American Internment Redress: Next Steps We Can (an Should) Take", Seattle Journal for Social Justice, Volume 11   Issue 1 Article 7, http://digitalcommons.law.seattleu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=163126context=sjsj)

With all of this in mind. I will make an observation and then pose
AND
social healing through justice" legacy of Gordon, Fred, and Min.

2NC Reparations Good

====No solvency without reparations – the aff is a prerequisite to any political engagement – failure to acknowledge the past leads to racialized violence.====
Matsuda, ’87 ~1987; Mari J. Matsuda; Assistant Professor of Law, University of Hawaii, The William S. Richardson School of Law; "LOOKING TO THE BOTTOM: CRITICAL LEGAL STUDIES AND REPARATIONS"~

This interpretation supports a doctrine of
AND
 that comes when old wounds go unsalved.

Tournament: Harvard | Round: 7 | Opponent: Kentucky GV | Judge: Mikaela Malsin

1NC CP

Plan:  The United States Federal Judiciary should subject United States’ drone strikes operations to judicial ex post review.

The affirmative plan text jurisdiction over all targeted killing.  This includes both drone strikes and Special ops.  The counterplan is just drone strikes

Special forces conduct important targeted killings – turns case - key to Afghanistan stability and preventing terrorist attacks

Sascha-Dominik Bachmann 13, Reader in International Law (University of Lincoln), 2013, "Targeted Killings: Contemporary Challenges, Risks and Opportunities," Journal of Conflict and Security Law, doi: 10.1093/jcsl/krt007
Targeted killing has also been used by the USA in theatres of actual combat operations
AND
the respective governments have created areas which are outside effective state control.33

Special forces operations are key to counter-prolif—-solves nuclear war

Jim Thomas 13, Vice President and Director of Studies at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, and Chris Dougherty is a Research Fellow at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, 2013, "BEYOND THE RAMPARTS THE FUTURE OF U.S. SPECIAL OPERATIONS FORCES," http://www.csbaonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/SOF-Report-CSBA-Final.pdf
WMD do not represent new threats to U.S. security interests, but
AND
for deposing WMD-armed regimes through UW campaigns should the need arise.

2nc

Afghan Impact

Success in Afghanistan key to prevent nuclear war

Morgan 7 (Stephen J., Political Writer and Former Member of the British Labour Party Executive Committee, "Better another Taliban Afghanistan, than a Taliban NUCLEAR Pakistan21?", 9-23, http://www.freearticlesarchive.com/article/_Better_another_Taliban_Afghanistan__than_a_Taliban_NUCLEAR_Pakistan___/99961/0/)

As the war intensifies, he has no guarantees that the current autonomy may yet
AND
in a new Cold War with China and Russia pitted against the US.

AT: Perm do the CP

Severance

TK includes special ops missions

Masters, Deputy Editor at the Council on Foreign Relations, 5/23/13
(Targeted Killings, www.cfr.org/counterterrorism/targeted-killings/p9627)
What methods of targeted killing does the United States employ? Drone Strikes Targeted attacks
AND
special operations raids and put Afghan forces in the lead of those activities.

AT: Due Process

Obviously they violate due process in the same damn way – CMON NOW

Here is a card that says the words you want
Perksey 12 – lawyer writing for DC Bar
http://www.dcbar.org/for_lawyers/resources/publications/washington_lawyer/march_2012/lethal_force.cfm
The swift and "nearly flawless" execution of the airstrike is a testament to
AND
, the right to counsel, and the right to a public trial.

Tournament: Kentucky | Round: 8 | Opponent: Wake Forest LM | Judge: Geoff Lundeen

Vote negative to politicize assassination.

The term targeted killing makes the practice seem legitimate—inconsistent with a strategy of resistance

Small, 12 
(Roundtable on Targeted Killing: Lawyering and Targeted Killing, http://www.jadaliyya.com/pages/index/4567/roundtable-on-targeted-killing_lawyering-and-targe)

The practice now commonly termed "targeted killing" was, before the turn of
AND
, if not persuasively, then at least plausibly, legal and permissible.

Targeted killing is a euphemism that makes it more difficult for their strategy to be effective—sanitizes murder

Smith, 12 
(1/22, "Sanitized Words," http://ramblingtaoist.blogspot.com/2012/01/sanitized-words.html)
"Targeted killing" has become the euphemism du jour. Remember "harsh interrogation"? The conduct discussed in the killing memo was once simply referred to as assassination.

More and more people are pushing back against the policy. They are reacting,
AND
and authoritarian regimes do? Don’t we criticize them when they assassinate people?

Tournament: Wake | Round: 8 | Opponent: MSU BS | Judge: Matt Munday

1nc

1NC CP 2

The United States federal government should require congressional authorization prior to the initiation of hostilities against the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Use of "force" includes the power to detain

Joseph Landau - Associate Professor, Fordham Law School - December, 2012, ARTICLE: CHEVRON MEETS YOUNGSTOWN: NATIONAL SECURITY AND THE ADMINISTRATIVE STATE, Boston University Law Review, 92 B.U.L. Rev. 1917
The Hamdi Court held that although the President had the power to detain, possibly
AND
the Court indicated that additional, more definitive congressional authorization might be required.

The plan spills over to broader Congressional decisionmaking

Paul 2008 - Senior Social Scientist; Professor, Pardee RAND Graduate School Pittsburgh Office Education Ph.D., M.A., and B.A. in sociology, University of California, Los Angeles (September, Christopher, "US Presidential War Powers: Legacy Chains in Military Intervention Decisionmaking* ," Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 45, No. 5 (Sep., 2008), pp. 665-679)

Legacy Chains
Finegold 26 Skocpol (1995: 222) describe policy legacies: Past and present
AND
law (see the extended ex ample presented later in the article).1 

Exec flexibility on detention powers now

Michael Tomatz 13, Colonel, B.A., University of Houston,  J
AND
ON ENEMY DETENTION," 69 A.F. L. Rev. 1
President Obama signed the NDAA "despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate
AND
about known and hidden dangers, and preventing terrorists from continuing the fight.

Terrorists can easily acquire nuclear weapons- an attack would trigger full scale nuclear war

Speice ’6
(Patrick F. Jr.-, J.D. Candidate @ Marshall-Wythe School of Law, B.A. @ Wake, Feb., William 26 Mary Law Review, "Negligence and Nuclear Nonproliferation: Eliminating the Current Liability Barrier to Bilateral U.S.-Russian Nonproliferation Assistance Programs", Lexis)

 Although no terrorist acts directed against the population or interests of the United States
AND
among terrorist groups, many of which are hostile to the United States.
The collapse of the Soviet Union dramatically increased the risk that terrorist organizations will succeed
AND
37 Graham Allison summarizes the implications of post-Soviet disorder in Russia:
The dramatic changes ... have produced political uncertainty, economic distress, and social dislocation
AND
valuable to any state or group that covets nuclear weapons. It is not
hard to imagine that people leading bleak, uncertain, and difficult lives might find irresistible the prospect of wealth and security via the nuclear black market...
Organizations such as the Russian military and Minatom are now operating in circumstances of great stress. Money is in short supply, paychecks are irregular, living conditions unpleasant ... ~D~isorder within Russia and the resulting strains within the military could easily cause a lapse or a breakdown in the Russian military’s guardianship of nuclear weapons. 38
Accordingly, there is a significant and ever-present risk that terrorists could acquire a nuclear device or fissile material from Russia as a result of the confluence of Russian economic decline and the end of stringent Soviet-era nuclear security measures. 39
Terrorist groups could acquire a nuclear weapon by a number of methods, including "
AND
are the most effective means of countering the risk of nuclear terrorism. 44
Moreover, the end of the Cold War eliminated the rationale for maintaining a large
AND
material to sell, to states or terrorist organizations with nuclear ambitions. 48
The potential consequences of the unchecked spread of nuclear knowledge and material to terrorist groups
AND
in the United States and escalate to the use of nuclear weapons. 53

1nr

Terror Impact Calc

Disad outweighs and turns case

2- Escalation- takes 24 hours

Easterbrook Senior Editor New Republic ’1
(Nov. 1, Lexis)

Well, what held through the Cold War, when the United States and Russia
AND
bombs rained down on every conceivable military target in a dozen Muslim countries. 

"Use of Force"

 Detention===

Use of force includes detention – prefer our evidence – its citing Supreme Court rulings and the US Code

Michael F. Hertz et al - March 13, 2009, Acting Assistant Attorney General, RESPONDENTS’ MEMORANDUM REGARDING THE GOVERNMENT’S DETENTION AUTHORITY RELATIVE TO DETAINEES HELD AT GUANTANAMO BAY, IN RE: GUANTANAMO BAY DETAINEE LITIGATION, http://www.justice.gov/opa/documents/memo-re-det-auth.pdf
 Thus, consistent with U.S. historical practice, and international law, the AUMF
authorizes the use of necessary and appropriate military force against members of an opposing armed
AND
, the principal organizations that fall within the AUMF’s authorization of force.2 

2NC Spillover

The plan spills over to all other warfighting capabilities –

1.) Institutional memory – the plan embeds normative categories

Paul 2008 - Senior Social Scientist; Professor, Pardee RAND Graduate School Pittsburgh Office Education Ph.D., M.A., and B.A. in sociology, University of California, Los Angeles (September, Christopher, "US Presidential War Powers: Legacy Chains in Military Intervention Decisionmaking* ," Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 45, No. 5 (Sep., 2008), pp. 665-679)

The Institutional Context ’Institution’ is used quite inclusively in this article. Following Nee 26
AND
limits, reporting requirements) on how presidents plan and launch military interventions. 

2.) Precedential effect – the plan requires reframing constitutional separations of power

Heder 2010 - magna cum laude , J. Reuben Clark Law School, Brigham Young University (Adam, J.D., "THE POWER TO END WAR: THE EXTENT AND LIMITS OF CONGRESSIONAL POWER," St. Mary’s Law Journal Vol. 41 No. 3, http://www.stmaryslawjournal.org/pdfs/Hederreadytogo.pdf) 

This constitutional silence invokes Justice Rehnquist’s oftquoted language from the landmark "political question"
AND
Constitution in an area where the Framers themselves declined to give such guidance. 

2NC AT Mueller

Terrorists and materials can slip in undetected

Daalder 26 Lindsay ’5
(Ivo-, James-, Feb.-March, Boston Review, "’For America, the age of geopolitics has ended and the age of global politics has begun’", Lexis)

Until September 11, 2001. Then a new reality dawned—the likelihood of
AND
the world, and many of its ills, have come to America. 

Consensus Mueller is wrong

Allison Director Belfer Center for Science 26 International Affairs ’7
(Graham-, Prof Gov 26 Chair Dubai Initiative Kennedy School of Gov., Nov. 12, National Interest, "The Three ’Nos’ Knows", http://www.nationalinterest.org/Article.aspx?id=15998)

In the previous issue of The National Interest, John Mueller argued that the threats from nuclear proliferation, nuclear terrorism and nuclear war are exaggerated. Rather, we may pose the greatest threat to ourselves: the price we pay for making nuclear weapons the "supreme priority" carries a hefty price in money and in lives. Graham Allison, Joseph Cirincione and William Potter weigh in. Mueller has the last word.
The Three "Nos" Knows
Graham Allison
"RADIOACTIVE HYPE" by John Mueller sharpens the barbs from his recent book, Overblown, in ways that demonstrate that he is, above all, a committed contrarian. One can agree with many points in his article and book. But his central propositions about the danger and appropriate responses to terrorism, nuclear terrorism and the proliferation of nuclear weapons are profoundly mistaken. Specifically, "Radioactive Hype" argues that:
–"Threat-mongers"—for which the 9/11 Commission, my book Nuclear Terrorism: The Ultimate Preventable Catastrophe and presidential candidates of both parties are the poster children—have greatly exaggerated the threat of terrorists exploding a nuclear weapon in one of our cities.
–An "obsessive quest to control nuclear proliferation—particularly since the end of the Cold War—has been substantially counterproductive."
–This "nuclear obsession" drove the United States into "the current disastrous Iraq War" and now threatens war with Iran.
Given the space allotted, my response to each proposition must be abridged but will reference my earlier work on this topic and other analyses from the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, where these issues are addressed in greater depth.1
How Serious is the Threat of Nuclear Terrorism?
MUELLER IS entitled to his opinion that the threat of nuclear proliferation and nuclear terrorism
AND
attack are relatively insignificant when considering how we should respond to the threat.

2NC AT Link turns

THE AFF RESULTS IN CATASTROPHIC TERRORISM

Jack Goldsmith 9, Henry L. Shattuck Professor at Harvard Law School, 2/4/09, "Long-Term Terrorist Detention and Our National Security Court," http://www.brookings.edu/~~/media/research/files/papers/2009/2/0920detention20goldsmith/0209_detention_goldsmith.pdf
These three concerns challenge the detention paradigm. They do nothing to eliminate the need
AND
in the past; having government authorities that reflect that change makes sense.

Tournament: Harvard | Round: 5 | Opponent: Northwestern MV | Judge: Stephen Weil

1NC CP

The United States Federal Government should restrict the President’s war making authority by limiting assassination and imprisonment without charge within zones of active hostilities to declared territories and by statutory codification of executive branch review policy for those practices; and in addition, by limiting assassination and imprisonment without charge outside zones of active hostilities to reviewable operations guided by an individualized threat requirement, a least-harmful-means test, a feasibility test for criminal prosecution, procedural safeguards, and by statutory codification of executive branch review policy for those practices.

Using the word "detention" is unethical and turns solvency—"imprisonment" is more accurate—hold the 1ac accountable

Sullivan, 4/12 editor of The New York Times
(Margaret Sullivan, 12 April 2013, "’Targeted Killing,’ ’Detainee’ and ’Torture’: Why Language Choice Matters," http://publiceditor.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/12/targeted-killing-detainee-and-torture-why-language-choice-matters/?_r=0)//CC
If it’s torture, why call it a "harsh interrogation technique"? If it’s
AND
thoughtful consideration – and, at times, some institutional soul-searching.

1ac use of term "targeted killing" is military codespeak used to justify mass murder – this euphemistic doubletalk that causes further violence

Small 12 
(Roundtable on Targeted Killing: Lawyering and Targeted Killing, http://www.jadaliyya.com/pages/index/4567/roundtable-on-targeted-killing_lawyering-and-targe)
The practice now commonly termed "targeted killing" was, before the turn of
AND
, if not persuasively, then at least plausibly, legal and permissible.

Tournament: Wake | Round: 5 | Opponent: Harvard HX | Judge: Bruce Najor

1NC CP

Text: The United States federal government should enact legislation restricting authority for targeted killing using remotely piloted aircraft systems to Title 10 military authority except for those active in Yemen.

Even if the DOD solves in Pakistan the CIA is key to fight AQAP in Yemen

Miller 2013 (May 25, "Obama’s new drone policy leaves room for CIA role" http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-05-25/world/39519388_1_drone-strikes-drone-operations-cia-s)

The drone campaign in Pakistan began under President George W. Bush and escalated after
AND
as an anomaly and saw lethal operations as the province of the military.

AQAP will attack India

Roychowdhury ’11 (Gen. Shankar Roychowdhury is a former Chief of Army Staff and a former member of Parliament, "India needs a 360° terror appraisal", Deccan Chronicle, http://www.deccanchronicle.com/editorial/dc-comment/india-needs-360C2B0-terror-appraisal-659, September 6, 2011)

In this context, Al Qaeda and its emerging connections in Yemen have become very
AND
take due note of other threats as well and exercise the requisite caution. 

Terrorist attack on India causes Indo-Pak war- escalates

Zarate ’11 (Juan C. Zarate,  "An alarming South Asia powder keg", Washington Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/18/AR2011021805662.html, February 20, 2011)

In 1914, a terrorist assassinated Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo - unleashing geopolitical forces
AND
for broader geopolitical crises may be the greatest threat we face from terrorism.

Tournament: USC | Round: Doubles | Opponent: Northwestern MV | Judge: Adrienne Brovero, Mikaela Malsin, David Heidt

Zenko CP

1NC Shell

The United States Congress should restrict targeted killings to the leadership of al-Qaeda and affiliated forces or individuals with a direct operational role in past or ongoing terrorist plots against the United States and its allies, end signature strikes, review the authority split for drone strikes between the CIA and JSOC, require the executive to provide information to the public, Congress, and UN special rapporteurs on targeted killing, prohibit targeted killings without an accountable human being authorizing the strike, maintain the MTCR Category I constraints on the export of armed drones, limit the retrofitting of drones already exported to U.S. allies that allow them to be weaponized, promote Track 1.5 or Track 2 discussions on armed drones, create an international association of drone manufacturers, explicitly state which legal principles apply—and do not apply—to drone strikes and the procedural safeguards, begin discussions with emerging drone powers for a code of conduct, and host discussions in partnership with Israel to engage emerging drone makers on how to strengthen norms against selling weapons capable systems. The United States federal government should end its use of the Warsame model of detention. The United States federal government should limit detention to operations guided by an individualized threat requirement and with procedural safeguards; and statutory codification of executive branch review policy for these practices.

The United States Federal Government should not use "zones of active hostilities" as a qualification for restrictions on targeted killing or detention.

The counterplan solves the case – avoids domestic and international backlash and effectively establishes norms controlling drone use and proliferation

Zenko 13, Fellow in the Center for Preventive Action at the Council on Foreign Relations
(Micah, January, Reforming U.S. Drone Strike Policies, Council Special Report No. 65)
In his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech, President Obama declared: "Where force
AND
the future, the United States should undertake the following specific policy recommendations.
Executive Branch
The president of the United States should
?? limit targeted killings to individuals who U.S. officials claim are being
targeted—the leadership of al-Qaeda and affiliated forces or individuals
with a direct operational role in past or ongoing terrorist plots
against the United States and its allies—and bring drone strike practices
in line with stated policies;
?? either end the practice of signature strikes or provide a public accounting
of how it meets the principles of distinction and proportionality
that the Obama administration claims;
?? review its current policy whereby the executive authority for drone
strikes is split between the CIA and JSOC, as each has vastly different
legal authorities, degrees of permissible transparency, and oversight;
?? provide information to the public, Congress, and UN special rapporteurs—
without disclosing classified information—on what procedures
exist to prevent harm to civilians, including collateral damage
mitigation, investigations into collateral damage, corrective actions
based on those investigations, and amends for civilian losses; and
?? never conduct nonbattlefield targeted killings without an accountable
human being authorizing the strike (while retaining the potential
necessity of autonomous decisions to use lethal force in warfare in
response to ground-based antiaircraft fire or aerial combat).
U.S. Congress
The relevant Senate and House committees should
?? demand regular White House briefings on drone strikes and how
such operations are coordinated with broader foreign policy objectives,
in order to hold the executive branch accountable for its actions;
?? hold hearings with government officials and nongovernmental
experts on the short- and long-term effects of U.S. targeted killings;
?? hold hearings to assess the geographic and temporal limits of the
AUMF and the legal justifications for targeted killings of U.S. citizens;
?? maintain the MTCR Category I constraints on the export of armed
drones and limit the retrofitting of drones already exported to U.S.
allies that allow them to be weaponized; and
?? withhold funding and/or subpoena the executive branch if cooperation
is not forthcoming.
International Cooperation
The United States should
?? promote Track 1.5 or Track 2 discussions on armed drones, similar to
dialogues with other countries on the principles and limits of weapons
systems such as nuclear weapons or cyberwarfare;
?? create an international association of drone manufacturers that
includes broad participation with emerging drone powers that
could be modeled on similar organizations like the Nuclear Suppliers
Group;
?? explicitly state which legal principles apply—and do not apply—to
drone strikes and the procedural safeguards to ensure compliance to
build broader international consensus;
?? begin discussions with emerging drone powers for a code of conduct
to develop common principles for how armed drones should be used
outside a state’s territory, which would address issues such as sovereignty,
proportionality, distinction, and appropriate legal framework;
and
?? host discussions in partnership with Israel to engage emerging
drone makers on how to strengthen norms against selling weapons capable
systems.

2NC Stuff

no measurable difference between the plan and CP for allies – they don’t care about zones

Anderson 09, Law Prof at American 
(Kenneth, Targeted Killing in U.S. Counterterrorism Strategy and Law, www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/papers/2009/5/1120counterterrorism20anderson/0511_counterterrorism_anderson.pdf)
Similarly, very few people in the United States, regardless of political persuasion,
AND
practical matter, these conditions would forbid all real-world targeted killings. 

The counterplan prevents blowback, increases domestic and international support, sustains allied cooperation, and develops norms

Zenko 13, Fellow in the Center for Preventive Action at the Council on Foreign Relations
(Micah, January, Reforming U.S. Drone Strike Policies, Council Special Report No. 65)
Although reforming U.S. drone strike policies will be difficult and will require
AND
other nations to use these technologies responsibly, we must use them responsibly."

A more carefully targeted drone policy prevents international backlash

Streeter 13
(Devin C. Streeter, Helms School Of Government, Liberty University "Boko Haram, Drone Policy, And Port Security: Issues For Congress", http://www.academia.edu/3523639/U.S._Drone_Policy_Tactical_Success_and_Strategic_Failure, April 19, 2013)
A new set of drone operating procedures would help to repair international relations and decrease
AND
agenda, for the purpose of improving foreign policy and repairing international relations.

Tournament: UMKC | Round: 7 | Opponent: Wyoming DM | Judge: Richard Tews

1NC Blowback

====No correlation between drone use and recruitment levels.====
Etzioni 13, Professor of International Relations @ George Washington University
(Aimtai Etzioni, senior adviser to the Carter administration, and#34;Everything Libertarians and Liberals Get Wrong About Dronesand#34;, The Atlantic, 4/30/13, http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/04/everything-libertarians-and-liberals-get-wrong-about-drones/275356/)**
Some critics worry that relying upon drones will engender significant resentment and potentially aid terrorist recruitment efforts. However, those who are inclined towards terrorism already loathe the United States for a thousand other reasons. Pew surveys show that anti-Americanism thrives in regions where there have been no drone strikes (for example, in Egypt) and, where drones have been active, high levels of anti-Americanism predated their arrival (for instance in Pakistan).

Al-Qaeda weak – Bin Laden’s death, Abbottabad intelligence, no safe haven

WILLIAM MCCANTS - Center for Strategic Studies / Johns Hopkins – Sept/Oct 2011, Al Qaeda’s Challenge, Foreign Affairs, http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/68160/william-mccants/al-qaedas-challenge?page=show
Al Qaeda now stands at a precipice. The Arab Spring and the success of
AND
, are willing and able to engage in the messy business of politics.

No threat of nuclear terrorism – bin Laden documents prove terrorists have no money

John Mueller- Prof poli sci, Ohio State, August 2, 2011, The Truth About al Qaeda, Foreign Affairs, http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/68012/john-mueller/the-truth-about-al-qaeda?page=show
The chief lesson of 9/11 should have been that small bands of terrorists
AND
terrorism is the wave of the future. No elephants there, either.

Tournament: UMKC | Round: 7 | Opponent: Wyoming DM | Judge: Richard Tews

1NC Prolif

====U.S. drone use doesn’t cause prolif – no international precedent.====
Etzioni 13, Professor of International Relations @ George Washington University
(Aimtai Etzioni, adviser to the Carter administration, and#34;The Great Drone Debate  and#34;, Military Review, 4/2013, http://usacac.army.mil/CAC2/MilitaryReview/Archives/English/MilitaryReview_20130430_art004.pdf)**
Other critics contend that by the United States ¶ using drones, it leads other
AND
In such circumstances, the role ¶ of norms is much more limited.

2NC

====Won’t cause global warfare====
Blank 12, Director of the International Humanitarian Law Clinic
(Laurie R. Blank, Emory University School of Law, and#34;After ’Top Gun’: How Drone Strikes Impact the Law of Warand#34;, University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law, Spring ’12)
Drones are Lawful Weapons¶ ¶ As the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial,
AND
armed drones falls clearly within the parameters of lawful weapons under international law.

No SCS war – in no one’s rational interest

Ba, Professor IR Delaware, ’11 (Alice, December, and#34;Staking Claims and Making Waves in the South China Sea: How Troubled Are the Waters?and#34; Contemporary Southeast Asia: A Journal of International and Strategic Affairs, Vol 33 No 3, Project Muse)
Conclusion To varying degrees, authors in this issue generally agree that conflict can be
AND
of conflict and militarization will be high and the benefits far from clear. 

Certainly, this is true of Southeast Asia’s weaker states, but it is also
AND
, if not lives (as it did forty years ago in Vietnam).

Tournament: UMKC | Round: 6 | Opponent: MO State HM | Judge: Kendall Kaut

1NC Soft Power

Restricting detention policies means we kill and extradite prisoners

Jack Goldsmith 09, a professor at Harvard Law School and a member of the Hoover Institution Task Force on National Security and Law, assistant attorney general in the Bush administration, 5/31/09, and#34;The Shell Game on Detainees and Interrogation,and#34; http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/29/AR2009052902989.html-http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/29/AR2009052902989.html
The cat-and-mouse game does not end there. As detentions at
AND
help the terrorists. But it does make us feel better about ourselves.

Turns credibility

IHCRC 12 ~September 2012, INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION CLINIC AT STANFORD LAW SCHOOL AND GLOBAL JUSTICE CLINIC AT NYU SCHOOL OF LAW, LIVING UNDER DRONES: DEATH, INJURY, AND TRAUMA TO CIVILIANS FROM USDRONE PRACTICES IN PAKISTAN (2012)., http://livingunderdrones.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Stanford-NYU-LIVING-UNDER-DRONES.pdf
The significant global opposition to drone strikes also erodes US credibility in the international community
AND
more difficult for it to build multilateral alliances to tackle pressing global challenges.

Libya and Iran prove soft power fails — Chinese counterbalancing also moots effectiveness — our evidence assumes a best case scenario

Ungar, Political Studies Professor 11, Dr Ariel Ungar is a Professor at the Department of Political Studies, Judea and Samaria College, PhD from Columbia University, The limits of soft power, http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/the-limits-of-soft-power-1.361425-http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/the-limits-of-soft-power-1.361425
Even under the best conditions, in which it is administered effectively, soft power is a slow-acting treatment. Muammar Gadhafi has scoffed at economic sanctions by first camouflaging, then reclaiming most of his assets, and spiriting them back to Tripoli to finance the civil war. The Iranians have successfully evaded sanctions, particularly as major flouters of those sanctions ? China, Turkey, etc. ? can continue trading, investing and arming without penalty.
Soft power appeared effective when its levers were concentrated financially and intellectually in the hands of the relative good guys. But it has been increasingly dispersed and is skillfully employed by countries that either do not subscribe to the agenda of human freedom or actively seek to subvert it.
The murmurings in Congress about cutting off aid to Pakistan are toothless because the United
AND
in return for silence on Chinese protectionist trade practices and human rights violations.

There’s no correlation between hegemony and stability

Fettweis, ’10
~Christopher J. Fettweis, Assistant Professor of Political Science at Tulane University, and#34;Threat and Anxiety in US Foreign Policy,and#34; Survival, 52:2, 59-82, March 25th 2010, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00396331003764603-http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00396331003764603~~
One potential explanation for the growth of global peace can be dismissed fairly quickly:
AND
to reach the conclusion that world peace and US military expenditure are unrelated.

2NC

The plan only bans indefinite detention – Obama will say that he still has authority for and#34;prolonged detentionand#34;

NYT 09 
(President’s Detention Plan Tests American Legal Tradition, www.nytimes.com/2009/05/23/us/politics/23detain.html?_r=0
President Obama’s proposal for a new legal system in which terrorism suspects could be held
AND
100 detainees might be held in the United States under such a system.

This means the govt gets to claim they aren’t doing any and#34;indefiniteand#34; detention

Hitchon 13 
(3/14, Joe, US Claims No Indefinite Detention at Guantánamo, https://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/03/14-0)
In unusual public testimony, the U.S. government has publicly stated that
AND
alternative system of justice, and yet that’s what we have in Guantánamo.and#34;

Tournament: UMKC | Round: 7 | Opponent: Wyoming DM | Judge: Richard Tews

1NC Solvency

Court would opt to not restrain the executive

Deference

Kaufman 13 
~Kaufman, Eileen, Washington University Global Studies Law Review, and#34;Deference or abdication: a comparison of the Supreme Courts of Israel and the United States in cases involving real or perceived threats to national security.and#34;, http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Deference+or+abdication3A+a+comparison+of+the+Supreme+Courts+of+Israel...-a0330250376~~
The targeted killing cases present the clearest example of how the two court systems differ
AND
case presented a non-justiciable political question and because petitioner lacked standing. 

Evidentiary standards

Marcy – 2/15/13, BA Amherst College, PhD program Michigan, Department of Pre-Crime, Part 3: What Law Would the Drone (and/or Targeted Killing) Court Interpret?, http://www.emptywheel.net/2013/02/15/department-of-pre-crime-part-3-what-law-would-the-drone-andor-targeted-killing-court-interpret/~~23sthash.5iwHrHQW.dpufhttp://www.emptywheel.net/2013/02/15/department-of-pre-crime-part-3-what-law-would-the-drone-andor-targeted-killing-court-interpret/

I’ve been writing about the nascent plan, on the part of a few Senators
AND
exists of that, at least not one Congress has bought off on.

2NC

Political question doctrine proves courts won’t engage war powers issues

Entin 12 – Prof of Law 26 Poli Sci @ Case Western Reserve University
(Jonathan, War Powers, Foreign Affairs, and the Courts: Some Institutional Considerations, Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law, Vol 45)
Even if a plaintiff with standing were available, a court still might decline to
AND
relating to foreign affairs suggests that the justiciability issue must be taken seriously.

====Drone court fails – can’t consider all legal factors in time.====
Groves 13, Senior Research Fellow @ Heritage Foundation
(Steven Groves, Senior Research Fellow in the Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom @ Heritage Foundation, J.D. from Ohio Northern University, BA in History, and#34;Drone Strikes: The Legality of U.S. Targeting Terrorists Abroadand#34;, The Heritage Foundation, 4/10/13, http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/04/drone-strikes-the-legality-of-us-targeting-terrorists-abroad)**
Certain former Obama Administration officials, the editorial board of The New York Times,
AND
and every drone strike. Does the target constitute an and#34;imminent threatand#34;

 to the United States? When civilian casualties may occur as a result of
AND
transparency no matter what kind of forum is established to oversee targeting decisions.

In the wake of the recent confirmation hearing on John Brennan’s nomination as CIA director
AND
The answer is simple: A search warrant is not a death warrant.

Tournament: UMKC | Round: 2 | Opponent: KCKCC CG | Judge: Donny Peters

1NC

1NC K

Obsession with language and human communication replicates anthropocentric norms
Bell and Russell 2k (anne and constance, Canadian journal of education, http://www.csse-scee.ca/CJE/Articles/FullText/CJE25-3/CJE25-3-bell.pdf)JFS
Although we acknowledge the important contribution of poststructuralism to analyses of oppression, privilege,
AND
thought and practice move in directions compatible with our own aspirations as educators.

Anthropocentrism outweighs
Gottlieb 94 — Roger S. Gottlieb, Professor of Humanities at Worcester Polytechnic Institute, holds a Ph.D. in Philosophy from Brandeis University, 1994 (and#34;Ethics and Trauma: Levinas, Feminism, and Deep Ecology,and#34; Crosscurrents: A Journal of Religion and Intellectual Life, Summer, Available Online at http://www.crosscurrents.org/feministecology.htm, Accessed 07-26-2011)
Here I will at least begin in agreement with Levinas. As he rejects an
AND
neither for our selves nor for the other, but for us all. 

moral obligation – equivalent to slavery
Best 6 (Steven, Intl Journal of Inclusive Democracy, http://www.inclusivedemocracy.org/journal/vol2/vol2_no3_Best_rethinking_revolution_PRINTABLE.htm)JFS
The next great step in moral evolution is to abolish the last acceptable form of
AND
, one based upon ecological and non-speciesist principles and universal justice.

Our alternative is to endorse the thought experiment of the voluntary global suicide of humanity – that solves
Kochi and Ordan 8 (Queen’s University, Borderlands journal, http://www.borderlands.net.au/vol7no3_2008/kochiordan_argument.pdf)JFS
For some, guided by the pressure of moral conscience or by a  practice of
AND
no matter  how hard we try to forget, suppress or repress it.

2NC

K

Creativity Link

Link to crit ped 26 creativity /
Bell and Russell 2k (anne and constance, Canadian journal of education, http://www.csse-scee.ca/CJE/Articles/FullText/CJE25-3/CJE25-3-bell.pdf)JFS
Take, for example, Freire’s (1990) statements about the differences
between and#34;Manand#34; and animals. To set up his discussion of praxis and the
importance of and#34;namingand#34; the world, he outlines what he assumes to be
shared, commonsensical beliefs about humans and other animals. He
defines the boundaries of human membership according to a sharp, hierarchical dichotomy that establishes human superiority. Humans alone, he
reminds us, are aware and self-conscious beings who can act to fulfill the
objectives they set for themselves. Humans alone are able to infuse the
world with their creative presence, to overcome situations that limit them,
and thus to demonstrate a and#34;decisive attitude towards the worldand#34; (p. 90). Freire (1990, pp. 87–91) represents other animals in terms of their lack of
such traits. They are doomed to passively accept the given, their lives
and#34;totally determinedand#34; because their decisions belong not to themselves but
to their species. Thus whereas humans inhabit a and#34;worldand#34; which they create
and transform and from which they can separate themselves, for animals
there is only habitat, a mere physical space to which they are and#34;organically
bound.and#34;
To accept Freire’s assumptions is to believe that humans are animals
only in a nominal sense. We are different not in degree but in kind, and
though we might recognize that other animals have distinct qualities, we
as humans are somehow more unique. We have the edge over other creatures because we are able to rise above monotonous, species-determined
biological existence. Change in the service of human freedom is seen to be
our primary agenda. Humans are thus cast as active agents whose very
essence is to transform the world – as if somehow acceptance, appreciation,
wonder, and reverence were beyond the pale.
This discursive frame of reference is characteristic of critical pedagogy.
The human/animal opposition upon which it rests is taken for granted, its
cultural and historical specificity not acknowledged. And therein lies the
problem. Like other social constructions, this one derives its persuasiveness
from its and#34;seeming facticity and from the deep investments individuals and
communities have in setting themselves off from othersand#34; (Britzman et al.,
1991, p. 91). This becomes the normal way of seeing the world, and like
other discourses of normalcy, it limits possibilities of taking up and confronting inequities (see Britzman, 1995). The primacy of the human enterprise is simply not questioned.
Precisely how an anthropocentric pedagogy might exacerbate the environmental crisis has not received much consideration in the literature
of critical pedagogy, especially in North America. Although there may be
passing reference to planetary destruction, there is seldom mention of the
relationship between education and the domination of nature, let alone any
sustained exploration of the links between the domination of nature and
other social injustices. Concerns about the nonhuman are relegated to
environmental education. And since environmental education, in turn,
remains peripheral to the core curriculum (A. Gough, 1997; Russell, Bell,
26 Fawcett, 2000), anthropocentrism passes unchallenged. S OF A CRITIQUE
Bowers (1993a, 1993b) has identified a number of root metaphors or and#34;analogsand#34; in critical pedagogy that reinforce the problem of anthropocentric
thinking. These include the notion of change as inherently progressive, faith in the power of rational thought, and an understanding of individuals
as and#34;potentially free, voluntaristic entities who will take responsibility for
creating themselves when freed from societal forms of oppressionand#34; (1993a,
pp. 25–26). Such assumptions, argues Bowers, are part of the Enlightenment legacy on which critical pedagogy, and indeed liberal education
generally, is based. In other words, they are culturally specific and stem
from a period in Western history when the modern industrial world view
was beginning to take shape.
To be fair, Bowers understates the extent to which these assumptions are
being questioned within critical pedagogy (e.g., Giroux, 1995; Peters, 1995;
Shapiro, 1994; Weiler 26 Mitchell, 1992, pp. 1, 5). Nevertheless, his main
point is well taken: proponents of critical pedagogy have yet to confront
the ecological consequences of an educational process that reinforces beliefs
and practices formed when unlimited economic expansion and social
progress seemed promised (Bowers, 1993b, p. 3). What happens when the
expansion of human possibilities is equated with the possibilities of consumption? How is educating for freedom predicated on the exploitation of
the nonhuman? Such queries push against taken-for-granted understandings of human, nature, self, and community, and thus bring into focus the
underlying tension between and#34;freedomand#34; as it is constituted within critical
pedagogy and the limits that emerge through consideration of humans’
interdependence with the more-than-human world.
This tension is symptomatic of anthropocentrism. Humans are assumed
to be free agents separate from and pitted against the rest of nature, our
fulfillment predicated on overcoming material constraints. This assumption
of human difference and superiority, central to Western thought since
Aristotle (Abram, 1996, p. 77), has long been used to justify the exploitation
of nature by and for humankind (Evernden, 1992, p. 96). It has also been
used to justify the exploitation of human groups (e.g., women, Blacks,
queers, indigenous peoples) deemed to be closer to nature – that is,
animalistic, irrational, savage, or uncivilized (Gaard, 1997; Haraway, 1989,
p. 30; Selby, 1995, pp. 17–20; Spiegel, 1988).
This and#34;organic apartheidand#34; (Evernden, 1992, p. 119) is bolstered by the
belief that language is an exclusively human property that elevates mere
biological existence to meaningful, social existence. Understood in this
way, language undermines our embodied sense of interdependence with
a more-than-human world. Rather than being a point of entry into the webs
of communication all around us, language becomes a medium through
which we set ourselves apart and above.
This view of language is deeply embedded in the conceptual framework
of critical pedagogy, including poststructuralist approaches. So too is the
human/nature dichotomy upon which it rests. When writers assume that and#34;it is language that enables us to think, speak and give meaning to the
world around us,and#34; that and#34;meaning and consciousness do not exist outside
languageand#34; (Weedon, 1987, p. 32) and that and#34;subjectivity is constructed by
and in languageand#34; (Luke 26 Luke, 1995, p. 378), then their transformative
projects are encoded so as to exclude any consideration of the nonhuman.
Such assumptions effectively remove all subjects from nature. As Evernden
(1992) puts it, and#34;if subjectivity, willing, valuation, and meaning are securely
lodged in the domain of humanity, the possibility of encountering anything
more than material objects in nature is niland#34; (p. 108).
What is forgotten? What is erased when the real is equated with a
proliferating culture of commodified signs (see Luke 26 Luke, 1995, on
Baudrillard)? To begin, we forget that we humans are surrounded by an
astonishing diversity of life forms. We no longer perceive or give expression to a world in which everything has intelligence, personality, and
voice. Polyphonous echoes are reduced to homophony, a term Kane (1994)
uses to denote and#34;the reduced sound of human language when it is used
under the assumption that speech is something belonging only to human
beingsand#34; (p. 192). We forget too what Abram (1996) describes as the gestural,
somatic dimension of language, its sensory and physical resonance that we
share with all expressive bodies (p. 80).

We don’t actually kill ourselves – but the thought experiment forces us to confront anthro
Kochi and Ordan 8 (Queen’s University, Borderlands journal, http://www.borderlands.net.au/vol7no3_2008/kochiordan_argument.pdf)JFS
From the outset it is important to make clear that the argument for the  global
AND
human to the non-human have,  so far, been unavailing.

Tournament: UMKC | Round: 3 | Opponent: Harvard BN | Judge: Eric Robinson

1NC 2

There’s something odd about two privileged white kids from Harvard complaining about the prison system—Their criticism of America is ethnocentric—ensures otherness is only portrayed as indistinguishable, agencyless mass which merely has instrumental value in their self-serving intellectual America bashing.

Rey Chow, Comparative Literature—Brown University, 1993 
Writing Diaspora, p. 19-20
To give one example, the sanctification of victimization in the American academy and its
AND
indistinguishable mass, while and#34;first worldand#34; intellectuals continue to have names.

The affirmative occupies the position of the Maoist – their valorization of revolutionary movements constitutes an anti-Orientalist polemics which effaces the subject position of the Arab Other

Rey Chow, Comparative Literature—Brown University, 1993 
Writing Diaspora, p. 15-16

The Orientalist has a special sibling whom I will, in order to highlight her
AND
puritanical alternative to the West in human form—a dream come true.

Their ’demand’ upon the state is not a radical act of politics but a means of deferring responsibility, reinscribing our implication in regimes in violence

Veitch 2k7 – Scott Veitch, Professor of Jurisprudence, Professor of Jurisprudence, and#34;Not in Our Name’? On Responsibility and Its Disavowaland#34;, pg. 3, http://sls.sagepub.com/content/16/2/281-http://sls.sagepub.com/content/16/2/281)

Yet on another reading again, was there not also something else, something more
AND

that is, to understand how they might operate to organize irresponsibility. 

This locks in an investment in the oppression of the Other about whom we are allowed to speak – they are confined to a position of perpetual lack, reinscribing the very violence they renounce

Rey Chow, Comparative Literature—Brown University, 1993 
Writing Diaspora, p. 12-15

In the 1980s and 1990s, however, the Maoist is disillusioned to watch the
AND
career. How do we intervene in the productivity of this overdetermined circuit? 

Reject the affirmative – struggle against becoming the object and instrument of power.

Rey Chow, Comparative Literature—Brown University, 1993 
Writing Diaspora, p. 16-17

While the struggle for hegemony remains necessary for many reasons – especially in cases where
AND
off field, in the military no less than in the academic sense?

1NR

1. Severs their epistemology which is a voter because it makes stable link ground and competition impossible. Interrogating their knowledge practices is a pre-requisite to evaluating the truth claims of the 1ac – even the most radical of policy prescriptions are corrupted by their institutional context

Kapoor, 2008 (Ilan, Associate Professor at the Faculty of Environmental Studies, York University, and#34;The Postcolonial Politics of Development,and#34; p. 49-50)
Of course, the above critique is not meant to pose as a comprehensive examination
AND
only in as far as we want to know it and control it.

Tournament: Kentucky | Round: 4 | Opponent: Idaho State DI | Judge: Colin Roark

1nc k

We believe in the potential of a politics that imbues personal experience and identity into our political lives in order to open the debate space to be less oppressive towards womyn, but there are issues with the way that the affirmative chooses to engage in these politics. We do not propose to eliminate identity politics in favor of a falsely neutral, colorblind political space. Instead, we want to create a space for political contestation that acknowledges the identity as a starting point of discussion, but then takes the dialogue beyond personal identity.

Our alternative builds a space of political contestation in which assumptions and arguments about who we are and what we ought to do are to be examined and debated without trump cards that reference "the truth of experience" or "personal identity." We want to create a political space that acknowledges the unique nature of all of our personal experiences and identities. This means not discussions of "I am this way" – a statement of identity – but rather discussions of "I want this for us" – creating a political community that can have debates and discussions with the goal of creating the best politics of resistance.

Brown 95 – prof @ Berkeley
(Wendy, States of Injury, p. 47-51)
The postmodern exposure of the imposed and created rather than discovered character of all knowledges
AND
identity, and morality and to redress our underdeveloped taste for political argument.

The affirmative speaks about identity in reference to the characteristics that we are GIVEN, like sex, which ensures an essentialist identity politics that is politically self-defeating. It reproduces exclusions based on authenticity tests and a demand for personal experience. Our alternative is to form political communities based on the DECIDED identity. We will acknowledge our given identities, but we will not let ourselves be restricted by them. We cannot decide to be born a womyn, but we can decide to be a feminist. Creating communities around our collective defined identity creates solidarity that works to combat injustice and revitalizes an effective identity politics, combats the failures of the affirmative.

Bhambra 10—U Warwick
AND—Victoria Margree—School of Humanities, U Brighton (Identity Politics and the Need for a ’Tomorrow’, http://www.academia.edu/471824/Identity_Politics_and_the_Need_for_a_Tomorrow_)
As such, a question arises as to what would happen if the "identity
AND
" since they are produced by very real actions, practices and projects.

Tournament: Fullerton | Round: 6 | Opponent: Rutgers RS | Judge: Dylan Quigley

We believe that the goals are necessary, but don’t necessarily agree with their method

Only a foundational grounding in clear principles of nonviolence can facilitate a successful struggle for liberation.  An approach that does not explicitly rule out violent tactics ensures an eventual move towards violence with counterproductive consequences

Domhoff 05, Professor of Sociology at UC Santa Cruz
(William, Social Movements and Strategic Nonviolence, www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/change/science_nonviolence.html)
Despite the effectiveness of strategic nonviolence, complete adherence to it has been abandoned by
AND
back up to 50 percent in 1966 and to 80 percent by 1980.

Violent resistance is intrinsically connected to violent masculinity and patriarchy.  The move towards violence ensures resistance failure and subjugation of those seen as weak

Bartkowski 13, Senior Director at the International Center on Nonviolent Conflict
(Maciej, Recovering Nonviolent History: Civil Resistance in Liberation Struggles, pg. 339)
Changing entrenched views about the effectiveness of armed resistance is particularly hard as they are
AND
anticolonial stuggles, as indeed in other struggles against other kinds of oppression.

Belief in the necessity of violent struggle to overcome oppression is not a neutral conception grounded in fact – it’s the result of an intentionally distorted history that privileges armed combat.  The negative will offer case studies to disrupt the dominant narrative of glorious battle for freedom in order to open new productive paths that enable successful non-violent resistance.

Bartkowski 13, Senior Director at the International Center on Nonviolent Conflict
(Maciej, Recovering Nonviolent History: Civil Resistance in Liberation Struggles, pg. 1)
Most people look to historical accounts to understand how their own nations emerged and fought
AND
to recognize and take into account the role and contribution of civil resistance.

We present the following case studies in order to challenge dominant narratives that valorize armed struggle and dismiss the power of nonviolent resistance:

Ghana - nonviolent resistance was able to quickly and successfully overthrow imperialist repression

Bartkowski 13, Senior Director at the International Center on Nonviolent Conflict
(Maciej, Recovering Nonviolent History: Civil Resistance in Liberation Struggles, pg. 63)
The newly independent state of Ghana took a leading role in advocating and using civil
AND
– if rarely acknowledged – that if facilitated this process of nation building.

Poland – Nonviolent resistance was the key to throw off occupation but official histories have covered these success stories up in favor of glorified violent struggle
Bartkowski 13, Senior Director at the International Center on Nonviolent Conflict
(Maciej, Recovering Nonviolent History: Civil Resistance in Liberation Struggles, pg. 274)
A critical attitude toward organic work is particularly perplexing given the extent to which the
AND
role in not only defending, but essentially reimagining, the Polish nation.

Non-violence is not passivity – it’s just a different means of waging conflict that creates a strong break with politics as usual

Martin 08, Professor of Social Sciences at the University of Wollongong
(Brian, How nonviolence is misrepresented, http://www.bmartin.cc/pubs/08gm2.html~~23_edn1)
Nonviolent action, as a technique of political communication and waging conflict, can be
AND
it. Their opponents can and often do use violence, sometimes brutally.

Tournament: Harvard | Round: 2 | Opponent: Minnesota CE | Judge: Seth Gannon

1NC K

Next off is the Law K

====modeling of US legal norms is a vague, empty concept – instead of guaranteeing global peace, it rhetorically provides political cover for violent western interventionism that produces mass structural violence – must be rejected====
Mattei 9 – prof of law @ Hastings
(Ugo, written with Marco de Morpurgo, M.Sc. Candidate, International University College of Turin, BOCCONI SCHOOL OF LAW, GLOBAL LAW 26 PLUNDER: THE DARK SIDE OF THE RULE OF LAW)
What we can identify as ’global law’ is not a single and coherent system
AND
does not recognize that the West is itself part of something much larger.

The impact is extinction – interventionism is unsustainable in the long-term and breeds asymmetric warfare and power balancing that escalates

Foster 3 (John, Prof. Sociology - U of Oregon, Poli Sci at York U - Toronto, "The new Age of Imperialism," Monthly Review 55.3)
At the same time, it is clear that in the present period of global
AND
prove to be its own—we hope not the world’s—undoing.

====The affirmative model of top-down Western legal development sacralizes the rule of law, which directly ensures military interventions and a fundamentally unequal world order. Our alternative is to rethink democratic development from the bottom-up. Cast your ballot in solidarity with the global resistance to the universalizing, falsely apolitical ’norms’ of the 1ac====
Mattei 9 – prof of law @ Hastings
(Ugo, written with Marco de Morpurgo, M.Sc. Candidate, International University College of Turin, BOCCONI SCHOOL OF LAW, GLOBAL LAW 26 PLUNDER: THE DARK SIDE OF THE RULE OF LAW)
In the complex spectrum of global law, both throughout the era of colonialism and
AND
from lack: the lack of world culture and of global political realism.

2nc

K

2NC Overview

====you should privilege this form of structural violence in your impact valuations because there is an ethical need to keep it from being invisible – it’s also an exponential form of attritional violence so even if the aff only causes a "small" amount of structural violence, the terminal impact is huge====
Nixon 11
(Rob, Rachel Carson Professor of English, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Slow Violence and the Environmentalism of the Poor, pgs. 2-3)
Three primary concerns animate this book, chief among them my conviction that we urgently
AND
in situations where the conditions for sustaining life become increasingly but gradually degraded.

====legal modeling produces economic inequality and poverty, which ensures backlash that guts all aff solvency – turns the case====
Tamanaha 8 – prof of law @ Hammond
(Brian, The Dark Side of the Relationship Between the Rule of Law and Liberalism, NYU Journal of Law 26 Liberty)
Despite positioning themselves as defenders of liberty—a claim that is merited on its
AND
law contributed to preventing it from taking hold and spreading around the world.

2NC FW

====This is a comparatively more productive strategy than the aff’s hubristic attempts to change the world – only our framework produces an ethical self that can create productive micropolitics====
Chandler 13 – prof of IR @ Westminster
(The World of Attachment? The Post-humanist Challenge to Freedom and Necessity, Millenium: Journal of International Studies, 41(3), 516– 534)
The world of becoming thereby is an ontologically flat world without the traditional hierarchies of
AND
be remade with a new self and a ’new self-interest’.

Tournament: Kentucky | Round: 5 | Opponent: Dartmouth ChMa | Judge: Nick Miller

1NC

====asking how the executive should be allowed to conduct war masks the fundamental question of whether war should be allowed at all – ensures a military mentality====
Cady 10 (Duane L., prof of phil @ hamline university, From Warism to Pacifism: A Moral Continuum, pp. 22-23)
The widespread, unquestioning acceptance of warism and the corresponding reluctance to consider pacifism as
AND
a given war or the morality of specific acts within a particular war.

this mindset is important – our consciousness of war guarantees endless violence that ensures planetary destruction and structural violence

Lawrence 9 (Grant, "Military Industrial "War" Consciousness Responsible for Economic and Social Collapse," OEN—OpEdNews, March 27)
As a presidential candidate, Barack Obama called Afghanistan ’’the war we must win.
AND
will be forced to live the life our present war consciousness is creating.

The alternative must begin in our minds – we need to free ourselves of the presumption towards war and advocate for peace and social justice to stop the flow of militarism that threatens existence

Demenchonok 9 – Worked as a senior researcher at the Institute of Philosophy of the
AND
Economics and Sociology, Volume 68, Issue 1, Pages 9-49
Where, then, does the future lie? Unilateralism, hegemonic political anarchy,
AND
also of the extent, quality, and urgency of our present choices.

Framing issue – the way we discuss and represent war should come first – the language surrounding violence has direct, concrete effects

Collins 26 Glover 2 (John, Assistant Prof. of Global Studies at St. Lawrence University, Ross, Visiting Professor of Sociology at St. Lawrence University, Collateral Language, p. 6-7)
As any university student knows, theories about the "social con¬struction" and social
AND
less likely to avert our mental gaze from the physical effects of violence.

2NC

Framework

The role of the teacher is to guide students toward ethically constructing advocacies – this means debate should focus on how we think about problems and not just the particular policy, so you should look at systems of warism versus pacifism and not the singular event of their impact scenarios – and deprioritize issues of link uniqueness and transition wars – our link arguments prove there’s a larger set of social relations the plan creates and the standpoints we take in relation to that are important.

The alt is a technique for creating a new social vocabulary surrounding war – if our vocabulary is good, you should endorse and adopt it as a way of reading future policy research.

First extend the language card – Collins and glover say the way we discuss war – they say that the military would be tight if only they were to be inclusive towards women

====The lenses with which we view war and peace influence the policy options we consider – academia is a critical space to break down the warism in our minds====
Cady 10 (Duane L., prof of phil @ hamline university, From Warism to Pacifism: A Moral Continuum, pp. 115-117)
The very notion of restraint in war— common to all positions along ¶ the
AND
would be surprising were they to do so, despite popular ¶ fears.

====Subject formation is what we are trying to accomplish in debate on an everyday level, we form better subjects by attuning our ethical sensibilities to the violence of militarism – comparatively more effective than a hubristic fantasy that we can change the world====
Chandler, Professor of IR at Westminster, 13
(The World of Attachment? The Post-humanist Challenge to Freedom and Necessity, Millenium: Journal of International Studies, 41(3), 516– 534)
The world of becoming thereby is an ontologically flat world without the traditional hierarchies of
AND
be remade with a new self and a ’new self-interest’.

Impact

====Best impact card imaginable – the ultimate AT: Impact Turns====
Kovel 2
(Joel, "The United States Military Machine", http://www.joelkovel.org/americanmilitary.htm; Jacob)
I want to talk to you this evening about war - not the immediate threat
AND
military machine is about to plunge, dragging us all down with it.

===AT: Mil Inev===

====Militaristic war may be a central value of modern Western culture, but it can be changed through analysis – multiple empirical examples prove====
Cady 10 (Duane L., prof of phil @ hamline university, From Warism to Pacifism: A Moral Continuum, pp. 23-24)
The slow but persistent rise in awareness of racial, ethnic, gender,   sexual
AND
war to be wrong,   and thus to require fundamental changes in society.

AT: Humanitarian Intervention

Their call for humanitarianism hides that a long history of US intervention is the cause of these problems

Lawston and Murillo (Assistant Professor of Women’s Studies at California State University San Marcos; Prof @ University of San Diego) 9
(Jodie Michelle Lawston and Ruben R. Murillo, The discursive figuration of U.S. supremacy in narratives sympathetic to undocumented immigrants, Social Justice, 36.2 (Summer 2009): p38(16))

Such stories engender sympathetic feelings for immigrants, especially for children, in the reader
AND
the United States in creating oppressive social and economic conditions in Central America.
Mexico serves as a melodramatic villain in Enrique’s Journey, just as it does in
AND
and individuals from the causes of poverty. Charity Discourse: Raising Historical Amnesia
It could be argued that Under the Same Moon and Enrique’s Journey strive to contest
AND
were not superior to the places from which they were trying to flee.
The long history of U.S. interventionism in Latin America created the dramatic
AND
detained them until they were deported, often to their deaths (Ibid.). 

The root cause of the conflicts they want to intervene in is colonialism but intervention leads to worse structural violence and is a smokescreen for imperialism

Castles 3
(Stephen, Towards a Sociology of Forced Migration and Social Transformation, Sociology, Vol. 77, no. 1, pp. 13-34, 2003)

The context of this trend was the inability to achieve economic and social development and
AND
thus the adoption of Northern economic structures, political institutions and value systems.

Tournament: USC | Round: 1 | Opponent: MSU FN | Judge: Jeff Buntin

Peace K – THE REMIX

1NC Shell

====aff’s use of the law is a militaristic tactic that creates legal legitimacy to propel more frequent, more deadly violent interventions that ensure infrastructural violence that maims civilians – they actively displace moral questions in favor of a pathologically detached question of legality====
Smith 2 – prof of phil @ U of South Florida
(Thomas, International Studies Quarterly 46, The New Law of War: Legitimizing Hi-Tech and Infrastructural Violence)
The role of military lawyers in all this has, according to one study,
AND
and construed, hopes of rescuing law from politics will be dim indeed.

====militarism is a fundamentally unsustainable system that is the root cause of all extinction threats and ensures mass structural violence – non-violence is the only possible response====
Kovel 2
(Joel, "The United States Military Machine", http://www.joelkovel.org/americanmilitary.htm; Jacob)
I want to talk to you this evening about war - not the immediate threat
AND
military machine is about to plunge, dragging us all down with it.

====the aff’s certain calculations about war are an impossibly arrogant form of mechanical, sterile analysis that eases the path towards war. their language is coopted to provide rhetorical ammunition for militarists. our alternative is not pure pacifism, but rather a pacifist analysis that injects moral and epistemic doubt into our decisionmaking about war – this is the only way to formulate better policies that address structural causes of war and avoids inevitable cycles of violence====
Neu 13 – prof @ U of Brighton
(Michael, International Relations 27(4), December, The Tragedy of Justified War)
Just war theory is not concerned with millions of starving people who could be saved
AND
otherwise deprive themselves, today, of the possibility of not wronging tomorrow.

Tournament: Texas | Round: 4 | Opponent: NYU DG | Judge: Ryan Cheek

1NC K

====Militarism cannot be attacked one piece at a time – the affirmatives supposedly radical critique is merely criticizing the hubcaps while the military jeep rolls on ====
Lichterman 3 (Andrew, Program Director of the Western States Legal Foundation, Missiles of Empire: America’s 21st Century Global Legions, WSLF Information Bulletin, Fall 2003, http://www.wslfweb.org/nukes.htm)
Criticizing the Hubcaps while the Juggernaut Rolls On The U.S. military-
AND
, it must be clear that we are leaving the path of violence.

====Their concern with the spectacle of militarized violence that is explosive views war as an isolated event – this approach makes it impossible to deal with the pervasive effects of everyday militarism ====
Cuomo 96 (Chris, prof of women’s studies @ UGA, War is Not Just an Event: Reflections on the Significance of Everyday Violence, Hypatia 11:4, Women and Violence, Autumn, pp. 30-45)
Philosophical attention to war has typically appeared in the form of justifications for entering into
AND
and militarism that are significant to nonmilitary personnel, including women  and nonhumans.

====militarism is a fundamentally unsustainable system that is the root cause of all extinction threats and ensures mass structural violence – non-violence is the only possible response====
Kovel 2
(Joel, "The United States Military Machine", http://www.joelkovel.org/americanmilitary.htm; Jacob)

I want to talk to you this evening about war - not the immediate threat
AND
military machine is about to plunge, dragging us all down with it.

The alternative must begin in our minds – we need to free ourselves of the presumption towards war and advocate for peace and social justice to stop the flow of militarism that threatens existence

Democracy itself is the product of searching for peaceful solutions
Demenchonok 9 – Worked as a senior researcher at the Institute of Philosophy of the
AND
Economics and Sociology, Volume 68, Issue 1, Pages 9-49
Where, then, does the future lie? Unilateralism, hegemonic political anarchy,
AND
also of the extent, quality, and urgency of our present choices.

2NC Links

Problem w the affs understanding of time + war

Mary L. Dudziak 10, chaired prof of history and pol-sci and USC, Law, War, and the History of Time, 98 Cal. L. Rev. 1669
When President George W. Bush told the American people in September 2001 that the
AND
satisfactory understanding of the ongoing relationship between war and American law and politics. 

they overdetermine 9/11 and focus on spectacular violence

Nixon ’11
(Rob, Rachel Carson Professor of English, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Slow Violence and the Environmentalism of the Poor, pgs. 12-14)

Over the past two decades, this high-speed planetary modification has been accompanied
AND
how our rhetorical conventions for bracketing violence routinely ignore ongoing, belated casualties.

====mut exclusive====
Pankhurst 3
(Donna-, May 1, Development in Practice, "The ’sex war’ and other wars: towards a feminist approach to peace building", Vol. 13 ~23 2263, Infomaworld; Jacob)
Turning to the meanings of the term ’peace’, Galtung’s (1985) conception
AND
, but also major social divisions and the social celebration of violent masculinities.