Tournament: Georgia State | Round: 2 | Opponent: Libery CW | Judge: Jonathan Paul
Contention 1: Inherency

The 1973 War Powers Resolution, or WPR, requires the President to report to Congress if armed forces are engaged in hostilities and must get Congressional approval if they are engaged in hostilities for 60 continuous days
Goldsmith, Professor of Law at Harvard, 2011
(Jack, “Problems with the Obama Administration’s War Powers Resolution Theory”, Lawfare, June 16, p. http://www.lawfareblog.com/2011/06/problems-with-the-obama-administrationE28099s-war-powers-resolution-theory-2/)
“I do not find the” and “Congress authorized the action.”

However, the WPR does not define what “hostilities” means even though the intention was broad limitation on the President
Litwak, American University National Security Law Brief, 2012
(Brian J., “Putting Constitutional Teeth Into a Paper Tiger: How to Fix the War Powers Resolution”, American University National Security Law Brief, Vol. 2, Issue 2, p. http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1034andcontext=nslb)
“A crucial omission from the” and “depth later in this Article. “

This ambiguity is not theoretical – the Obama Administration argued that the War Powers Resolution didn’t apply in Libya because US activities did not constitute “hostilities”
Harvard Law Review, 2012
(“RECENT ADMINISTRATIVE INTERPRETATION: Separation of Powers - War Powers Resolution - Obama
Administration Argues that U.S. Military Action in Libya Does Not Constitute "Hostilities."”, Harvard Law Review, April, 125 Harv. L. Rev. 1546)
“The War Powers Resolution” and “which Koh's argument relied.”

Advantage 1: Escalation 

Obama’s hostilities definition in Libya will be used as a precedent to erode Congressional input over war powers when using remotely deployed weapons systems
Shane, Chair in Law at Ohio State, 2012
(Peter M., “The Obama Administration and the Prospects for a Democratic Presidency in a Post-9/11 World”, New York Law School Law Review, 2011/2013, 56 N.Y.L. Sch. L. Rev. 27, p. Lexis)
“In other words, the administration” and “Congress for military action.”

These attacks encourage escalation
Kels, major in the U.S. Air Force Reserve and an attorney for the Department of Homeland Security, September 2, 2013
(Charles, “Syria Insta-Symposium: Charles Kels–At the Intersection of Legal Regimes”, Opinio Juris, p. http://opiniojuris.org/2013/09/02/syria-insta-symposium-charles-kels-intersection-legal-regimes)
“There are two major problems” and “Then it wasn’t.”

Conflict escalation is the most likely scenario for great power war
Bosco, '6 (Senior Editor -- Foreign Policy, LA Times, 7-23)
“The understanding that small” and “about managing conflict?”

Great power war goes nuclear
Gholz, Press, and Sapolsky ‘97 (PhD candidates – Dept. Poli. Sci. @ MIT, Prof. Public Policy and Organization @ MIT, International Security, Vol. 21, No. 4)
“The larger long-term cost” and “selective engagers propose.”

Conventional attacks risk a nuclear response which leads to Armageddon
Freedberg, Deputy Editor at Breaking Defense, 2013
(Sydney J., Jr., “No Longer Unthinkable: Should US Ready For ‘Limited’ Nuclear War? “, Breaking Defense, May 30, p. http://breakingdefense.com/2013/05/30/no-longer-unthinkable-should-us-ready-for-limited-nuclear-war/)
“For more than 60 years” and “a lot more dangerous.”

Advantage 2: Modeling 

Obama’s definition of hostilities sets a precedent for China to use airpower to attack Taiwan and launch DF-21 ballistic missiles as long as they don’t deploy troops
Farley, assistant professor at the Patterson School of Diplomacy and International Commerce at the University of Kentucky, 2011
(Robert, “Over the Horizon: Libya, Airpower and Executive War Powers”, World Politics Review, June 29, p. http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/9321/over-the-horizon-libya-airpower-and-executive-war-powers)
“This idea depends on conceiving” and “prove attractive to others.”

China will use airpower to overwhelm Taiwan – this will draw in the US and cause escalation
Kearn, Assistant Professor of Government and Politics at St. John's University, 2013
(David W., “China, Taiwan and the 'Anti-Access' Challenge “, Huffington Post, June 26, p. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-w-kearn/china-taiwan-relations_b_3497230.html)
“However, while relations have” and “the world's largest powers.”

War over Taiwan escalates to nuclear war
Hunkovic, 2009, The Chinese-Taiwanese Conflict Possible Futures of a Confrontation between China, Taiwan and the United States of America Masters in Intelligence Studies, American Military University, Lee J., p. http://www.lamp-method.org/eCommons/Hunkovic.pdf
“A war between China” and “militarily affected by it.”

Now is key – the window is closing for establish norms on technological warfare around a model of accountability
Roberts, editor of National Journal, 2013
(Kristen, “When the Whole World Has Drones”, National Journal, March 22, p. http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/when-the-whole-world-has-drones-20130321?print=true)
“It’s a classic and common phase” and “moral one as well.”

Plan: United States Congress should amend the 1973 War Powers Resolution to specify that using remotely deployed weapons constitutes an introduction of United States Armed Forces into hostilities.

Contention 2: Solvency

Amending the WPR over hostilities resolves all ambiguities
Bejesky, taught in the Department of Political Science at the University of Michigan, 2012
(Robert, “Precedent Supporting the Constitutionality of Section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution”, Law Review, Fall, 49 Willamette L. Rev. 1, p. Lexis)
“Delving more deeply into” and “war on terrorism.”

Amending the WPR over hostilities solves – it constrains Presidential action
Patera, Hamline Journal of Public Law and Policy, 2012
(John, “War Powers Resolution in the Age of Drone Warfare: How Drone Technology has Dramatically Reduced the Resolution's Effectiveness as a Curb on Executive Power”, Hamline Journal of Public Law and Policy, 33 Hamline J. Pub. L. and Pol'y 387, Spring, p. Lexis)
“Critics may argue that” and “definition of "hostilities.””

Congress is key – only they can define hostilities and enforce accountability
Farley, editor-in-Chief, Emory International Law Review, 2012
(Benjamin R., “Drones and Democracy: Missing Out on Accountability?”, South Texas Law Review, Winter, 54 S. Tex. L. Rev. 385, p. Lexis)
“Effective accountability mechanisms” and “WPR cases thus far.”