Congress will successfully avert a government shutdown now, but time is super tight Fox News, 9-11-2013, “House pulls spending bill amid backlash as government shutdown looms,” http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/11/house-leaders-pull-temporary-spending-bill-after-conservative-backlash/ House Republican leaders pulled their plan Wednesday to temporarily fund the federal government after rank AND Security Agency can collect data on Americans in its efforts to thwart terrorism. The plan would trade off with Congress’s ability to avert the shutdown - GOP has momentum and will, but they need literally every hour to get it done Frank James, 9-13-2013, “Congress Searches For A Shutdown-Free Future,” NPR, http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/09/13/221809062/congress-searches-for-a-shutdown-free-future The only thing found Thursday seemed to be more time for negotiations and vote- AND people. When we have something to report, we'll let you know." Shutdown wrecks the economy Yi Wu, 8-27-2013, “Government Shutdown 2013: Still a Terrible Idea,” PolicyMic, http://www.policymic.com/articles/60837/government-shutdown-2013-still-a-terrible-idea Around a third of House Republicans, many Tea Party-backed, sent a AND to demand cancellation of the entire health care reform enacted a year before. Global nuclear war Harris and Burrows 9 Mathew, PhD European History @ Cambridge, counselor of the U.S. 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 Of course, the report encompasses more than economics and indeed believes the future is AND within and between states in a more dog-eat-dog world. 1NC
Restrictions are prohibitions on action -~-- the aff is a reporting requirement Jean Schiedler-Brown 12, Attorney, Jean Schiedler-Brown and 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 the reporting and monitoring or supervising terms and conditions that are included in the 2001 Stipulation. Black's Law Dictionary, 'fifth edition,(1979) defines "restriction" as; A limitation often imposed in a deed or lease respecting the use to which the AND or by interposing obstacle, to repress or suppress, to curb. In contrast, the terms "supervise" and "supervisor" are defined as AND merely routine or clerical nature, but required the use of independent judgment. Comparing the above definitions, it is clear that the definition of "restriction" is very different from the definition of "supervision"-very few of the same words are used to explain or define the different terms. In his 2001 stipulation, Mr. Kincheloe essentially agreed to some supervision conditions, but he did not agree to restrict his license.
Restrictions on authority are distinct from conditions William Conner 78, former federal judge for the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York United States District Court, S. D. New York, CORPORACION VENEZOLANA de FOMENTO v. VINTERO SALES, http://www.leagle.com/decision/19781560452FSupp1108_11379 Plaintiff next contends that Merban was charged with notice of the restrictions on the authority AND were not authorized to act except upon the fulfillment of the specified conditions.
Vote neg-~--
Only prohibitions on authority guarantee neg ground-~--their interpretation lets affs no link the best neg offense like deference
Precision-~--only our interpretation defines “restrictions on authority”-~--that’s key to adequate preparation and policy analysis
1NC Text: The United States Federal Government should clarify that the Department of Defense has the legal authority and intent to conduct proportional offensive cyber operations to “counter imminent threats to the United States’ national interests in cyberspace” on orders of the President. The United States Federal Government should store backups of offensive cyber capabilities in offline locations and invest in maintenance of secure telephone and radio lines for chain of command communications. Recent advances in attribution capability mean the counterplan creates effective cyber-deterrence -~-- prevents cyber-attacks on the US -~-- the plan and permutation destroy deterrence credibility Jack Goldsmith 12, is the Henry L. Shattuck Professor @ Harvard Law School, where he teaches and writes about national security law, presidential power, cybersecurity, international law, internet law, foreign relations law, and conflict of laws. Before coming to Harvard, Professor Goldsmith served as Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel from 2003–2004, and Special Counsel to the Department of Defense from 2002–2003. Professor Goldsmith is a member of the Hoover Institution Task Force on National Security and Law, 10/15, “The Significance of Panetta’s Cyber Speech and the Persistent Difficulty of Deterring Cyberattacks,” Lawfare, http://www.lawfareblog.com/2012/10/the-significance-of-panettas-cyber-speech-and-the-persistent-difficulty-of-deterring-cyberattacks/ Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta’s speech last week on cyber is more significant than has AND it says it needs to, its threats to act are not credible.
1NC
Congressional restrictions cause adversaries to doubt the credibility of our threats -~-- causes crisis escalation Matthew Waxman 8/25/13, Professor of Law @ Columbia and Adjunct Senior Fellow for Law and Foreign Policy @ CFR, “The Constitutional Power to Threaten War,” Forthcoming in Yale Law Journal, vol. 123, August 25, 2013, SSRN A claim previously advanced from a presidentialist perspective is that stronger legislative checks on war AND to use force in order to prevent a confrontation which might escalate.179
Perception of weak Presidential crisis response collapses heg John R. Bolton 9, Senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and Former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, “The danger of Obama's dithering,” Los Angeles Times, October 18, http://articles.latimes.com/2009/oct/18/opinion/oe-bolton18 Weakness in American foreign policy in one region often invites challenges elsewhere, because our AND the face of criticism and adversity, engagement simply embodies weakness and indecision.
Hegemony solves great power war Khalilzad 11 – Zalmay Khalilzad, the United States ambassador to Afghanistan, Iraq, and the United Nations during the presidency of George W. Bush and the director of policy planning at the Defense Department from 1990 to 1992, February 8, 2011, “The Economy and National Security; If we don’t get our economic house in order, we risk a new era of multi-polarity,” online: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/259024/economy-and-national-security-zalmay-khalilzad We face this domestic challenge while other major powers are experiencing rapid economic growth. AND the United States is the most significant barrier facing Chinese hegemony and aggression.
OCOs give the US coercive leverage to deescalate North Korean nuclear brinksmanship -~-- speed is key Martin C. Libicki 13, Senior Management Scientist @ RAND and adjunct fellow @ Georgetown’s Center for Security Studies, “Brandishing Cyberattack Capabilities,” RAND, http://www.rand.org/pub s/research_reports/RR175.html Our inquiry is therefore more humble. Could a U.S. threat that AND up tensions in advance of the U.S. crossing red lines.
Threat of OCO strikes deescalates Senkaku conflict -~-- prevents great power war Leigh Drogen 13, founder and chief investment officer of Surfview Capital, LLC, a New York based investment management firm, “Why Cyber Weapons Will Make The World Even Safer,” 3/4, http://www.leighdrogen.com/why-cyber-weapons-will-make-the-world-even-safer/ Scene: China has just exchanged fire with Japan over the East China Sea Islands AND believe cyber weapons will add to global security as they become more pervasive.
1NC TEXT: The US Congress and US Executive should cooperate to develop guidelines for the use of offensive cyber operations. The US Congress should require that ex-post notification be part of these guidelines. Congress should create guidelines with the president, not restrict Stephen Dycus—1AC Author—10, Professor, Vermont Law School, 8/11/10, “Congress’s Role in Cyber Warfare,” http://jnslp.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/11_Dycus.pdf Congress obviously cannot act alone to develop a cyber warfare policy for the United States AND branch actions that seem – as a matter of policy – particularly unwise. Notification kills effective cyber responses Stephen Dycus—1AC Author—10, Professor, Vermont Law School, 8/11/10, “Congress’s Role in Cyber Warfare,” http://jnslp.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/11_Dycus.pdf Cyber weapons bear a striking resemblance to nuclear weapons in some important ways. An AND before launching a counterstrike, if that were U.S. policy.
Case Solvency 1NC Circumvention Secrecy means Congress would be ineffective—no solvency Stephen Dycus—1AC Author—10, Professor, Vermont Law School, 8/11/10, “Congress’s Role in Cyber Warfare,” http://jnslp.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/11_Dycus.pdf The National Security Act of 1947 23 showed Congress’s determination to exert some control over AND significant role.36 Moreover, any reporting might be delayed indefinitely.37 Military procedures means cyber operations wouldn’t be reported—kills solvency Stephen Dycus—1AC Author—10, Professor, Vermont Law School, 8/11/10, “Congress’s Role in Cyber Warfare,” http://jnslp.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/11_Dycus.pdf Another potential obstacle to congressional involvement is the reportedly common but statutorily unauthorized practice of AND findings requirement for covert actions and any reporting to the intelligence committees.44 The President would ignore the plan Stephen Dycus—1AC Author—10, Professor, Vermont Law School, 8/11/10, “Congress’s Role in Cyber Warfare,” http://jnslp.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/11_Dycus.pdf Congress’s active role in the development and implementation of cyber warfare policy is no guarantee AND the importance of Congress’s role. Or they might be challenged in court.
1NC Norms Fail Norms fail—cheating and miscalc Stewart Baker 12, former official at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the National Security Agency, 5/1/12, “What Is the Role of Lawyers in Cyberwarfare?,” http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/what_is_the_role_of_lawyers_in_cyberwarfare/ Former Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin summed up Britain’s strategic position in 1932 with a candor AND world we live in, not the world we’d like to live in. Cyberweapons are inev -~-- US restraint does nothing -~-- norm setting is utopian James Lewis 12, Director of the Technology and Public Policy Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, “Benefits Are Great, and the Risks Exist Anyway,” Oct 17, NYT, http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/06/04/do-cyberattacks-on-iran-make-us-vulnerable-12/benefits-are-great-and-the-risks-exist-anyway Nor do cyberattacks against Iran increase the risk of damaging cyberattacks against the United States AND nuclear program was more important than possible risk to slow-moving negotiations. Pandora’s box has already been opened -~-- cyber-war inevitable Mikko Hypponen 12, an authority on cybercrime and one of Foreign Policy’s ‘Top 100 Global Thinkers,’ is the chief research officer at F-Secure Corporation, “A Pandora’s Box We Will Regret Opening,” June 5, NYT, http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/06/04/do-cyberattacks-on-iran-make-us-vulnerable-12/a-pandoras-box-we-will-regret-opening If somebody would have told me five years ago that by 2012 it would be AND opened Pandora's box. They will most likely end up regretting this decision. Can’t stop cyberweapons -~-- incentives to use are too high Dr. Paul Kaminski 13, Chairman of the Defense Science Board Task Force on Resilient Military Systems and PhD from Stanford, “Department of Defense Defense Science Board Task Force Report: Resilient Military Systems and the Advanced Cyber Threat,” January, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, http://www.acq.osd.mil/dsb/reports/ResilientMilitarySystems.CyberThreat.pdf There is no single silver bullet to solve the threat posed by cyber-attack AND (However, they have many of the same risks to their systems). Cyber War AT: Cyber Arms Race Uncontrollability of cyber-war is a neg warrant -~-- means countries won’t use them Thomas P.M. Barnett 13, special assistant for strategic futures in the U.S. Defense Department's Office of Force Transformation from 2001 to 2003, is chief analyst for Wikistrat, March/April 2013, “Think Again: The Pentagon,” Foreign Policy, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/03/04/the_pentagon?page=full As for cyber serving as a stand-alone war-fifighting domain, there AND But you won't hear that from the next-warriors on the Potomac. Zero impact to cyber arms race -~-- overwhelming consensus of qualified authors goes neg - No motivation-~--can’t be used for coercive leverage - Defenses solve-~--benefits of offense are overstated - Too difficult to execute/mistakes in code are inevitable - AT: Infrastructure attacks - Military networks are air-gapped/difficult to access - Overwhelming consensus goes neg Colin S. Gray 13, Prof. of International Politics and Strategic Studies @ the University of Reading and External Researcher @ the Strategic Studies Institute @ the U.S. Army War College, April, “Making Strategic Sense of Cyber Power: Why the Sky Is Not Falling,” U.S. Army War College Press, http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/PUB1147.pdf CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: THE SKY IS NOT FALLING¶ This analysis has sought to AND its independence is seen as too close to absurd to merit much concern. Diminishing marginal returns means there’s no impact Martin C. Libicki 9, Senior Management Scientist @ RAND and adjunct fellow @ Georgetown’s Center for Security Studies, “Cyberdeterrence and Cyberwar,” RAND, http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG877.html Strategic Cyberwar Is Unlikely to Be Decisive ¶ No one knows how destructive any one AND likely to become more, rather than less, resistant to further coercion. AT: Impact Cyberattacks won’t result in nuclear war -~-- airgapping solves Green 2 – editor of The Washington Monthly (Joshua, 11/11, The Myth of Cyberterrorism, http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0211.green.html) There's just one problem: There is no such thing as cyberterrorism--no instance AND year's Quadrennial Defense Review was how strongly it focused on protecting information systems. Alliances 1NC A2/AD New military doctrine means no A2AD threat Jonathan Greenert 12, Chief of Naval Operations, 5/10/12, “Projecting Power, Assuring Access,” http://cno.navylive.dodlive.mil/2012/05/10/projecting-power-assuring-access/ There’s been attention recently about closing an international strait using, among other means, AND cases we accepted reductions in capacity to ensure the needed capabilities were retained. U.S. can adapt to A2/AD James Dobbins 12, directs the International Security and Defense Policy Center at the RAND Corporation, previously served as American Ambassador to the European Community and Assistant Secretary of State, August/September 2012, “War with China,” Survival, Vol. 54, No. 4, p. 7-24 The increasing difficulty in ensuring direct defence could be consequential even if Sino-American AND quality (if not quantity) with Chinese advances in the military field. Barring unforeseen technological developments that assure survivability for US forces and C4ISR capabilities, it AND followed by Northeast Asia and then Southeast Asia at a somewhat later date. 1NC South Korea Cyber Coop High Cyber and military coop with South Korea is high—common interests Kim 13 Eun-jung, Yonhap News Agency, 4/1/13, “S. Korean military to prepare with U.S. for cyber warfare scenarios,” http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/national/2013/04/01/20/0301000000AEN20130401004000315F.HTML In light of the massive attacks on the websites of major broadcasters and banks, AND North Korean military facilities to better anticipate aggressive actions by the communist state. 1NC Allied Coop High Allied cyber coop high John Reed 12, national security reporter for Foreign Policy, 9/10, “U.S. swapping cyber notes with allies,” http://killerapps.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/09/10/us_now_swapping_notes_on_cyber_attacks_with_closest_allies The Defense Department has reached what Pentagon officials describe a key agreement with some of AND that and share it with the rest of the group," said Davis.
AT: Taiwan China wants a peaceful rise-~--any threats are just saber rattling-~--US also deters Vu Duc ‘13 "Khanh Vu Duc is a Vietnamese-Canadian lawyer who researches on Vietnamese politics, international relations and international law. He is a frequent contributor to Asia Sentinel and BBC Vietnamese Service, "Who's Bluffing Whom in the South China Sea?" www.asiasentinel.com/index.php?option=com_contentandtask=viewandid=5237andItemid=171 Nevertheless, it remains unlikely that any conflict between China and Japan, Philippines, AND for a peaceful rise would be immediately set back, if not ruined. Presently, tensions are already running high; however, any clear displays of Chinese aggression would simply add fuel to the fire. Countries such as the Philippines and Vietnam would then be able to turn some of their neighbours—previously skeptical, if not cautious, about standing in opposition to China—and convince these states to protest openly. Any goodwill China possessed among some of these countries would evaporate as the Philippines and/or Vietnam make their case. However, of all the scenarios of a conflict involving China, what can be AND region, the US would prove to be an appropriate balance against China.
Block CP 2NC Guidelines Solve/Aff Fails Congress should set guidelines—that solves while preserving flex Stephen Dycus—1AC Author—10, Professor, Vermont Law School, 8/11/10, “Congress’s Role in Cyber Warfare,” http://jnslp.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/11_Dycus.pdf Congress accordingly needs to work closely with the executive branch in the development of a AND require a prompt and full account of every significant use of cyber weapons. Consult Kills Rapid Response Consultation kills rapid response Stephen Dycus—1AC Author—10, Professor, Vermont Law School, 8/11/10, “Congress’s Role in Cyber Warfare,” http://jnslp.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/11_Dycus.pdf 8. Require consultation with the designated congressional committees in every possible instance before any AND use is “significant” for these purposes are suggested supra note 31.
Cp 2 AT: Russia Add-on Transparent cyber cooperation with Russia high—answers their internal specifically Amber Corrin 6/19/13, a staff writer covering defense and national security, “U.S. teams with unexpected new cyber ally,” http://fcw.com/articles/2013/06/19/russia-cybersecurity-cooperation.aspx The United States is pushing forward in bilateral cooperation efforts with Russia that build on AND independent research firm. "In this case, ironically, it works."
Alliances
AT: SCS No SCS war VOA 12 – Voice of America News, 9/4/12, “Will South China Sea Disputes Lead to War?,” http://www.voanews.com/content/south-china-sea-war-unlikely/1501780.html “A minor military clash in the South China Sea is, rather worryingly, AND Southeast Asian countries into closer strategic alignment with the US,” said Kaplan.
AT: NoKo Collapse Zero risk of great power war and Kim’s death makes it inev Barnett 9 – Thomas P. M. Barnett, visiting scholar at the University of Tennessee's Howard Baker Center, March 23, 2009, “Threat of Great Power War Recedes,” online: http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/opinon/2009/03/137_41779.html As for Kim Jong-il's North Korea, that fake state won't long survive the Dear Leader's death, made all the more imminent by a recent stroke that Pyongyang strenuously denied. Whatever the timetable, the key point here is that none of the concerned great powers expects North Korea's collapse will trigger war among them. Their long-standing multilateral talks have demystified that dire scenario. No Korean war-~--laundry list-~--(rational regime, empirics, military inferiority, and it’s all just domestic propaganda) Fisher ‘13 Max, Foreign Policy Writer @ Washington Post and Former Editor at the Atlantic, “Why North Korea loves to threaten World War III (but probably won’t follow through)” http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/03/12/why-north-korea-loves-to-threaten-world-war-iii-but-probably-wont-follow-through/ North Korea is indeed a dangerous rogue state that has, in the recent past AND 100 artillery shells at Yeonpyeong Island, killing two civilians and wounding 19. But is North Korea really an irrational nation on the brink of launching “all-out war,” a mad dog of East Asia? Is Pyongyang ready to sacrifice it all? Probably not. The North Korean regime, for all its cruelty, has also shown itself to be shrewd, calculating, and single-mindedly obsessed with its own self-preservation. The regime’s past behavior suggests pretty strongly that these threats are empty. But they still matter. For years, North Korea has threatened the worst and, despite all of its AND to bear the costs of preventing its outbursts from sparking an unwanted war. Starting World War III or a second Korean War would not serve any of Pyongyang’s AND United States, it would almost certainly end with the regime’s total destruction. Still, provocations and threats do serve Pyongyang’s interests, even if no one takes AND death that Kim had made up for North Korea’s weakness with canny belligerence: The shtick of apparent madness flowed from his country’s fundamental weakness as he, like AND nuclear reactor construction, hard cash-earning tourist enclaves and investment zones. At the risk of insulting Kim Jong Eun, it helps to think of North AND because he deserves it, but because you want the tantrum to stop.
Solvency
Squo Solves Squo solves -~-- new USFG cyber guidelines Tim Stevens 12, Associate for the Centre for Science and Security Studies and an Associate Fellow of the International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation and Political Violence, PhD candidate @ King’s College London, MA in War Studies, “A Cyberwar of Ideas? Deterrence and Norms in Cyberspace,” Contemporary Security Policy, Vol. 33, Iss. 1, Apr. 13, Taylor and Francis Online In May 2011, the US International Strategy for Cyberspace answered the President's call and AND , and can be framed as a form of norms-based deterrence.
DA
Speed The structure of Congress inherently favors delay and inaction -~-- that’s awful for crisis response John Yoo 4, Emanuel S. Heller Professor of Law @ UC-Berkeley Law, visiting scholar @ the American Enterprise Institute, former Fulbright Distinguished Chair in Law @ the University of Trento, served as a deputy assistant attorney general in the Office of Legal Council at the U.S. Department of Justice between 2001 and 2003, received his J.D. from Yale and his undergraduate degree from Harvard, “War, Responsibility, and the Age of Terrorism,” UC-Berkeley Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series, http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1015andcontext=johnyoo In order to weigh the advantages of the Congress-first approach, it is AND possible attack, or the uncertainty over whether congressional authorization will be forthcoming.
Congress is too slow to respond to 21st century threats -~-- executive deference is critical Andrew Rudalevige 6, the Thomas Brackett Reed Professor of Government @ Bowdoin College, “The New Imperial Presidency,” UMich-Ann Arbor Press, Book, p. 264-67 That fragmentation is most obvious at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue. Despite common AND , yet indiicts damage that, if anything, is more devastating.14
Cred
Plan allows Congress to vocally oppose crisis intervention -~-- or they literally don’t solve anything-~-- that destroys international perception of U.S. resolve Waxman 8/25/13 Matthew Waxman, Professor of Law @ Columbia and Adjunct Senior Fellow for Law and Foreign Policy @ CFR, citing William Howell, Sydney Stein Professor in American Politics @ U-Chicago, and Jon Pevehouse, Professor of Political Science @ U-Wisconsin-Madison, “The Constitutional Power to Threaten War,” Forthcoming in Yale Law Journal, vol. 123, August 25, 2013, SSRN When members of Congress vocally oppose a use of force, they undermine the president’s AND abandon, those military operations that do not involve vital strategic interests.145
Link-~--Congress-~--Secrecy Secrecy is key to effective cyber deterrence and response John Mowchan 11, Lt Col, October, “Don’t Draw the (Red) Line,” http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2011-10/dont-draw-red-line Those arguing for establishing red lines fail to comprehend the complexity of the digital domain, in which adaptation and anonymity are the norm. The United States is better served in the long run by not establishing such thresholds, for four reasons. First, not doing so allows government leaders the latitude to tailor response options
based on a hostile act, its physical and digital effects, and how it AND actions and could undermine credibility and the power to effectively deter our adversaries.
Link-~--AT: Plan Doesn’t Affect Retaliation Retaliatory OCOs are offensive, not defense -~-- prefer military statements Derek Klobucher 13, journalist for SAP, the world’s leading provider of business software, “U.S. Prepares Counterstrike Against Cyber-Attack,” 3/15, Forbes, http://www.forbes.com/sites/sap/2013/03/15/u-s-prepares-counterstrike-against-cyber-attack/ In a departure for Alexander, the general not only discussed U.S. AND Department would use to defend the nation if it were attacked in cyberspace.”
T Overview
There's a clear brightline-~--restrictions require a floor and a ceiling-~--oversight is a floor but doesn't set a cap on the President's potential actions USCA 77, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 564 F.2d 292, 1977 U.S. App. LEXIS 10899,. 1978 Fire and Casualty Cases (CCH) P317 Continental argues that even if the Aetna and Continental policies provide coverage for the Cattuzzo accident, that coverage should 8 be limited to a total of $300,000 because Atlas agreed to procure "not less than" $300,000 coverage. The District Court properly found that the subcontract language does not support a restriction on the terms of Continental's policy because the subcontract only sets a floor, not a ceiling, for coverage.
AT: We Meet They don’t meet -~-- they don’t ban an area of flexibility since covert OCOs are still an option – their evidence is terrible – it’s in the context of the Arms Control Treaty, not war powers Gaul 8, Matthew J. Gaul is a partner in Steptoe’s New York office. A former insurance regulator and securities enforcement attorney for the state of New York, Mr. Gaul represents insurance companies and other financial institutions in government investigations and complex regulatory matters, http://faculty.lls.edu/manheim/ns/gaul2.htm A. The Arms Export Control Act¶ The laws and regulations congress and the AND export deals totaling $50 million or more.¶ CAL’S CARD ENDS Contextual definitions bad – intent to define outweighs Eric Kupferbreg 87, University of Kentucky, Senior Assistant Dean, Academic and Faculty Affairs at Northeastern University, College of Professional Studies Associate Director, Trust Initiative at Harvard School of Public Health 1987 “Limits - The Essence of Topicality” http://groups.wfu.edu/debate/MiscSites/DRGArticles/Kupferberg1987LatAmer.htm Often, field contextual definitions are too broad or too narrow for debate purposes. AND is a unique context, then additional considerations enter into our definitional analysis. Authority is the exercise of power over others OED 13 (http://www.oed.com/viewdictionaryentry/Entry/13349) authority, n. I. Power to enforce obedience. a. Power or right to enforce obedience; moral or legal supremacy; the right to command, or give an ultimate decision. b. in authority: in a position of power; in possession of power over others.
Restrictions must be enforceable
Restrictions must be enforceable Elizabeth Boalt 5, Professor of Law Emeritus, University of California, Berkeley, University of Arkansas at Little Rock School of Law The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process Fall, 20035 J. App. Prac. and Process 473, lexis Four questions follow: (1) Are discouraging words "restrictions" on citation under Rule 32.1? (2) What difference, if any, does it make? (3) What is the risk of judicial resistance to *493 no-citation rules, through discouraging words or other means? and (4) Should discouraging words be forbidden?
Are Discouraging Words "Restrictions" under Rule 32.1? The committee's statement notwithstanding, it is not clear that discouraging words have to be AND restriction" that was barred by Rule 32.1 as presently drafted. In the rules of some other circuits, however, the language disfavoring citation of AND , and hence that the citation was not permitted by the circuit rule. With what result? It would follow, paradoxically, that the opinion could be cited - because the circuit rule would be struck down under Rule 32.1 as a forbidden "restriction" on citation. The committee's double-negative drafting thus creates a Hall of Mirrors in which citation AND 32.1 strikes it down, and again the citation is permitted.
Their ev only defines "restrictions," not "restrictions on authority" - that kills predictability J.A.D. Haneman 59, justice of the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division. “Russell S. Bertrand et al. v. Donald T. Jones et al.,” 58 NJ Super. 273; 156 A.2d 161; 1959 N.J. Super, Lexis HN4 In ascertaining the meaning of the word "restrictions" as here employed AND be construed as being used in the same limited fashion as "zoning."
And, substantial requires an objective, absolute measurement-~-- there's no way to quantify the impact oversight has on War Powers which means that their interpretation has no coherent way to account for an entire word in the topic Words and Phrases 64, 40 WandP 759 The words "outward, open, actual, risible, substantial, and exclusive AND . Bass v. Pease, 79 111. App. 308, 31R
They conflate management and restrictions BEREC 12, Guidelines for quality of service in the scope of net neutrality, Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications The concept of “traffic management” is sometimes used as a synonym of “restrictions”, but in these guidelines BEREC seeks to avoid misunderstanding by using the term “restrictions” to refer to all limitations, including those which are contractually binding and/or technically implemented limitations.
Trading autobiographical narrative for the ballot commodifies one’s identity and has limited impact on the culture that one attempt’s to reform – when autobiographical narrative “wins,” it subverts its own most radical intentions by becoming an exemplar of the very culture under indictment Coughlin 95—associate Professor of Law, Vanderbilt Law School. (Anne, REGULATING THE SELF: AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL PERFORMANCES IN OUTSIDER SCHOLARSHIP, 81 Va. L. Rev. 1229) Although Williams is quick to detect insensitivity and bigotry in remarks made by strangers, AND publication record is itself sufficient evidence of the success of their endeavor. n200 Certainly, publication of a best seller may transform its author's life, with the AND Sacvan Bercovitch, "to have your dissent and make it too." n205
Performance is not a mode of resistance - it gives too much power to the audience because the performer is structurally blocked from controlling the (re)presentation of their representations. Appealing to the ballot is a way of turning over one’s identity to the same reproductive economy that underwrites liberalism Phelan 96—chair of New York University's Department of Performance Studies (Peggy, Unmarked: the politics of performance, ed published in the Taylor and Francis e-Library, 2005, 146 Performance’s only life is in the present. Performance cannot be saved, recorded, documented, or otherwise participate in the circulation of representations of representations: once it does so, it becomes something other than performance. To the degree that performance attempts to enter the economy of reproduction it betrays and lessens the promise of its own ontology. Performance’s being, like the ontology of subjectivity proposed here, becomes itself through disappearance. The pressures brought to bear on performance to succumb to the laws of the reproductive AND only a spur to memory, an encouragement of memory to become present.
This is precisely why autobiography is so easily coopted by liberalism – autobiography IS the practice of the liberal autonomous subject par excellence – this same notion of the liberal subject has historically been responsible for the Western conquest of the world. Even if their best intention is to resist the liberal subject, autobiography is understood by its consuming audience as the assertion of the classic autonomous subject – this subverts the political potential of performance by rendering one’s experience legible to the terms of liberalism . Coughlin 95—associate Professor of Law, Vanderbilt Law School. (Anne, REGULATING THE SELF: AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL PERFORMANCES IN OUTSIDER SCHOLARSHIP, 81 Va. L. Rev. 1229)
Although Williams is quick to detect insensitivity and bigotry in remarks made by strangers, AND publication record is itself sufficient evidence of the success of their endeavor. n200 Certainly, publication of a best seller may transform its author's life, with the AND Sacvan Bercovitch, "to have your dissent and make it too." n205 IV. The Autobiographical Self The outsider narratives do not reflect on another feature of autobiographical discourse that is perhaps AND whose claims to full individuality have often been denied by our society." n210 Precisely because it appeals to readers' fascination with the self-sufficiency, resiliency and AND her individual desires and rights above the needs and obligations of a collectivity. Moreover, literary theorists have remarked the tendency of autobiographical discourse to override radical authorial AND text's political and social observations only as another aspect of the author's personality. Paradoxically, although autobiography is the product of a culture that cultivates human individuality, AND , rather than subvert, autobiographical protagonists that serve the values of liberalism.
The very act of articulating why performance ought be attached to the ballot casts performance within the terms of liberalism’s discursive economy – this reduces their performance to a form of aesthetic formalism, this subordinates the political potential of performance to the narrow disciplinary concerns of academic knowledge production Phelan ‘96—chair of New York University's Department of Performance Studies (Peggy, Unmarked: the politics of performance, ed published in the Taylor and Francis e-Library, 2005, In his 1981 article Representation and the Limits of Interpretation, Eric E. Peterson AND reinvestigating the process of performance as art, not subject-object relations.
Musical performance cannot act as vehicle for resistance – it operates through a circular logic: one starts with identifying the groups that are “hegemonic” and the groups that are “marginal” and then simply valorizes the practices of those groups without rigorously researching and debating the material political conditions that produce poverty, racism, and violence. This undermines political agency by offering the false hope that engaging in the practices that become the markers of identity is political while remaining elusive whenever one is pressed to define the conditions of oppression that one opposes and whenever one is challenged to defend the substantive politics that might actual redress those conditions. Gitlin 97—sociology, Columbia (Todd, The anti-political populism of cultural studies, Dissent; Spring, Vol. 44, Iss. 2; p 77, ProQuest)
From the late 1960s onward, as I have said, the insurgent energy was AND politics. Let us not think that our academic work is already that.
Identity arguments are only ever implicit explanations of the constitutive effects of the social order, never a manifestation of some metaphysical status. Experience does not create us; we constitute experience and identity in concert with others. Knowledge of experience is therefore not the province of the individual; instead, we can only know identity through the shared practices that make communities the locus of knowledge production.
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_) We suggest that alternative models of identity and community are required from those put forward AND ” since they are produced by very real actions, practices and projects.
Our alternative is to recognize debate as a site of contingent commonality in which we can forge bonds of argumentation beyond identity-~--the affirmative’s focus on subjectivity abdicates the flux of politics and debate for the incontestable truth of identity Brown 95—prof at UC Berkely (Wendy, States of Injury, 47-51)
The postmodern exposure of the imposed and created rather than dis- covered character of AND identity, and morality and to redress our underdeveloped taste for political argument.
2nc aff = conservative
The permutation is reactionary conservatism----their appeal to “real suffering” abandons the flux of politics in favor of the truth of identity Brown 95—prof at UC Berkely (Wendy, States of Injury, 37-8)
When these precepts “without which we cannot survive” issue from the intellectual or AND by feminist projects. To thc particulars of this attachment wc now turn.
2nc empowerement link
resistance/empowerment via the ballot can only instill an adaptive politics of being and effaces the institutional constraints that reproduce structural violence Brown 95—prof at UC Berkely (Wendy, States of Injury, 21-3)
For some, fueled by opprobrium toward regulatory norms or other mo- dalities of AND so forms an important element of legitimacy for the antidemocratic dimensions of liberalism.
2nc wounded attatchements
The aff’s narrative is grounded in injuries of the past with no guide for the future-~--this reinscribes exclusion and foreclosures social justice 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_)
2 The Reification of Identity We wish to turn now to a related problem within AND to the identity being foreclosed through its attention to past-based grievances.
2NC Ballot Commodification
They make the ballot a commodity that makes social transformation impossible Bryant 13—philosophy prof at Collin College (Levi, The Paradox of Emancipatory Political Theory, http://larvalsubjects.wordpress.com/2013/05/31/the-paradox-of-emancipatory-political-theory/) There’s a sort of Hegelian contradiction at the heart of all academic political theory that AND a particularly effective rhetorical strategy for the autopoiesis of academia in the humanities). Were the aim political change, then the discourse would have to find a way AND academia. Both options are foreclosed by the sociological conditions of their discourse. The paradox of emancipatory academic political discourse is thus that it is formally and functionally AND important and like their the best thing since sliced bread, I guess.
2NC Moral Currency
The claim that oppression should be the basis for winning a debate round is a pretty good example of our link argument-~--the ballot is not a tool of emancipation, but rather a tool of revenge-~--it serves as a palliative that denies their investment in oppression as a means by which to claim the power of victory Enns 12—Professor of Philosophy at McMaster University (Dianne, The Violence of Victimhood, 28-30)
Guilt and Ressentiment We need to think carefully about what is at stake here. AND . 23 Let us turn now to an exploration of this third outcome.
10/11/13
1 UMKC Round 6 vs UCO
Tournament: 2013babyjo | Round: 6 | Opponent: Central Oklahoma Vance-Yost | Judge: Box 1nc Off 1NC
“Resolved” implies a policy or legislative decision Parcher 1 - Jeff Parcher, former debate coach at Georgetown, Feb 2001 http://www.ndtceda.com/archives/200102/0790.html Pardon me if I turn to a source besides Bill. American Heritage Dictionary: AND or 'no' - which, of course, are answers to a question. Second, the agent of the resolution is the USFG-~--we’ll read ev later if they contest this obvious fact Finally, “should” means “shall” or “must” – the affirmative is required to defend implementation Nieto 9 -~-- Judge Henry Nieto, Colorado Court of Appeals, 8-20-2009 People v. Munoz, 240 P.3d 311 (Colo. Ct. App. 2009) "Should" is "used . . . to express duty, obligation, AND be allocated for the purpose of parents' federal tax exemption to be mandatory).
1NC Due process reforms result in catastrophic terrorism-~--releases them and kills intel gathering 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.
Due process collapses intelligence gathering -~-- sources dry up -~-- destroys the heart of counter-terror policy Delery Et.al. ’12 - Principal Deputy, Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, DOJ Principal Deputy, Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, STUART F. DELERY Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, United States' Statement of Interest, Case 1:12-cv-01192-RMC Document 18 Filed 12/14/12 Page 1 of 58, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 12/14/2012 Third. Plaintiffs' claims raise the specter of disclosing classified intelligence information in open court AND classified information is a special factor in the "extraordinary rendition" context). Targeted killing’s vital to counterterrorism-~--disrupts leadership and makes carrying out attacks impossible Kenneth Anderson 13, Professor of International Law at American University, June 2013, “The Case for Drones,” Commentary, Vol. 135, No. 6 Targeted killing of high-value terrorist targets, by contrast, is the end result of a long, independent intelligence process. What the drone adds to that intelligence might be considerable, through its surveillance capabilities -- but much of the drone's contribution will be tactical, providing intelligence that assists in the planning and execution of the strike itself, in order to pick the moment when there might be the fewest civilian casualties. Nonetheless, in conjunction with high-quality intelligence, drone warfare offers an unparalleled means to strike directly at terrorist organizations without needing a conventional or counterinsurgency approach to reach terrorist groups in their safe havens. It offers an offensive capability, rather than simply defensive measures, such as homeland security alone. Drone warfare offers a raiding strategy directly against the terrorists and their leadership. If one believes, as many of the critics of drone warfare do, that AND common enemies are examples of the methods that are just of military nature. Drone warfare today is integrated with a much larger strategic counterterrorism target -- one in AND acknowledged in communications, have a significant impact on planning and organizational effectiveness. Nuclear terrorism is feasible-~--high risk of theft and attacks escalate 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 a common understanding of these threats and develop a strategy to combat them. Extinction-~--equivalent to full-scale nuclear war Owen B. Toon 7, chair of the Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences at CU-Boulder, et al., April 19, 2007, “Atmospheric effects and societal consequences of regional scale nuclear conflicts and acts of individual nuclear terrorism,” online: http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/pdf/acp-7-1973-2007.pdf To an increasing extent, people are congregating in the world’s great urban centers, AND should be carried out as well for the present scenarios and physical outcomes. A violent war on terror is the only way to solve—nonviolent solutions empirically fail Hanson 10—Senior Fellow, Hoover. Former visiting prof, classics, Stanford. PhD in classics, Stanford (Victor Davis, The Tragic Truth of War, 19 February 2010, http://www.victorhanson.com/articles/hanson021910.html) Victory has usually been defined throughout the ages as forcing the enemy to accept certain AND , and tragically always will — until the nature of man himself changes.
1NC
The Executive branch of the United States should make necessary adjustments to its targeted killing policy to ensure compliance with relevant domestic and international law, including principles of necessity, distinction, and proportionality. The Executive branch should publicly articulate its legal rationale for its targeted killing policy, including the process and safeguards in place for target selection. The CP’s the best middle ground-~--preserves the vital counter-terror role of targeted killings while resolving all their downsides Daniel Byman 13, Professor in the Security Studies Program at the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University and a Senior Fellow at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution, July/August 2013, “Why Drones Work,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 92, No. 4 Despite President Barack Obama's recent call to reduce the United States' reliance on drones, AND , and with fewer civilian casualties than many alternative methods would have caused. Critics, however, remain skeptical. They claim that drones kill thousands of innocent AND comparatively low-risk way of targeting these areas while minimizing collateral damage. So drone warfare is here to stay, and it is likely to expand in AND drone warfare risks dragging the United States into conflicts it could otherwise avoid. 1NC The political is defined by relationships of enmity and the inevitability of violence-~--the goal of politics must be to limit but not eradicate war-~--the affirmatives attempt to limit the sovereign destroys the foundation of the political itself Rasch 5 – William Rasch, Professor of Germanic Studies at the University of Indiana, Spring 2005, “Lines in the Sand: Enmity as a Structuring Principle,” The South Atlantic Quarterly, Vol. 104, No. 2, p. 253-262 = modified In The Concept of the Political, Schmitt concludes that ‘‘all genuine political theories AND as evidence of greed, moral perversity, or some other pathological behavior. With its pacific presuppositions, liberalism, according to Schmitt, dissolves the specificity of AND that this imperfection manifests itself as violence and the guilt associated with it. That generates total war through paranoia and genocidal conflicts of all against all Reinhard 4 – Kenneth Reinhard, Professor of Jewish Studies at UCLA, 2004, “Towards a Political Theology- Of the Neighbor,” online: http://www.cjs.ucla.edu/Mellon/Towards_Political_Theology.pdf If the concept of the political is defined, as Carl Schmitt does, in AND and politically, as Jacques Derrida points out in The Politics of Friendship: The effects of this destructuration would be countless: the ‘subject’ in question would AND does one then find oneself, qua a self? (PF 77) If one accepts Schmitt’s account of the political, the disappearance of the enemy results AND collapse, resulting in full-blown delusions, hallucinations, and paranoia. Hence, for Schmitt, a world without enemies is much more dangerous than one AND ultimately appeasing contours, because they would be identifiable” (PF 83).
The alternative is to affirm the necessity of the sovereign to define the state of exception de Benoist 7 – Alexis de Benoist, editor of the two French academic journals Krisis and Nouvelle Ecole, has translated articles by Carl Schmitt into French and has published the first full bibliography of Schmitt’s works, 2007, “Global terrorism and the state of permanent exception: The significance of Carl Schmitt’s thought today,” in The International Political Thought of Carl Schmitt, Edited by: Odysseos and Petito, p. 85-87 The notion of the ‘state of emergency’ (Ernstfall) or the state of AND a pre-established rule or norm can be applied to any situation. Schmitt adds that, in suspending legal norms, the exception helps us to understand AND
whoever decides to derogate from the norm is equally fixing the norm. The state of exception is also important because it reveals the original nonnormative character of AND , the suspension of the norms by the sovereign can only be provisional. It can also open a new cycle of law. In his book on dictatorship AND decide on the concrete conditions in which the norm can still be applied. Case
The aff can’t solve the broader power grabs of the state Nasser Hussain 7, an assistant professor in the Department of Law, Jurisprudence, and Social Thought at Amherst College, Summer 07, “Beyond Norm and Exception: Guantánamo,” Critical Inquiry, Vol. 33, No. 4 Finally, what are some of the implications of the argument that norm and exception AND liberal emergency constitution will invariably miss a great many of its intended targets.
Maximizing all lives is the only way to affirm equality Cummiskey 90 – Professor of Philosophy, Bates (David, Kantian Consequentialism, Ethics 100.3, p 601-2, p 606, jstor,)
We must not obscure the issue by characterizing this type of case as the sacrifice AND consideration of conduct, one's own subjective concerns do not have overriding importance.
Ethical policymaking requires calculation of consequences Gvosdev 5 – Rhodes scholar, PhD from St. Antony’s College, executive editor of The National Interest (Nikolas, The Value(s) of Realism, SAIS Review 25.1, pmuse)
As the name implies, realists focus on promoting policies that are achievable and sustainable AND —and the one that had also been roundly condemned on moral grounds.
Moral tunnel vision is complicit with evil Issac 2—Professor of Political Science at Indiana-Bloomington, Director of the Center for the Study of Democracy and Public Life, PhD from Yale (Jeffery C., Dissent Magazine, Vol. 49, Iss. 2, “Ends, Means, and Politics,” p. Proquest)
As a result, the most important political questions are simply not asked. It AND not true believers. It promotes arrogance. And it undermines political effectiveness.
Casualties are way down and drones are far more precise than alternatives-~--our ev uses the best data Michael Cohen 13, Fellow at the Century Foundation, 5/23/13, “Give President Obama a chance: there is a role for drones,” The Guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/may/23/obama-drone-speech-use-justified Drone critics have a much different take. They are passionate in their conviction that AND " and "makes their lives into a nightmare worthy of dystopian novels". I disagree. Increasingly it appears that arguments like Friedersdorf makes are no longer sustainable (and there's real question if they ever were). Not only have drone strikes decreased, but so too have the number of civilians killed – and dramatically so. This conclusion comes not from Obama administration apologists but rather, Chris Woods, whose research has served as the empirical basis for the harshest attacks on the Obama Administration's drone policy. Woods heads the covert war program for the Bureau of Investigative Journalism (TBIJ), AND of numbers here speaks to the extraordinary challenge in tabulating civilian death rates. There is little local reporting done on the ground in northwest Pakistan, which is the epicenter of the US drone program. As a result data collection is reliant on Pakistani news reporting, which is also dependent on Pakistani intelligence, which has a vested interest in playing up the negative consequences of US drones. When I spoke with Woods last month, he said that a fairly clear pattern has emerged over the past year – far fewer civilians are dying from drones. "For those who are opposed to drone strikes," says Woods there is historical merit to the charge of significant civilian deaths, "but from a contemporary standpoint the numbers just aren't there." While Woods makes clear that one has to be "cautious" on any estimates of casualties, it's not just a numeric decline that is being seen, but rather it's a "proportionate decline". In other words, the percentage of civilians dying in drone strikes is also falling, which suggests to Woods that US drone operators are showing far greater care in trying to limit collateral damage. Woods estimates are supported by the aforementioned databases. In Pakistan, New America Foundation claims there have been no civilian deaths this year and only five last year; Long War Journal reported four deaths in 2012 and 11 so far in 2013; and TBIJ reports a range of 7-42 in 2012 and 0-4 in 2013. In addition, the drop in casualty figures is occurring not just in Pakistan but also in Yemen. These numbers are broadly consistent with what has been an under-reported decline in AND in Somalia there has been no strike reported for more than a year. Ironically, these numbers are in line with the public statements of CIA director Brennan, and even more so with Senator Dianne Feinstein of California, chairman of the Select Intelligence Committee, who claimed in February that the numbers she has received from the Obama administration suggest that the typical number of victims per year from drone attacks is in "the single digits". Part of the reason for these low counts is that the Obama administration has sought to minimize the number of civilian casualties through what can best be described as "creative bookkeeping". The administration counts all military-age males as possible combatants unless they have information (posthumously provided) that proves them innocent. Few have taken the White House's side on this issue (and for good reason) though some outside researchers concur with the administration's estimates. Christine Fair, a professor at Georgetown University has long maintained that civilian deaths from drones in Pakistan are dramatically overstated. She argues that considering the alternatives of sending in the Pakistani military or using manned aircraft to flush out jihadists, drone strikes are a far more humane method of war-fighting. Rejecting sovereignty exacerbates inequalities and prevents emancipation Tara McCormack 10, Lecturer in International Politics at the University of Leicester, PhD in IR from the University of Westminster, “Critique, Security and Power: The Political Limits to Emancipatory Approaches,” p139, google books Critics of critical and emancipatory theory have raised pertinent problems in terms both of the AND people might have a chance to have some meaningful control over their lives. The state of exception can be contained-~--no impact Jennifer Mitzen 11, PhD, University of Chicago, Associate Professor of Political Science at Ohio State University, Michael E. Newell, “Crisis Authority, the War on Terror and the Future of Constitutional Democracy,” PDF But what Agamben has potentially overlooked is the conversation between the government, public and AND , Bush and his administration left, suggesting that popular sovereignty remained intact.
Block
Cp
Solvency-~--2NC
Disclosing the legal basis and procedures for targeted killing policy enables public accountability and criticism-~--it’s the best middle ground that solves the excesses of drone warfare while preserving its beneficial clarification of the stakes of state violence Kiel Brennan-Marquez 13, Visiting Human Rights Fellow at Yale Law School, 5/24/13, “A Progressive Defense of Drones,” http://www.salon.com/2013/05/24/a_progressive_defense_of_drones/ In this respect, drones represent a welcome shift of paradigm: they stand to AND they cause. Transparency is a precondition of outrage – and of accountability. Importantly, this does not necessarily mean that information about drone strikes should be publicized AND — will transform from a means of protection into a wellspring of abuse. I take no position in this debate – not because I don’t have my own AND of our democracy, the most potent oversight of all: popular disapproval. This defense of transparency may seem cold comfort, little as it does to ensure AND has happened, and to decide for ourselves whether the results are acceptable. It is in this respect, if only this respect, that drones are a welcome development in the history of war making. They make possible what to date has been, for all intents and purposes, a fantasy: the irruption of moral truth in a domain — the battlefield — traditionally overrun by mysticism and lies.
Disclosing the legal rationale for targeted killings triggers robust, informed public debate-~--it’s the real mechanism to enforce accountability Jack Goldsmith 11, the Henry L. Shattuck Professor at Harvard Law School, 10/3/11, “Release the al-Aulaqi OLC opinion, Or Its Reasoning,” http://www.lawfareblog.com/2011/10/release-the-al-aulaqi-olc-opinion-or-its-reasoning/ I have no doubt that Obama administration lawyers did a thorough and careful job of AND of targeted killings depends on a thorough public legal explanation by the administration. The best argument against disclosure is that it would reveal classified information or, relatedly AND legal conclusions (and operational details) about the al-Aulaqi killing. A full legal analysis, as opposed to conclusory explanations in government speeches and leaks AND . It could also describe the limits of presidential power in this context. The Obama administration frequently trumpets its commitment to transparency and the rule of law. AND show the Obama administration in a very good light to most American audiences.
DA
Derrida Terror Impact Conceded extinction
Even K-hack critics of security practices concede terrorism’s worse-~--threatens extinction Derrida 3 - Jacques Derrida, Directeur d’Etudes at the Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales in Paris, and Professor of Philosophy, French and Comparative Literature at the University of California, Irvine, 2003, Philosophy in a Time of Terror, p. 98-99
Why is this threat signaled by the “end of the Cold War”? Why AND movement of the world, life on earth and elsewhere, with¬out remainder.
Terrorism turns preemption—Al Qaeda seeks to preempt the entire future of the globe Derrida 3 - Jacques Derrida, Directeur d’Etudes at the Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales in Paris, and Professor of Philosophy, French and Comparative Literature at the University of California, Irvine, 2003, Philosophy in a Time of Terror, interviewed by Giovanni Borradori, p. 98-99
Borradori: Earlier you emphasized the essential role of international organizations and the need to cultivate a respect for international law. Do you think that the kind of terrorism linked to the al Qaeda organization and to bin Laden harbors international political ambitions? Derrida: What appears to me unacceptable in the "strategy" (in terms AND coming from "bin Laden," at least not one for this world. A2 US = Terrorists
Distinctions between terrorists and combatant or civilian are vital to understanding violence—abandoning them justifies more terror and collapses into relativist nihilism Elshtain 3 – professor of social and political ethics, Chicago (Jean, Thinking About September 11, http://www.aft.org/pubs-reports/american_educator/summer2003/sept11.html, AG)
In a situation in which noncombatants are deliberately targeted and the murder of the maximum AND and moral bearings. The victims of September 11 deserve more from us.
Hardline good Empirically proven Hawks 1—AA from Santa Monica College and BS from the University of Oregon (Chuck, How To Defeat Terrorism, http://www.chuckhawks.com/defeat_terrorism.htm, AMiles) But do the conditions that made non-violence a successful strategy in these three AND beliefs, it is to make the other poor bastard die for his.
Military solutions can solve terror—empirically proven Gordon 10—journalist living in Israel and the author of “The Deadly Price of Pursuing Peace,” (Evelyn, West Bank Shows There Is a Military Solution to Terror, 12.14.2010, http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/category/contentions/page/4, AMiles)
The “expert” report Max cited yesterday, which declared Afghanistan unwinnable even while AND desert in droves. And then the “unwinnable” war is won.
Terrorists think they have a religious duty to destroy us—force is the only option Jones 8—religion, psychology and terrorism, Rutgers. Snr Research Fellow, Center on Terrorism, John Jay College. ThD, Uppasala U. Psy.D, dept of clinical psychology, Rutgers. PhD in religious studies, Brown. (James, Blood That Cries Out From the Earth, 42-3, AMiles)
One of the most widespread beliefs of violent religious movements is their apocalyptic vision of AND and the jihadists are not alone in declaring war on the secular state.
Prefer emipirics and public statements-~--the aff presumes they know terrorists motives better than thye do ELSHTAIN 2003 (Jean Bethke, Prof of Social and Political Ethics at U Chicago, Just War Against Terrorism, p. 94-95) Those who do not argue outright that the United States is the author of its AND America, it just needs to have a lower cultural and military profile \
in the Muslim world?” These terrorists aren’t out for a new kind of coexistence with us. They are out for our non-existence. None of this seems to have seeped into the “Yes, but…” crowd.
Their argument essentializes terror scholarship – it’s not a monolithic entity – defer to specific research Michael J. Boyle '8, School of International Relations, University of St. Andrews, and John Horgan, International Center for the Study of Terrorism, Department of Psychology, Pennsylvania State University, April 2008, “A Case Against Critical Terrorism Studies,” Critical Studies On Terrorism, Vol. 1, No. 1, p. 51-64 Some CTS advocates have positioned the CTS project against something usually called ‘terrorism studies’ AND based on a well-grounded critique of the current research on terrorism.
Terrorism studies are epistemologically and methodologically valid-~--our authors are self-reflexive Michael J. Boyle '8, School of International Relations, University of St. Andrews, and John Horgan, International Center for the Study of Terrorism, Department of Psychology, Pennsylvania State University, April 2008, “A Case Against Critical Terrorism Studies,” Critical Studies On Terrorism, Vol. 1, No. 1, p. 51-64 Jackson (2007c) calls for the development of an explicitly CTS on the AND community of scholars does not produce such scathing indictments of its own work.
Terror DA Terror Real/Coming Threat growing now Marc Lynch 8/8, professor of political science and international affairs at George Washington University and an editor of Foreign Policy's Middle East Channel, 8/8/13, "The Gift", Foreign Policy, www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/08/08/the_gift_al_qaeda_arab_spring The failure of most of the Arab uprisings has therefore been an extraordinary gift AND new opportunities to reposition itself within the turbulent, hyperactive new Arab politics. Chalopuka uses factual errors and ignores alternate theories -~-- fails to impact nuclear politics Andrew Marchant-Shapiro, Prof of Sociology and Political Science at Union College, “Review: untitled”, The American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 100, No. 1 (Jul., 1994), pp. 265-266, JSTOR As an attempt to deal with "the politics and culture of the atom," AND admixture of empirical data and assertions seems to play a primarily illustrative role. In seven remarkably brief (if tediously sesquipedalian) chapters, Cha-loupka discusses AND the latter inheres in a political system—in this case, nuclearism: This "external irony" was often misdiagnosed as existentialist absurdity by the American counterculture AND oppositional politics in a postmodern world, pp. 101-2 In a volume that purports to take language seriously (or even playfully) this AND " (p. 68). This situation should make sociologists particularly uneasy. Given these not inconsiderable problems, is there any reason to read this book? AND number of assertions and hypotheses that may be of interest to political sociologists. While some of these useful parts have appeared elsewhere, Chaloupka occasionally gives them a AND threatening by their very humanity (in contrast to an earlier decade's HAL9000)? For me, one of Chaloupka's most interesting suggestions is that we should consider wowparticipation AND to participate can be read as an extrasystemic protest against co-optation. Good ideas, alas, do not make a good book. This volume, AND entire territory. It is a trickster's map" (p. xv). Nuke war isn’t just textual -~-- it’s a logical possibility Christopher Norris 92, Distinguished Research Professor in philosophy and former professor of English at the University of Wales in Cardiff, Uncritical theory These issues receive an admirably vigorous and clear-headed treatment in J. Fisher AND (or its probable outcome) in real-world practical terms.19 According to Derrida nuclear war is a 'fabulous' or 'fictive' referent: firstly in the AND such as can scarcely be comprehended under existing paradigms of knowledge and truth. These include not only the logistics of war, its technological, political and military aspects, but also 'the relations between knowing and acting, between constative speech-acts and performative speech-acts, between the invention that finds what was already there and the one that produces new mechanisms or new spaces*. In this situation, as Derrida reads it, we no longer possess any means AND (though wrongly) be read as an endorsement of Baudrillard's postmodernist theses: the dividing line between doxa and episteme i.e., 'mere opinion' and 'genuine knowledge' begins to blur as soon as there is no longer any such thing as an absolutely legitimizable competence for a phenomenon which is no longer strictly techno-scientific but techno-militaro-politico-diplomatic through and through, and which brings into play the doxa or incompetence even in its calculations.22 All of which might lead one to conclude that deconstruction is indeed what opponents like Habermas and Searle would make of it: a mode of irresponsible word-spinning sophistry that can turn anything (nuclear war included) into grist for the well-oiled 'textualist' mill. Solomon doesn't altogether go along with this reading, though he does view Derrida's essay AND -they seem and things-as-they-actually-are. Solomon comes out very strongly against these varieties of modish neo-pragmatist or textualist AND position that post-structuralists, postmodernists, neo-pragmatists and others are so expert at knocking down. What they fail to perceive - or, in AND from the sphere of informed philosophical debate or competent peer-group review. Solomon is much too polite to put it like this but his arguments clearly point AND measure of cognitive or truth-telling warrant. As Solomon puts it: the reality to which the nuclear referent refers ... is, in Aristotelian terms, AND , a potentiality that can’t be calculated through the calculus of probability.26 This is not to suggest that Solomon takes the whole Aristotelian doctrine on board, AND regularities, rational conjectures, the weighing of probable outcomes etc. For the absence of any strictly logical (i.e. deductive) order of necessity does nothing to disqualify these other forms of valid inferential reasoning.
Case AT: Biopolitics Agamben’s rejection of all law as inherently violent is based on misreadings of political theory and false generalizations – not all law is violent, and we shouldn’t assume that it is Jean-Philippe Deranty 4, Professor of French and German Philosophy at Macquarie University, online: http://www.borderlandsejournal.adelaide.edu.au/vol3no1_2004/deranty_agambnschall.htm 28. All this explains why Agamben chooses to focus on the decisionistic tradition ( AND the authors he relies on thought rather that the two were fundamentally different. AT: Endless War No risk of endless warfare Gray 7—Director of the Centre for Strategic Studies and Professor of International Relations and Strategic Studies at the University of Reading, graduate of the Universities of Manchester and Oxford, Founder and Senior Associate to the National Institute for Public Policy, formerly with the International Institute for Strategic Studies and the Hudson Institute (Colin, July, “The Implications of Preemptive and Preventive War Doctrines: A Reconsideration”, http://www.ciaonet.org/wps/ssi10561/ssi10561.pdf)
7. A policy that favors preventive warfare expresses a futile quest for absolute security AND strategy, though not always policy, must be nothing if not pragmatic. Discursive othering doesn’t result in ‘uncontrollable violence’ Rodwell 5—PhD candidate, Manchester Met. (Jonathan, Trendy But Empty: A Response to Richard Jackson, http://www.49thparallel.bham.ac.uk/back/issue15/rodwell1.htm, AMiles)
In this response I wish to argue that the Post-Structural analysis put forward AND analysis provides us with is a set of universals and a heuristic model. AT: Instrumentality Zero risk of their impact-~--instrumental knowledge production doesn’t cause violence and discursive criticism could never solve it anyway Ken Hirschkop 7, Professor of English and Rhetoric at the University of Waterloo, July 25, 2007, “On Being Difficult,” Electronic Book Review, online: http://www.electronicbookreview.com/thread/criticalecologies/transitive This defect - not being art - is one that theory should prolong and celebrate AND militarized, particularly under the aegis of so-called "area studies". It's hard not to see this as a Pacific version of the notorious argument that AND 35) and this is proved, with grim results, every day. But it's the title of this new epoch - the title of the book as AND , but also "reflection", i.e., Heidegger's own philosophy. It's a philosophical reprise of what Francis Mulhern has dubbed "metaculture", the discourse AND how this stance can serve as the starting point for a political critique. If Chow decides to pursue this unpromising path anyhow, it is probably because turning AND more at home exulting in its own plenitude than merely referring to things. Poor old language. Apparently ignored for centuries, it only receives its due when AND the invisibility - of language as a tool of communication" (48). We have been down this road before and will no doubt go down it again AND to more Sisyphean frustration. In fact, there are several good reasons. Instrumental thought and language don’t cause militarism and resisting them can’t break it down Ken Hirschkop 7, Professor of English and Rhetoric at the University of Waterloo, July 25, 2007, “On Being Difficult,” Electronic Book Review, online: http://www.electronicbookreview.com/thread/criticalecologies/transitive First, by transparency Chow seems to mean a kind of spontaneous empiricism we adopt AND the act of referring, which can coexist with a variety of epistemologies. Second, and perhaps more serious, is the confusion of "instrumentalism", a mode of action, with referring. It's hard to conceive of instrumental relationships without acts of reference, but you can't conceive of non-instrumental relationships without them, either ("I love you", after all, requires reference). In and of itself, referring in language doesn't incline us towards any particular mode of social existence, or any particular politics: it's just something we do in language, and do naturally. Put another way, to imagine that language is only acknowledged in philosophy and poetry AND and you can find traces of it in everyone from Herder to Habermas. For sure, human cooperation is inconceivable without the activities gathered under the title of AND , and it's more than disingenuous to pretend these two facts aren't connected. Sisyphus was condemned to his task by Zeus. Cultural critics are free to stop pushing language up the hill whenever they want. Rey Chow can't emancipate the injured and exploited by giving up her vision of self-referentiality; but she'll free her readers from an illusion, and open up more promising political paths when she does. AT: V2L “No value to life” doesn’t outweigh-~--prioritize existence because value is subjective Torbjörn Tännsjö 11, the Kristian Claëson Professor of Practical Philosophy at Stockholm University, 2011, “Shalt Thou Sometimes Murder? On the Ethics of Killing,” online: http://people.su.se/~jolso/HS-texter/shaltthou.pdf I suppose it is correct to say that, if Schopenhauer is right, if AND suffering (in their lives) than I avoid (in my life). AT: Predictions = Genocide Predictions avoid genocide. They allow us to reclaim our agency from passivity. Bindé 2k Jérôme, Dir. Analysis and Forecasting Office – UNESCO, Public Culture, “Toward an Ethics of the Future”, 12:1, Project Muse An ethics of the future is not an ethics in the future. If tomorrow AND To paraphrase a common saying, the future delayed is the future denied.
Off-Case Off Restrictions are prohibitions on action -~-- the aff is not Jean Schiedler-Brown 12, Attorney, Jean Schiedler-Brown and 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 the reporting and monitoring or supervising terms and conditions that are included in the 2001 Stipulation. Black's Law Dictionary, 'fifth edition,(1979) defines "restriction" as; A limitation often imposed in a deed or lease respecting the use to which the AND or by interposing obstacle, to repress or suppress, to curb. In contrast, the terms "supervise" and "supervisor" are defined as AND merely routine or clerical nature, but required the use of independent judgment. Comparing the above definitions, it is clear that the definition of "restriction" is very different from the definition of "supervision"-very few of the same words are used to explain or define the different terms. In his 2001 stipulation, Mr. Kincheloe essentially agreed to some supervision conditions, but he did not agree to restrict his license. Restrictions on authority are distinct from conditions William Conner 78, former federal judge for the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York United States District Court, S. D. New York, CORPORACION VENEZOLANA de FOMENTO v. VINTERO SALES, http://www.leagle.com/decision/19781560452FSupp1108_11379 Plaintiff next contends that Merban was charged with notice of the restrictions on the authority AND were not authorized to act except upon the fulfillment of the specified conditions. Increase means from a baseline Rogers 5 Judge, STATE OF NEW YORK, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, RESPONDENT, NSR MANUFACTURERS ROUNDTABLE, ET AL., INTERVENORS, 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 12378, ; 60 ERC (BNA) 1791, 6/24, lexis 48 Statutory Interpretation. HN16While the CAA defines a "modification" AND car five or ten years ago when the engine was in perfect condition.
Off Plan’s reforms result in catastrophic terrorism-~--kills intel gathering Jack Goldsmith 09, 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.
Nuke terror causes extinction-~--equivalent to full-scale nuclear war Owen B. Toon 7, chair of the Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences at CU-Boulder, et al., April 19, 2007, “Atmospheric effects and societal consequences of regional scale nuclear conflicts and acts of individual nuclear terrorism,” online: http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/pdf/acp-7-1973-2007.pdf To an increasing extent, people are congregating in the world’s great urban centers, AND should be carried out as well for the present scenarios and physical outcomes. Off 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.
Judicial review of foreign policy decks the executive flexibility necessary to solve prolif, terror, and the rise of hostile powers-~--link threshold is low Robert Blomquist 10, Professor of Law, Valparaiso University School of Law, THE JURISPRUDENCE OF AMERICAN NATIONAL SECURITY PRESIPRUDENCE, 44 Val. U.L. Rev. 881 Supreme Court Justices--along with legal advocates--need to conceptualize and prioritize big AND hyper-energy in the Executive branch in responding to these threats. n16 The Justices should also consult Professor Robert S. Summers's masterful elaboration and amplification of AND of Congress) to preserve, protect, and defend the Nation. n22 *886 B. Geopolitical Strategic Considerations Bearing on Judicial Interpretation Before the United States Supreme Court Justices form an opinion on the legality of national AND security facts and conceptions before sitting in judgment on presiprudential national security determinations. (1) "National security policy . . . is harder today because the AND -traffickers support terrorists, and terrorists align themselves with regional powers." n27 (2) "Yet, as worrisome as these immediate concerns may be, the long-term challenges are even harder to deal with, and the stakes are higher. Whereas the main Cold War threat--the Soviet Union--was brittle, most of the potential adversaries and challengers America now faces are resilient." n28 (3) "The most important task for U.S. national security AND When you do not hold the strategic advantage, they do not." n30 (4) While "keeping the strategic advantage may not have the idealistic ring of making the world safe for democracy and does not sound as decisively macho as maintaining American hegemony," n31 maintaining the American "strategic advantage is critical, because it is essential for just about everything else America hopes to achieve--promoting freedom, protecting the homeland, defending its values, preserving peace, and so on." n32 (5) The United States requires national security "agility." n33 It not only needs "to refocus its resources repeatedly; it needs to do this faster than an adversary can focus its own resources." n34 *888 As further serious preparation for engaging in the jurisprudence of American AND stake. This is the kind of knowledge suited to a Jacksonian." n39 Turning to how the Supreme Court should view and interpret American presidential measures to oversee AND ," n48 as determined by the POTUS and his national security executive subordinates.
Off The plan identifies the non-Western world as a space devoid of the rule of law-~--that sets the stage for aggressive intervention and colonial plunder, which locks in neoliberal structural violence-~--and their ev is based on distorted representations of the rule of law that have no relationship to reality Ugo Mattei 9, Professor at Hastings College of the Law and University of Turin; and Marco de Morpurgo, M.Sc. Candidate, International University College of Turin, LL.M. Candidate, Harvard Law School, 2009, “GLOBAL LAW and PLUNDER: THE DARK SIDE OF THE RULE OF LAW,” online: http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1014andcontext=bocconi_legal_papers Within this framework, Western law has constantly enjoyed a dominant position during the past AND , behaving as a neo-colonialist within the ideology known as neoliberalism. Western countries identify themselves as law-abiding and civilized no matter what their actual AND lack’ the minimal institutional systems necessary for the unfolding of a market economy. The theory of ‘lack’ and the rhetoric of the rule of law have justified AND is today by the WTO in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Foreign-imposed privatization laws that facilitate unconscionable bargains at the expense of the people have been vehicles of plunder, not of legality. In all these settings the tragic human suffering produced by such plunder is simply ignored. In this context law played a major role in legalizing such practices of powerful actors against the powerless.5 Yet, this use of power is scarcely explored in the study of Western law. The exportation of Western legal institutions from the West to the ‘rest’ has systematically AND proactive: more succinctly, a technological framework for an ‘efficient’ market. The rule of law has a bright and a dark side, with the latter progressively conquering new ground whenever the former is not empowered by a political soul. In the absence of such political life, the rule of law becomes a cold technology. Moreover, when large corporate actors dominate states (affected by a declining regulatory role), law becomes a product of the economy, and economy governs the law rather than being governed by it. Global movements against neoliberal hegemony are emerging now and will be effective-~--the plan’s consolidation of U.S.-driven economic orthodoxy collapses democracy, causes resource wars, environmental collapse, and extinction Vandana Shiva 12, founder of the Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology, Ph.D. in Philosophy from the University of Western Ontario, chairs the Commission on the Future of Food set up by the Region of Tuscany in Italy and is a member of the Scientific Committee which advises President Zapatero of Spain, March 1, 2012, “Imposed Austerity vs Chosen Simplicity: Who Will Pay For Which Adjustments?,” online: http://www.ethicalmarkets.com/2012/03/01/imposed-austerity-vs-chosen-simplicity-who-will-pay-for-which-adjustments/ The dominant economic model based on limitless growth on a limited planet is leading to AND have started to say “No to the Green Economy of the 1”. But an ecological adjustment is possible, and is happening. This ecological adjustment involves AND based on the recovery of the commons and the creation of Earth Democracy. The dominant economic model based on resource monopolies and the rule of an oligarchy is AND homeland security in U.S., and multiple security laws in India. The calls for a democratic adjustment from below are witnessed worldwide in the rise of non-violent protests, from the Arab spring to the American autumn of “Occupy” and the Russian winter challenging the hijack of elections and electoral democracy. And these movements for democratic adjustment are also rising everywhere in response to the “ AND houses, manicure the fingernails, and maintain the lawn of the affluent”. Forced austerity based on the old paradigm allows the 1 super rich, the AND imposed austerity built into the trade liberalization and “economic reform” policies. There is another paradigm emerging which is shared by Gandhi and the new movements of AND and it creates a path for economic adjustment based on justice and equity. Forced austerity makes the poor and working families pay for the excesses of limitless greed and accumulation by the super rich. Chosen simplicity stops these excesses and allow us to flower into an Earth Democracy where the rights and freedoms of all species and all people are protected and respected.
Reject their ideological focus on short-term impacts-~--cast the ballot to fundamentally rethink the global promotion of Western law Ugo Mattei 9, Professor at Hastings College of the Law and University of Turin; and Marco de Morpurgo, M.Sc. Candidate, International University College of Turin, LL.M. Candidate, Harvard Law School, 2009, “GLOBAL LAW and PLUNDER: THE DARK SIDE OF THE RULE OF LAW,” online: http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1014andcontext=bocconi_legal_papers Contemporary mass cultures operate within a short time-span. Most intellectuals do not acknowledge that it is exactly because of plunder of gold, silver, bioresources and so on that development accelerated in the West, so that underdevelopment is a historically produced victimization of weaker and more enclosed communities and not the disease of lesser people. Prevailing short-term and short-sighted opportunism must be overcome. An analysis of the imperial adventure rendered in legal terms opens up a possibility for a radical rethinking of a model of development defined by Western ideas of progress, development and economic efficiency. A reconfiguration would mean, first and foremost, a clear rejection of an ideology of inherent superiority of Western culture that does not recognize that the West is itself part of something much larger. Off The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit should form an en banc panel to review its opinion in Al-Bihani v. Obama on the basis of maintaining uniformity and on the exceptional importance of the case. The en banc panel of the D.C. Circuit should decide that its ruling in Al-Bihani v. Obama has no precedential effect on any other court, that it was limited solely to the facts presented in the original case and that no court should regard Al-Bihani v. Obama as a repudiation of the Charming Betsy canon. The CP solves all of their advantages and locks in SQ Presidential detention powers: The CP limits the reach of al-Bihani by blocking its application in other contexts Thomas G. Hansford and James F. Spriggs 7, 8-7-, “The Politics of Precedent on the U.S. Supreme Court,” http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/s8204.html Second, the Court can negatively interpret a precedent by restricting its reach or calling AND legal authority of a precedent and diminish its applicability to other legal disputes.
The D.C. Circuit can rehear the case en banc D.C. Circuit Rules ’11 – Authored by Clerks of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals CIRCUIT RULES of the UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS for the DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, Amended Through December 1, 2011, http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/home.nsf/Content/VL20-20RPP20-20Circuit20Rules/$FILE/RulesDecember2011LINKSandBOOKMARKScj2013.pdf Rule 35. En Banc Determination¶ (a) When Hearing or Rehearing En AND decisions;¶ (2) the proceeding involves a question of exceptional importance. Their author agrees that an en banc review hearing can reassess the precedential effect of an Appellate Court ruling like Al-Bihani Alistine ’11 – Prof of Law @ Univ. of Maryland Michael P. Van Alstine, Prof of Law University of Maryland, Duke Law Journal, STARE DECISIS AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1881137 KU Evidence Begins… It is a curious fact the Framers structured the Constitution precisely to protect against divergent AND of the foreign relations power to the national government in the first place.” KU Evidence Ends.
Case Solvency No Solvency The aff is a facial ruling that doesn’t require tangible policy changes Kim Lane Scheppele 12, Laurance S. Rockefeller Professor of Sociology and Public Affairs in the Woodrow Wilson School and University Center for Human Values; Director of the Program in Law and Public Affairs, Princeton University. THE NEW JUDICIAL DEFERENCE, 92 B.U.L. Rev. 89 In this Article, I will show that American courts have often approached the extreme AND present to bring counter-terrorism policy back under the constraint of constitutionalism.
Their author also concludes in the un-highlighted portions of the 1AC that Al-Bihani is UNLIKELY to impact other court decisions and that it only contributes to an already negative image of the U.S. Tarnogorski ’10 – Polish Inst. For Int’l Affairs USA and Laws of War (Al-Bihani v. Obama), PDF can be found at here: http://www.isn.ethz.ch/Digital-Library/Publications/Detail/?ots591=0c54e3b3-1e9c-be1e-2c24-a6a8c7060233andlng=enandid=112282 The trial court rejected his arguments on the grounds that his detention as a member AND .S. as a power given to opportunistic treatment of international standards.
Waring concludes that more recent cases by the D.C. Circuit have reigned in the impact of Al-Bihani – at worst only a handful of detainees are impacted Waring ’12 – Associate @ Winston and Strawn LLP, J.D. from Georgetown University Law Center Spring, 2012 Georgetown Journal of International Law 43 Geo. J. Int'l L. 927, Lexis B. Revival of International Law Despite Al-Bihani?¶ 1. Al Warafi AND on the basis of expansive detention authority unlimited by the law of war.
Aff = Meaningless Al-Bihani clearly didn’t overrule the Charming Betsy doctrine-~--the decision that denied his appeal for re-hearing explicitly clarified that Charming Betsy didn’t apply to the case J. Taylor Benson 11, J.D., Creighton University School of Law, June 2011, “INTERNATIONAL LAWS-OF-WAR, WHAT ARE THEY GOOD FOR? THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT IN AL-BIHANI V. OBAMA CORRECTLY CLARIFIED THAT INTERNATIONAL LAWS-OF-WAR DO NOT LIMIT THE PRESIDENT'S AUTHORITY TO DETAIN ENEMY COMBATANTS,” Creighton Law Review, 44 Creighton L. Rev. 1277 Al-Bihani then petitioned the United States Court of Appeals for the District of AND of-war principles was unnecessary to the disposition on the merits. n75 *1284 The three original panel judges each filed statements concurring in the AND I was one of two alternative holdings, each holding precedential effect. n79 Addressing what she believed to be a countervailing motivation behind the en banc panel's short AND not ambiguous, Judge Brown concluded that Charming Betsy did not apply. n85 Charming Betsy No Court Adoption No chance the Courts enforce I-Law Daniel Abebe and Eric A. Posner 11, Assistant Professor and Kirkland and Ellis Professor, University of Chicago Law School, The Flaws of Foreign Affairs Legalism, 51 Va. J. Int'l L. 507 Foreign affairs legalists make sweeping claims about the American judiciary's promotion of international law, AND not the judiciary, as the branch most responsible for advancing international law. *528
The American Judiciary's Contribution to International Law Foreign affairs legalists celebrate the American judiciary's contributions to international law, but they can AND v. Holland, n103 but these cases are weak and inconsistent. n104 Moreover, the empirical literature regarding the judiciary's support of international law is thin. AND allow what they learn to affect the way that they decide cases. n109 In contrast, many court decisions and judge-made doctrines cut against the claims AND . In treaty interpretation cases, courts frequently defer to the executive. n113 On questions of international law - the area most important to foreign affairs legalists - AND preclude a U.S. trial court's jurisdiction over the abductee. n118 The Supreme Court's treatment of international law in Medellin v. Texas n119 is also AND Court held that he did not have the power to do so. n126
Ilaw Fails
Ilaw fails -~-- states will either inevitably cooperate, or ilaw can’t convince them to Eric A. Posner 9, Kirkland and Ellis Professor of Law at the University of Chicago Law School. The Perils of Global Legalism, 34-6 34 ¶ Most global legalists acknowledge that international law is created and enforced by states AND , and bad states, all exist on a plane of equality. ¶ Treaty Obligations Treaty obligations are inevitable and we will meet some of them to prevent war – their impact is non-sensical Multilat fails Holmes 10-~--VP, foreign policy and defense studies, Heritage. Frmr Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs. While at the State Department, Holmes was responsible for developing policy and coordinating U.S. engagement at the United Nations and 46 other international organizations. Member of the CFR. Frmr adjunct prof of history, Georgetown. PhD in history, Georgetown (Kim, Smart Multilateralism and the United Nations, 21 Sept. 2010, http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/09/smart-multilateralism-when-and-when-not-to-rely-on-the-united-nations)
The need for multilateralism is obvious. Nations share concerns about many problems and issues AND even if those countries voted with the United States for starkly different reasons.
AT: Warming No impact-~--mitigation and adaptation will solve-~--no tipping point or “1 risk” args Robert O. Mendelsohn 9, the Edwin Weyerhaeuser Davis Professor, Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Yale University, June 2009, “Climate Change and Economic Growth,” online: http://www.growthcommission.org/storage/cgdev/documents/gcwp060web.pdf The heart of the debate about climate change comes from a number of warnings from AND economic growth and well?being may be at risk (Stern 2006). These statements are largely alarmist and misleading. Although climate change is a serious problem AND range climate risks. What is needed are long?run balanced responses.
Judicial Review AT: Kellman No nuclear war from judicial abdication – Kellman’s from 1989, hundreds of instances of abdication since then disprove AT: Soft Power Soft power fails — no empirical evidence and it’s derived from the private sector Singh 8 (Robert, professor in the School of Politics in Birkbeck College at University of London, “The exceptional empire,” Vol. 45, Iss. 5, ProQuest) Like many theoretical constructs in social science, 'soft power' has its appeal and adherents AND As one Newsweek poll recorded the sorry figuresunderpinning America's 'tarnished global image.' Obama won’t use soft power — empirics prove Lagon 11 (Mark, Chair, International Relations and Security Concentration, and Visiting Professor, MSFS Program MASTER OF SCIENCE IN FOREIGN SERVICE (MSFS), Georgetown University, "Soft Power Under Obama," 10-18, http://www.isn.ethz.ch/isn/Current-Affairs/ISN-Insights/Detail?lng=enandid=133416andcontextid734=133416andcontextid735=133415andtabid=133415anddynrel=4888caa0-b3db-1461-98b9-e20e7b9c13d4,0c54e3b3-1e9c-be1e-2c24-a6a8c7060233, EMM) One irony of the Obama presidency is how much it relies on hard power. AND power itself that Obama doubts, but America’s moral standing to project it.
Block
OVERVIEW
U.S. legal leadership enables a neocolonial agenda of global neoliberal domination-~--this link is phenomenally specific to their mechanism of boosting the prestige of U.S. courts in order to export legal norms and practices Ugo Mattei 9, Professor at Hastings College of the Law and University of Turin; and Marco de Morpurgo, M.Sc. Candidate, International University College of Turin, LL.M. Candidate, Harvard Law School, 2009, “GLOBAL LAW and PLUNDER: THE DARK SIDE OF THE RULE OF LAW,” online: http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1014andcontext=bocconi_legal_papers There is a clear pattern of continuity, not of rupture, between the current policy trend in the international institutional setting and earlier practices, in particular colonialism. The Western world, under current U.S. leadership, having persuaded itself of its superior position, largely justified by its form of government, has succeeded in diffusing rule of law ideology as universally valid, behind whose shadows plunder hides, both in domestic and in international matters. Present-day international interventions led by the United States are no longer openly colonial AND using the rule of law to pave the way for international corporate domination. Export of the law can be described and explained in a variety of ways. AND are imposed in countries under US occupation, such as Afghanistan and Iraq. A second model can be described as imposition by bargaining, in the sense that AND ), and so on) in the ‘developing’ and former socialist world. A third model, constructed as fully consensual, is diffusion by prestige, a AND time of Haile Selassie and Japan during the Meiji restoration are modern examples. Interestingly, if the transplant ‘fails’, such as with the attempts to impose AND local complexities and suggests radical and universal transplantation of Western notions and institutions.
Global expansion of the Western conception of rule of law enables neoliberal resource plundering-~--turns the whole case because it causes failed transitions that are hijacked by authoritarians Ugo Mattei 9, Professor at Hastings College of the Law and University of Turin; and Marco de Morpurgo, M.Sc. Candidate, International University College of Turin, LL.M. Candidate, Harvard Law School, 2009, “GLOBAL LAW and PLUNDER: THE DARK SIDE OF THE RULE OF LAW,” online: http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1014andcontext=bocconi_legal_papers The rule of law rhetoric has been used as a justification for ‘plunder’ ( AND contrary its close association with practices of ‘plunder’ has to be recognized. In the dominant liberal democratic tradition the rule of law has at least two different AND investment thus come packaged with the prestigious wrapping of the rule of law. According to the second approach, which relates to a liberal political tradition rooted in AND governed by the rule of law when its leaders are under its restraint. Some conservatives might favour the first meaning, protecting property and contracts. The second AND , promote the private sector growth, fight poverty and have legitimacy’.8 A system can be governed by the rule of law in one or the other AND ‘good governance’ prescriptions of the World Bank also fall in this category. In other systems, with good human rights credentials, governments interpret their role as AND United States’ New Deal), might offer such a model in Western societies. Western countries have developed a strong identity as being governed by the rule of law, no matter what the actual history or the present situation might be. Such identity is obtained—as is the usual pattern—by comparison with ‘the other’, almost invariably portrayed as ‘lacking’ the rule of law. Based on the idea that others ‘lack’ the rule of law, many external interventions have been enacted in the so-called ‘developing countries’ by Western actors. Many of such interventions, instead of being beneficial for the local society, have shown the possibility for the law to be used as an instrument of oppression and plunder, ironically representing an ‘illegal’ use of the rule of law.9
Framework-~--2NC Our framework is necessary to reclaim the political from state-focused methods that constrict democratic dialogue. Error replication is inevitable without interrogating the ethical foundations of the 1ac Shampa Biswas 7 Prof of Politics @ Whitman “Empire and Global Public Intellectuals: Reading Edward Said as an International Relations Theorist” Millennium 36 (1) p. 117-125
The recent resuscitation of the project of Empire should give International Relations scholars particular pause AND expertise) in the most fundamental and important senses of the vocation.21
Framework-~--policymakers and legal intellectuals use representations of the rule of law as a positive force that bear no relationship to reality-~--interrogating flawed understandings of the rule of law undermines the truth-value of their claims about its tangible effects-~--our framework arg is not about the rhetoric of the 1AC but rather the rhetoric of judges and policymakers which means none of their spin about “judge choice” or severing reps applies Ugo Mattei 9, Professor at Hastings College of the Law and University of Turin; and Marco de Morpurgo, M.Sc. Candidate, International University College of Turin, LL.M. Candidate, Harvard Law School, 2009, “GLOBAL LAW and PLUNDER: THE DARK SIDE OF THE RULE OF LAW,” online: http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1014andcontext=bocconi_legal_papers The expression ‘rule of law’ has gained currency well outside the specialized learning of lawyers. It has reached political and cultural spheres, entering everyday discourse and media language, it is pronounced in countless political speeches and promenades on the agendas of private and public actors. Unfortunately, the term has incrementally lost clarity and is today interpreted in widely disparate AND not for the weighty political implications of the phrase in different contexts.7 The connotations of the expression ‘rule of law’ have always been implicitly positive. Today, the concept is inextricably linked to the notion of democracy, thus becoming a powerful, almost indisputable, positively loaded ideal. Who could argue against a society governed under democracy and the rule of law? The rule of law lives today in a comfortable limbo, stretched to fit the AND artefact, closely connected with the diffusion of Western political and economic domination.
FW/Alt-~--Jones 99
Critical intellectualism key to solve extinction-~--voting negative outweighs hypothetical plan consequences Jones 99—IR, Aberystwyth (Richard, “6. Emancipation: Reconceptualizing Practice,” Security, Strategy and Critical Theory, http://www.ciaonet.org/book/wynjones/wynjones06.html, AMiles)
The central political task of the intellectuals is to aid in the construction of a AND should act as both an inspiration and a challenge to critical security studies.
Warming
Aff is anxisou Dodds 12 Joseph, MPhil, Psychoanalytic Studies, Sheffield University, UK, MA, Psychoanalytic Studies, Sheffield University, UK BSc, Psychology and Neuroscience, Manchester University, UK, Chartered Psychologist (CPsychol) of the British Psychological Society (BPS), and a member of several other professional organizations such as the International Neuropsychoanalysis Society, Psychoanalysis and Ecology at the Edge of Chaos p 27 *gender mod Why psychoanalysis? On the face of it, it seems frankly irrelevant. Surely AND human environment, until very recently his colleagues have almost entirely ignored him. In this section we explore some of the theories with which we may be able AND hidden motivations and phantasies, this investigation will not be able to proceed. Renee Lertzman (2008), one of the first psychoanalytically informed social scientists to engage with the ecological crisis, describes a common surreal aspect of our everyday responses to 'eco-anxiety', the experience of flipping through a newspaper and being suddenly confronted with: the stop-dead-in-your-tracks, bone-chilling kind of ecological travesties taking place around our planet today ... declining honey bees, melting glaciers, plastics in the sea, or the rate of coal plants being built in China each second. But how many of us actually do stop dead in our tracks? Have we become numb? ... if so, how can we become more awake and engaged to what is happening? Environmental campaigners have become increasingly frustrated and pessimistic. Even as their messages spread further AND with the danger (for the full report see Climate Action Network 2010). Recent opinion polls show climate scepticism is on the rise in the UK as well AND about man's contribution to climate change and becoming more so' (BBC 2010a). Most remarkable here is the discrepancy between public and expert opinion. According to the AND overall science, and yet this is not how the public perceived it. Subsequently, the UK Parliament's Commons Science and Technology Committee completed its investigation into the case (BBC 2010c). The MPs' committee concluded there was no evidence that UEA's Professor Phil Jones had manipulated data, or tried 'to subvert the peer review process' and that 'his reputation, and that of his climate research unit, remained intact' (BBC 2010c). The report noted that 'it is not standard practice in climate science to AND global warming is happening and is induced by human activity' (BBC 2010c). This story was followed closely by another in January 2010 when the IPCC admitted a AND the Parliamentary committee's report as further evidence of an institutional cover-up. The important psychological point is that people are ready for such events, indeed eager AND discipline has a lot to offer. As Lertzman (2008) writes: What if the core issue is more about how humans respond to anxiety? ... Environmental problems ... conjure up anxieties that ... we are done for, and nothing can really be done ... To help me understand more, I turn to Freud ... because I have found few others who speak as eloquently, and sensitively about what humans do when faced with anxiety or anxiety-provoking news. Freud, civilization, nature and the dialectic of the Enlightenment Is Freud really relevant to understanding our current crisis? While he was very much AND , Freud did offer us some crucial reflections on our relationship with nature: The principle task of civilization, its actual raison d'etre, is to defend us against nature. We all know that in many ways civilization does this fairly well already, and clearly as time goes on it will do it much better. But no one is under the illusion that nature has already been vanquished; and few dare hope that she will ever be entirely subdued to man. (Freud 1927: 51) Here we can see an interesting ambivalence in Freud's rhetorical style, which perhaps unwittingly AND nature, rather than fighting it.' Thus, according to Rust, we find ourselves ... between stories (Berry 1999), in a transitional space ... AND our own myths as well as find inspiration from the stories of others. (ibid.) The myth of progress enters the climate change debate in calls for geo-engineering AND fear and trembling in the face of the awesome power of mother nature. There are the elements which seem to mock at all human control: the earth AND and helplessness, which we thought to escape through the work of civilization. (Freud 1927: 15-16) Here is the other side of Freud's writing on the relation between 'Nature' and 'Civilization', with humanity portrayed as a weak and helpless infant in awe and fear of a mighty and terrible mother. The lure and horror of matriarchy lie behind the defensive constructs of patriarchal civilization, just as Klein's paranoid-schizoid fears of fragmentation, engulfment, and annihilation lie behind later castration threats (Hinshelwood 1991). With each new earthquake or flood, nature erupts into culture -similar to Kristeva's AND attempt to maintain an illusory autonomy and control in the face of chaos. There is often a tension in Freud, between the celebration of Enlightenment values found AND its most trenchant defence. Psychoanalysis, as always, is exquisitely ambivalent. Ultimately, for Freud, both the natural world and our inner nature are untamable AND previously smaller and more manageable ones (Diamond 2006: 43-47). The control promised by the Enlightenment, the power of the intellect to overcome chaos (environmental and emotional), is therefore at least partly a defensive and at times dangerous illusion. In our age of anxiety, with the destruction of civilization threatened by nuclear holocaust, ecosystemic collapse, bioweapons and dirty bombs, Freud's warning is more relevant than ever: Humans* have gained control over the forces of nature to such an extent that with their help they would have no difficulty in exterminating one another to the last man ... hence comes a large part of their current unrest, their unhappiness and their mood of anxiety. (Freud 1930: 135) Freud's binaries 'masculine/Enlightenment/control/autonomy' versus 'feminine/nature/chaos AND "third" party is always regarded ... as a threat' (ibid.). Deleuze and Guattari describe such dualistic forms of thinking using the ecological metaphor of the AND of 'holding environments', the ultimate 'environment mother' (Winnicott 1999,1987).
Pinker’s establishment ideology kicks-in very clearly in his comparative treatment of communism, AND of economic reform,” Jawaharal Nehru University economist Utsa Patnaik observes.154
AT Kurasawa
Kurasawa concludes neg— a. He concedes alarmism destroys predictions and collapses into manufactured technostrategic discourse Kurasawa 4 Professor of Sociology @ York Universty of Toronto, Constellations, 11.4 Foremost among the possible distortions of farsightedness is alarmism, the manufacturing of unwarranted and unfounded doomsday scenarios. State and market institutions may seek to produce a culture of fear by deliberately stretching interpretations of reality beyond the limits of the plausible so as to exaggerate the prospects of impending catastrophes, or yet again, by intentionally promoting certain prognoses over others for instrumental purposes. Accordingly, regressive dystopias can operate as Trojan horses
advancing political agendas or commercial interests that would otherwise be susceptible to public scrutiny AND ideas beget a culture of fear, the reverse is no less true.
P
The permutation is the worst form of paranoid politics—it gives into their threats of immediate consequences and thereby feeds their psychosis—it’s tantamount to a crack addict who says “this is my last time”—the belief we can fill the gaps in security and then move beyond it fails to escape the grip of anxiety and is the ultimate inauthentic act—complete rejection is critical Neocleous 8 Mark Neocleous, Prof. of Government @ Brunel, Critique of Security, 185-6
The only way out of such a dilemma, to escape the fetish, is AND
it requires us to be brave enough to return the gift.143
AT Movements fail
The assumption everyone will be neoliberal is self-fulfilling and false-~--particularly in the context of energy, voting neg actively creates a non-neoliberal public sphere-~--imaginaries of the public are more important in shaping policy Joanne Swaffield 12, Professor of Economics at The University of York, 2012, “Can ‘climate champions’ save the planet? A critical reflection on neoliberal social change,” Environmental Politics, Vol. 21, No. 2, p. 248-267 We believe that the difference between the way that climate champions conceive of other people's AND for the ‘imagined public’ to be more significant than ‘real’ publics: Indeed, depending on how the subjectivity and agency of the public is anticipated and internalised into organisational strategies and working practices of different actors within and across sectoral networks, this imagined public might be of greater long-term significance than the ‘real’ version of specific publics encountered in meeting rooms and community halls. (Walker et al. 2010, p. 943) Our research suggests that something similar may be occurring with the climate champions in our AND ‘real’ partly as a consequence of our acting as if it existed. However, if we ‘scratch beneath the surface’ of a ‘neoliberal’ person, AND issues), most people do not think like the archetypal ‘neoliberal’ person. We believe that this suggests that it may be worth exploring an alternative ‘deliberative’ AND climate change, they might find that their colleagues are moral agents too.
T Overview
There's a clear brightline-~--restrictions require a floor and a ceiling-~--oversight is a floor but doesn't set a cap on the President's potential actions USCA 77, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 564 F.2d 292, 1977 U.S. App. LEXIS 10899,. 1978 Fire and Casualty Cases (CCH) P317 Continental argues that even if the Aetna and Continental policies provide coverage for the Cattuzzo accident, that coverage should 8 be limited to a total of $300,000 because Atlas agreed to procure "not less than" $300,000 coverage. The District Court properly found that the subcontract language does not support a restriction on the terms of Continental's policy because the subcontract only sets a floor, not a ceiling, for coverage.
authority, n. I. Power to enforce obedience. a. Power or right to enforce obedience; moral or legal supremacy; the right to command, or give an ultimate decision. b. in authority: in a position of power; in possession of power over others.
AT: C/I
AT: Area
“In the area” means all of the activities UN 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;
10/11/13
3 KY RR vs OU LM
Tournament: KY RR | Round: 7 | Opponent: OU LM | Judge: 1NC
Off-Case 1NC Interpretation---the plan should specify the newly-restricted legal threshold and accountability mechanism it establishes for targeted killings Legal specificity’s a pre-requisite to productive debates over targeted killing Gregory McNeal 13, Associate Professor of Law, Pepperdine University, 3/5/13, “Targeted Killing and Accountability,” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1819583 Discussing and analyzing the notion of accountability and the practice of targeted killings raises problems AND “unaccountable” while failing to specify what they mean by accountability.12 The literature is far from clear. Commentators might be focusing on instrumental concerns, AND in an analysis of targeted killings without specifying what one means by accountability. Overcoming the problem of theory specification is a necessary precondition for any analysis that claims AND ease of replicability, and grounding in the social science and governance literature. Vote neg: Ground---precise legal standards for killings determine the scope of the plan---we can’t read disad links or generate competition without textual commitment in the 1AC to defend a particular legal standard. Precision---legal education’s the point of forced topic rotation---they undermine it.
1NC Miles and I affirm that: the authority of governments in the United States to employ capital punishment in the criminal justice system should be substantially restricted; the war powers authority of the President of the United States to conduct war using remotely piloted aircraft armed with nuclear weapons and/or adjustable-, supervised-, or fully-autonomous robotic systems should be substantially restricted; the war powers authority of the President of the United States in the area of so-called targeted killing should be preserved so long as targeted killings are carried out with an ethic of melancholy duty and an awareness that they are justified despite their problematic moral foundations, not because of them
Solves the case:
1) Death penalty---the CP takes an ethical stance against state violence in the context of capital punishment---that’s sufficient, proven by their ev Rupa Reddy 3, researcher at the Centre for Capital Punishment Studies, based at the School of Law in the University of Westminster, has multiple degrees in law, 2003, “The Changing Face of the Killing State,” http://www.westminster.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0014/43403/Occasional_2.pdf State killing symbolises “the vindication of absolute and ultimate power appropriated to governmental ends AND an important role to play in the practical limitation of this power.196 With regard to modern day America, this awareness no longer exists amongst a large AND ideologies related to race, and other factors such as wealth and class. Is this the same kind of sovereign power, merely disguised more effectively under the AND that capital punishment continues to be used as an ideological tool of power. CONCLUSION In this discussion I have attempted to demonstrate that “capital punishment has played, AND , no effective counter-strategy can be devised to oppose it.202 One solution to this aspect of the problem then, must be to “bring AND merely raising such issues reminds people of the moral issues involved in executions. By using such methods to raise public consciousness, might it be possible to show AND with nothing but killing as the currency of social life.”207
2) Autonomous drones---their impact ev is not about targeted killings, it’s about future autonomous drones which the CP bans---this is from earlier in their Singer article, making clear that it’s about autonomous robots Peter W. Singer 9, Director of the Center for 21st Century Security and Intelligence at Brookings, Senior Fellow in Foreign Policy, Winter 2009, “Robots at War: The New Battlefield,” http://www.cc.gatech.edu/classes/AY2009/cs4001c_spring/documents/WilsonQuarterly-RobotsAtWar.pdf So, despite what one article called “all the lip service paid to keeping a human in the loop,” autonomous armed robots are coming to war. They simply make too much sense to the people who matter. With robots taking on more and more roles, and humans ever further out of the loop, some wonder whether human warriors will eventually be rendered obsolete. Describing a visit he had with the 2007 graduating class at the Air Force Academy, a retired Air Force officer says, “There is a lot of fear that they will never be able to fly in combat.” The most controversial role for robots in the future would be as replacements for the AND on average, to be least likely ever to be delegated to robots. The average year the soldiers predicted that humanoid robots would start to be used in AND in the field well before many of us pay of f our mortgages. However, as H. R. “Bart” Everett, a Navy robotics AND team, much along the lines of a police dog and its handler.” A 2006 solicitation by the Pentagon to the robotics industry captures the vision: “ AND robot platforms working with one or more human teammates as a cohesive unit.” Another U.S. military–funded project envisions the creation of “playbooks” for tactical operations by a robot-human team. Much like a football quarterback, the human soldier would call the “play” for robots to carry out, but like the players on the field, the robots would have the latitude to change what they did if the situation shifted. The military, then, doesn’t expect to replace all its soldiers with robots anytime AND soldiers in these units will also be circumscribed by their orders and rules.
Rejecting all use of deadly force in counter-terrorism is just as immoral as saying the U.S. is purely innocent---the only true ethical option is the middle ground that views carrying out violence as a sad duty rather than a joyful act of revenge Slavoj Zizek 2, international man of mystery, 2002, Welcome to the Desert of the Real, p. 48-52 September 11 is already being appropriated for ideological causes: from the claims in all AND is to locate it in the context of the antagonisms of global capitalism. We do not yet know what consequences this event will have for the economy, AND USA is not its excess of power, but its lack of it. The WTC attacks confront us with the necessity of resisting the temptation of a double AND its other, of the forces which resist it on 'fundamentalist' ideological grounds. Consequently, of the two main stories which emerged after September 11, both are AND has to do it without getting involved in the obscene mathematics of guilt.)
1NC
Targeted killing’s vital to counterterrorism---disrupts leadership and makes carrying out attacks impossible Kenneth Anderson 13, Professor of International Law at American University, June 2013, “The Case for Drones,” Commentary, Vol. 135, No. 6 Targeted killing of high-value terrorist targets, by contrast, is the end result of a long, independent intelligence process. What the drone adds to that intelligence might be considerable, through its surveillance capabilities -- but much of the drone's contribution will be tactical, providing intelligence that assists in the planning and execution of the strike itself, in order to pick the moment when there might be the fewest civilian casualties. Nonetheless, in conjunction with high-quality intelligence, drone warfare offers an unparalleled means to strike directly at terrorist organizations without needing a conventional or counterinsurgency approach to reach terrorist groups in their safe havens. It offers an offensive capability, rather than simply defensive measures, such as homeland security alone. Drone warfare offers a raiding strategy directly against the terrorists and their leadership. If one believes, as many of the critics of drone warfare do, that AND common enemies are examples of the methods that are just of military nature. Drone warfare today is integrated with a much larger strategic counterterrorism target -- one in AND acknowledged in communications, have a significant impact on planning and organizational effectiveness.
Al Qaeda’s actions, statements, and internal documents prove they want nuclear weapons and mass casualty attacks---if the US relents, it guarantees nuclear attacks Larry J. Arbuckle 8, Naval Postgraduate School, "The Deterrence of Nuclear Terrorism through an Attribution Capability", Thesis for master of science in defense analysis, approved by Professor Robert O'Connell, and Gordon McCormick, Chairman, Department of Defense Analysis, Naval Postgraduate School, June However, there is evidence that a small number of terrorist organizations in recent history AND and not a function of their pure preference (Western Europe, 2005).
High risk of nuke terror---escalates and turns the case because civil-liberties crackdowns 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 a common understanding of these threats and develop a strategy to combat them.
Terrorism causes extinction---hard-line responses are key Nathan Myhrvold '13, Phd in theoretical and mathematical physics from Princeton, and founded Intellectual Ventures after retiring as chief strategist and chief technology officer of Microsoft Corporation , July 2013, "Stratgic Terrorism: A Call to Action," The Lawfare Research Paper Series No.2, http://www.lawfareblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Strategic-Terrorism-Myhrvold-7-3-2013.pdf Several powerful trends have aligned to profoundly change the way that the world works. AND us with our shortcomings by repeatedly attacking us or hectoring us for decades.
Terrorism studies are epistemologically and methodologically valid---our authors are self-reflexive Michael J. Boyle '8, School of International Relations, University of St. Andrews, and John Horgan, International Center for the Study of Terrorism, Department of Psychology, Pennsylvania State University, April 2008, “A Case Against Critical Terrorism Studies,” Critical Studies On Terrorism, Vol. 1, No. 1, p. 51-64 Jackson (2007c) calls for the development of an explicitly CTS on the AND community of scholars does not produce such scathing indictments of its own work.
Solving the root causes of terrorism is impossible because of expansive jihadist demands---the aff’s attempt at reconciliation collapses causes global violence Peter Beinart 8, associate professor of journalism and political science at CUNY, The Good Fight; Why Liberals – and only Liberals – Can Win the War on Terror and Make America Great Again, 100-2 While different U.S. policies may be more or less important at differ AND - Muslim rule, because such a compromise threatens the path to paradise.
Case
Util
Maximizing all lives is the only way to affirm equality Cummiskey 90 – Professor of Philosophy, Bates (David, Kantian Consequentialism, Ethics 100.3, p 601-2, p 606, jstor)
We must not obscure the issue by characterizing this type of case as the sacrifice AND consideration of conduct, one's own subjective concerns do not have overriding importance.
Ethical policymaking requires calculation of consequences Gvosdev 5 – Rhodes scholar, PhD from St. Antony’s College, executive editor of The National Interest (Nikolas, The Value(s) of Realism, SAIS Review 25.1, pmuse,)
As the name implies, realists focus on promoting policies that are achievable and sustainable AND —and the one that had also been roundly condemned on moral grounds.
Moral tunnel vision is complicit with evil Issac 2—Professor of Political Science at Indiana-Bloomington, Director of the Center for the Study of Democracy and Public Life, PhD from Yale (Jeffery C., Dissent Magazine, Vol. 49, Iss. 2, “Ends, Means, and Politics,” p. Proquest)
As a result, the most important political questions are simply not asked. It AND not true believers. It promotes arrogance. And it undermines political effectiveness.
Not Murder---1NC Targeted killing is morally justified and isn’t murder---it upholds value to life Steven Clark 12, J.D. Candidate, Indiana University School of Law, Served in the Foreign Service Institute's Stability Operations Division supporting Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq training programs, Summer 2012, “Targeted Killings: Justified Acts of War or Too Much Power for One Government?,” Global Security Studies, Vol. 3, No. 3, http://globalsecuritystudies.com/Clark20Targeted.pdf There are two basic models for dealings with threats. The first is the war AND ” of moral theorists. According to the Jeff McMahan of Rutgers University: …the Orthodox View among moral theorists is that, while it is normally or AND of harm to, or is engaged in harming, another person.49 Therefore, if terrorists present themselves as imminent threats, they lose their right to innocence during a time of war and can therefore be killed within the law of war. However, for the Orthodox View to apply one must be able to use the AND United States’ actions against al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations is war. Some question whether the analogy of war applies to the targeted killing of terrorists. Michael Gross, Chair of the Department of International Relations at The University of Haifa, Israel claims that: Soldiers fight anonymously, as agents for the political communities they defend, and without any ‘personal’ grievances against their adversary. This is part of the veil that soldiers must wear to override the normal human aversion to murder. But naming names lifts the veil, pushing self-defence perilously close to premeditated murder and beyond the pale of permissible warfare. 50 What he is claiming is that the difference between what happens in war and through targeted killings is the naming of the target. According to him, no longer is the battle soldier simply fighting soldiers, but now people are being named, which is somehow different than conventional war. He claims that naming your target is akin to murder. Though Gross claims that this is somewhat different than conventional warfare, he is wrong AND other soldiers. Instead, this is a form of naming their targets. The naming argument fails on another level as well. Contrary to Gross’s assumption, AND exclusively a post September 11th concept and has been used during conventional wars. Gross’s claim that the practice of targeted killing is “morally abhorrent”54 is AND yet going after specific threats is reprehensible is a false and absurd claim. The claim that targeted killings are similar to premeditated murder is also preposterous. What AND . Because of these reasons, Gross’s claims fall short on many levels. Morality General---1NC Targeted killing against terrorists is a moral imperative---the point of terrorism is senseless, un-targeted killing---responding with force is necessary to preserve and uphold the value of innocent lives---in the context of Camus, targeted killing is most analogous to the figure of the just assassin Michael Walzer 13, Professor Emeritus of Social Science at the Institute for Advanced Study and co-Editor of Dissent Magazine, 1/11/13, “Targeted Killing and Drone Warfare,” http://www.dissentmagazine.org/online_articles/targeted-killing-and-drone-warfare First things first. Untargeted killing, random killing, the bomb in the supermarket AND refused to do that or, at least, he didn’t do it. There are radical limits on political assassinations. In democracies, they can never be AND blowing up the neighborhood in which they live is not a moral option. Military leaders are obviously legitimate targets in wartime. A sniper sent to a forward AND and women who organized it—and lawyers and judges after the police. The targeted killing of insurgents and terrorists in wartime is subject to the same constraints AND field, the risks must be accepted before the killing can be justified.
War Heroism---1NC Drones and targeted killings create a beneficial shift in our cultural view of war---by removing the human element, war is no longer lionized and made heroic---this shift restrains violence by making harm done to our enemies presumptively unjustifiable and therefore only acceptable in truly exceptional circumstances Kiel Brennan-Marquez 13, Visiting Human Rights Fellow at Yale Law School, 5/24/13, “A Progressive Defense of Drones,” http://www.salon.com/2013/05/24/a_progressive_defense_of_drones/ In Thursday’s speech before the National Defense University, President Obama reflected on the concerns AND grade. It’s an argument of last resort, defensive rather than triumphant. Alternatives---1NC Moral evaluation of drones requires considering the most likely alternatives that would replace them---they’re all worse for casualties and violence Kenneth Anderson 13, Professor of International Law at American University, June 2013, “The Case for Drones,” Commentary, Vol. 135, No. 6 EFFECTIVENESS IS ONE THING, MORALITY ANOTHER. The leading objection to drone warfare today AND bigger question of whether one ought to use force in counterterrorism at all. The likely alternative to targeted killings would be invasions or un-targeted killings, both of which involve far more state violence Alan M. Dershowitz 12, the Felix Frankfurter professor of law at Harvard Law School, 11/15/12, “The Rule of Proportionality,” http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/11/14/how-can-targeted-killings-be-justified/in-targeted-killings-the-rule-of-proportionality-should-be-the-guiding-principle If a combatant is appropriately subject to military attack, as the military leader of AND will often be the least bad alternative in an inevitable choice of evils.
Distancing---1NC Distancing created by drones is good---battlefield pressure makes soldiers more likely to commit unethical actions and demonize the enemy---removal from the field of battle causes ethical decision-making and restraint Stephen Holmes 13, the Walter E. Meyer Professor of Law, New York University School of Law, July 2013, “What’s in it for Obama?,” The London Review of Books, http://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n14/stephen-holmes/whats-in-it-for-obama But Obama can make an even subtler case for drones. Well-meaning but AND side, and is therefore much less likely to escalate out of control.
Block CP
Solvency---2NC They are wrong---ethical rebellion does not require rejecting all resort to lethal force---killing is conditionally justified in cases where the target is culpable for injustice. This distinction will win us the debate---ethical rebellion can allow killing, so long as we recognize that it is simultaneously necessary, but cannot be truly ethically justified. Recognizing our own conduct as ethically unjustifiable despite its necessity in preserving innocent life sets up killing as truly exceptional Matt Hartman 13, MA, Philosophy, University of Chicago, 6/5/13, “The Rebel or the Militant: Universality and Political Violence,” http://lucian.uchicago.edu/blogs/colloquium/2013/06/05/the-rebel-or-the-militant-universality-and-political-violence/ I begin with rebellion, Camus’ analogue to Badiou’s event. For him, rebellion means something restricted, something that respects its own limits. The rebels who ... wanted to construct ... a savage immortality are terrified at the prospect of being obliged to kill in their turn. Nevertheless, if they retreat they must accept death; if they advance they must accept murder. Rebellion, cut off from its origins and cynically travestied, oscillates, on all levels, between sacrifice and murder.24 In other words, rebellion is characterized by a recognition that the status quo is AND done. As we will see, that limit is marked by murder. Moreover, that limit is dependent upon the beginnings of the rebellion. “I AND as all must be equal in their ability to make the same declaration. Rebellion is the assertion of an axiom of equality between one and all. “In assigning oppression a limit within which begins the dignity26 common to all men, rebellion defined a primary value” (R 281). Camus’ formulation necessitates an understanding?an ethical principle?of equality that rebels must recognize. Rebellion is the very process of the assertion of this egalitarianism. We can already begin to see, then, how Camus’ axiom is an ethical principle. But this point further implies that the claim of rebellion?a claim to act AND towards all?they have a limit on what they can not do. But, against Badiou, they also have a limit on what they can do. The result of the ‘universal value’ defined by the axiom/principle in Camus’ formulation is a limit placed upon rebels. This limit is murder: Murder is thus a desperate exception or it is nothing. It is the limit that can be reached but once, after which one must die. The rebel ... kills and dies so that it shall be clear that murder is impossible. He demonstrates that, in reality, he prefers the ‘We are’ to the ‘We shall be.’ ... Beyond the farthest frontier, contradiction and nihilism begin. (R 282) This passage contains the core of The Rebel. Camus condemns any logic that justifies murder on the grounds of a history?either because it helps bring about a desired future state or because it is part of a larger, necessary historical epoch. He denies any logic that determinatively ties ethical action to a historical context, subsuming particular situations under history. To justify an act by history is to implicitly de-value the present. AND providing a framework to make historical change sensible even as it is ongoing. The axiomatic aspect of rebellion’s principles conditions this thought. Camus does not claim that AND justification of their logic. Every (legitimate) rebellion has this form. And as a result, for Camus, universality is not a matter of Badiou’s AND the ethical question of them, even though it is based in particularity. This is because the actual universality Camus posits provides a substantial ethics: murder is AND of The Rebel that rebellions that have accepted murder became incoherent.27 However, Camus did not forswear murder?he claimed that it was a limit AND kills and dies so that it shall be clear that murder is impossible.” Camus navigates this paradox by insisting on murder’s exceptional status. One should rebel, AND . Their universality must be protected in the material actions throughout the rebellion. For this reason, even the legitimacy of murder is conditional.28 First AND was allowing the Terror to become an institution that altered the rebellion’s logic.
The ethics of targeted killing is not a simple question that can be answered with the 1AC’s universal “no”---we should recognize targeted killing as morally problematic but nevertheless required by the imperative of defending our political community from terrorists whose explicit aims include the murder of innocents. It’s entirely consistent to say that you personally are not morally comfortable with targeted killing and simultaneously that the government should have the authority to do it in certain limited circumstances Fernando R. Tesón 11, Simon Eminent Scholar, Florida State University, 2011, “Targeted Killing in War and Peace: A Philosophical Analysis,” http://www.elac.ox.ac.uk/downloads/tk20tesF3n20oup.pdf Why are targeted killings morally repulsive even when they give villains their due and lead AND , even if that worry does not suffice to make it wrongful.67 This troubling aspect can be illuminated by reference to the idea of moral philosophers that AND ” and “it is a good thing that I killed bin Laden.” Can agent-relative reasons apply to the government? Possibly yes. The idea is that liberal governments should attempt to behave in accordance with values and virtues for which they stand.68 This includes rejecting self-help, revenge, and random violence in favor of lawful coercion, coercion under the rule of law. This excludes assassination of any sort. The prohibition on assassination is an expression of the values embedded in the liberal social AND in the face of supreme emergency, but they certainly carry substantial weight. (c) Are the objections conclusive? These objections carry considerable weight. The fact that governments will often err about the AND citizens the fact that these killings were, after all, summary executions. VII. Concluding thought A legitimate function of the liberal state is to protect persons from one another and AND we may become, also matters. Perhaps that is what matters most.
Calahan
Survival focus inevitable, doesn’t lead to tyranny, and preconditions all other human values Callahan 73 (Daniel, The Tyranny of Survival, p 90-1, AG)
Moreover, I would want to argue that, in order to remain human, AND of human drives, and has always required a special explanation or justification.
No link—their authors criticize atrocities justified in the name of constructed threats—you should assume our impacts are legitimate threats unless they win specific takeouts
And, extinction’s irreversibility justifies prioritizing survival Callahan 73 (Daniel, The Tyranny of Survival, p 106-7)
At what point in the deterioration should survival become a priority? Observe that I AND set in, making it increasingly impossible to return to the original conditions.
DA OV
Terror is a real threat driven by forces the aff can’t resolve---we should reform the war on terror, not surrender---any terror attack turns the entire case Peter Beinart 8, associate professor of journalism and political science at CUNY, The Good Fight; Why Liberals – and only Liberals – Can Win the War on Terror and Make America Great Again, vii-viii APPLYING THAT TRADITION today is not easy. Cold war liberals devel- oped their AND the reaction will make John Ashcroft look like the head of the ACLU.
Drones Key/Decapitation Prefer our evidence---critics are wrong---drones are highly effective at CT, and don’t cause high civilian casualties or blowback Alex Young 13, Associate Staff, Harvard International Review, 2/25/13, “A Defense of Drones,” Harvard International Review, http://hir.harvard.edu/a-defense-of-drones The War on Terror is no longer a traditional conflict. The diffuse, decentralized AND , and other countries has changed the nature of the war on terror. This strategy is not without controversy. The Obama administration’s heavy use of unmanned drones AND use of drones exacerbates, rather than solves, the problem of terrorism. The reality is not so bleak: drones are very good at what they do. Unmanned attacks are highly effective when it comes to eliminating specific members of terrorist organizations, disrupting terrorist networks without creating too much collateral damage. Their effectiveness makes drone strikes a vital part of US counterterrorism strategy. Predator and Reaper drones are not the indiscriminate civilian-killers that some make them AND also help to mitigate anti-American sentiment that stems from civilian casualties.
Drones solve leadership decapitation – turns quality arg Patrick B. Johnston 13, Associate Political Scientist, RAND Corporation, and Anoop Sarbahi, postdoctoral scholar in the Department of Political Science at the University of California, Los Angeles, July 2013, “The Impact of U.S. Drone Strikes on Terrorism in Pakistan and Afghanistan,” http://patrickjohnston.info/materials/drones.pdf We expect drone strikes that kill terrorist leaders will be associated with reductions in terrorist AND the most commonly listed experience type, just ahead of “weapons.”22 In the context of northwest Pakistan, where militant freedom of movement is limited by AND degradation of terrorists’ ability to produce violence. This logic implies Hypothesis 3: H3: All else equal, drone strikes that kill one or mor e terrorist leader(s) will lead to a decrease in terrorist violence.
Data proves Patrick B. Johnston 13, Associate Political Scientist, RAND Corporation, and Anoop Sarbahi, postdoctoral scholar in the Department of Political Science at the University of California, Los Angeles, July 2013, “The Impact of U.S. Drone Strikes on Terrorism in Pakistan and Afghanistan,” http://patrickjohnston.info/materials/drones.pdf Given that killing terrorist leaders or HVIs in terrorist organizations is the purpose of drone AND , weaker evidence that HVI removals reduce militant lethality and IED attacks.45 Overall, the evidence is somewhat consistent with the argument that individuals matter for a terrorist organization’s ability to produce violence at sustained rates. Along with other evidence from macro-level studies of leadership decapitation, the present results suggest that critics who argue against the efficacy of removing key figures may be overemphasizing the extent to which such individuals can be readily replaced.46
Best empirical data proves targeted killings reduce terrorism Patrick B. Johnston 13, Associate Political Scientist, RAND Corporation, and Anoop Sarbahi, postdoctoral scholar in the Department of Political Science at the University of California, Los Angeles, July 2013, “The Impact of U.S. Drone Strikes on Terrorism in Pakistan and Afghanistan,” http://patrickjohnston.info/materials/drones.pdf To test Hypotheses 1 and 2, we examine five different measures of militant violence AND drone strikes increase violence. We discuss these results in more detail below. The 2FESL estimates in column 2 of table 2 show that drone strikes are associated with a decrease in militant attacks of approximately 24 percentage points—a result that is statistically significant at the one percent level. From 2007 through 2011, the average agency suffered roughly 0.88 militant attacks per week. During weeks in which a drone strike occurred, agencies suffered an average of about 0.68 attacks. Given that drone strikes are associated with reductions in insurgent attacks in the areas where AND number of drone strikes would increase by one per agency-week.44 The disruption hypothesis also implies that drone strikes should reduce militants’ ability to conduct complex AND 0.25 per agency-week when there is one drone strike.
Prefer our evidence---it’s a systematic statistical analysis of the relationship between U.S. drone strikes and terrorism---concludes targeted killing limits the frequency and severity of terror attacks Patrick B. Johnston 13, Associate Political Scientist, RAND Corporation, and Anoop Sarbahi, postdoctoral scholar in the Department of Political Science at the University of California, Los Angeles, July 2013, “The Impact of U.S. Drone Strikes on Terrorism in Pakistan and Afghanistan,” http://patrickjohnston.info/materials/drones.pdf This paper offers a systematic analysis of the relationship between U.S. drone AND despite the econometric techniques used to mitigate selection bias in our regression estimates. Still, our findings appear consistent with the hypothesis that new technologies— specifically, AND can alter conventionally accepted “logics of violence” in civil war.48
Prefer our Johnston evidence---it’s the only rigorous, data-based analysis of the effectiveness of targeted killing Patrick B. Johnston 13, Associate Political Scientist, RAND Corporation, and Anoop Sarbahi, postdoctoral scholar in the Department of Political Science at the University of California, Los Angeles, July 2013, “The Impact of U.S. Drone Strikes on Terrorism in Pakistan and Afghanistan,” http://patrickjohnston.info/materials/drones.pdf Drone strikes are not the only instrument the U.S. can use to AND Pakistan appear to be credible and should not be dismissed out of hand.
Low-Level Killings Good Targeting low-level militants is key to all aspects of counter-terror---in-depth network analysis means the people we target don’t seem important to observers, but they’re actually vital to the effectiveness of terror groups Gregory McNeal 13, Associate Professor of Law, Pepperdine University, 3/5/13, “Targeted Killing and Accountability,” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1819583 This becomes obvious when one considers that national security bureaucrats will look beyond criticality and AND various nodes and links within networks to disrupt and degrade their functionality.144 To effectively pursue a network-based approach, bureaucrats rely in part on what AND vulnerable, thus negating the enemy’s asymmetric advantage of denying a target.”151 Viewing targeting in this way demonstrates how seemingly low-level individuals such as couriers AND function, disrupting those lines of communication can significantly impact those networks.157
Prefer McNeal Dear god Mcneal is just so much better than your authors Gregory McNeal 13, Associate Professor of Law, Pepperdine University, 3/5/13, “Targeted Killing and Accountability,” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1819583 To date scholars have lacked a thorough understanding of the U.S. government’s AND legal theory, and constrained scholarly discourse on a matter of public import. This article is a necessary corrective to the public and scholarly debate. It has AND independent review can enhance the already robust accountability mechanisms embedded in current practice.
AT: Recruiting Targeted killings destroy operational effectiveness of terror groups---they can’t recruit new operatives fast enough to keep pace with losses Alex Young 13, Associate Staff, Harvard International Review, 2/25/13, “A Defense of Drones,” Harvard International Review, http://hir.harvard.edu/a-defense-of-drones Moreover, drone strikes have disrupted al Qaeda’s system for training new recruits. The AND of death from the skies has forced extremist organizations to become more scattered. More importantly, though, drone strikes do not only kill top leaders; they AND
the idea that these strikes only kill senior officials is a myth.
2NC Yes Nuke Terror
High risk of nuke terror---there’s motivation and capability Kenneth C. Brill 12, is a former U.S. ambassador to the I.A.E.A. Kenneth N. Luongo is president of the Partnership for Global Security. Both are members of the Fissile Material Working Group, a nonpartisan nongovernmental organization. Nuclear Terrorism: A Clear Danger, www.nytimes.com/2012/03/16/opinion/nuclear-terrorism-a-clear-danger.html?_r=0 Terrorists exploit gaps in security. The current global regime for protecting the nuclear materials AND member is thought to remain at large with a kilogram of this material.
Yes Technical Capacity
Yes technical capacity---intel assessments prove and it’s not that hard John P. Holdren 7, et al * Former prof at Harvard’s Kennedy School AND Commissioned by the Nuclear Threat Initiative, www.nti.org/securingthebomb *elipses in orig If terrorists could obtain the HEU or plutonium that are the essential ingredients of a AND —and the world might never know until it was too late.27
AT: Intel Losses from Not Capturing Shifting to capture missions is impossible---every alternative to drones is worse for CT Daniel Byman 13, Professor in the Security Studies Program at the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University and a Senior Fellow at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution, July/August 2013, “Why Drones Work,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 92, No. 4 Critics of drone strikes often fail to take into account the fact that the alternatives AND . casualties, and possibly the deaths of the suspects and innocent civilians.
AT: Whack-a-Mole The “whack-a-mole” thesis is wrong---targeted killings are effective at thinning the ranks overall Kenneth Anderson 13, Professor of International Law at American University, June 2013, “The Case for Drones,” Commentary, Vol. 135, No. 6 This is all subject to objections, of course, and the objections generally fall into three categories: unnecessary, ineffective, or counterproductive. There are some who argue that drone warfare is unnecessary because the right approach is simply to defend the homeland from within the homeland; among liberals this is often a way of saying, fight terrorists with law enforcement and criminal law, while among some conservatives it corresponds closely with the resurgence of right-wing isolationism. Other critics argue that drone warfare is ineffective because killing one operational commander merely means AND the one that says you can win a war from the air alone. The whack-a-mole criticism is wildly overstated and, as a matter AND and the resulting inability to plan another 9/11 is also critical.
Case
Case Util “No value to life” doesn’t outweigh---prioritize existence because value is subjective and could improve in the future Torbjörn Tännsjö 11, the Kristian Claëson Professor of Practical Philosophy at Stockholm University, 2011, “Shalt Thou Sometimes Murder? On the Ethics of Killing,” online: http://people.su.se/~jolso/HS-texter/shaltthou.pdf I suppose it is correct to say that, if Schopenhauer is right, if AND suffering (in their lives) than I avoid (in my life).
Morality General---2NC Drone strikes are more ethical than any other tool of warfare --- don’t make the perfect the enemy of the good Scott Shane 12 is a national security reporter for The New York Times, “The Moral Case for Drones”, July 14, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/15/sunday-review/the-moral-case-for-drones.html?_r=0 FOR streamlined, unmanned aircraft, drones carry a lot of baggage these days, AND of the 152 people killed in drone strikes through July 7 were civilians.
War Heroism---2NC Drones eliminate nationalistic attachments from conflict---that clarifies the moral stakes of war and makes military adventurism less likely Kiel Brennan-Marquez 13, Visiting Human Rights Fellow at Yale Law School, 5/24/13, “A Progressive Defense of Drones,” http://www.salon.com/2013/05/24/a_progressive_defense_of_drones/ Before exploring what practical light this observation can shed on drone strikes, it’s worth AND they cause. Transparency is a precondition of outrage – and of accountability. Alternatives---2NC The likely alternative to targeted killings would be invasions or un-targeted killings, both of which involve far more state violence Alan M. Dershowitz 12, the Felix Frankfurter professor of law at Harvard Law School, 11/15/12, “The Rule of Proportionality,” http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/11/14/how-can-targeted-killings-be-justified/in-targeted-killings-the-rule-of-proportionality-should-be-the-guiding-principle If a combatant is appropriately subject to military attack, as the military leader of AND will often be the least bad alternative in an inevitable choice of evils.
This isn’t theoretical---the U.S. will put boots on the ground where it can no longer use drones Adrian Johnson 13, Director of Publications, Royal United Services Institute, 5/3/13, “Mr Emmerson Takes on Washington,” http://www.rusi.org/publications/newsbrief/ref:A5183D24D108B9/#.UizUn9L_l8E It could well be the case that drones are the best of a bad bunch AND have been inflicted, are rather more discriminating than many of the alternatives. Neither is drone warfare as ‘costless’ to the protagonist or as revolutionary as many AND -insurgency in Pakistan. This may be a novelty of unmanned capabilities. Distancing---2NC Distancing created by drones is good---it avoids the battlefield pressure that makes soldiers more likely to commit unethical actions drones cause ethical decision-making and restraint – that’s Holmes Finishing it here
in order to align them with the sacrifices being made. War aims are not AND side, and is therefore much less likely to escalate out of control.
a. Interpretation and violation---the affirmative should defend the desirability of topical government action
Most predictable—the agent and verb indicate a debate about hypothetical government action Jon M Ericson 3, Dean Emeritus of the College of Liberal Arts – California Polytechnic U., et al., The Debater’s Guide, Third Edition, p. 4 The Proposition of Policy: Urging Future Action In policy propositions, each topic contains AND compelling reasons for an audience to perform the future action that you propose.
A general subject isn’t enough—debate requires a specific point of difference Steinberg and Freeley 8 *Austin J. Freeley is a Boston based attorney who focuses on criminal, personal injury and civil rights law, AND David L. Steinberg , Lecturer of Communication Studies @ U Miami, Argumentation and Debate: Critical Thinking for Reasoned Decision Making pp45- Debate is a means of settling differences, so there must be a difference of AND particular point of difference, which will be outlined in the following discussion.
b. Vote neg
Preparation and clash—changing the topic post facto manipulates balance of prep, which structurally favors the aff because they speak last and permute alternatives—strategic fairness is key to engaging a well-prepared opponent Topical fairness requirements are key to effective dialogue—monopolizing strategy and prep makes the discussion one-sided and subverts any meaningful neg role Galloway 7—Samford Comm prof (Ryan, Contemporary Argumentation and Debate, Vol. 28, 2007) Debate as a dialogue sets an argumentative table, where all parties receive a relatively AND substitutes for topical action do not accrue the dialogical benefits of topical advocacy.
2. Substantive constraints on the debate are key to actualize effective pluralism and agonistic democracy John Dryzek 6, Professor of Social and Political Theory, The Australian National University, Reconciling Pluralism and Consensus as Political Ideals, American Journal of Political Science,Vol. 50, No. 3, July 2006, Pp. 634–649 A more radical contemporary pluralism is suspicious of liberal and communitarian devices for reconciling difference AND ofliberal theory that looks neutral but in practice supports and serves the powerful. Difference democrats are hostile to consensus, partly because consensus decisionmaking (of the sort AND which Young also subscribes; 2000, 49–51), Mouffe states: To negate the ineradicable character of antagonism and aim at a universal rational consensus— that is the real threat to democracy. Indeed, this can lead to violence being unrecognized and hidden behind appeals to “rationality,” as is often the case in liberal thinking. (1996, 248) Mouffe is a radical pluralist: “By pluralism I mean the end of a AND respect” as “a critical pluralist ethos” (1999, 70). Mouffe and Young both want pluralism to be regulated by a particular kind of attitude AND need principles to regulate the substance of what rightfully belongs in democratic debate.
1NC
The political is defined by relationships of enmity and the inevitability of violence---the goal of politics must be to limit but not eradicate war---the affirmatives attempt at surrender destroys the foundation of the political itself Rasch 5 – William Rasch, Professor of Germanic Studies at the University of Indiana, Spring 2005, “Lines in the Sand: Enmity as a Structuring Principle,” The South Atlantic Quarterly, Vol. 104, No. 2, p. 253-262 = modified In The Concept of the Political, Schmitt concludes that ‘‘all genuine political theories AND that this imperfection manifests itself as violence and the guilt associated with it.
That generates total war through paranoia and genocidal conflicts of all against all Reinhard 4 – Kenneth Reinhard, Professor of Jewish Studies at UCLA, 2004, “Towards a Political Theology- Of the Neighbor,” online: http://www.cjs.ucla.edu/Mellon/Towards_Political_Theology.pdf If the concept of the political is defined, as Carl Schmitt does, in AND ultimately appeasing contours, because they would be identifiable” (PF 83).
Vote negative to reject the affirmative in favor of proper political enmity Rasch 5 – William Rasch, Professor of Germanic Studies at the University of Indiana, Spring 2005, “Lines in the Sand: Enmity as a Structuring Principle,” The South Atlantic Quarterly, Vol. 104, No. 2, p. 253-262 In theory and practice, then, the individual is protected from arbitrary and irrational AND it may also always produce recurring, asphyxiating political nightmares of absolute exclusion. 1NC The plan undermines perception of US resolve and credibility of threats globally Matthew Waxman 8/25/13, Professor of Law @ Columbia and Adjunct Senior Fellow for Law and Foreign Policy @ CFR, “The Constitutional Power to Threaten War,” Forthcoming in Yale Law Journal, vol. 123, August 25, 2013, SSRN A claim previously advanced from a presidentialist perspective is that stronger legislative checks on war AND to use force in order to prevent a confrontation which might escalate.179 Executive flexibility is vital to solve multiple nuclear threats Li 9 Zheyao, J.D. candidate, Georgetown University Law Center, 2009; B.A., political science and history, Yale University, 2006. This paper is the culmination of work begun in the "Constitutional Interpretation in the Legislative and Executive Branches" seminar, led by Judge Brett Kavanaugh, “War Powers for the Fourth Generation: Constitutional Interpretation in the Age of Asymmetric Warfare,” 7 Geo. J.L. and 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. 1NC The United States Federal Government should substantially increase statutory and/or judicial restrictions on the war powers authority of the President of the United States to engage in indefinite detention and introduction of the United States Armed Forces into hostilities.
Hardline TK policies are necessary to solve terrorism---the aff’s a concession that emboldens attacks James Phillips 6, Frmr Research Fellow at the CRS. Senior Research Fellow for Middle Eastern Affairs at Council for Foreign Policy Studies. Bachelor’s in IR from Brown and Master’s in International Security Studies at Tufts, “The Evolving Al-Qaeda Threat,” 17 March 2006, http://www.heritage.org/research/homelandsecurity/hl928.cfm Al-Qaeda's core group is disciplined, relentless, and fanatical and probably cannot AND fewer victims if the targeted countries stand firm and refuse to appease them. High risk of nuke terror---escalates and turns the case because civil-liberties crackdowns 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 a common understanding of these threats and develop a strategy to combat them. Terrorism causes extinction---hard-line responses are key Nathan Myhrvold 13, Phd in theoretical and mathematical physics from Princeton, and founded Intellectual Ventures after retiring as chief strategist and chief technology officer of Microsoft Corporation , July 2013, "Stratgic Terrorism: A Call to Action," The Lawfare Research Paper Series No.2, http://www.lawfareblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Strategic-Terrorism-Myhrvold-7-3-2013.pdf Several powerful trends have aligned to profoundly change the way that the world works. AND us with our shortcomings by repeatedly attacking us or hectoring us for decades.
Al Qaeda’s actions, statements, and internal documents prove they want nuclear weapons and mass casualty attacks---if the US relents, it guarantees nuclear attacks Larry J. Arbuckle 8, Naval Postgraduate School, "The Deterrence of Nuclear Terrorism through an Attribution Capability", Thesis for master of science in defense analysis, approved by Professor Robert O'Connell, and Gordon McCormick, Chairman, Department of Defense Analysis, Naval Postgraduate School, June However, there is evidence that a small number of terrorist organizations in recent history AND and not a function of their pure preference (Western Europe, 2005).
1NC Resistance as a political strategy inevitably fails --- it’s reliant upon that which it critques Mann in 1996 (Paul, Professor of English @ Pomona College, “The Nine Grounds of Intellectual Warfare”, PMC 6.2, pMUSE-rkc) Without exception, all positions are oriented toward the institutional apparatus. Marginality here is AND not an exception. Effective resistance must be located in other tactical forms. Criticism fails by revealing itself to its enemies, and by getting caught up in the very cultural commodification they criticize Mann, 99 (Paul, Prof. of English at Pomona College, Masocriticism. “The Afterlife of the Avant-Garde, 3-4, mb) Now autopsies ofthe putative corpse ofthe avant-garde usually reveal a predictable etiology In AND of discourse. It talked, wrote, and painted itself to death.
They make the ballot a commodity that makes social transformation impossible Bryant 13—philosophy prof at Collin College (Levi, The Paradox of Emancipatory Political Theory, http://larvalsubjects.wordpress.com/2013/05/31/the-paradox-of-emancipatory-political-theory/) There’s a sort of Hegelian contradiction at the heart of all academic political theory that AND a particularly effective rhetorical strategy for the autopoiesis of academia in the humanities). Were the aim political change, then the discourse would have to find a way AND academia. Both options are foreclosed by the sociological conditions of their discourse. The paradox of emancipatory academic political discourse is thus that it is formally and functionally AND important and like their the best thing since sliced bread, I guess.
Case Simulation Good Simulated national security law debates preserve agency and enhance decision-making---avoids cooption Laura K. Donohue 13, Associate Professor of Law, Georgetown Law, 4/11, “National Security Law Pedagogy and the Role of Simulations”, http://jnslp.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/National-Security-Law-Pedagogy-and-the-Role-of-Simulations.pdf The concept of simulations as an aspect of higher education, or in the law AND undoubtedly necessary, it suggests one potential direction for the years to come. Prefer specificity—simulation about war powers is uniquely empowering Laura K. Donohue 13, Associate Professor of Law, Georgetown Law, 4/11, National Security Law Pedagogy and the Role of Simulations, http://jnslp.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/National-Security-Law-Pedagogy-and-the-Role-of-Simulations.pdf 2. Factual Chaos and Uncertainty¶ One of the most important skills for students AND their future success to give students the ability to create conditions of learning.
Block
Schmitt 2nc chandler=neg
The alternative is to reject surrender in order to re-ground counter-terror within a framework of proper-political enmity---the aff misreads global war as a result of the US desire for control---the problem with the war on terror is that it is not instrumental or political enough David Chandler 9, Professor of International Relations at the Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Westminster, War Without End(s): Grounding the Discourse of `Global War', Security Dialogue 2009; 40; 243 International law evolved on the basis of the ever-present possibility of real war AND desire for control fails to contextualize conflict in the social relations of today.
2NC Alt Solves SOE/Agamben
The alternative is to affirm the necessity of the sovereign to define the state of exception de Benoist 7 – Alexis de Benoist, editor of the two French academic journals Krisis and Nouvelle Ecole, has translated articles by Carl Schmitt into French and has published the first full bibliography of Schmitt’s works, 2007, “Global terrorism and the state of permanent exception: The significance of Carl Schmitt’s thought today,” in The International Political Thought of Carl Schmitt, Edited by: Odysseos and Petito, p. 85-87 The notion of the ‘state of emergency’ (Ernstfall) or the state of AND decide on the concrete conditions in which the norm can still be applied.
2NC Enmity Inev
Ignoring evolutionary predisposition to violence and friend/enemy distinctions triggers mass violence---recognizing it is key to containing it and limiting violence Dimijian 10 Dr. Gregory G. Dimijianm, Department of Psychiatry, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical School "Warfare, genocide, and ethnic conflict: a Darwinian approach" Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent) July; 23(3): 292–300. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2900985/ We have neglected to teach the evolution of human nature to children—very young AND when there are rich opportunities to understand the evolutionary origins of the paradox.
Refusing to demarcate terrorists doesn’t eliminate conflict – instead ---the drive to exclude becomes more violent --- such as preemptive strikes against terrorists before they reach they even reach the border Prozorov 6 – Sergei Prozorov, collegium fellow at the Helsinki Collegium for Advanced Studies, University of Helsinki, Professor of International Relations in the Department of International Relations, Faculty of Politics and Social Sciences, Petrozavodsk State University, Russia, 2006, “Liberal Enmity: The Figure of the Foe in the Political Ontology of Liberalism,” Millennium: Journal of International Studies, Vol. 35, No. 1, p. 75-99 At the same time, the practical implementation of such a project is hardly conceivable AND whose acts and properties are deemed to be ‘proscribed by nature itself’.
2NC Framework
Only this method enables accurate understandings of present and future politics Odysseos and Petito 7 – Louiza Odysseos, Senior Lecturer in International Relations, University of Sussex, and Fabio Petito, teaches International Relations at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), London, and the University ‘L’Orientale’ in Naples, 2007, “Introduction The international political thought of Carl Schmitt,” in The International Political Thought of Carl Schmitt, Edited by: Odysseos and Petito, p. 3 Second, what is really at stake in seeking to redress the neglect of Schmitt’s AND a global interventionist liberal cosmopolitanism (see Schmitt 2000 1963, 1996). Yet why place such an emphasis on the past, that is on a history AND international society of the present can have no meaning’ (1984: 9). With this methodological premise in mind, we offer below a critical introduction to Schmitt’s AND becomes clear and the question of a new nomos of the earth arises.
Other k? Kinkaid
Our alternative approach refuses to identify and represent ontological violence within the field of the political – this enables us to work our way around the trope of resistance and instead regard politics as an open site of invention that is not already opposed to power in the form of ontological violence. Only this strategy can avoid reconstituting a violent metaphysical center in order to oppose it – a strategy which routinely degenerates into a predictable and rigged politics James R. Kincaid 3, Arnold Professor of English @ Southern Cal, Theories and Methodologies, Resist Me, You Sweet Resistible You, Kincaid, pages 1325-1333. Here’s the answer to these questions. First, resistance is conceptualized nowadays within the AND predictable and the occasion for it about as attractive as a Pentagon briefing. Which leads one to wonder why you Accepted the invitation to write on resistance. You’re going to write on resisting resistance. No. I’m going to write on writing around the idea of resistance, on AND to pit one material thing against another material thing, force, etc. Our challenge is not to resist something already out there but to bring something into existence, not to be prepared but to be fecund. More specifically, we can direct our activities toward the manufacturing of means for becoming “sufficiently interested in our lives to go on living them” (Phillips 6). Interest can be lost, but it cannot be found; it is invented. And we’re good at inventing. There’s nothing to resist out there. Of course, we can call up things from the vasty deep; we can write as if we were resisting. And that’s bad. Not bad but grooved, predictable. It provides little victories for critics and scholars, but the fact that those victories are rigged, guaranteed in advance by the discursive formulas,
Start here takes away some of the sweetness. And everybody is claiming victory at somebody else’s expense. And we’ve been repeating ourselves for some time now. We have become routinely competent, and competence is at war with interest. Wouldn’t it be easy to release ourselves from these imaginary dungeons of power, this discursive world of artificial demons and contrived heroisms? We need some kind of thesis here, or a summary—a look ahead or backward. The model of a discourse of resistance works in a practice secured by a worship of power as an explanatory tool and a metaphysical center. We believe that we can generate a powerful oppositional position, oppositional questions, an oppositional narrative. We like to think we can resist, if we are shrewd enough about power operations and courageous enough in recruiting arguments to fight back.
da AT: Islamophobia Their argument essentializes terror scholarship – it’s not a monolithic entity – defer to specific research Michael J. Boyle '8, School of International Relations, University of St. Andrews, and John Horgan, International Center for the Study of Terrorism, Department of Psychology, Pennsylvania State University, April 2008, “A Case Against Critical Terrorism Studies,” Critical Studies On Terrorism, Vol. 1, No. 1, p. 51-64 Some CTS advocates have positioned the CTS project against something usually called ‘terrorism studies’ AND based on a well-grounded critique of the current research on terrorism.
Terrorism studies are epistemologically and methodologically valid---our authors are self-reflexive Michael J. Boyle '8, School of International Relations, University of St. Andrews, and John Horgan, International Center for the Study of Terrorism, Department of Psychology, Pennsylvania State University, April 2008, “A Case Against Critical Terrorism Studies,” Critical Studies On Terrorism, Vol. 1, No. 1, p. 51-64 Jackson (2007c) calls for the development of an explicitly CTS on the AND community of scholars does not produce such scathing indictments of its own work.
Claims of bias are overstated generalizations – evaluate arguments on their merits Michael J. Boyle '8, School of International Relations, University of St. Andrews, and John Horgan, International Center for the Study of Terrorism, Department of Psychology, Pennsylvania State University, April 2008, “A Case Against Critical Terrorism Studies,” Critical Studies On Terrorism, Vol. 1, No. 1, p. 51-64 One of the tensions within CTS concerns the issue of ‘policy relevance’. At AND the ear of the prince, but it is just a different prince. Gunning (2007a) also argues that research should be assessed on its own merits AND illegal activity is in our view unwarranted, to say the very least. AT: Superpower Syndrome Lifton thinks reasonable measures to fight violence like the CP are good Lifton 3 Robert Jay Lifton, Visiting Professor of Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, previously Distinguished Professor of Psychiatry and Psychology at the Graduate School and Director of The Center on Violence and Human Survival at John Jay College of Criminal Justice at the City University of New York, 2003 (Superpower Syndrome: America’s Apocalyptic Confrontation With The World, Published by Thunder’s Mouth Press / Nation Books, ISBN 1560255129, p. 196-199)
Stepping out of that syndrome would also include surrendering the claim of certainty, of AND vision to protect themselves from death, and to provide immortality through killing. Obama solves superpower syndrome---and if he doesn’t, the plan only makes it worse by triggering a conservative backlash---cut some Lifton updates Robert J. Lifton 11, aff guy, 2011, Witness to an Extreme Century: A Memoir, p. 405-406 With all of the American angst during the first year or so of the Obama AND a specific rejection of nuclearism and a call for abolition of the weapons. Yet despite all that, the syndrome lingers in crucial areas that specifically connect with AND alternative inclination to defend Obama as an incremental reformer who needs more time. I took the latter position in a series of discussions with Howard Zinn, who AND in the backlash over the election of our first African-American president.
AT: Aff Solves Aff cannot solve – they restrict TK operations which are necessary for an effective war on terror – they have no defense to this
Their public arg doesn’t make sense in this context since they’ll continue tearing down the whole drone program
Hardline policies are necessary to solve terrorism---the aff’s a concession that emboldens attacks James Phillips 6, Frmr Research Fellow at the CRS. Senior Research Fellow for Middle Eastern Affairs at Council for Foreign Policy Studies. Bachelor’s in IR from Brown and Master’s in International Security Studies at Tufts, “The Evolving Al-Qaeda Threat,” 17 March 2006, http://www.heritage.org/research/homelandsecurity/hl928.cfm Al-Qaeda's core group is disciplined, relentless, and fanatical and probably cannot AND fewer victims if the targeted countries stand firm and refuse to appease them. Terror is a real threat driven by forces the aff can’t resolve---we should reform the war on terror, not surrender---any terror attack turns the entire case Peter Beinart 8, associate professor of journalism and political science at CUNY, The Good Fight; Why Liberals – and only Liberals – Can Win the War on Terror and Make America Great Again, vii-viii APPLYING THAT TRADITION today is not easy. Cold war liberals devel- oped their AND the reaction will make John Ashcroft look like the head of the ACLU.
Statements prove Jones 8—religion, psychology and terrorism, Rutgers. Snr Research Fellow, Center on Terrorism, John Jay College. ThD, Uppasala U. Psy.D, dept of clinical psychology, Rutgers. PhD in religious studies, Brown. (James, Blood That Cries Out From the Earth, 42-3, AMiles)
One of the most widespread beliefs of violent religious movements is their apocalyptic vision of AND and the jihadists are not alone in declaring war on the secular state.
A violent war on terror is the only way to solve—nonviolent solutions empirically fail Victor Davis Hanson 10, Senior Fellow, Hoover. Former visiting prof, classics, Stanford. PhD in classics, Stanford, The Tragic Truth of War, 19 February 2010, http://www.victorhanson.com/articles/hanson021910.html
Victory has usually been defined throughout the ages as forcing the enemy to accept certain AND , and tragically always will — until the nature of man himself changes.
AT: No Nuke Terror Their evidence is all just like “there are a lot of steps” --- ya obviously, and our authors considered all of them --- the risk is real Peter Beinart 8, associate professor of journalism and political science at CUNY, The Good Fight; Why Liberals – and only Liberals – Can Win the War on Terror and Make America Great Again, 106-7 For all these reasons, jihadists seem less intent on acquiring a finished nuclear weapon AND they performed the same exercise—and got the uranium past customs again. AT: Recruiting TKs destroy operational effectiveness of terrorists---they can’t recruit new operatives fast enough to keep pace with losses Alex Young 13, Associate Staff, Harvard International Review, 2/25/13, “A Defense of Drones,” Harvard International Review, http://hir.harvard.edu/a-defense-of-drones Moreover, drone strikes have disrupted al Qaeda’s system for training new recruits. The AND of death from the skies has forced extremist organizations to become more scattered. More importantly, though, drone strikes do not only kill top leaders; they AND
the idea that these strikes only kill senior officials is a myth.
10/4/13
3 KY RR, vs KY GR
Tournament: KY RR | Round: 3 | Opponent: KY GR | Judge: 1nc
Off 1NC Restrictions are prohibitions --- the aff is distinct Jean Schiedler-Brown 12, Attorney, Jean Schiedler-Brown and 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 the reporting and monitoring or supervising terms and conditions that are included in the 2001 Stipulation. Black's Law Dictionary, 'fifth edition,(1979) defines "restriction" as; A limitation often imposed in a deed or lease respecting the use to which the AND or by interposing obstacle, to repress or suppress, to curb. In contrast, the terms "supervise" and "supervisor" are defined as AND merely routine or clerical nature, but required the use of independent judgment. Comparing the above definitions, it is clear that the definition of "restriction" is very different from the definition of "supervision"-very few of the same words are used to explain or define the different terms. In his 2001 stipulation, Mr. Kincheloe essentially agreed to some supervision conditions, but he did not agree to restrict his license. Restrictions on authority are distinct from conditions William Conner 78, former federal judge for the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York United States District Court, S. D. New York, CORPORACION VENEZOLANA de FOMENTO v. VINTERO SALES, http://www.leagle.com/decision/19781560452FSupp1108_11379 Plaintiff next contends that Merban was charged with notice of the restrictions on the authority AND were not authorized to act except upon the fulfillment of the specified conditions. Authority is power delegated to an agent by a principle Kelly 3 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.
Violation: Ex-post review only determines whether particular targeted killings exceeded authority the government already had---that doesn’t affect the legality of targeted killings at all Steve Vladeck 13, professor of law and the associate dean for scholarship at American University Washington College of Law, 2/5/13, “What’s Really Wrong With the Targeted Killing White Paper,” http://www.lawfareblog.com/2013/02/whats-really-wrong-with-the-targeted-killing-white-paper/ Many of us wondered, at the time, just where this came from–since it’s hard to imagine what due process could be without at least some judicial oversight. On this point, the white paper again isn’t very helpful. The sum total of its analysis is Section II.C, on page 10, which provides that: Under the circumstances described in this paper, there exists no appropriate AND of an enemy force against which Congress has authorized the use of force. There are two enormous problems with this reasoning: First, many of us who argue for at least some judicial review in this AND more general allusion to the political question doctrine. Which brings me to… Second, and in any event, the suggestion that lawsuits arising out of targeted AND was a senior operational leader of al Qaeda or one of its affiliates… Don’t get me wrong: Any suit challenging a targeted killing operation, even a AND context in which it clearly does not–and should not–apply. V. A Modest Proposal This all leads me to what I’ve increasingly come to believe is the only real AND which the perfect is the enemy of the good, this is it. Vote neg--- Neg ground---only prohibitions on particular authorities guarantee links to every core argument like flexibility and deference Precision---only our interpretation defines “restrictions on authority”---that’s key to adequate preparation and policy analysis Limits---there are an infinite number of small hoops they could require the president to jump through---overstretches our research burden
1NC Debt ceiling will be raised now --- shutdown only consolidates momentum Ezra Klein 9/28/13, writer @ the Washington Post, “The House GOP’s shutdown plan is great news,” Washington Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/09/28/the-house-gops-shutdown-plan-is-great-news/ House Republicans plan to attach a one-year delay of Obamacare to the continuing AND begin exerting real political pressure to force a resolution before a default happens. Plan ends Obama’s credibility with Congress Seeking Alpha 9/10/13 (“Syria Could Upend Debt Ceiling Fight”, http://seekingalpha.com/article/1684082-syria-could-upend-debt-ceiling-fight) Unless President Obama can totally change a reluctant public's perception of another Middle-Eastern AND U.S. obligations unless another last minute deal can be struck. Obama’s capital is key Jonathan Allen 9/19, Politico, 9/19/13, GOP battles boost President Obama, dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=17961849-5BE5-43CA-B1BC-ED8A12A534EB There’s a simple reason President Barack Obama is using his bully pulpit to focus the AND the government shouldn’t shut down and that the country should pay its bills. That collapses the global economy Adam Davidson 9/10/13, economy columnist for The New York Times, co-founder of Planet Money, NPR’s team of economics reporters, “Our Debt to Society,” NYT, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/15/magazine/our-debt-to-society.html?pagewanted=alland_r=0 If the debt ceiling isn’t lifted again this fall, some serious financial decisions will AND free asset more risky, the entire global economy becomes riskier and costlier. Global nuclear war Cesare Merlini 11, nonresident senior fellow at the Center on the United States and Europe and chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Italian Institute for International Affairs, May 2011, “A Post-Secular World?”, Survival, Vol. 53, No. 2 Two neatly opposed scenarios for the future of the world order illustrate the range of AND theocratic absolutes, competing or converging with secular absolutes such as unbridled nationalism. 1NC Judicial review would result in all targeted killings being ruled unconstitutional---courts would conclude they don’t satisfy the requirement of imminence for use of force in self-defense Benjamin McKelvey 11, J.D., Vanderbilt University Law School, November 2011, “NOTE: Due Process Rights and the Targeted Killing of Suspected Terrorists: The Unconstitutional Scope of Executive Killing Power,” Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, 44 Vand. J. Transnat'l L. 1353 In the alternative, and far more broadly, the DOJ argued that executive authority AND President's constitutional powers and is not subject to judicial interference or review. n104 The DOJ is correct in arguing that the President is constitutionally empowered to use military AND , specific, and imminent threat of harm to the United States. n108 Therefore, the President was justified in using lethal force to protect the nation against AND , not political questions, and they are subject to judicial review. n114 Under judicial review, a court would likely determine that targeted killing does not satisfy AND not satisfy the imminence standard for the constitutional use of defensive force. n118
Plan would collapse military effectiveness and command structure---causes second-guessing of every battlefield decision Stuart F. Delery 12, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, 12/14/12, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, NASSER AL-AULAQI, as personal representative of the estate of ANWAR AL-AULAQI, et al., Plaintiffs, v. LEON E. PANETTA, et al., in their individual capacities, Defendants, No. 1:12-cv-01192 (RMC), http://www.lawfareblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/MTD-AAA.pdf First, the D.C. Circuit has repeatedly held that where claims directly AND Accordingly, national security considerations bar inferring a remedy for Plaintiffs’ claims.19 Second, Plaintiffs’ claims implicate the effectiveness of the military. As with national security AND to each other’s decisions and actions” (citation and internal quotation omitted)). Creating a new damages remedy in the context of alleged missile strikes against enemy forces AND on military effectiveness. This too warrants barring this new species of litigation. Targeted killing’s vital to CT Kenneth Anderson 13, Professor of International Law at American University, June 2013, “The Case for Drones,” Commentary, Vol. 135, No. 6 Targeted killing of high-value terrorist targets, by contrast, is the end result of a long, independent intelligence process. What the drone adds to that intelligence might be considerable, through its surveillance capabilities -- but much of the drone's contribution will be tactical, providing intelligence that assists in the planning and execution of the strike itself, in order to pick the moment when there might be the fewest civilian casualties. Nonetheless, in conjunction with high-quality intelligence, drone warfare offers an unparalleled means to strike directly at terrorist organizations without needing a conventional or counterinsurgency approach to reach terrorist groups in their safe havens. It offers an offensive capability, rather than simply defensive measures, such as homeland security alone. Drone warfare offers a raiding strategy directly against the terrorists and their leadership. If one believes, as many of the critics of drone warfare do, that AND common enemies are examples of the methods that are just of military nature. Drone warfare today is integrated with a much larger strategic counterterrorism target -- one in AND acknowledged in communications, have a significant impact on planning and organizational effectiveness. Plan would collapse the effectiveness of Special Forces missions---lawsuits would disclose sources and methods that are vital to mission accomplishment Larry Maher 10, Quartermaster General, Veterans of Foreign Wars, et al, 9/30/10, BRIEF OF THE VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS OF THE UNITED STATES AS AMICUS CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS AND DISMISSAL, Nasser al-Aulaqi, Plaintiff, vs. Barack H. Obama, et al., Defendants, http://www.lawfareblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/VFW_Brief_PACER.pdf Finally, the VFW’s membership includes many current and former members of the U.S. armed forces’ elite special operations forces—Army Rangers and Special Forces, Navy SEALs, Air Force parajumpers and combat controllers, and Marine Corps Force Reconnaissance personnel, among others. These elite warriors conduct highly dangerous missions today in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other countries around the world. By definition, special operations “are operations conducted in hostile, denied, or politically sensitive environments to achieve military, diplomatic, informational, and/or economic objectives employing military capabilities for which there is no broad conventional force requirement. These operations often require covert, clandestine, or low-visibility capabilities.” U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, Joint Pub. 3-05, Doctrine for Joint Special Operations, at I-1 (2003), available at http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/new_pubs/jp3_05.pdf. Special operations are differentiated from conventional operations in many ways, but foremost among these AND Exhibit 4, September 23, 2010, at ¶¶ 6-7. In this matter, the Plaintiff asks the Court to pull back the veil on AND methods which are essential to the success and survival of special operations personnel. Special forces’ effectiveness is key to counter-prolif 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. Special forces are key to disarm rogues’ nuclear programs---the alternative is U.S. counterforce nuclear strikes 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 Finally, if the United States goes to war with a nuclear-armed adversary AND a viable unconventional regime-change option when confronting WMD-armed adversaries. Rogues will locate their WMD in cities---U.S. nuclear strikes cause mass casualties Gormley 9 – Dennis Gormley, Senior Fellow in the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Monterey Institute for International Studies, Fall 2009, “The Path to Deep Nuclear Reductions: Dealing with American Conventional Superiority,” online: http://www.ifri.org/files/Securite_defense/PP29_Gormley.pdf Attacking strategic underground targets seems superficially to be the role for which nuclear weapons are AND beyond reach, and such weapons would still produce unwanted collateral effects.26 Causes nuclear winter and extinction---only city attacks are sufficient Stuart Arsmtrong 12, James Martin Research Fellow, Future of Humanity Institute, University of Oxford, 3/16/12, “Old threats never die, they fade away from our minds: nuclear winter,” http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2012/03/old-threats-never-die-they-fade-away-from-our-minds-nuclear-winter/ In 1983, scientists published a paper on nuclear winter. This boosted the death AND on all aspects of nuclear weapons – can you guess what happened next? Correct – the issue was ignored for decades. For over twenty years, there AND threat; the initial fear was right. Their most likely scenario was: A global average surface cooling of –7°C to –8°C AND –30°C over much of Eurasia, including all agricultural regions. Also, precipitation would be cut in half and we’d lose most of the ozone layer. But there was a more worrying development: it also seems that a small-scale nuclear war could generate its own mini nuclear winter. It’s important to understand that nuclear winter would not be a direct consequences of the AND but the smoke didn’t reach the stratosphere, and global damage was avoided. FOOTNOTE: *Edit: the extinction risks doesn’t come directly from the nuclear winter (some human groups will survive), but from the collapse of human society and fragmentation of the species into small, vulnerable subgroups, with no guarantee that they’d survive setbacks or ever climb back to a technological society.
1NC Plan breaks the political question doctrine---triggers a slippery slope Christopher Ehrfurth 11, 10/10/11, “The Extrajudicial Killing of Anwar al-Awlaki,” http://law.marquette.edu/facultyblog/2011/10/10/the-extrajudicial-killing-of-anwar-al-awlaki/ The legality of the extrajudicial assassination of al-Awlaki was the subject of a AND The court’s lengthy opinion begins with a compelling recitation of the questions presented: How is it that judicial approval is required when the United States decides to target AND under the September 18, 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force? Al-Aulaqi v. Obama, 727 F.Supp.2d 1, 8-9 (D.D.C. 2010). Before contemplating the more compelling issues, the court first decided the issue of standing AND al-Awlaki surrendered peacefully he could not be executed without due process. The court also denied third party standing, holding that Anwar’s father could not show that a parent suffers an injury in fact if his adult child is threatened with a future extrajudicial killing. Anwar’s status as an adult was of particular importance because a parent does not have a constitutionally (or common law) protected liberty interest in maintaining a relationship with his adult child free from government influence. Prudential standing was denied because, among other reasons, the court refused to “ AND not recognize as authoritative, especially in a country that he openly despised. Ultimately, the most compelling issues were not addressed because the court found that judicial AND based upon that intelligence) to use military force against terrorist targets overseas: This Court does not hold that the Executive possesses “unreviewable authority AND Court finds that the political question doctrine bars judicial resolution of this case. Al-Aulaqi, 727 F.Supp.2d at 52-53. It is unfortunate that the Aulaqi case never made it beyond the issue of standing, but perhaps that was the proper outcome. Although Awlaki was a U.S. citizen (and a citizen of Yemen), he was also clearly a member of al-Qaeda. Shortly after 9/11, Congress passed the Authorization for Use of Military Force (“AUMF”). The AUMF provides that: The President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001…in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States… Everyone (except for the guy who leaves “9/11 was inside job AND indicate that the President was acting at the highest ebb of his authority. Still, many columnists and politicians like Ron Paul believe that Obama’s decision was illegal AND holding U.S. citizenship, but that issue was never addressed. Was the force used against al-Awlaki necessary and appropriate? It seems difficult AND President is tracking and killing those who are actively trying to kill Americans. After reading the al-Aulaqi opinion, I was left feeling unsatisfied with the AND if faced with the same choice as the President, would choose differently. That spills over to climate change cases---litigants are turning to the Courts now and asking them to abrogate the PQD Laurence H. Tribe 10, the Carl M. Loeb University Professor, Harvard Law School; Joshua D. Branson, J.D., Harvard Law School and NDT Champion, Northwestern University; and Tristan L. Duncan, Partner, Shook, Hardy and Bacon L.L.P., January 2010, “TOOHOTFORCOURTSTO HANDLE: FUEL TEMPERATURES, GLOBAL WARMING, AND THE POLITICAL QUESTION DOCTRINE,” http://www.wlf.org/Upload/legalstudies/workingpaper/012910Tribe_WP.pdf Two sets of problems, one manifested at a microcosmic level and the other about AND constitutionally deficient—and structurally unsound—mechanism for remedying temperature’s unwanted effects. It has been axiomatic throughout our constitutional history that there exist some questions beyond the AND “a lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving it.”3 The spectrum of nonjusticiable political questions in a sense spans the poles formed by these AND courts must be principled, rational, and based upon reasoned distinctions.”4 At a deeper level, however, the two poles collapse into one. The AND issue, even if broadly and implicitly, to the political branches.5 It has become commonplace that confusion and controversy have long distinguished the doctrine that determines AND cases demonstrates, the political question doctrine is feeling heat from both directions. That wrecks coordination necessary to solve warming Laurence H. Tribe 10, the Carl M. Loeb University Professor, Harvard Law School; Joshua D. Branson, J.D., Harvard Law School and NDT Champion, Northwestern University; and Tristan L. Duncan, Partner, Shook, Hardy and Bacon L.L.P., January 2010, “TOOHOTFORCOURTSTO HANDLE: FUEL TEMPERATURES, GLOBAL WARMING, AND THE POLITICAL QUESTION DOCTRINE,” http://www.wlf.org/Upload/legalstudies/workingpaper/012910Tribe_WP.pdf But that being said, if the Second Circuit was implying that such claims are AND influence and be influenced by the delicate state of international climate negotiations.45 Against this backdrop, courts would be wise to heed the conclusion of one report AND n insufficient number of participants will doom an emissions trading market.”49 There is no doubt that the “Copenhagen Accord only begins the battle” against AND involved parties, are the only ones constitutionally entitled to fight that battle. CONCLUSION Some prognosticators opine that the political question doctrine has fallen into disrepute and that it AND the climate of the times and its implications for how we govern ourselves. Extinction Flournoy 12 -- Citing Feng Hsu, PhD NASA Scientist @ the Goddard Space Flight AND , Springer Briefs in Space Development, Book, p. 10-11 In the Online Journal of Space Communication , Dr. Feng Hsu, a NASA AND simply too high for us to take any chances” (Hsu 2010 ) 1NC The Executive branch should publicly articulate its legal rationale for its targeted killing policy, including the process and safeguards in place for target selection. The United States Congress should enact a resolution and issue a white paper stating that, in the conduct of its oversight it has reviewed ongoing targeted killing operations and determined that the United States government is conducting such operations in full compliance with relevant laws, including but not limited to the Authorization to Use Military Force of 2001, covert action findings, and the President’s inherent powers under the Constitution. The United States Federal Judiciary should apply judicial review to Congressional and Executive regulations concerning sexual assault in the United States Armed Forces by allowing a cause of action for damages arising directly out of the constitutional provision allegedly offended. The United States Federal Judiciary should apply judicial review to Congressional and Executive regulations concerning the US compliance with obligations under the Convention against Torture The United States Federal Judiciary should rule that judicial ex post review of United States targeted killing operations is precluded by standards of justiciability, including special factors counseling hesitation arising from such review necessitating judicial evaluation of the execution of Constitutional responsibilities textually committed to the Executive branch in the conduct of war.
The CP’s the best middle ground---preserves the vital counter-terror role of targeted killings while resolving all their downsides Daniel Byman 13, Professor in the Security Studies Program at the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University and a Senior Fellow at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution, July/August 2013, “Why Drones Work,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 92, No. 4 Despite President Barack Obama's recent call to reduce the United States' reliance on drones, AND , and with fewer civilian casualties than many alternative methods would have caused. Critics, however, remain skeptical. They claim that drones kill thousands of innocent AND comparatively low-risk way of targeting these areas while minimizing collateral damage. So drone warfare is here to stay, and it is likely to expand in AND drone warfare risks dragging the United States into conflicts it could otherwise avoid.
Solves---the combination of executive disclosure and Congressional support boosts accountability and legitimacy Gregory McNeal 13, Associate Professor of Law, Pepperdine University, 3/5/13, “Targeted Killing and Accountability,” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1819583 Perhaps the most obvious way to add accountability to the targeted killing process is for AND post 9/11 targeted killings. In fact, James Baker once noted "In my experience, the United States does a better job at incorporating intelligence AND the decision cycle for that subset of targets raising the hardest issues…"519 Publicly defending the process is a natural fit for public accountability mechanisms. It provides AND control, thus their caution is understandable (albeit self-serving).520 It’s not just the Executive branch that can benefit from a healthier defense of the process. Congress too can bolster the legitimacy of the program by specifying how they have conducted their oversight activities. The best mechanism by which they can do this is through a white paper. That paper could include: A statement about why the committees believe the U.S. government's use of AND publicly withdraw our support for the program, and terminate funding for it." A statement detailing the breadth and depth of Congressional oversight activities. When Senator Feinstein AND improper targeting? Are the members satisfied that internal disciplinary procedures are adequate? 3) Congressional assessment of the foreign relations implications of the program. The Constitution AND us to question the wisdom and perhaps even the legality of the program."
Judicial review on sexual assault policy doesn’t undermine the military---it’s about protecting the rights of servicemembers---the aff is about protecting the rights of terrorists Francine Banner 13, Associate Professor of Law, Phoenix School of Law, 2013, “ARTICLE: IMMORAL WAIVER: JUDICIAL REVIEW OF INTRA-MILITARY SEXUAL ASSAULT CLAIMS,” Lewis and Clark Law Review, 17 Lewis and Clark L. Rev. 723 In 2011, governmental officials estimate that approximately 19,000 sexual assaults took place AND -masculinity and severely penalizes victims for reporting incidents of sexual misconduct. n7 The plaintiffs in Cioca and Klay face a Sisyphean battle due to two significant and AND recent cases challenging application of the doctrine, thus further entrenching it. n10 The other substantial obstacle to these lawsuits is the normative but no less significant specter AND believe to be established precedent baring judicial review of intra-military claims. This hands-off position in regard to all things military is part and parcel AND increased opportunities to avoid decisions that they would prefer not to make." n17 When it comes to constitutional claims stemming from intra-military sexual assaults, this AND blind application of outdated caselaw in these cases is legally and morally unsound. Over the years, the Court has identified three core principles underlying Feres: ( AND waive the judiciary's obligation to resolve the Klay and Cioca plaintiffs' constitutional claims. Feres was decided just after World War II, a historical moment that differed dramatically AND Shearer n25 - faced a vastly different world than the judiciary faces today. This is not our grandparents' military, in which nearly 10 of the population AND heartland of America, military decisionmaking has been severed from civilian accountability. n33 The biggest hurdle to resolution of the Cioca and Klay plaintiffs' claims is the idea AND , the biggest threat to democracy is not judicial intervention but judicial complacency. Chief Justice Earl Warren famously cautioned that "our citizens in uniform may not be stripped of basic rights simply because they have doffed their civilian clothes." n38 However, this is precisely what is happening today in the case of victims of military sexual assault. As Jonathan Turley profoundly observes: There remains a striking discontinuity in the duty of our servicemembers to defend liberties and rights with which they are only partially vested... . When servicemembers encounter ... dangers, they do so as citizen-soldiers. It is the significance of the first part of the term citizen-soldier that demands greater attention from those of us who are the beneficiaries of the second part. n39 Turley observes, further, that the most essential time for civilians to step in and protect the rights of servicemembers is when they are "engaged in a new struggle against a hidden and dangerous enemy." n40 The "hidden and dangerous" enemy to which Turley refers is international terrorism, but the same can be said of the domestic and endemic issue of sexual assault.
Case CT Advantage SQ Solves – Yes Allied Coop Allied terror coop is high now, despite frictions Kristin Archick, European affairs specialist @ CRS, 9-4-2013, “U.S.-EU Cooperation Against Terrorism,” Congressional Research Service, http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RS22030.pdf As part of the EU’s efforts to combat terrorism since September 11, 2001, AND security and protection to citizens of all nations while also upholding individual rights.”
AT: Blowback There’s no impact to anti-drones backlash Stephen Holmes 13, the Walter E. Meyer Professor of Law, New York University School of Law, July 2013, “What’s in it for Obama?,” The London Review of Books, http://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n14/stephen-holmes/whats-in-it-for-obama This is the crux of the problem. We stand at the beginning of the AND against which antiwar forces are apparently unable to rally even modest public support.
CMR Advantage CMR Crisis Inev Lack of military education about CMR makes the gap inevitable Noonan 8 – Michael P. Noonan, managing director of the Program on National Security at the Foreign Policy Research Institute and a veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom, January 2008, “Mind the Gap: Post-Iraq Civil-Military Relations in America,” online: http://www.fpri.org/enotes/200801.noonan.mindthegap.html Repairing the “rent fabric” of contemporary U.S. civil-military AND we are going to continue to pay a high price,” argued Hoffman. No Modeling Friendly democracies can decipher between good and bad US norms, and authoritarian nations don’t care either way John O. McGinnis 7, Professor of Law, Northwestern University School of Law. Ilya Somin Assistant Professor of Law, George Mason University School of Law. GLOBAL CONSTITUTIONALISM: GLOBAL INFLUENCE ON U.S. JURISPRUDENCE: Should International Law Be Part of Our Law? 59 Stan. L. Rev. 1175 The second benefit to foreigners of distinctive U.S. legal norms is information AND nations can decide to adopt our good norms and avoid our bad ones. The only noteworthy counterargument is the claim that U.S. norms will have AND political processes to screen out American norms that might cause harm if copied. Of course, many nations remain authoritarian. n270 But our norms are not likely AND compared to the harm of allowing raw international law to trump domestic law.
AT: LA Prolif No chance of prolif – treaty norms, and most analysts don’t regard it as a significant threat Sarah Chankin-Gould 4, a Scoville Peace Fellow with the Arms Sales Monitoring Project at the Federation of American Scientists, Winter 2004, FAS Public Interest Report, Vol. 57, No. 1, online: http://www.fas.org/faspir/2004/v57n1/tlatelolco.htm, In 1967, before the Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and at AND nuclear non-proliferation both in their own NWFZ and around the world.
Bivens Advantage No Sexual Assault Spillover No spillover from the plan to sexual assault damages---the Court’s terrified of being perceived as activist on disputes within the military---that distinction means they won’t apply the plan as precedent Francine Banner 13, Associate Professor of Law, Phoenix School of Law, 2013, “ARTICLE: IMMORAL WAIVER: JUDICIAL REVIEW OF INTRA-MILITARY SEXUAL ASSAULT CLAIMS,” Lewis and Clark Law Review, 17 Lewis and Clark L. Rev. 723 In 2011, governmental officials estimate that approximately 19,000 sexual assaults took place AND -masculinity and severely penalizes victims for reporting incidents of sexual misconduct. n7 The plaintiffs in Cioca and Klay face a Sisyphean battle due to two significant and AND recent cases challenging application of the doctrine, thus further entrenching it. n10 The other substantial obstacle to these lawsuits is the normative but no less significant specter AND believe to be established precedent baring judicial review of intra-military claims. This hands-off position in regard to all things military is part and parcel AND increased opportunities to avoid decisions that they would prefer not to make." n17 No Heg Impact No impact to heg Friedman 10 Ben, research fellow in defense and homeland security, Cato. PhD candidate in pol sci, MIT, Military Restraint and Defense Savings, 20 July, http://www.cato.org/testimony/ct-bf-07202010.html Another argument for high military spending is that U.S. military hegemony underlies AND and threaten to drag us into wars, while providing no obvious benefit. AT: Democracy Obama ended US torture---means no internal link Hearings will be delayed so no compliance---doesn’t solve leadership Demo peace theory’s wrong---Diamond’s outdated Rosato 3 – PhD PolSci, Chicago; conclusion of a statistical survey of democracies (Sebastian, The Flawed Logic of Democratic Peace Theory, The American Political Science Review 97.4) The causal logics that underpin democratic peace theory cannot explain why democracies remain at peace AND these findings there are good reasons to doubt that joint democracy causes peace. AT: Uighers China won’t model---even if US stops, not reverse causal No lashout – CCP knows it would be suicide and PLA wouldn’t support it Gilley 4 Bruce, former contributing editor at the Far Eastern Economic Review, M.A. Oxford, 2004, China’s Democratic Future, p. 114 Yet the risks, even to a dying regime, may be too high. AND about its future, the resort to nuclear confrontation would not make sense.
Block
China
AT: Uighers China won’t model---even if US stops, not reverse causal No lashout – CCP knows it would be suicide and PLA wouldn’t support it Gilley 4 Bruce, former contributing editor at the Far Eastern Economic Review, M.A. Oxford, 2004, China’s Democratic Future, p. 114 Yet the risks, even to a dying regime, may be too high. AND about its future, the resort to nuclear confrontation would not make sense.
CT
Intel
EU cooperation on terrorism intel high and inevitable – in their self interest Kristin Archick, European affairs specialist @ CRS, 9-4-2013, “U.S.-EU Cooperation Against Terrorism,” Congressional Research Service, http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RS22030.pdf As part of its drive to bolster its counterterrorism capabilities, the EU has also AND have been working together to curb terrorist financing and to strengthen transport security.
CMR
Smartness
education collapse inev --- means US CMR will be totally useless bc our coop will spread a bad model --- conceded
Their judiciary key ev is from 98 ---reject
Weeks ev says that countries can argue “given national security concerns, the military should not be held accountable” --- proves McGinnis not reverse causal – justify but no change
Also Weeks evidence says post 9-11 THE US PRESSURES military control over nuclear weapons --- aff can’t reverse that --- the reason is that their Weeks evidence says that “civilian institutions in LA need to get stronger”----if the US thought LA civilian gov’ts weren’t so terrible , we would be trying to help them --- nothing post the plan changes that
Their Finichio impact ev says civilians control nukes now --- no uq ev --- also Sanchez says countries are modeling civilian LA coop now --- crucial arg- -- sanchez is from 11 – most recent uq ev --- their internals about mil control of nuke program is irrel bc CIVIL COOP is high – this just kinda proves how little sense their impact makes Also 2ac dropped no LA prolif --- 2ac ev says htat no countries want to pursue nukes there --- if model LA on prolif stuff, that just means that they’ll model non-proliferation
Prlif inev Prolif inev --- coop can’t do anything about it Jacques E. C. Hymans, Assistant Professor in the School of International Relations at the University of Southern California, 2006, The Psychology of Nuclear Proliferation: Identity, Emotions, and Foreign Policy, p. 1-2 This book is an analysis of why some – but only some – political leaders AND introspection vary widely, but they can be systematically summarized and rigorously explained. The leaders who have chosen to thrust their nations into the nuclear club include the AND neither a close call nor a possible last resort but an absolute necessity. In the process of making its case about the importance of oppositional nationalism for decisions AND , is to show the model’s applicability to the issue of nuclear proliferation.
DA
Drones DA---2NC
No turns---reducing targeted killings can’t make al-Qaeda any less likely to attack us John Yoo 12, Professor of Law, University of California at Berkeley, School of Law; Visiting Scholar, American Enterprise Institute, 2011/12, “Assassination or Targeted Killings After 9/11,” New York Law School Law Review, http://www.nylslawreview.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Yoo-56-1.pdf What about reciprocity? Former attorney general Reno warned President Clinton that attacking Osama bin AND , but because the allies were fully prepared to retaliate in kind.98 Al-Qaeda will never follow the rules of war. Al-Qaeda gains AND has made possible some of the United States’ most important victories to date.
Civilians
Targeting citizens is key to counter-terror---operational opacity of terror organizations means the U.S. has to define ‘imminent threats’ expansively Benjamin Wittes 13, Senior Fellow in Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution, 2/27/13, “In Defense of the Administration on Targeted Killing of Americans,” http://www.lawfareblog.com/2013/02/in-defense-of-the-administration-on-targeted-killing-of-americans/ To understand why this position must be correct, consider an example from an entirely AND , it is not constitutionally unreasonable to prevent escape by using deadly force.” I submit that the case that truly meets the administration’s legal test—and only AND that than it requires that police forego the shot at the hostage taker.
AT Blowback Kills Program
Absolutely zero chance that criticism of the drone program causes the U.S. to ban it Benjamin Wittes 13, Senior Fellow in Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution, 2/27/13, “In Defense of the Administration on Targeted Killing of Americans,” http://www.lawfareblog.com/2013/02/in-defense-of-the-administration-on-targeted-killing-of-americans/ This view has currency among European allies, among advocacy groups, and in the AND 2012 NDAA with respect to detention, once again contains no geographical limitation. There is, in other words, a consensus among the branches of government on AND which the executive branch is entitled to rely in formulating its legal views.
Backlash is inevitable even with the plan---critics want to shut the entire program down, but Obama’s not budging Steven Groves 13, the Bernard and Barbara Lomas Fellow in the Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom, a division of the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies, at The Heritage Foundation, 1/25/13, “The U.S. Should Ignore U.N. Inquiry Into Drone Strikes,” http://blog.heritage.org/2013/01/25/the-u-s-should-ignore-u-n-inquiry-into-drone-strikes/ Various international legal academics and human rights activists have regularly made these and other similar allegations ever since the Obama Administration stepped up the drone program in 2009. While drone strikes cannot be viewed alone as an effective counterterrorism strategy, the Administration has repeatedly defended the legality of the program. Emmerson and his fellow U.N. special rapporteurs Philip Alston and Christof Heyns have repeatedly demanded that the U.S. provide more information on drone strikes—and the U.S. has repeatedly complied, issuing public statement after public statement defending every aspect of the drone program. Public statements detailing the legality and propriety of the drone program have been made by top Administration officials, including State Department Legal Adviser Harold Koh, Attorney General Eric Holder, Deputy National Security Advisor John Brennan, General Counsel for the Department of Defense Jeh Johnson, and CIA General Counsel Stephen Preston. Increased transparency will, of course, be deemed by human rights activists as insufficient where their true goal is to stop the U.S. drone program in its entirety. Unless and until the U.S. can somehow promise that no civilian casualties will result from drone strikes, such strikes will be considered violations of international law. Ignoring the U.N. probe will not make it go away, but the Obama Administration should not be so naive as to expect that its cooperation will substantively alter the investigation’s findings and conclusions.
Bivens
Ex-post review that allows Bivens suits over targeted killings would destroy battlefield effectiveness---undermines the chain of command and secrecy---the link is based on the possibility of suits, so substantive outcomes are irrelevant Richard Klingler 12, currently a partner at Sidley Austin and previously the NSC's Legal Advisor (2006-07), 7/25/12, “Bivens and/as Immunity: Richard Klingler Responds on Al-Aulaqi–and I Reply,” http://www.lawfareblog.com/2012/07/bivens-andas-immunity-richard-klingler-responds-on-al-aulaqi-and-i-reply/ Steve’s post arguing that courts should recognize Bivens actions seeking damages from military officials based AND a matter of national security policy and the better view of the law. A Bivens action is a damages claim, directed against individual officials personally for an AND exists if an officer has no defenses to liability (such as immunity). The post’s first point, which underpins the legal analysis, is simply not correct AND no remedy exists (and that in a Souter opinion for eight Justices). Similarly, the Bivens Court’s original intention is a poor basis for implying a damages AND separation of powers cases pointing to a limited judicial role in military affairs. The post’s policy point regarding incentives that should be created for military officers to do AND that would relish the opportunities to seek damages against military officers and policymakers. As for the post’s proposed test, it fails to account for either the Bivens AND and will weigh as they resolve cases brought against military officials and policymakers.
Immanence
Plan collapses drones --- McKelvey says doesn’t meet standard of immanance bc we plan the ops over a period of montsh
Expansive interpretation of imminence is key to win the entire war on terror---prevents bio and nuclear terrorism John Yoo 12, Professor of Law, University of California at Berkeley, School of Law; Visiting Scholar, American Enterprise Institute, 2011/12, “Assassination or Targeted Killings After 9/11,” New York Law School Law Review, http://www.nylslawreview.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Yoo-56-1.pdf Imminence is not a purely temporal concept. The concept traces its origins to the AND lives, it is now necessary to use force earlier and more selectively. Imminence as a concept also fails to deal with covert activity. Terrorists deliberately disguise AND . Rules of self defense need to adapt to the current terrorist threat. In addition to imminence, the United States needs to account for the degree of AND . There was an inherent technological limit on the destructiveness of armed conflict. The speed and severity possible today mean that the right to preempt today should be AND that must be considered in determining when to use force against the enemy.
Geography
Judicial review would result in limiting AUMF drone strikes to declared zones of armed conflict---that functionally bans drones Milena Sterio 12, Associate Professor of Law, Cleveland-Marshall College of Law, Fall 2012, “Presidential Powers and Foreign Affairs: Rendition and Targeted Killings of Americans: The United States' Use of Drones in the War on Terror: The (Il)legality of Targeted Killings Under International Law,” Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law, 45 Case W. Res. J. Int'l L. 197 After the terrorist attacks of 9/11, President George W. Bush, AND well as the CIA. As Jane Mayer famously noted in her article: The U.S. government runs two drone programs. The military's version, which is publicly acknowledged, operates in the recognized war zones of Afghanistan and Iraq, and targets enemies of U.S. troops stationed there. As such, it is an extension of conventional warfare. The C.I.A.'s program is aimed at terror suspects around the world, including in countries where U.S. troops are not based. n3 *199 Moreover, although the President had designated Afghanistan and its airspace as a combat zone AND have offered detailed legal justifications for the legality of the American drone program. Harold Koh, State Department Legal Advisor, justified the use of drones at the AND proportionality to ensure that the targets are legitimate and collateral damage minimized. n12 Koh offered four reasons supporting the legality of targeted drone killings. First, enemy AND high level belligerent leaders" does not violate domestic law banning assassinations. n16 The Obama Administration has continued to use drones in Pakistan, as well as in AND abroad without any judicial involvement or proceedings to determine guilt of any crime. In a subsequent speech, Attorney General Eric Holder confirmed the Obama Administration's view on AND be conducted in a manner consistent with applicable law of war principles. n21 Despite Koh's and Holder's justifications, many have questioned the legality of the American use AND IV); and the location and status of drone operators (Part V). II. What and Where is the Battlefield? Which Laws Apply? Under the Bush Administration approach, the United States post 9/11 was engaged AND of drones, could be used if consistent with the laws of war. Under the Obama Administration, the rhetoric has slightly changed: the United States is AND where central governments cannot claim to possess effective control. n28 *203 The above described terminology ("global war on terror" and "war against al AND the use of force is necessary and the use of force is proportionate. First, a state resorting to force must prove its decision to resort to force AND groups project military-scale power," n33 this view remains controversial. n34 Second, a state resorting to the use of force must prove its use of AND the lawfulness of this type of force through the jus ad bellum prism. If, however, one rejects the conclusion that the United States is engaged in AND Under this paradigm, one must conclude that the drone program is illegal.
Link UQ---Must Read Status quo target vetting is carefully calibrated to avoid every aff impact in balance with CT--- there’s only a risk that restrictions destroy it Gregory McNeal 13, Associate Professor of Law, Pepperdine University, 3/5/13, “Targeted Killing and Accountability,” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1819583 Target vetting is the process by which the government integrates the opinions of subject matter AND , as targets are progressively refined within particular agencies and at interagency meetings. A validation step follows the vetting step. It is intended to ensure that all AND are not considered in current operations). Some of the questions asked are: • Is attacking the target lawful? What are the law of war and rules of engagement considerations? • Does the target contribute to the adversary's capability and will to wage war? • Is the target (still) operational? Is it (still) a viable element of a target system? Where is the target located? • Will striking the target arouse political or cultural “sensitivities”? • How will striking the target affect public opinion? (Enemy, friendly, and neutral)? • What is the relative potential for collateral damage or collateral effects, to include casualties? • What psychological impact will operations against the target have on the adversary, friendly forces, or multinational partners? • What would be the impact of not conducting operations against the target?187 As the preceding criteria highlight, many of the concerns that critics say should be AND .g. creating more terrorists as a result of the killing).191
AT: Recruiting
No public backlash in Pakistan or Yemen---just as many people love them as hate them Max Boot 13, the Jeane J. Kirkpatrick Senior Fellow in National Security Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, 2/6/13, “Obama Drone Memo is a Careful, Responsible Document,” http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2013/02/06/obama-drone-memo-is-a-careful-responsible-document/ Drone strikes are by no means risk free, the biggest risk being that by AND been conducted with less collateral damage and more precision than in the past. It is hard to assess what impact they have had on public opinion in countries AND died in January of wounds received in a drone strike late last year.”
Targeted killings destroy operational effectiveness of terror groups---they can’t recruit new operatives fast enough to keep pace with losses Alex Young 13, Associate Staff, Harvard International Review, 2/25/13, “A Defense of Drones,” Harvard International Review, http://hir.harvard.edu/a-defense-of-drones Moreover, drone strikes have disrupted al Qaeda’s system for training new recruits. The AND of death from the skies has forced extremist organizations to become more scattered. More importantly, though, drone strikes do not only kill top leaders; they AND
the idea that these strikes only kill senior officials is a myth.
Special ops
Due process collapses intelligence gathering --- sources dry up --- destroys the heart of counter-terror policy Delery Et.al. ’12 - Principal Deputy, Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, DOJ Principal Deputy, Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, STUART F. DELERY Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, United States' Statement of Interest, Case 1:12-cv-01192-RMC Document 18 Filed 12/14/12 Page 1 of 58, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 12/14/2012 Third. Plaintiffs' claims raise the specter of disclosing classified intelligence information in open court AND classified information is a special factor in the "extraordinary rendition" context).
CP CP Solves Disclosing target criteria builds diplomatic credibility, enacts domestic accountability, and doesn’t link to the terror disad Gregory McNeal 13, Associate Professor of Law, Pepperdine University, 3/5/13, “Targeted Killing and Accountability,” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1819583 Related to defending the process, and using performance data is the possibility that the AND better diplomatic footing, and would certainly engender mechanisms of domestic political accountability.
Strongly err neg---their authors don’t understand how thorough and effective inter-executive mechanisms are---adding transparency’s clearly sufficient Gregory McNeal 13, Associate Professor of Law, Pepperdine University, 3/5/13, “Targeted Killing and Accountability,” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1819583 To date scholars have lacked a thorough understanding of the U.S. government’s AND legal theory, and constrained scholarly discourse on a matter of public import. This article is a necessary corrective to the public and scholarly debate. It has AND independent review can enhance the already robust accountability mechanisms embedded in current practice. Solves---Sexual Assault CP solves sexual assault Francine Banner 13, Associate Professor of Law, Phoenix School of Law, 2013, “ARTICLE: IMMORAL WAIVER: JUDICIAL REVIEW OF INTRA-MILITARY SEXUAL ASSAULT CLAIMS,” Lewis and Clark Law Review, 17 Lewis and Clark L. Rev. 723 In 2011, governmental officials estimate that approximately 19,000 sexual assaults took place AND -masculinity and severely penalizes victims for reporting incidents of sexual misconduct. n7 The plaintiffs in Cioca and Klay face a Sisyphean battle due to two significant and AND recent cases challenging application of the doctrine, thus further entrenching it. n10 The other substantial obstacle to these lawsuits is the normative but no less significant specter AND believe to be established precedent baring judicial review of intra-military claims. This hands-off position in regard to all things military is part and parcel AND increased opportunities to avoid decisions that they would prefer not to make." n17 When it comes to constitutional claims stemming from intra-military sexual assaults, this AND blind application of outdated caselaw in these cases is legally and morally unsound. Over the years, the Court has identified three core principles underlying Feres: ( AND waive the judiciary's obligation to resolve the Klay and Cioca plaintiffs' constitutional claims. Feres was decided just after World War II, a historical moment that differed dramatically AND Shearer n25 - faced a vastly different world than the judiciary faces today. This is not our grandparents' military, in which nearly 10 of the population AND heartland of America, military decisionmaking has been severed from civilian accountability. n33 The biggest hurdle to resolution of the Cioca and Klay plaintiffs' claims is the idea AND , the biggest threat to democracy is not judicial intervention but judicial complacency. Chief Justice Earl Warren famously cautioned that "our citizens in uniform may not be stripped of basic rights simply because they have doffed their civilian clothes." n38 However, this is precisely what is happening today in the case of victims of military sexual assault. As Jonathan Turley profoundly observes: There remains a striking discontinuity in the duty of our servicemembers to defend liberties and rights with which they are only partially vested... . When servicemembers encounter ... dangers, they do so as citizen-soldiers. It is the significance of the first part of the term citizen-soldier that demands greater attention from those of us who are the beneficiaries of the second part. n39 Turley observes, further, that the most essential time for civilians to step in and protect the rights of servicemembers is when they are "engaged in a new struggle against a hidden and dangerous enemy." n40 The "hidden and dangerous" enemy to which Turley refers is international terrorism, but the same can be said of the domestic and endemic issue of sexual assault. Solves---Perception---Human Rights/Due Process Publicizing target procedures is the most effective way to resolve the perception of targeted killing as violating human rights and CMR Cheri Kramer 11, J.D., Santa Clara University School of Law, 1/1/11, “The Legality of Targeted Drone Attacks as U.S. Policy,” Santa Clara Journal of International Law, http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1105andcontext=scujil Some advocates in the field of human rights assert that targeted killing denies individuals due AND thereby invoking guilt for a war crime under the Rome Statute.13 7 AT: Bernstein Bernstein card is a NEG card – doesn’t assume the CP, just the executive plank and says “Administrative remedial schemes must be authorized through a delegation of congressional power to the Executive and are subject to legislative strictures and specifications.” – proves the CP solves Disclosing the criteria for placement on the kill list provides sufficient due process for U.S. citizens Mike Dreyfuss 12, J.D., Vanderbilt University Law School, January, 2012, “NOTE: My Fellow Americans, We Are Going to Kill You: The Legality of Targeting and Killing U.S. Citizens Abroad,” Vanderbilt Law Review, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 249 An underlying element of all law is the principle of nullem crimen sine lege, AND secretly kill them, and officially deny any involvement in the action. n144 These unpublished "kill lists" or other means of designating individuals for targeted killing AND , it did not publicly acknowledge his presence on a kill list. n148 Military expedience and security arguments support the practice of nonpublication of the lists. If the targets know that they have been designated, then they will make it more difficult, more expensive, and more dangerous for our armed forces to kill them. Notifying the targets will also make continued intelligence gathering more difficult. Fundamental justice arguments support publication. All people have rights to life and liberty unless AND provide notice because it is a fundamental principle of our justice system. n149 AT: Perm Do Both Links to the terror DA – court involvement wrecks the drone program
The counterplan alone is key to effective drone operations---the permutation sends the signal that the rest of the government sides with critics of drones over the executive---that delegitimizes drones and collapses the program Kenneth Anderson 10, Professor of International Law at American University, 3/8/10, “Predators Over Pakistan,” The Weekly Standard, http://www.weeklystandard.com/print/articles/predators-over-pakistan Obama deserves support and praise for this program from across the political spectrum. More than that, though, the drone strikes need an aggressive defense against increasingly vocal critics who are moving to create around drone warfare a narrative of American wickedness and cowardice and of CIA perfidy. Here the administration has dropped the ball. It has so far failed to provide a robust affirmation of the propositions that underwrite Predator drone warfare. Namely: n Targeted killings of terrorists, including by Predators and even when the targets are American citizens, are a lawful practice; n Use of force is justified against terrorists anywhere they set up safe havens, including in states that cannot or will not prevent them; n These operations may be covert—and they are as justifiable when the CIA is tasked to carry them out secretly as when the military does so in open armed conflict. n All of the above fall within the traditional American legal view of “self-defense” in international law, and “vital national security interests” in U.S. domestic law. There are good reasons for Republicans and centrist Democrats to make common cause in defending AND view of domestic and international law for future administrations, Democratic and Republican. At the same time, congressional Republicans and centrist Democrats need to put Obama’s senior AND with hedged and narrow legal rationales from which they can later walk away. Consider, for instance, the diffidence of Harold Koh, the legal adviser of AND , and other agencies directly conducting these activities as somewhat less than reassuring. In fact, the administration’s top lawyers should offer a public legal defense of its AND S. government and will be publicly defended as such by their superiors. Even as the Obama administration increasingly relies on Predator strikes for its counterterrorism strategy, AND at stigmatizing the use of Predators as both illegal and a coward’s weapon. Stigmatizing the technology and the practice of targeted killing is only half of it, AND —either as law enforcement or as armed conflict conducted by uniformed military. The Obama administration is complacent about this emerging “international soft law” campaign. AND spun by the interlocking international “soft law” community and global media. It’s a mistake to remain oblivious to either the sense or the sensibility. Outside AND United States, or abroad in Europe, or at the United Nations? The Obama administration assumes that it uniquely sets the terms of legal legitimacy and has AND Here’s the thumbnail version of drone warfare, as portrayed in the media. AT: Roach The aff doesn’t solve this unless they abrogate the entire state secrets doctrine since secret evidence would still exist The CP satisfies a key demand of for drone transparency and public debate---it’s clearly sufficient to solve the case Lesley Wexler 13, Professor of Law and Thomas A. Mengler Faculty Scholar, University of Illinois College of Law, 5/8/13, “The Role of the Judicial Branch during the Long War: Drone Courts, Damage Suits, and FOIA Requests,” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2262412 Critics of the status quo would like greater transparency and accountability in regards to tar AND proposed the use of courts to foster either transparency or accountability or both. Case No Heg Impact Impact’s empirically denied Preble 10 – Former prof, history, Temple U. PhD, history, Temple (Christopher, U.S. Military Power: Preeminence for What Purpose?, 3 August, http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/u-s-military-power-preeminence-for-what-purpose/) Goure and the Hadley-Perry commissioners who produced the alternate QDR argue that the AND States while the schlubs in fly-over country pick up the tab. No escalation Haas 8 Richard, President of the Council on Foreign Relations, former director of policy planning for the Department of State, former vice president and director of foreign policy studies at the Brookings Institution, the Sol M. Linowitz visiting professor of international studies at Hamilton College, a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a lecturer in public policy at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, and a research associate at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, April, “Ask the Expert: What Comes After Unipolarity?” http://www.cfr.org/publication/16063/ask_the_expert.html Does a non polar world increase or reduce the chances of another world war? AND highly costly conflicts involving terrorist groups, militias, rogue states, etc. AT: Democracy Demo peace theory’s wrong---Diamond’s outdated – that’s Rosato Rosato 3 – PhD PolSci, Chicago; conclusion of a statistical survey of democracies (Sebastian, The Flawed Logic of Democratic Peace Theory, The American Political Science Review 97.4) The causal logics that underpin democratic peace theory cannot explain why democracies remain at peace AND these findings there are good reasons to doubt that joint democracy causes peace. AT: Uighers No lashout – CCP knows it would be suicide and PLA wouldn’t support it Gilley 4 Bruce, former contributing editor at the Far Eastern Economic Review, M.A. Oxford, 2004, China’s Democratic Future, p. 114 Yet the risks, even to a dying regime, may be too high. AND about its future, the resort to nuclear confrontation would not make sense.
2NR
Pakistan has to act like they’re kicking us out---but if they were going to, they would have already Gregory McNeal 13, Associate Professor of Law, Pepperdine University, 3/5/13, “Targeted Killing and Accountability,” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1819583 Granted, “lawyers at the State Department, including top legal adviser Harold Koh AND it tacitly allows drone strikes in its territory63 and in the same New York Times article discussed above an official with Pakistani intelligence “said any suggestion of Pakistani AND the record specifically noting their approval of U.S. strikes.65
Pakistan supports aggressive U.S. drone strikes---they just can’t admit it publicly for domestic political reasons Daniel Byman 13, Professor in the Security Studies Program at the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University and a Senior Fellow at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution, July/August 2013, “Why Drones Work,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 92, No. 4 It is also telling that drones have earned the backing, albeit secret, of AND zero margin of error, if you know what target you're aiming at." As officials in both Pakistan and Yemen realize, U.S. drone strikes AND against the drone program in the National Assembly and then ignore it." Still, Pakistan is reluctant to make its approval public. First of all, AND the Pakistani public is vehemently opposed to U.S. drone strikes.
Off 1NC Security is a psychological construct—the aff’s scenarios for conflict are products of paranoia that project our violent impulses onto the other Mack 91 – Doctor of Psychiatry and a professor at Harvard University (John, “The Enemy System” http://www.johnemackinstitute.org/eJournal/article.asp?id=23 *Gender modified)
The threat of nuclear annihilation has stimulated us to try to understand what it is AND , taking their cues from the leadership, contribute powerfully to the process. Our response is to interrogate the psychological underpinnings of enemy creation–prevents war Byles 3—English, U Cyprus (Joanna, Psychoanalysis and War: The Superego and Projective Identification, http://www.clas.ufl.edu/ipsa/journal/articles/art_byles01.shtml)
The problem of warfare which includes genocide, and its most recent manifestation, international AND adaptation to the other within the self and the self within the other. 1NC Debt ceiling will be raised now but it’s not certain --- Obama’s ironclad political capital is forcing the GOP to give in Brian Beutler 10/3/13, “Republicans finally confronting reality: They’re trapped!,” Salon http://www.salon.com/2013/10/03/republicans_finally_confronting_reality_theyre_trapped/ After struggling for weeks and weeks in stages one through four, Republicans are finally AND final act, and revealed who’s being fitted with the red dye packet. Plan wrecks PC Vladeck 13 (Steve – professor of law and the associate dean for scholarship at American University Washington College of Law, “Drones, Domestic Detention, and the Costs of Libertarian Hijacking”, 3/14, http://www.lawfareblog.com/2013/03/drones-domestic-detention-and-the-costs-of-libertarian-hijacking/) The same thing appears to be happening with targeted killings. Whether or not Attorney AND cogently explained in this post on Senator Paul and the DPGA from November). Obama’s PC is key Jonathan Allen 9/19, Politico, 9/19/13, GOP battles boost President Obama, dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=17961849-5BE5-43CA-B1BC-ED8A12A534EB There’s a simple reason President Barack Obama is using his bully pulpit to focus the AND the government shouldn’t shut down and that the country should pay its bills. Collapses economy Adam Davidson 9/10/13, economy columnist for The New York Times, co-founder of Planet Money, NPR’s team of economics reporters, “Our Debt to Society,” NYT, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/15/magazine/our-debt-to-society.html?pagewanted=alland_r=0 If the debt ceiling isn’t lifted again this fall, some serious financial decisions will AND free asset more risky, the entire global economy becomes riskier and costlier.
Nuclear war Cesare Merlini 11, nonresident senior fellow at the Center on the United States and Europe and chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Italian Institute for International Affairs, May 2011, “A Post-Secular World?”, Survival, Vol. 53, No. 2 Two neatly opposed scenarios for the future of the world order illustrate the range of AND theocratic absolutes, competing or converging with secular absolutes such as unbridled nationalism. 1NC The United States Federal Government should condition the use of the President’s authority for targeted killings as a first resort to response to attack by a non-state actor located within a state has consented to the United States’ carrying out targeted killing missions within its borders, or that is unwilling or unable to prosecute or neutralize such actors. The standard of “unable or unwilling” should require offering notice, when feasible, to the targeted state and allowance of time for a good-faith effort to neutralize the threat to the United States. “Ability” should be defined by analysis of the level of sovereign control the state exercises over the territory in which the relevant non-state groups are located. Competes---it’s functionally distinct from the plan because it makes no reference to active hostilities or geographical limits on targeted killing authority. Solves the case---no other legal model will ever achieve status as a norm---the plan forfeits the ability to shape that norm by clarifying its criteria Ashley S. Deeks 12, Academic Fellow, Columbia Law School, Spring 2012, “ARTICLE: "Unwilling or Unable": Toward a Normative Framework for Extraterritorial Self-Defense,” Virginia Journal of International Law, 52 Va. J. Int'l L. 483 In an August 2007 speech, then-Presidential candidate Barack Obama asserted that his AND Pakistan is unwilling or unable to strike against them, we should." n2 On May 2, 2011, the United States put those words into operation. AND response. The lack of guidance therefore has the potential to be costly. President Obama's speech invoked an important but little understood legal standard governing the use of AND threat in a way that the United States believes may not be adequate? Many states agree that the "unwilling or unable" test is the correct standard AND suppress the threat before using force without consent in that state's territory. n10 Given that academic discussion of the test has been limited thus far, we may AND (and proportional) to suppress the threat that the nonstate group poses. A test constructed at this level of generality offers insufficient guidance to states. Although AND solutions to -- the imprecision surrounding the "unwilling or unable" test. The test's lack of content undermines the legitimacy of the test as it currently is AND be "unwilling or unable" to suppress attacks by a nonstate actor. Identifying the test's pedigree demonstrates the legitimacy of the core test and helps to frame AND development and applications of the test in ascertaining what its meaning should be. It is worth noting that this test is not the only standard around which states AND the preferred test, a hurdle no other option is poised to meet. In considering the appropriate content of the test, I argue that the "unwilling AND reduce the frequency of) those that stand in tension with the test.
1NC Legally codifying the plan loses the war on terrorism---sends a signal that terrorists can have safe havens outside conflict zones and grants immunity to terror groups that hop borders---it’s unique because the rules’ current status as non-binding policy doesn’t link Geoffrey Corn 13, Professor of Law and Presidential Research Professor, South Texas College of Law, 5/16/13, Statement before the Senate Armed Services Committee, CQ Congressional Testimony, lexis 3. What is the geographic scope of the AUMF and under what circumstances may the United States attack belligerent targets in the territory of another country? In my opinion, there is no need to amend the AUMF to define the AND with the strategic objective of preventing future terrorist attacks against the United States. I believe much of the momentum for asserting some arbitrary geographic limitation on the scope AND military objectives pursuant to the law of armed conflict are subjected to attack. I do not, however, intend to suggest that it is proper to view AND him to dictate when and where he will be subject to lawful attack.
Codifying current target policy as law signals a legal abandonment of the Law of Armed Conflict framework outside of explicitly declared conflict zones---that collapses CT Geoffrey Corn 9-30, The Presidential Research Professor of Law at South Texas College of Law, Lieutenant Colonel (Retired), U.S. Army, was formerly the Army’s senior law of war expert advisor, 9/30/13, “Debate (Round 1): The Military Component of Counter-Terror Operations,” http://justsecurity.org/2013/09/30/military-component-counter-terror-operations/ Twelve years after the September 11th terrorist attacks, however, highly informed experts both AND misconstrue statements of policy restraint for declarations of a shift in legal interpretation. The imposition of policy-based constraints on LOAC authorities is certainly unremarkable. This AND to classify counter-terror military operations against al Qaeda is simply invalid. But beyond the interesting debate over whether transnational armed conflict is or is not consistent AND . As noted above, LOAC based response authority is far more robust. This binary operational response framework arguably reveals why the United States has and continues to AND the fight’ to the enemy and deny the enemy functional geographic safe haven. Reverting back to a pure law enforcement response will therefore seriously undermine the efficacy of AND achieve against such a threat (consider the Israeli experience as an example). Maximizing operational and tactical flexibility to strike high value terrorist targets – command, control AND , however, would be the result outside the context of armed conflict. None of this is intended to suggest that the armed conflict characterization makes executing counter AND disruptive effect on our counter-terror operations, not on the enemy.
1NC The Executive branch should publicly articulate its legal rationale for its targeted killing policy, including the process and safeguards in place for target selection. The United States Congress should enact a resolution declaring that, in the normal process of its oversight of United States targeted killing operations, it is satisfied that current Executive branch policy regarding the use of targeted killing as a first resort outside zones of active hostilities satisfies all relevant United States legal obligations that apply to such operations. The counterplan clarifies the legality of the current approach to TKs---unites Congress and the executive Geoffrey Corn 13, Professor of Law and Presidential Research Professor, South Texas College of Law, 5/16/13, Statement before the Senate Armed Services Committee, CQ Congressional Testimony, lexis 15.What is the role of Congress in overseeing the use of lethal force pursuant to the AUMF, and can the process be made more transparent without compromising operational security? As noted in several prior questions, I believe Congress has an essential role in AND be animated by analogous prudence in response to calls to revoke this statute. Furthermore, Congress must ensure that any expansion to the scope of the AUMF is consistent with principles of international law, and therefore only consider such expansion to cover terrorist groups that present a level threat sufficient to reasonably justify characterizing the U.S. response as an armed conflict. I also believe Congress, through close coordination and collaboration with the Executive, must AND process associated with them, to ensure the AUMF is being faithfully executed.
Case Terrorism Allied Coop Now Allied terror coop is high now, despite frictions Kristin Archick, European affairs specialist @ CRS, 9-4-2013, “U.S.-EU Cooperation Against Terrorism,” Congressional Research Service, http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RS22030.pdf As part of the EU’s efforts to combat terrorism since September 11, 2001, AND security and protection to citizens of all nations while also upholding individual rights.” Alt-Cause – Laundry List PRISM and detention are massive alt-causes Kristin Archick, European affairs specialist @ CRS, 9-4-2013, “U.S.-EU Cooperation Against Terrorism,” Congressional Research Service, http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RS22030.pdf Although the United States and the EU both recognize the importance of sharing information in AND make the European Parliament even more cautious and skeptical about granting its approval. Allies Not Key US anti-terror intel is fine on its own – outstrips everybody else Barton Gellman and Greg Miller, 8-29-2013, “Top secret ‘black budget’ reveals US spy agencies’ spending,” LA Daily News, http://www.dailynews.com/government-and-politics/20130829/top-secret-black-budget-reveals-us-spy-agencies-spending “The United States has made a considerable investment in the Intelligence Community since the AND rivals or exceeds the levels reached at the height of the Cold War. Allies Won’t Backlash Allies agree that TKs are appropriate as a first resort even outside of conflict zones Geoffrey S. Corn 12, Professor of Law and Presidential Research Professor, South Texas College of Law, 2012, “Blurring the Line Between the Jus ad Bellum and the Jus in Bello,” in Non-International Armed Conflict in the Twenty-First Century, p. 75-76 The statement by Legal Advisor Koh following the Bin Laden raid addressing U.S AND obligated to attempt to capture Bin Laden before resorting to deadly force.178 A recent statement made by John Brennan, Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, further clarifies the current administration's justification for using deadly force as a first resort against al Qaeda operatives: The United States does not view our authority to use military force against al-Qa'ida as being restricted solely to "hot" battlefields like Afghanistan. Because we are engaged in an armed conflict with al-Qa'ida, the United States takes the legal position that... we have the authority to take action against al-Qa'ida and its associated forces without doing a separate self-defense analysis each time---- This Administration's counterterrorism efforts outside of Afghanistan and Iraq are focused on those individuals who are a threat to the United States, whose removal would cause a significant—even if only temporary—disruption of the plans and capabilities of al-Qa'ida and its associated forces. Practically speaking, then, the question turns principally on how you define "imminence." We are finding increasing recognition in the international community that a more flexible understanding of AND -day capabilities, techniques, and technological innovations of terrorist organizations.1'9 No Program Collapse Drone program sustainable Robert Chesney 12, professor at the University of Texas School of Law, nonresident senior fellow of the Brookings Institution, distinguished scholar at the Robert S. Strauss Center for International Security and Law, 8/29/12, “Beyond the Battlefield, Beyond Al Qaeda: The Destabilizing Legal Architecture of Counterterrorism,” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2138623 This multi-year pattern of cross-branch and cross-party consensus gives the impression that the legal architecture of detention has stabilized at last. But the settlement phenomenon is not limited to detention policy. The same thing has happened, albeit to a lesser extent, in other areas. The military commission prosecution system provides a good example. When the Obama administration came AND far more stable today than at any point in the past decade.51 There have been strong elements of cross-party continuity between the Bush and Obama AND who was in fact killed in a drone strike some months later).54 The point of all this is not to claim that legal disputes surrounding these counterterrorism AND reached a stage of stability that was good enough for the time being. Norms 1NC No Drone Wars No risk of drone wars Joseph Singh 12, researcher at the Center for a New American Security, 8/13/12, “Betting Against a Drone Arms Race,” http://nation.time.com/2012/08/13/betting-against-a-drone-arms-race/#ixzz2eSvaZnfQ In short, the doomsday drone scenario Ignatieff and Sharkey predict results from an excessive focus on rapidly-evolving military technology. Instead, we must return to what we know about state behavior in an anarchistic international order. Nations will confront the same principles of deterrence, for example, when deciding to launch a targeted killing operation regardless of whether they conduct it through a drone or a covert amphibious assault team. Drones may make waging war more domestically palatable, but they don’t change the very serious risks of retaliation for an attacking state. Any state otherwise deterred from using force abroad will not significantly increase its power projection on account of acquiring drones. What’s more, the very states whose use of drones could threaten U.S. security – countries like China – are not democratic, which means that the possible political ramifications of the low risk of casualties resulting from drone use are irrelevant. For all their military benefits, putting drones into play requires an ability to meet the political and security risks associated with their use. Despite these realities, there remain a host of defensible arguments one could employ to discredit the Obama drone strategy. The legal justification for targeted killings in areas not internationally recognized as war zones is uncertain at best. Further, the short-term gains yielded by targeted killing operations in Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen, while debilitating to Al Qaeda leadership in the short-term, may serve to destroy already tenacious bilateral relations in the region and radicalize local populations. Yet, the past decade’s experience with drones bears no evidence of impending instability in the global strategic landscape. Conflict may not be any less likely in the era of drones, but the nature of 21st Century warfare remains fundamentally unaltered despite their arrival in large numbers. 1NC Precedent Answers 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. Zero chance that U.S. self-restraint causes any other country to give up their plans for drones Max Boot 11, the Jeane J. Kirkpatrick Senior Fellow in National Security Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, 10/9/11, “We Cannot Afford to Stop Drone Strikes,” Commentary Magazine, http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/10/09/drone-arms-race/ The New York Times engages in some scare-mongering today about a drone ams race. Scott Shane notes correctly other nations such as China are building their own drones and in the future U.S. forces could be attacked by them–our forces will not have a monopoly on their use forever. Fair enough, but he goes further, suggesting our current use of drones to target terrorists will backfire: If China, for instance, sends killer drones into Kazakhstan to hunt minority Uighur Muslims it accuses of plotting terrorism, what will the United States say? What if India uses remotely controlled craft to hit terrorism suspects in Kashmir, or Russia sends drones after militants in the Caucasus? American officials who protest will likely find their own example thrown back at them. “The problem is that we’re creating an international norm” — asserting the right to strike preemptively against those we suspect of planning attacks, argues Dennis M. Gormley, a senior research fellow at the University of Pittsburgh and author of Missile Contagion, who has called for tougher export controls on American drone technology. “The copycatting is what I worry about most.” This is a familiar trope of liberal critics who are always claiming we should forego AND and cut down our own arsenal–to encourage similar restraint from Iran. The argument falls apart rather quickly because it is founded on a false premise: AND is unilateral disarmament–which is what the New York Times implicitly suggests. Imagine if we did refrain from drone strikes against al-Qaeda–what would AND . What’s the difference between sending a hit team and sending a drone? While a decision on our part to stop drone strikes would be unlikely to alter AND the vain hope it will encourage disarmament on the part of dictatorial states. AT: China The idea that China wouldn’t have realized it could use drones to carry out strikes internationally absent the U.S. doing so, is stupid Kenneth Anderson 11, Professor of International Law at American University, 10/9/11, “What Kind of Drones Arms Race Is Coming?,” http://www.volokh.com/2011/10/09/what-kind-of-drones-arms-race-is-coming/#more-51516 It is indeed likely that the future will see more instances of uses of force AND this for a long time and thinks it is legally and morally right. No impact to Chinese drones---their ev is irrational media hype Trefor Moss 13, journalist for The Diplomat covering Asian politics, defense and security, formerly Asia-Pacific Editor at Jane’s Defence Weekly, 3/2/13, “Here Come…China’s Drones,” The Diplomat, http://thediplomat.com/2013/03/02/here-comes-chinas-drones/?print=yes Unmanned systems have become the legal and ethical problem child of the global defense industry and the governments they supply, rewriting the rules of military engagement in ways that many find disturbing. And this sense of unease about where we’re headed is hardly unfamiliar. Much like the emergence of drone technology, the rise of China and its reshaping of the geopolitical landscape has stirred up a sometimes understandable, sometimes irrational, fear of the unknown. It’s safe to say, then, that Chinese drones conjure up a particularly intense AND Department of Defense report which described China’s development of UAVs as "alarming." That’s quite unreasonable. All of the world’s advanced militaries are adopting drones, not AND modernizing in all areas of military technology – unmanned systems being no exception. AT: SCS SCS tension inevitable but won’t escalate, even if they win a huge internal link Michal Meidan 12, China Analyst at the Eurasia Group, 8/7/12, “Guest post: Why tensions will persist, but not escalate, in the South China Sea,” http://blogs.ft.com/beyond-brics/2012/08/07/guest-post-why-tensions-will-persist-but-not-escalate-in-the-south-china-sea/#axzz2Cbw54ORc These tensions are likely to persist. And Beijing is not alone in perpetuating them AND in other deepwater plays elsewhere, as its attempted takeover of Nexen demonstrates. AT: Turkey Model Turkey model fails Soner Cagaptay 11, Senior Fellow and Director of the Turkish Reseaerch Program – Washington Institute for Near East Policy, “Turkey's Future Role in the 'Arab Spring',” inFocus Quarterly, 5(4), Winter, http://www.jewishpolicycenter.org/2814/turkey-arab-spring Turkey ruled the Arab Middle East until World War I, and it must now AND part of the divided island of Cyprus (Turkish Cypriots control the north). No Iran Prolif No impact to Iranian prolif Kenneth Waltz 12, senior research scholar @ Saltzman, Poly Sci Prof @ Columbia, September/October 2012, “Iran and the Bomb – Waltz Replies,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 91, No. 5, p. 157-162 In arguing that a nuclear-armed Iran would represent an unacceptable threat to the AND . But the many benefits of regional stability would far outweigh the costs.
Block
DA
2nc links
Our link destroys all their spin about the plan merely codifying current policy---the current approach makes limits on first-resort killings part of the rules of engagement, not a legal restriction on authority---legally codifying them would destroy flexibility Geoffrey Corn 13, Professor of Law and Presidential Research Professor, South Texas College of Law, 2013, “Geography of Armed Conflict: Why it is a Mistake to Fish for the Red Herring,” International Legal Studies, 89 INT’L L. STUD. 77 (2013) Ironically, when Professor Gabrielle Blum proposed such a limitation in her article The Dispensable AND that authority, we were much more closely aligned in our views.78 This latter aspect of the “capture or kill” debate is critical, and AND of the shock effect it will produce on the corporate enemy capability.80
The disad turns the entire case---legally codifying geographic limits causes the U.S. to circumvent the ban by relying on even worse legal justifications---that’s clearly net worse for both norms and allied perception Geoffrey Corn 13, Professor of Law and Presidential Research Professor, South Texas College of Law, 2013, “Geography of Armed Conflict: Why it is a Mistake to Fish for the Red Herring,” International Legal Studies, 89 INT’L L. STUD. 77 (2013) NOTE: “Sub rosa” denotes secrecy or confidentiality – Wikipedia The law of conflict regulation is arguably at a critical crossroads. If threat drives AND way to protect the State to legal liabilities based on inapposite legal norms.
The plan causes massive resistance and backlash by the executive: a) The U.S. views itself as in an armed conflict with al-Qaeda, regardless of the geographical zone of combat Laurie R. Blank 10, Director, International Humanitarian Law Clinic, Emory Law School, 9/16/10, “DEFINING THE BATTLEFIELD IN CONTEMPORARY CONFLICT AND COUNTERTERRORISM: UNDERSTANDING THE PARAMETERS OF THE ZONE OF COMBAT,” Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law, Vol. 39, No. 1, 2010, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1677965 This Article will focus on a related question, but one that has not yet AND on the applicable law within (and without) the zone of combat.
b) The plan applies the human rights law framework to areas that the U.S. currently understands as governed by the law of armed conflict---that causes military backlash against both the plan and any broader effort to make battlefield conduct comply with human rights law---that’s net offense against both advantages Geoffrey Corn 10, Professor of Law and Presidential Research Professor, South Texas College of Law, 2010, “Mixing Apples and Hand Grenades: The Logical Limit of Applying Human Rights Norms to Armed Con?ict,” International Humanitarian Legal Studies 1 (2010) 52–94 Perhaps the most critical premise of this article is that failing to recognize the existence AND produce results that are consistent with the very nature of armed con?ict. 11 Each of these outcomes is problematic. In the ? rst instance, noncompliance inevitably AND of overbroad application creates the potent to disable the e?cacy of military operations.
Codification
Retaining legal authority to revert back from current policy restrictions as the threat changes is key to counter-terror Italics in original Geoffrey Corn 10-1, The Presidential Research Professor of Law at South Texas College of Law, Lieutenant Colonel (Retired), U.S. Army, was formerly the Army’s senior law of war expert advisor, 10/1/13, “Debate (Round 2): A Reply to Rona and Jinks,” http://justsecurity.org/2013/10/01/debate-round-ii-reply-corn/ Professor Jinks assertion of a complementary role for IHL and IHR suggests certain human rights AND , and no place is this more compelling than in the targeting process.
The option to use lethal force as a first resort is key to the entire conduct of hostilities---the plan requires individualized assessments of immediate personal danger to our troops before deadly force can be used---that collapses battlefield effectiveness---and the link is all specific to their distinction between Obama policy in the squo and legal requirements after the plan Geoffrey Corn 10, Professor of Law and Presidential Research Professor, South Texas College of Law, 2010, “Mixing Apples and Hand Grenades: The Logical Limit of Applying Human Rights Norms to Armed Con?ict,” International Humanitarian Legal Studies 1 (2010) 52–94 The most profound distinction between regulating government power in armed con?ict versus peacetime exists in AND enemy combatant, the e?ectiveness of combat capability will inevitably be diluted. 118
*Link---First Resort Outside of “hot” battlefields it’s drones or nothing---other first resort options aren’t politically viable Rosa Brooks 13, Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center and Bernard L. Schwartz Senior Fellow, New America Foundation, 4/23/13, “The Constitutional and Counterterrorism Implications of Targeted Killing,” http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/pdf/04-23-13BrooksTestimony.pdf This increasing use of drone strikes to go after individuals with more and more tenuous AND terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations, or persons.” The AUMF’s language appears to restrict the use of force both with regard to who AND or capability to engage in acts of international terrorism against the United States? 3. The true costs of current US drone policy When we come to rely excessively on drone strikes as a counterterrorism tool, this has potential costs of its own. Drones strikes enable a "short-term fix" approach to counterterrorism, one that relies excessively on eliminating specific individuals deemed to be a threat, without much discussion of whether this strategy is likely to produce long-term security gains. Most counter-terrorism experts agree that in the long-term, terrorist organizations AND out against them and residents report their activities and identities to the authorities. A comprehensive counterterrorist strategy recognizes this, and therefore relies heavily on activities intended to undermine terrorist credibility within populations, as well as on activities designed to disrupt terrorist communications and financing. Much of the time, these are the traditional tools of intelligence and law enforcement. Kinetic force undeniably has a role to play in counterterrorism in certain circumstances, but it is rarely a magic bullet. In addition, overreliance on kinetic tools at the expense of other approaches can be AND , drone strikes are increasingly causing dismay and concern within the US population. As the Obama administration increases its reliance on drone strikes as the counterterrorism tool of AND Iraq war, are we creating terrorists faster than we kill them?27 At the moment, there is little evidence that US drone policy – or individual drone strikes—result from a comprehensive assessment of strategic costs and benefits, as opposed to a shortsighted determination to strike targets of opportunity, regardless of long-term impact. As a military acquaintance of mine memorably put it, drone strikes remain “a tactic in search of a strategy.” 4. Drones and the rule of law Mr. Chairman, I would like to turn now to the legal framework applicable AND requirements as the use of other lawful means and methods of warfare.28 But if drones used in traditional armed conflicts or traditional self-defense situations present no “new” legal issues, some of the activities and policies enabled and facilitated by drone technologies pose significant challenges to existing legal frameworks. As I have discussed above, the availability of perceived low cost of drone technologies AND traditional or “hot” battlefields that their use challenges existing legal frameworks.
New detentions are politically impossible---requiring capture before killing means we won’t do either Lisa Hajjar 12, chair of the Law and Society Program at the University of California, Santa Barbara, Fall 2012, “Anatomy of the US Targeted Killing Policy,” Middle East Report, No. 264, http://www.merip.org/mer/mer264/anatomy-us-targeted-killing-policy?ip_login_no_cache=fe0d21bdc1a90052f29270e6930e1752 These uncertain answers in the spring of 2011 highlighted the lack of a clear detention AND members of the enemy going forward creates a heightened incentive to kill people.”
Targeted killings using drones are literally incapable of offering surrender---means the plan results in banning drones everywhere outside Afghanistan Michael W. Lewis 12, Associate Professor of Law at Ohio Northern University Pettit College of Law, Spring 2012, “ARTICLE: SYMPOSIUM: THE 2009 AIR AND MISSILE WARFARE MANUAL: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS: Drones and the Boundaries of the Battlefield,” Texas International Law Journal, p. lexis The legal determination of what constitutes "the battlefield" has particular significance for the AND that an opportunity to surrender be offered before lethal force is employed. n38 Because drones are incapable of offering surrender before utilizing lethal force, armed drones may AND adapt their operating procedures to comply with IHRL's requirements. Armed drones cannot. *301 As a result, the debate about what constitutes the legal AND is accepted, then drone use would be considered illegal everywhere outside Afghanistan.
1NC/2NC SOF Stuff Combined
Retaining the legal option of first resort killing is key to military training---breaking that paradigm collapses operational effectiveness Geoffrey Corn 10, Professor of Law and Presidential Research Professor, South Texas College of Law, 2010, “Mixing Apples and Hand Grenades: The Logical Limit of Applying Human Rights Norms to Armed Con?ict,” International Humanitarian Legal Studies 1 (2010) 52–94 Furthermore, while it might be tempting to assume that shifting from one use of AND of lawful targeting of military objectives that is the focus or proportionality analysis.
Specifically, special forces conduct first-resort targeted killings outside of armed conflict zones 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 readiness is 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.
Special forces are key to disarm rogues’ nuclear programs---the alternative is U.S. counterforce nuclear strikes which cause extinction 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 Finally, if the United States goes to war with a nuclear-armed adversary AND a viable unconventional regime-change option when confronting WMD-armed adversaries.
Case
Kris
That solves safe havens and extradition to the US court system David S. Kris 11 – Former Assistant Attorney General for National Security at the U.S. Department of Justice, Law Enforcement as a Counterterrorism Tool, Assistant Attorney General for National Security at the U.S. Department of Justice, from March 2009 to March 2011, Journal of Security Law and Policy, Vol5:1. 2011, http://jnslp.com//wp-content/uploads/2011/06/01_David-Kris.pdf Finally, the criminal justice system may help us obtain important cooperation from other countries AND because they do¶ not face charges pending in the¶ foreign nation.
Coop Inevitable – Self-Interest EU cooperation on terrorism intel high and inevitable – in their self interest Kristin Archick, European affairs specialist @ CRS, 9-4-2013, “U.S.-EU Cooperation Against Terrorism,” Congressional Research Service, http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RS22030.pdf As part of its drive to bolster its counterterrorism capabilities, the EU has also AND have been working together to curb terrorist financing and to strengthen transport security.
Allies not key Allied coop on law enforcement is unnecessary and has lots of barriers Kristin Archick, European affairs specialist @ CRS, 9-4-2013, “U.S.-EU Cooperation Against Terrorism,” Congressional Research Service, http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RS22030.pdf Despite these growing U.S.-EU ties and agreements in the law enforcement AND provision of legal assistance and the extradition of terrorist suspects in some cases.
Resilient/High 1NC No Pakistani collapse Sunil Dasgupta '13 Ph.D. in political science and the director of UMBC's Political Science Program and a senior fellow at Brookings, 2/25/13, "How will India respond to civil war in Pakistan," East Asia Forum, http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2013/02/25/how-will-india-respond-to-civil-war-in-pakistan/ Bill Keller of the New York Times has described Pakistani president Asif Ail Zardari as AND out a Pakistani civil war while covertly coordinating policy with the United States.
Executive Overview The combo solves every possible deficit Gregory McNeal 13, Associate Professor of Law, Pepperdine University, 3/5/13, “Targeted Killing and Accountability,” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1819583 Perhaps the most obvious way to add accountability to the targeted killing process is for AND post 9/11 targeted killings. In fact, James Baker once noted "In my experience, the United States does a better job at incorporating intelligence AND the decision cycle for that subset of targets raising the hardest issues…"519 Publicly defending the process is a natural fit for public accountability mechanisms. It provides AND control, thus their caution is understandable (albeit self-serving).520 It’s not just the Executive branch that can benefit from a healthier defense of the process. Congress too can bolster the legitimacy of the program by specifying how they have conducted their oversight activities. The best mechanism by which they can do this is through a white paper. That paper could include: A statement about why the committees believe the U.S. government's use of AND publicly withdraw our support for the program, and terminate funding for it." A statement detailing the breadth and depth of Congressional oversight activities. When Senator Feinstein AND improper targeting? Are the members satisfied that internal disciplinary procedures are adequate? 3) Congressional assessment of the foreign relations implications of the program. The Constitution AND us to question the wisdom and perhaps even the legality of the program." Solves---Allies Transparency solves allied perception, blowback, and drone norms while maintaining the counter-terror benefits of targeted killings Michael Aaronson 13, Professorial Research Fellow and Executive Director of cii – the Centre for International Intervention – at the University of Surrey, and Adrian Johnson, Director of Publications at RUSI, the book reviews editor for the RUSI Journal, and chair of the RUSI Editorial Board, “Conclusion,” in Hitting the Target?: How New Capabilities are Shaping International Intervention, ed. Aaronson and Johnson, http://www.rusi.org/downloads/assets/Hitting_the_Target.pdf The Obama administration faces some tough dilemmas, and analysts should be careful not to AND kinetic element of a solution to terrorism that is, ultimately, political. Solves Norms Executive-branch transparency and bringing U.S. practice in line with policy builds the international diplomatic capital to press for drone norms Kristin Roberts 13, News Editor, National Journal, 3/22/13, “When the Whole World Has Drones,” http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/when-the-whole-world-has-drones-20130321 But even without raising standards, tightening up drone-specific restrictions in the standing AND , or 15 years—might find helpful in arguing against another’s actions. A not-insignificant faction of U.S. defense and intelligence experts, AND some weapons, including land mines, blinding lasers, and nuclear bombs. Arguably more significant than spotty legal regimes, however, is the behavior of the AND policy that it did most recently on “enhanced interrogation” of terrorists. The case against open, transparent rule-making is that it might only hamstring AND operations manual for other nations but a legal and moral one as well. Only the CP solves the case---moving too fast to restrict targeted killing’s ineffective---starting with the CP’s legal transparency’s more effective Afsheen John Radsan 12, Professor, William Mitchell College of Law, Assistant General Counsel at the Central Intelligence Agency from 2002 to 2004; and Richard Murphy, the ATandT Professor of Law, Texas Tech University School of Law, 2012, “The Evolution of Law and Policy for CIA Targeted Killing,” Journal of National Security Law and Policy, Vol. 5, p. 439-463 A thorough review of the arguments against the CIA drone campaign, however, shows AND (or perhaps unwilling) to control the threat these armed groups pose. Although critics of the CIA drone program do not demonstrate that its strikes are clearly AND by its terms, demands “intelligence-driven use of force.”5 To facilitate the evolution of a “due process” of targeted killing, in AND likely to be the most sensitive. Take Pakistan as one possible example. We do not expect opponents of CIA drones to give up their rhetorical weapon claiming AND and non-lawyers alike, are welcome to advise him on drones. AT: CP Not Durable It’s durable Adrian Johnson 13, Director of Publications, Royal United Services Institute, 5/3/13, “Mr Emmerson Takes on Washington,” http://www.rusi.org/publications/newsbrief/ref:A5183D24D108B9/#.UizUn9L_l8E It is difficult to assess the conduct of the drone campaign with reasonable certainty, Foust points out, if the debate relies on anecdote and data smuggled out of areas in which the traditional organs of civil society, like journalists and NGOs, cannot easily operate. And without more clarity on the administration’s targeting criteria, it is hard to reach definitive judgements on whether it is indeed respecting the principles of proportionality, discrimination and imminence. Solves Signal---2NC The CP signals restraint of the “global battlefield” paradigm---current policy incorporates U.S. legal obligations under the law of armed conflict---the CP ensures that remains the case while preserving the executive’s overall flexibility Geoffrey Corn 13, Professor of Law and Presidential Research Professor, South Texas College of Law, 5/16/13, Statement before the Senate Armed Services Committee, CQ Congressional Testimony, lexis The authority for, scope of, and means used to prosecute the armed conflict AND similar authorizations for the conduct of armed hostilities, and is therefore unsurprising. The undefined scope does not, however, suggest an unlimited grant of authority, AND regulate the use of military force, namely the law of armed conflict. Norms AT: Senkaku No Sino-Japanese/Senkaku conflict Reuters 12, “Japan, China military conflict seen unlikely despite strain,” 9/23/12, http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/23/us-china-japan-confrontation-idUSBRE88M0F220120923 Hawkish Chinese commentators have urged Beijing to prepare for military conflict with Japan as tensions AND military confrontation what is already the worst crisis in bilateral ties in decades.
No Caucases Impact Empirically denied Structural barriers prevent instability Weitz 12 (Richard, writes a weekly column on Asia-Pacific strategic and security issues. He is director of the Center for Political-Military Analysis and a Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute. His commentaries have appeared in the International Herald Tribune, The Guardian and Wall Street Journal (Europe), among other publications. “Stabilizing the Stans”, 6/1, http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/stabilizing-the-stans) Social disorder in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and other Arab countries has invariably led observers to regard Central Asia’s autocracies as potentially vulnerable to similar upheaval. Some Central Asian leaders have been in power for many years, and only Kyrgyzstan, the most impoverished of the five, has developed a competitive multi-party political system. Elsewhere, political parties are weak or are tools of the regime. But other factors make the Arab scenario less plausible in Central Asia.
Security forces are more closely aligned with ruling elites; independent political groups and social-media networks are less well developed; economic performance remains high in some countries; and a previous wave of revolutions produced disappointing results in Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan.
10/6/13
4 Clay vs MoSt BR
Tournament: Kentucky | Round: 7 | Opponent: Missouri State Bess-Rumbaugh | Judge: Weiner 1nc Off 1NC The aff is not topical --- introducing armed forces only refers to human troops, not weapons systems such as nuclear weapons --- prefer our interpretation because it’s based on textual analysis, legislative history, and intent of the WPR Lorber 13 – Eric Lorber, J.D. Candidate, University of Pennsylvania Law School, Ph.D Candidate, Duke University Department of Political Science. January 2013, "Executive Warmaking Authority and Offensive Cyber Operations: Can Existing Legislation Successfully Constrain Presidential Power?" University of Pennsylvania Journal of Contsitutional Law, 15 U. Pa. J. Const. L. 961, lexis nexis As is evident from a textual analysis, n177 an examination of the legislative history AND is highly unlikely - such operations will not trigger the War Powers Resolution. Vote negative for predictable limits --- nuclear weapons is a whole topic on its own --- requires research into a whole separate literature base --- undermines preparedness for all debates.
1NC Judicial deference is stable now but the plan’s precedent collapses it John O’Connor 7, Former officer in the Marine Corp and Judge Advocate; JD, U Maryland Law School. Statistics and the Military Deference Doctrine: a Response to Professor Lichtman, 66 Md. L. Rev. 668, Lexis As I have written elsewhere, one of the most important aspects of the military AND or no actual deference to the policy determinations of Congress and the President. But early indications from the Roberts Court, with Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito AND when Congress legislates pursuant to its constitutional power to raise and support armies: The Constitution grants Congress the power to “provide for the common Defence,” “ AND ” when Congress legislates under its authority to raise and support armies.179 While it is always dangerous to draw conclusions from a single case, all participating AND every other member of the Court joined an opinion applying it in FAIR. V. Conclusion This Article is by no means an attempt to catalogue every military deference case decided AND not - apply to statutes and regulations burdening civilians instead of military personnel. The military deference doctrine is, at once, both historically immature and limited, AND there is no sign that such an upheaval is anywhere on the horizon.
Deference is vital to effective executive crisis response --- solves terror, rogue states, and prolif Robert Blomquist 10, Professor of Law, Valparaiso University School of Law, THE JURISPRUDENCE OF AMERICAN NATIONAL SECURITY PRESIPRUDENCE, 44 Val. U.L. Rev. 881 Supreme Court Justices--along with legal advocates--need to conceptualize and prioritize big AND hyper-energy in the Executive branch in responding to these threats. n16 The Justices should also consult Professor Robert S. Summers's masterful elaboration and amplification of AND of Congress) to preserve, protect, and defend the Nation. n22 *886 B. Geopolitical Strategic Considerations Bearing on Judicial Interpretation Before the United States Supreme Court Justices form an opinion on the legality of national AND security facts and conceptions before sitting in judgment on presiprudential national security determinations. (1) "National security policy . . . is harder today because the AND -traffickers support terrorists, and terrorists align themselves with regional powers." n27 (2) "Yet, as worrisome as these immediate concerns may be, the long-term challenges are even harder to deal with, and the stakes are higher. Whereas the main Cold War threat--the Soviet Union--was brittle, most of the potential adversaries and challengers America now faces are resilient." n28 (3) "The most important task for U.S. national security AND When you do not hold the strategic advantage, they do not." n30 (4) While "keeping the strategic advantage may not have the idealistic ring of making the world safe for democracy and does not sound as decisively macho as maintaining American hegemony," n31 maintaining the American "strategic advantage is critical, because it is essential for just about everything else America hopes to achieve--promoting freedom, protecting the homeland, defending its values, preserving peace, and so on." n32 (5) The United States requires national security "agility." n33 It not only needs "to refocus its resources repeatedly; it needs to do this faster than an adversary can focus its own resources." n34 *888 As further serious preparation for engaging in the jurisprudence of American AND stake. This is the kind of knowledge suited to a Jacksonian." n39 Turning to how the Supreme Court should view and interpret American presidential measures to oversee AND ," n48 as determined by the POTUS and his national security executive subordinates.
1NC The President of the United States should not authorize the introduction of nuclear armed forces into hostilities against a government for inadvertently releasing nuclear material used in an attack against the United States or its allies. The United States Federal Government should require Congressional authorization prior to initiating offensive use of military force.
Solves group think Annette Dickerson 9, Director of Education and Outreach for the Center for Constitutional Rights, Restore. Protect. Expand. Amend the War Powers Resolution, http://ccrjustice.org/files/CCR_White_WarPowers.pdf
Reform the War Powers Resolution The War Powers Resolution has failed. Every president since the enactment of the Act AND seek relief, or that the claim presents non-justifiable political questions. The War Powers Resolution, as written, was flawed in several key respects. AND in is before hostilities are commenced, not 60 or 90 days afterward. Secondly, the War Powers Resolution correctly recognized that even congressional silence, inaction or AND responded by effectually saying: if Congress did nothing, why should we? Reforming the War Powers Resolution is a project that will require leadership from the President and the political will of Congress, working together in the service and preservation of the Constitution. In light of the abuses that have taken place under the Bush administration, it is the responsibility of a new administration to insist on transparency in the drafting of new legislation. There is a long history of attempts to revise the War Powers Resolution. As new legislation is drafted, though, it will be important to focus on the central constitutional issues. Much time has been spent in debating how to address contingencies. It will be impossible to write into law any comprehensive formula for every conceivable situation, though; much more important will be establishing the fundamental principles of reform: The War Powers Resolution should explicitly prohibit executive acts of war without previous Congressional authorization. The only exception should be the executive’s power in an emergency to use short-term force to repel sudden attacks on US territories, troops or citizens. It is true that many potential conflict situations will be murky, complicated or divisive, and that quick congressional action may not always be forthcoming. Yet, history shows the folly of launching wars that are not supported by the American people. The United States should not use military force until a substantial consensus develops in Congress and the public that military force is necessary, appropriate and wise. Today, as in 1787, the reality is that the interests of the people AND disguised as preemptive war, has no place in constitutional or international law.
1NC
The Court’s pursuing an incremental strategy in regards to War Powers now---the plan causes massive backlash and executive non-acquiescence Neavl Devins 10, Goodrich Professor of Law and Professor of Government, College of William and Mary., Talk Loudly and Carry a Small Stick: The Supreme Court and Enemy Combatants, 12 U. Pa. J. Const. L. 491 Congress, the President, and the Court. Throughout the enemy combatant litigation, AND without setting meaningful boundaries on what the administration could or could not do. Congress will backlash against the plan and cut judicial pay Philip A. Talmadge 99, Justice, Washington State Supreme Court, Winter, Seattle University Law Review, 22 Seattle Univ. L. R. 695, p. 701-704 The doctrine of judicial restraint has been encrusted in recent years with considerable ideological cant AND in the principles of restraint employed in the federal and state court systems. Adequate funding for the judiciary is key to the rule of law – it’s watched internationally Testimony of Associate Justice Anthony M. Kennedy 7 before the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary Judicial Security and Independence February 14, http://judiciary.senate.gov/testimony.cfm?id=2526andwit_id=6070 The provision of judicial resources by Congress over the years is admirable in most respects AND of views. Please permit me to make some remarks on the subject. That causes nuclear war gender paraphrased. Charles S. Rhyne 58, Founder and Senior Partner of Rhyne and Rhyne law firm. “Law Day Speech for Voice of America.” May 1, American Bar Association. http://www.abanet.org/publiced/lawday/rhyne58.html In these days of soul-searching and re-evaluation and inventorying of basic AND to replace weapons before the dreadful holocaust of nuclear war overtake our people. 1NC The United States federal judiciary should rule that the war powers authority of the President of the United States to introduce nuclear armed forces into hostilities against a government for inadvertently releasing nuclear material used in an attack against the United States or its allies without Congressional approval will be limited to retaliation against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and that nuclear use will not be considered if the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea notifies the United States of an inadvertent release of nuclear material before such material is used in an attack on the United States or its allies.
The United States federal government should repudiate and ban policies authorizing nuclear use against governments other than the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea for inadvertently releasing nuclear material used in an attack against the United States or its allies.
The United States federal government should substantially increase resources devoted to nuclear forensics and attribution, including fallout forensics, the establishment of an international database of nuclear tags, and publicly disclosing successful results of nuclear attribution missions.
The counterplan solves the case---North Korea is a crucial exception to every aff argument Limiting retaliation for negligence to North Korea eliminates the threat of retaliation against Russia and Pakistan, the two states that are key to the entire case---and deterrence is uniquely successful against North Korea Levi 8 – Michael A. Levi, the David M. Rubenstein senior fellow for energy and the environment at the Council on Foreign Relations, previously fellow for science and technology at CFR, “Deterring State Sponsorship of Nuclear Terrorism,” online: http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/Nuclear_Deterrence_CSR39.pdf Threatening retaliation against countries like Russia and Pakistan in response to terrorist attacks stemming from AND , in most cases, emphasize cooperation instead while explicitly ruling out retribution. North Korea is a critical exception: it is unique among nuclear states in that AND that U.S. strategy does not dangerously and unnecessarily provoke Pyongyang.
The counterplan is goldilocks---eliminating threats against states other than North Korea means they’ll cooperate on attribution---that massively boosts our ability to attribute transfers to North Korea. This makes the CP’s threat of retaliation credible and internationally accepted. Levi 8 – Michael A. Levi, the David M. Rubenstein senior fellow for energy and the environment at the Council on Foreign Relations, previously fellow for science and technology at CFR, “Deterring State Sponsorship of Nuclear Terrorism,” online: http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/Nuclear_Deterrence_CSR39.pdf Attribution efforts should not, in most cases, be aimed at directly bolstering a AND threats of retaliation will help encourage the information sharing involved in such efforts. Second, and of greater direct relevance here, U.S. efforts should AND the world, complicating efforts to positively identify the source of any materials. Building better capacity to exclude other countries with similar facilities as sources of materials would AND the United States will need to be flexible in how it approaches deterrence.
The net-benefit---threatening retaliation against inadvertent North Korean transfers is vital to deterring nuclear terrorism. North Korea will respond to the plan by transferring nuclear weapons and claiming that it was inadvertent---this guarantees nuclear terror Levi 8 – Michael A. Levi, the David M. Rubenstein senior fellow for energy and the environment at the Council on Foreign Relations, previously fellow for science and technology at CFR, “Deterring State Sponsorship of Nuclear Terrorism,” online: http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/Nuclear_Deterrence_CSR39.pdf Uncertainty surrounding attribution is, of course, compounded by uncertainty regarding North Korean intent AND that can be traced to North Korea. This second option is wisest. A policy that allows for retaliation only if the United States is certain that an AND as it would if faced with a North Korean missile or bomber attack.
Case Adv 1 No Retal No retaliation Ruwe 8 (Daniel, 5/27, http://danielruwe.blogspot.com/2008/05/barack-obama-gaffe-machine.html) Another revealing Obama quote is his answer to a debate question regarding a hypothetical terrorist AND . This quote is revealing because he rarely enunciates this idea so openly. No nuclear retaliation Korb 10 (Lawrence J. Korb “Obama's Nuclear Policy Enhances America's Moral Position, Security” http://politics.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2010/04/26/obamas-nuclear-policy-enhances-americas-moral-position-security.html 4/26/10) The policy of not using nuclear weapons against nonnuclear states was first enunciated back in AND weapon on us, we would have to retaliate on a conventional basis." Russia The risk of nuclear theft in Russia is low Bunn 10 Matthew Bunn, Associate Professor at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, “Securing the Bomb 2010,” http://www.nti.org/media/pdfs/Securing_The_Bomb_2010.pdf?_=1317159794 When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, many important elements of nuclear security— AND Nuclear Security Upgrades in Russia and the Eurasian States,” p. 35.) Throughout the Russian nuclear complex, the most egregious weaknesses of the past—gaping AND . 26 Nevertheless, there remain strong grounds for concern, discussed below.
No Russia war---no motive or capability Betts 13 Richard is the Arnold A. Saltzman Professor of War and Peace Studies @ Columbia. “The Lost Logic of Deterrence,” Foreign Affairs, March/April, Vol. 92, Issue 2, Online These continuities with the Cold War would make sense only between intense adversaries. Washington AND , it is not the vanguard of a globe-spanning revolutionary ideal.
Pakistan Pitt is a NYT news writer, no credibility and should be thrown out No scenario for nuclear acquisition from Pakistan Michael Clarke '13, PhD in Asian and International Studies and an Australian Research Council (ARC) Research Fellow at the Griffith Asia Institute, 4/17/13, "Pakistan and Nuclear Terrorism: How Real is the Threat?" Comparative Strategy, Vol. 32 No.2 C2= command and control system- ensures that the state's nuclear weapons will only be used according to the principles of its nuclear doctrine This article demonstrates that while nuclear terrorism is indeed possible, there remain significant obstacles AND and complex barriers to terrorists acquiring intact weapons and fissile or radiological material.
No Pakistani collapse Sunil Dasgupta '13 Ph.D. in political science and the director of UMBC's Political Science Program and a senior fellow at Brookings, 2/25/13, "How will India respond to civil war in Pakistan," East Asia Forum, http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2013/02/25/how-will-india-respond-to-civil-war-in-pakistan/ Bill Keller of the New York Times has described Pakistani president Asif Ail Zardari as AND out a Pakistani civil war while covertly coordinating policy with the United States.
Adv 2 – PQD No Solvency
There’s no chance the plan spills over---the plan will just be distinguished away Jonathan L. Entin 12, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs (School of Law), David L. Brennan Professor of Law, and Professor of Political Science, Case Western Reserve University. War Powers, Foreign Affairs, and the Courts: Some Institutional Considerations, 45 Case W. Res. J. Int'l L. 443 Although these procedural and jurisdictional barriers to judicial review can be overcome, those who AND both rulings, n108 the Supreme Court declined to review either case. n109
The plan can’t set a precedent---Roberts is a sly dog William D. Araiza, Law Prof @ Brooklyn, Summer 2012, “PLAYING WELL WITH OTHERS-BUT STILL WINNING,” 46 Ga. L. Rev. 1059, ln How can a judge undermine precedent while still following it? This Essay considers the AND as faithful to stare decisis while nevertheless pushing the law away from precedents.
Offense Setting a precedent against the PQD spills over to climate change cases---litigants are turning to the Courts now and asking them to abrogate the PQD Laurence H. Tribe 10, the Carl M. Loeb University Professor, Harvard Law School; Joshua D. Branson, J.D., Harvard Law School and NDT Champion, Northwestern University; and Tristan L. Duncan, Partner, Shook, Hardy and Bacon L.L.P., January 2010, “TOOHOTFORCOURTSTO HANDLE: FUEL TEMPERATURES, GLOBAL WARMING, AND THE POLITICAL QUESTION DOCTRINE,” http://www.wlf.org/Upload/legalstudies/workingpaper/012910Tribe_WP.pdf Two sets of problems, one manifested at a microcosmic level and the other about AND constitutionally deficient—and structurally unsound—mechanism for remedying temperature’s unwanted effects. It has been axiomatic throughout our constitutional history that there exist some questions beyond the AND “a lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving it.”3 The spectrum of nonjusticiable political questions in a sense spans the poles formed by these AND courts must be principled, rational, and based upon reasoned distinctions.”4 At a deeper level, however, the two poles collapse into one. The AND issue, even if broadly and implicitly, to the political branches.5 It has become commonplace that confusion and controversy have long distinguished the doctrine that determines AND cases demonstrates, the political question doctrine is feeling heat from both directions.
That crushes global coordination necessary to solve climate change Laurence H. Tribe 10, the Carl M. Loeb University Professor, Harvard Law School; Joshua D. Branson, J.D., Harvard Law School and NDT Champion, Northwestern University; and Tristan L. Duncan, Partner, Shook, Hardy and Bacon L.L.P., January 2010, “TOOHOTFORCOURTSTO HANDLE: FUEL TEMPERATURES, GLOBAL WARMING, AND THE POLITICAL QUESTION DOCTRINE,” http://www.wlf.org/Upload/legalstudies/workingpaper/012910Tribe_WP.pdf But that being said, if the Second Circuit was implying that such claims are AND influence and be influenced by the delicate state of international climate negotiations.45 Against this backdrop, courts would be wise to heed the conclusion of one report AND n insufficient number of participants will doom an emissions trading market.”49 There is no doubt that the “Copenhagen Accord only begins the battle” against AND involved parties, are the only ones constitutionally entitled to fight that battle. CONCLUSION Some prognosticators opine that the political question doctrine has fallen into disrepute and that it AND the climate of the times and its implications for how we govern ourselves.
Warming is real, anthropogenic and causes extinction Flournoy 12 -- Citing Feng Hsu, PhD NASA Scientist @ the Goddard Space Flight AND , Springer Briefs in Space Development, Book, p. 10-11 In the Online Journal of Space Communication , Dr. Feng Hsu, a NASA AND simply too high for us to take any chances” (Hsu 2010 )
AT: Groupthink Courts don’t need to get involved with nuclear weapons – no evidence on this – CX proves they have ZERO internal link *Groupthink theory is wrong Anthony Hempell 4, User Experience Consulting Senior Information Architect, “Groupthink: An introduction to Janis' theory of concurrence-seeking tendencies in group work., http://www.anthonyhempell.com/papers/groupthink/, March 3 In the thirty years since Janis first proposed the groupthink model, there is still AND 1986, p. 399; cited by Choi and Kim, 1999).
Block
Exec
Public declaration
XOs, proclamations, memorandum, etc are legally binding---we can call our CP whatever we want Graham G. Dodds 13, Associate Professor, pol sci, Concordia. Take Up Your Pen: Unilateral Presidential Directives in American Politics, 9-10 Beyond executive orders, proclamations, and memoranda, there are several other types of AND with by Congress. courts, or by a future unilateral presidential directive.
Presidential commitments credible Marvin Kalb 13, Nonresident Senior Fellow at Foreign Policy, James Clark Welling Presidential Fellow, The George Washington University Edward R. Murrow Professor of Practice (Emeritus), Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, 2013, "The Road to War," book,pg. 7-8, www.brookings.edu//media/press/books/2013/theroadtowar/theroadtowar_samplechapter.pdf As we learned in Vietnam and in the broader Middle East, a presidential commitment AND standard, even if the gold does not glitter as once it did.
DA
Link
Court involvement in national security causes massive blowback that crushes judicial legitimacy Robert M. Chesney 9, Professor, University of Texas School of Law, NATIONAL SECURITY FACT DEFERENCE, 95 Va. L. Rev. 1361 Judicial involvement in national security litigation, as noted at the outset, poses unusual AND and authority or perhaps even by triggering some form of concrete political response.
Court stripping destroys judicial legitimacy and separation of powers---even unsuccessful backlash can put the entire edifice of judicial review in question Andrew D. Martin 1, Prof of Political Science at Washington University 2001. Statuatory Battles and Constitutional Wars: Congress and the Supreme Court But the large policy payoff in the constitutional cases. What does the ability of AND which the justices may feel in the not-so-distant future.
The Court has zero legitimacy in foreign affairs cases which means the plan will be ignored---backlash will prompt Congress to question judicial review on domestic issues---that’s obviously way worse for all their modeling advs Jide Nzelibe 4, Bigelow Fellow and Lecturer in Law, University of Chicago Law School, March, “The Uniqueness of Foreign Affairs,” 89 Iowa L. Rev. 941, Lexis In many contexts, the courts are reluctant to involve themselves in foreign affairs controversies AND among numerous actors, many of whom do not face judicial restrictions." n220
2NC Link Wall Congress perceives plan as activist, that means they’ll cut pay, the impact is judicial independence and terrorism HARLINGTON WOOD Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. New York University Annual Survey of American Law 2001 Since the federal judges are protected from unjustified removal, is it nevertheless possible to AND crises, or the terrorists will have achieved some part of their goal. Best studies prove congress will cut pay and the judiciary will respond by not adhering to your precedent Frank B. Cross*, Herbert D. Kelleher Centennial Professor of Business Law at the McCombs School, University of Texas, and Professor of Law at the University of Texas Law School. Blake J. Nelson Assistant Professor of Political Science, Pennsylvania State University, Harrisburg. Article: Strategic Institutional Effects On Supreme Court Decisionmaking Northwestern University Law Review Summer, 2001 There is empirical evidence that Congress pays attention to Supreme Court decisions and punishes undesirable AND 209 Congress may achieve indirectly through appropriations what it cannot do directly. 210
Pay cuts and budget stripping results from congressionally unpopular rulings Frank B. Cross*, Herbert D. Kelleher Centennial Professor of Business Law at the McCombs School, University of Texas, and Professor of Law at the University of Texas Law School. Blake J. Nelson Assistant Professor of Political Science, Pennsylvania State University, Harrisburg. Article: Strategic Institutional Effects On Supreme Court Decisionmaking Northwestern University Law Review Summer, 2001 Distinct from, but analogous to, jurisdiction stripping is the creation of non- AND has both the power and inclination to manipulate appropriations to the courts. 184
2NC Latin America Impact 1NC Kennedy evidence says judicial salaries are modeled globally – we’re the envy of the world Latin American salaries are key to judicial independence and checking the executive World Bank Fechnical Paper Number 319 9 1996The Judicial Sector in Latin America and the Caribbean http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:wW7QdZw3Eb4J:www.bancomundial.org.br/content/_downloadblob.php3Fcod_blob3D546+22latin+america22+22judicial+salaries22andhl=enandct=clnkandcd=7andgl=usandclient=firefox-a It is also important that the individual judges have personal independence. Personal independence refers AND this oversight and consultation, economic reforms may be unstable and subject to reversal Failure of Latin American democratization nuclear conflict Donald Schulz, Chairman of the Political Science Department at Cleveland State University, March 2000, The United States and Latin America: Shaping an Elusive Future, p. 3and26-28, http://stinet.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA375197andLocation=U2anddoc=GetTRDoc.pdf In short, democracy and economic integration are not simply value preferences, but are AND the United States, and is now considered a non-NATO ally. Schulz continues Until recently, the primary U.S. concern about Brazil has been that AND heightened politico-military rivalry between different blocs or coalitions in the hemisphere.
Tism Adv
2NC AT Retal---No Retal No one would support retaliation --- their public outcry arguments ignore backlash against Iraq and Afghanistan Bremmer 4—IR prof, Columbia. Faculty member at Stanford’s Hoover Institution. Senior Fellow, World Policy Institute. PhD in pol sci, Stanford (Ian, 11/13, Suppose a new 9/11 hit America . . ., http://www.newstatesman.com/200409130005) What would happen if there were a new terrorist attack inside the United States on AND the international outcry it would provoke would make quick action against Iran unthinkable. Recent events prove he won’t retaliate IMB 11 (11 July 2011, Israel Matzav Blogspot, Obama's response to attack on US embassy in Damascus: He's going to file a lawsuit, http://israelmatzav.blogspot.com/2011/07/obamas-response-to-attack-on-us-embassy.html) In an earlier post, I reported on attacks on the American and French embassies in Damascus by pro-Assad 'demonstrators.' I now have some updates on that post. The US State Department on Monday formally condemned Syria for failing to protect the US embassy complex in Damascus from a violent assault it said was encouraged by a pro-government Syrian television station. "A television station that is heavily influenced by Syrian authorities encouraged this violent demonstration," a State Department spokesperson said in a statement." So what does the world's only superpower do? Send in the Marines to get the ambassador out and protect the embassy grounds? Not in the age of Obama. In the age of Obama the US threatens... to file a lawsuit. "We strongly condemn the Syrian government's refusal to protect our embassy, and demand compensation for damages. We call on the Syrian government to fulfill its obligations to its own citizens as well," the statement said. "We are calling in the Syrian charge d'affaires to complain," said the US official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "We feel they failed in their responsibility to protect US diplomats. We are going to condemn their slow response." Spoke on condition of anonymity? The Secretary of State hasn't got the junk to stand up there and say we're withdrawing our ambassador and instead a low-level functionary speaking on condition of anonymity is trotted out to threaten to summon the Syrian Charge d'Affaires?!? What happened to Teddy Roosevelt's 'speak softly and carry a big stick'? It looks like it's been replaced by Jimmy Carter's helicopter crash in the desert. Is this how Reagan would have responded? Is this how Bush II would have responded? Of course not. We would have seen Shock and Awe on all of Assad's palaces. Instead, Obama is going to file a lawsuit demanding compensation. What could go wrong? Obama won’t retaliate to a terrorist attack. AP 10 (AP, “United States Could 'Absorb' Another Terror Attack, Obama Says in Woodward Book,” September 22, 2010, http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/09/22/obama-divided-afghan-war-woodward-book/) President Obama, after being warned repeatedly by his advisers about the threat of another AND Times. Obama was among administration officials that Woodward interviewed for the book. No retaliation—US won’t sacrifice moral dignity Fisher 7—PhD candidate pol sci, U Colorado-Boulder (Uri, “Deterrence, Terrorism, and American Values,” February 2007, http://www.hsaj.org/?fullarticle=3.1.4)
In the aftermath of the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the AND , radiological, and nuclear weapons (CBRN), to materialize before acting. Alternatively, many commentators and researchers, especially in the field of political science, AND and expanding targeted killing operations to included terrorists’ family members and loved ones. Implementing policies such as these are the only ways to effectively deter elements of a AND controversy and disagreement have emerged over the morality and legality of such actions. The simplistic argument that terrorists cannot be deterred is reductionist. Additionally, those who argue that deterrence maintains significant utility in the U.S. war on terror fail to acknowledge the level of harshness and brutality required of U.S. policy to establish a deterrent mechanism against members of terrorist networks. What really prevents the U.S. from deterring terrorists is not the simple unsuitability of the strategic concept of deterrence, but America’s humanity, civility, and idealism. 2NC AT Retal---Not Nuclear Response wouldn’t be nuclear Alexander 95 – professor of history, Longwood U (Bevin, The Future of Warfare, http://www.bevinalexander.com/books/future-of-warfare-intro.htm)
An irrational dictator might use the bomb, and there's the chance that a terrorist AND to destroy the places in other countries where the guilty terrorists find refuge. No escalation Davis 2 – Professor of Policy Analysis, RAND Graduate School (Paul and Brian Jenkins, Deterrence and Influence in Counterterrorism, http://www.rand.org/publications/MR/MR1619/MR1619.pdf)
That is, al Qaeda could use WMD against the United States, but retaliation—and certainly escalation—would be difficult because (1) the United States will not use chemical, biological, or radiological weapons; (2) its nuclear weapons will seldom be suitable for use; and (3) there are no good targets (the terrorists themselves fade into the woodwork). Obama won’t use nukes to fight terrorism AP 7 – 8-2-07, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20093852/ WASHINGTON - Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama said Thursday he would not use nuclear weapons "in any circumstance" to fight terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan. "I think it would be a profound mistake for us to use nuclear weapons in any circumstance," Obama said, with a pause, "involving civilians." Then he quickly added, "Let me scratch that. There's been no discussion of nuclear weapons. That's not on the table."
Russia
Russian nuclear materials are secure Matthews and Nemtsova 11 Owen Matthews, Newsweek and The Daily Beast’s bureau chief in Moscow and Istanbul, and Anna Nemtsova, a correspondent for Newsweek and The Daily Beast based in Moscow; “A New Nuclear Scare Rocks Eastern Europe,” June 30 2011, http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/06/30/uranium-smuggling-arrests-in-moldova-revive-security-debate.html At the same time, Russian nuclear specialists have been quick to pour cold water AND decade. Novikov says, “This Moldovan story is grandmother’s fairy tales.” Experts in the U.S. agree that Russia has come a long way AND showing up on the black market in Leningrad, Istanbul, and Munich. Since then, in large part thanks to billions in assistance from the U. AND has been reduced to a fraction of what it was a decade ago.”
They wouldn’t know how to detonate them and the bombs wouldn’t work Mueller 7—pol sci prof and IR, Ohio State. Widely-recognized expert on terrorism threats in foreign policy. AB from U Chicago, MA in pol sci from UCLA and PhD in pol sci from UCLA (John, Reactions And Overreactions to Terrorism: The Atomic Obsession, 24 July 2007, http://psweb.sbs.ohio-state.edu/faculty/jmueller/APSA2007.PDF, AMiles) There has been a lot of worry about "loose nukes," particularly in post AND would have to be stolen and then opened successfully (2005, 502).
Stolen nukes can’t be deployed Frost 5 – intelligence analyst with the Canadian government (Robin, Adelphi, 45.378, December, “The nuclear black market”, InformaWorld)
Even if terrorists had been able to obtain any of these weapons, Sokov argues AND nuclear weapons - but Sokov is unusually well qualified to address the matter.
Deference AT: Deference Causes Lash-Out Court deference is at an all-time high --- most recent cases prove George D. Brown 11, Interim Dean and Robert F. Drinan, S.l., Professor of Law, Boston College Law School, 1/7/11, “Accountability, Liability, and the War on Terror -- Constitutional Tort Suits as Truth and Reconciliation Vehicles,” Florida Law Review, http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1337andcontext=lsfp Still, the notion of national security deference is deeply ingrained in our constitutional tradition AND stand in stark contrast to the habeas decisions of a few years earlier. Link---Perception Court involvement kills the perception of resolve----it emboldens adversaries John Yoo 6, Professor of Law, University of California at Berkeley School of Law, Courts At War, 91 Cornell L. Rev. 573 Article III itself also significantly limits the role of federal courts in performing certain functions AND of the judgment in that particular case would harm the national interest. n119 Judicial decisions may harm the national interest because courts cannot control the timing of their AND the executive branch, such deference may undermine any appearance of judicial independence. That collapses heg John R. Bolton 9, Senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and Former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, “The danger of Obama's dithering,” Los Angeles Times, October 18, http://articles.latimes.com/2009/oct/18/opinion/oe-bolton18 Weakness in American foreign policy in one region often invites challenges elsewhere, because our AND the face of criticism and adversity, engagement simply embodies weakness and indecision. Strict adherence to the political question doctrine now – aff obviously changes that Bradley 9/2 (Curtis A., William Van Alstyne Professor of Law – Duke Law School, “War Powers, Syria, and Non-Judicial Precedent,” Lawfare Blog, 2013, http://www.lawfareblog.com/2013/09/war-powers-syria-and-non-judicial-precedent/) As an initial matter, we need to bracket the issue of whether Obama’s action AND that might have motivated Obama to go to Congress with respect to Syria. SQ rulings haven’t clarified the legal debate---the plan does Jonathan L. Entin 12, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs (School of Law), David L. Brennan Professor of Law, and Professor of Political Science, Case Western Reserve University. War Powers, Foreign Affairs, and the Courts: Some Institutional Considerations, 45 Case W. Res. J. Int'l L. 443 To be sure, the Supreme Court has decided some well-known national security AND other legal issues that pervade the debate about presidential power and foreign affairs. Beyond the limitations of the Supreme Court rulings, the judiciary probably will not contribute very much to the debate. Various procedural and jurisdictional obstacles make it difficult for courts to address the merits of disputes about war powers and foreign affairs. Even if those obstacles can be surmounted, those who decry what they view as presidential excess should note that the judiciary typically has taken a deferential role in reviewing challenges to executive action.
AT: Knowles Judicial reviews prevents quick action during a crisis --- causes failure Robert Knowles 9, Acting Asst. Professor @ NYU School of Law, Spring, “American Hegemony and the Foreign Affairs Constitution,” 41 Ariz. St. L.J. 87, Lexis Nonetheless, foreign relations remain special, and courts must treat them differently in one AND issue does not fall within the President's textually-specified Article I powers. Judicial review hamstrings effective crisis response --- too inflexible and slow Eric Posner 7, the Kirkland and Ellis Professor of Law @ U-Chicago, and Adrian Vermeule, the John H. Watson, Jr. Professor of Law @ Harvard, Jan 4, “Terror in the Balance: Security, Liberty, and the Courts,” Book The deferential view does not rest on a conceptual claim; it rests on a AND but to defer heavily to executive action, and the judges know this.
Impact---Executive/Congress Dispute Resolution
Judicial war-powers rulings kill Executive-Congressional dispute resolution---causes Congress to snipe at the President Jonathan L. Entin 12, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs (School of Law), David L. Brennan Professor of Law, and Professor of Political Science, Case Western Reserve University. War Powers, Foreign Affairs, and the Courts: Some Institutional Considerations, 45 Case W. Res. J. Int'l L. 443 III. The Benefits of Political Resolution of Interbranch Disputes Whatever the merits of the decisions discussed in the previous section, those rulings should AND in decisions that can have profound consequences for our nation and the world. If the courts cannot resolve these matters, questions of war and diplomacy, it AND words, judicial review does not always provide clear answers to complex questions. The complexity of those questions is particularly evident in the military and diplomatic arenas. AND -term litigation advantage that might complicate the resolution of future disagreements. n116 In addition, the litigation process takes time. Of course, the Pentagon Papers AND help, but events on the ground might well frustrate orderly judicial disposition. Executive flexibility is vital to solve multiple nuclear threats Li 9 Zheyao, J.D. candidate, Georgetown University Law Center, 2009; B.A., political science and history, Yale University, 2006. This paper is the culmination of work begun in the "Constitutional Interpretation in the Legislative and Executive Branches" seminar, led by Judge Brett Kavanaugh, “War Powers for the Fourth Generation: Constitutional Interpretation in the Age of Asymmetric Warfare,” 7 Geo. J.L. and 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. AT: Groupthink
No groupthink—executives are fragmented and pluralistic—Congress links harder Posner and Vermeule, 7 – *Kirkland and Ellis Professor of Law at the University of Chicago Law School AND professor at Harvard Law School (Eric and Adrian, Terror in the Balance: Security, Liberty, and the Courts p. 46-47) The idea that Congress will, on net, weed out bad policies rests on AND to block harmful policies, whereas executive decisionmaking is relatively centralized and unitary. The contrast is drawn too sharply, because in practice the executive is a they AND of Arab Americans in Michigan, often a swing state in presidential elections. It is not obvious, then, that statutory authorization makes any difference at all AND resists the stampede toward bad policies and safeguards the interests of oppressed minorities. Even if that condition obtains, however, the argument for authorization goes wrong by AND policies that need to be adopted quickly if they are to be effective.
Informal checks on groupthink are sufficient Kennedy, 12 Copyright (c) 2012 Gould School of Law Southern California AND Arts and Sciences; B.A. Government 2009, Harvard University. Neither the president nor the decision-making group members implement "hybrid" checks AND - the executive branch - and thereby become part of the bureaucratic machine.
Inter-Agency Process The "inter-agency process" check involves getting approval for, or opinions about, a proposed decision from other agencies. n252 The inter-agency process is particularly common for national security and foreign policy decisions. n253 "Occasionally, it will operate at a higher level in principals' committees involving Cabinet-level or sub-Cabinet people and their deputies," thus directly checking the decision-making group members. n254 2. Intra-Agency Process Another similar check is the "intra-agency process," in which the circulation of proposed decisions within the agency empowers dissidents and harnesses a diversity of thinking. n255 If nothing else, the process catches errors, or at least increases the odds of avoiding them, given the number of people who must review or approve a document or decision within the agency. n256 3. Agency or Lawyer Culture The culture of a particular agency - the institutional self-awareness of its professionalism - provides another check. n257 "Lawyer culture" - which places high value on competency and adherence to rules and laws - resides at the core of agency culture; n258 its "nay-saying" objectivity "is especially important in the small inner circle of presidential decision making to counter the tendency towards groupthink and a vulnerability to sycophancy." n259 *677 4. Public Humiliation A final check in this category is the "public humiliation" check. n260 This check only comes into play when the previous three have failed, and involves the threat to ""go public' by leaking embarrassing information or publicly resigning." PQD Advantage AT: Asia Pivot The pivot fails---no impact Aaron L. Friedberg 12, Professor of Politics and International Affairs at the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University, September/October 2012, “Bucking Beijing,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 91, No. 5, p. 48-58 The problem with the pivot is that to date it has lacked serious substance. AND more candid about the nature of the challenge posed by China's growing strength. Multiple factors make Asia war unlikely Vannarith 10—Executive Director of the Cambodian Institute for Cooperation and Peace. PhD in Asia Pacific Studies, Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific U (Chheang, Asia Pacific Security Issues: Challenges and Adaptive Mechanism, http://www.cicp.org.kh/download/CICP20Policy20brief/CICP20Policy20brief20No203.pdf) Some people look to China for economic and strategic interests while others still stick to AND the region and those elements are present and being improved in this region.
a. Interpretation and violation---the affirmative should defend the desirability of topical government action Most predictable—the agent and verb indicate a debate about hypothetical government action Jon M Ericson 3, Dean Emeritus of the College of Liberal Arts – California Polytechnic U., et al., The Debater’s Guide, Third Edition, p. 4 The Proposition of Policy: Urging Future Action In policy propositions, each topic contains AND compelling reasons for an audience to perform the future action that you propose.
A general subject isn’t enough—debate requires a specific point of difference Steinberg and Freeley 8 *Austin J. Freeley is a Boston based attorney who focuses on criminal, personal injury and civil rights law, AND David L. Steinberg , Lecturer of Communication Studies @ U Miami, Argumentation and Debate: Critical Thinking for Reasoned Decision Making pp45- Debate is a means of settling differences, so there must be a difference of AND particular point of difference, which will be outlined in the following discussion.
b. Vote neg
Preparation and clash—changing the topic post facto manipulates balance of prep, which structurally favors the aff because they speak last and permute alternatives—strategic fairness is key to engaging a well-prepared opponent Topical fairness requirements are key to effective dialogue—monopolizing strategy and prep makes the discussion one-sided and subverts any meaningful neg role Galloway 7—Samford Comm prof (Ryan, Contemporary Argumentation and Debate, Vol. 28, 2007) Debate as a dialogue sets an argumentative table, where all parties receive a relatively AND substitutes for topical action do not accrue the dialogical benefits of topical advocacy.
2. Substantive constraints on the debate are key to actualize effective pluralism and agonistic democracy John Dryzek 6, Professor of Social and Political Theory, The Australian National University, Reconciling Pluralism and Consensus as Political Ideals, American Journal of Political Science,Vol. 50, No. 3, July 2006, Pp. 634–649 A more radical contemporary pluralism is suspicious of liberal and communitarian devices for reconciling difference AND ofliberal theory that looks neutral but in practice supports and serves the powerful. Difference democrats are hostile to consensus, partly because consensus decisionmaking (of the sort AND which Young also subscribes; 2000, 49–51), Mouffe states: To negate the ineradicable character of antagonism and aim at a universal rational consensus— that is the real threat to democracy. Indeed, this can lead to violence being unrecognized and hidden behind appeals to “rationality,” as is often the case in liberal thinking. (1996, 248) Mouffe is a radical pluralist: “By pluralism I mean the end of a AND respect” as “a critical pluralist ethos” (1999, 70). Mouffe and Young both want pluralism to be regulated by a particular kind of attitude AND need principles to regulate the substance of what rightfully belongs in democratic debate.
Simulated national security law debates preserve agency and enhance decision-making---avoids cooption Laura K. Donohue 13, Associate Professor of Law, Georgetown Law, 4/11, “National Security Law Pedagogy and the Role of Simulations”, http://jnslp.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/National-Security-Law-Pedagogy-and-the-Role-of-Simulations.pdf The concept of simulations as an aspect of higher education, or in the law AND undoubtedly necessary, it suggests one potential direction for the years to come.
1NC We affirm that the living-conditions for detainees at Guantanamo should be reformed and substantially improved based on the 1AC’s narrative but indefinite detention as a practice should be retained. The aff results in catastrophic terrorism---releases terrorists and kills intel gathering 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. That wrecks effective CT Delery et al 12 - Principal Deputy, Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, DOJ Principal Deputy, Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, STUART F. DELERY Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, United States' Statement of Interest, Case 1:12-cv-01192-RMC Document 18 Filed 12/14/12 Page 1 of 58, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 12/14/2012 Third. Plaintiffs' claims raise the specter of disclosing classified intelligence information in open court AND classified information is a special factor in the "extraordinary rendition" context). High risk of nuke terror---escalates and turns the case because civil-liberties crackdowns 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 a common understanding of these threats and develop a strategy to combat them. Terrorism causes extinction---hard-line responses are key Nathan Myhrvold '13, Phd in theoretical and mathematical physics from Princeton, and founded Intellectual Ventures after retiring as chief strategist and chief technology officer of Microsoft Corporation , July 2013, "Stratgic Terrorism: A Call to Action," The Lawfare Research Paper Series No.2, http://www.lawfareblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Strategic-Terrorism-Myhrvold-7-3-2013.pdf Several powerful trends have aligned to profoundly change the way that the world works. AND us with our shortcomings by repeatedly attacking us or hectoring us for decades. Terrorism studies are epistemologically and methodologically valid---our authors are self-reflexive Michael J. Boyle 8, School of International Relations, University of St. Andrews, and John Horgan, International Center for the Study of Terrorism, Department of Psychology, Pennsylvania State University, April 2008, “A Case Against Critical Terrorism Studies,” Critical Studies On Terrorism, Vol. 1, No. 1, p. 51-64 Jackson (2007c) calls for the development of an explicitly CTS on the AND community of scholars does not produce such scathing indictments of its own work.
1NC
Enmity is a fundamental condition that defines the political---the strategy of surrender ignores that the goal of politics must be to limit, not eradicate war---the affirmative’s project of embracing vulnerability can only end in a violent war on difference Prozorov 6 – Sergei Prozorov, collegium fellow at the Helsinki Collegium for Advanced Studies, University of Helsinki, Professor of International Relations in the Department of International Relations, Faculty of Politics and Social Sciences, Petrozavodsk State University, Russia, 2006, “Liberal Enmity: The Figure of the Foe in the Political Ontology of Liberalism,” Millennium: Journal of International Studies, Vol. 35, No. 1, p. 75-99 The Savage and the Barbarian: Natural Liberty and Supplementary Violence Schmitt’s prophecy about the infinite plasticity of the category of the foe as ‘proscribed AND of an ontological critique of liberalism, hence the present importance of Schmitt.
That generates total war through paranoia and genocidal conflicts of all against all Reinhard 4 – Kenneth Reinhard, Professor of Jewish Studies at UCLA, 2004, “Towards a Political Theology- Of the Neighbor,” online: http://www.cjs.ucla.edu/Mellon/Towards_Political_Theology.pdf If the concept of the political is defined, as Carl Schmitt does, in AND ultimately appeasing contours, because they would be identifiable” (PF 83).
The alternative is to reject surrender in order to re-ground counter-terror within a framework of proper-political enmity---the aff misreads global war as a result of the US desire for control---the problem with the war on terror is that it is not instrumental or political enough David Chandler 9, Professor of International Relations at the Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Westminster, War Without End(s): Grounding the Discourse of `Global War', Security Dialogue 2009; 40; 243 International law evolved on the basis of the ever-present possibility of real war AND desire for control fails to contextualize conflict in the social relations of today.
Case 1NC No Solvency
The POINT of the state of exception is that rights the plan provides will be suspended Andrew Neal 5, PhD candidate and part-time Research Associate in the School of Politics, Philosophy, and International Relations and Keele University, 4/12/05, http://www.libertysecurity.org/article199.html The apparent popular, national legitimacy accorded to Guantanamo marks a further and central element AND on sovereignty is dualistic and as such cannot account for its own negativity. 1NC No Bare Life Impact The prisoners are not bare life—there are rules that prevent true reduction Halit Tagma 09, Professor of Political Science, Arizona State , “Homo Sacer vs. Homo Soccer Mom: Reading Agamben and Foucault in the War on Terror,” Alternatives: Global, Local, Political, Vol. 34, No. 4 (Oct.-Dec. 2009), pp. 407-435 Thus in some respects, prisoners of the "war on terror" might be AND work in the day-to-day administration of this space.67 1NC Util Maximizing all lives is the only way to affirm equality Cummiskey 90 – Professor of Philosophy, Bates (David, Kantian Consequentialism, Ethics 100.3, p 601-2, p 606, jstor)
We must not obscure the issue by characterizing this type of case as the sacrifice AND consideration of conduct, one's own subjective concerns do not have overriding importance. Ethical policymaking requires calculation of consequences Gvosdev 5 – Rhodes scholar, PhD from St. Antony’s College, executive editor of The National Interest (Nikolas, The Value(s) of Realism, SAIS Review 25.1, pmuse,)
As the name implies, realists focus on promoting policies that are achievable and sustainable AND —and the one that had also been roundly condemned on moral grounds. Moral tunnel vision is complicit with evil Issac 2—Professor of Political Science at Indiana-Bloomington, Director of the Center for the Study of Democracy and Public Life, PhD from Yale (Jeffery C., Dissent Magazine, Vol. 49, Iss. 2, “Ends, Means, and Politics,” p. Proquest)
As a result, the most important political questions are simply not asked. It AND not true believers. It promotes arrogance. And it undermines political effectiveness. AT: Endless War No risk of endless warfare Gray 7—Director of the Centre for Strategic Studies and Professor of International Relations and Strategic Studies at the University of Reading, graduate of the Universities of Manchester and Oxford, Founder and Senior Associate to the National Institute for Public Policy, formerly with the International Institute for Strategic Studies and the Hudson Institute (Colin, July, “The Implications of Preemptive and Preventive War Doctrines: A Reconsideration”, http://www.ciaonet.org/wps/ssi10561/ssi10561.pdf) 7. A policy that favors preventive warfare expresses a futile quest for absolute security AND strategy, though not always policy, must be nothing if not pragmatic. AT: V2L “No value to life” doesn’t outweigh---prioritize existence because value is subjective and could improve in the future Torbjörn Tännsjö 11, the Kristian Claëson Professor of Practical Philosophy at Stockholm University, 2011, “Shalt Thou Sometimes Murder? On the Ethics of Killing,” online: http://people.su.se/~jolso/HS-texter/shaltthou.pdf I suppose it is correct to say that, if Schopenhauer is right, if AND suffering (in their lives) than I avoid (in my life). AT: SVio Nuke war threat is real and o/w structural and invisible violence---their expansion of structural violence to an all-pervasive omnipresence makes preventing war impossible Ken Boulding 78 is professor of economics and director, Center for Research on Conflict Resolution, University of Michigan, “Future Directions in Conflict and Peace Studies,” The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 22, No. 2 (Jun., 1978), pp. 342-354
Galtung is very legitimately interested in problems of world poverty and the failure of development AND Galtung did not like. Another factor in this situation was the feeling,
certainly in the 1960s and early 1970s, that nuclear deterrence was actually succeeding AND , increases with every improvement in technology, either of war or of peacex Extinction outweighs structural violence Bostrum 12 (Nick, Professor of Philosophy at Oxford, directs Oxford's Future of Humanity Institute and winner of the Gannon Award, Interview with Ross Andersen, correspondent at The Atlantic, 3/6, “We're Underestimating the Risk of Human Extinction”, http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/03/were-underestimating-the-risk-of-human-extinction/253821/) Bostrom, who directs Oxford's Future of Humanity Institute, has argued over the course AND that he expects to grow in number and potency over the next century. Despite his concerns about the risks posed to humans by technological progress, Bostrom is AND , and about what we can do to make sure we outlast them. Some have argued that we ought to be directing our resources toward humanity's existing problems, rather than future existential risks, because many of the latter are highly improbable. You have responded by suggesting that existential risk mitigation may in fact be a dominant moral priority over the alleviation of present suffering. Can you explain why? Bostrom: Well suppose you have a moral view that counts future people as being AND eliminating poverty or curing malaria, which would be tremendous under ordinary standards. The status quo is structurally improving Dash 2/4 Co-Founder and Managing Director at Activate, a new kind of strategy consultancy that advises companies about the opportunities at the intersection of technology and media co-founder and CEO of ThinkUp, which shows you how to be better at using your social networks, publisher, editor and owner of Dashes.com, my personal blog where I've been publishing continuously since 1999, entrepreneur, writer and geek living in New York City (Anil Dash, 4 February 2013, “THE WORLD IS GETTING BETTER. QUICKLY.,” http://dashes.com/anil/2013/02/the-world-is-getting-better-quickly.html) The world is getting better, faster, than we could ever have imagined. AND of resources, time and effort to tackling the problems we have left.
Block Schmitt
Links
Refusing to demarcate terrorists doesn’t eliminate conflict – instead ---the drive to exclude becomes more violent --- such as preemptive strikes against terrorists before they reach they even reach the border Prozorov 6 – Sergei Prozorov, collegium fellow at the Helsinki Collegium for Advanced Studies, University of Helsinki, Professor of International Relations in the Department of International Relations, Faculty of Politics and Social Sciences, Petrozavodsk State University, Russia, 2006, “Liberal Enmity: The Figure of the Foe in the Political Ontology of Liberalism,” Millennium: Journal of International Studies, Vol. 35, No. 1, p. 75-99 At the same time, the practical implementation of such a project is hardly conceivable AND whose acts and properties are deemed to be ‘proscribed by nature itself’.
2NC Alt Solves SOE/Agamben
The alternative is to affirm the necessity of the sovereign to define the state of exception de Benoist 7 – Alexis de Benoist, editor of the two French academic journals Krisis and Nouvelle Ecole, has translated articles by Carl Schmitt into French and has published the first full bibliography of Schmitt’s works, 2007, “Global terrorism and the state of permanent exception: The significance of Carl Schmitt’s thought today,” in The International Political Thought of Carl Schmitt, Edited by: Odysseos and Petito, p. 85-87 The notion of the ‘state of emergency’ (Ernstfall) or the state of AND decide on the concrete conditions in which the norm can still be applied.
Case
Substance
cx 2ac --- cooption - the aff Browne 3 – former Libertarian Party candidate and Director of Public Policy, American Liberty Foundation (Harry, 5/3, Libertarians and War, http://www.harrybrowne.org/articles/LibertariansAndWar.htm, AG)
Government is politics: Whenever you turn anything over to the government, it ceases AND fulfill their objectives, not yours — in their way, not yours.
This flips your ethics Browne 95 – former Libertarian Party candidate and Director of Public Policy, American Liberty Foundation (Harry, Why Government Doesn’t Work, p 19-20, AG)
To get it enacted you’ll need political allies, since alone you have only limited AND your program may end up being the opposite of what you had intended.
Util
Moral tunnel vision is complicit with evil Issac 2—Professor of Political Science at Indiana-Bloomington, Director of the Center for the Study of Democracy and Public Life, PhD from Yale (Jeffery C., Dissent Magazine, Vol. 49, Iss. 2, “Ends, Means, and Politics,” p. Proquest)
As a result, the most important political questions are simply not asked. It AND not true believers. It promotes arrogance. And it undermines political effectiveness.
AT: V2L “No value to life” doesn’t outweigh---prioritize existence because value is subjective and could improve in the future Torbjörn Tännsjö 11, the Kristian Claëson Professor of Practical Philosophy at Stockholm University, 2011, “Shalt Thou Sometimes Murder? On the Ethics of Killing,” online: http://people.su.se/~jolso/HS-texter/shaltthou.pdf I suppose it is correct to say that, if Schopenhauer is right, if AND suffering (in their lives) than I avoid (in my life).
STruc V
Finishing boulding
certainly in the 1960s and early 1970s, that nuclear deterrence was actually succeeding as AND , increases with every improvement in technology, either of war or of peacex
KATO
KATO’s textual argument ignores violence against indigenous peoples --- lack of empirics makes his alt nonsensical Sankaran Krishna, Professor of Political Science at the University of Hawaii at Manoa, “The Importance of Being Ironic: A Postcolonial View on Critical International Relations Theory”, Alternatives, Summer, 1993 William Chaloupka argues that we need new ways to understand and live in nuclear times AND substituting a new, replacement metaphysics or universalism." (KN: xiv) Having rendered the nuke unspeakable, Chaloupka suggests that society used the metonymies of the computer and the robot to deal with the nuke.21 Chaloupka foregrounds this discussion with the claim that nuclear war has never happened and that modern warfare is fabulously textual (echoing Baudrillard, Der Derian, Derrida, Foucault, and Virilio), has resulted in the disappearance of the warrior, and has become a batde for sign systems rather than for territory or materiality. In all this, Chaloupka seems to miss a rather immediate point: more than AND ways in which nuclear war has been ongoing in the last five decades,
both in the West and elsewhere. Chaloupka argues that once one has given up on metaphysical conceits, one of the ways in which to continue to politicize and oppose the reigning fictions masquerading as truth is to ceaselessly ironize them. Discussing the dramatic shifts in East Europe and the former Soviet Union, Chaloupka notes: A distinctive feature of these transformations is that they elude capture by the existing ideological AND of critical theory, either for that matter). (KN: 121) Unfortunately, Chaloupka is unable to maintain this unremittingly postmodernist posture and cannot resist the temptation to enlist the recent changes in Europe and US-Soviet relations as illustrating the effectivity of a postmodernist politics. He thus makes the following highly unconvincing claim: Opposition to new forms of authority, propitious use of speed and fractal character of change, the sometimes frivolous attitude towards the ends of radical action—all of these were evident in 1989 and 1990, and each confirms the possibility of postmodern oppositional tactics ... Gorbachev and Reagan had finally issued forth an unmistakably postmodern era, a triumph of deconstructive strategies. What else could the removal of the Berlin Wall mean? (KN: 123-25) To argue from a putative similarity between (textual) strategies of postmodernist practice and the events of 1989 and 1990 that there was some kind of causal connection, or that this somehow demonstrates the political effectiveness of postmodernist politics, sounds disingenuous. Whatever else the collapse of the Berlin Wall might signify, the claim that it "confirms the possibility of postmodern oppositional tactics" will have to be substantiated by convincing empirical argumentation and not mere assertion.
CP Overview Terror is a real threat driven by forces the aff can’t resolve---we should reform the war on terror, not vulnerability---any terror attack turns the entire case Peter Beinart 8, associate professor of journalism and political science at CUNY, The Good Fight; Why Liberals – and only Liberals – Can Win the War on Terror and Make America Great Again, vii-viii APPLYING THAT TRADITION today is not easy. Cold war liberals devel- oped their AND the reaction will make John Ashcroft look like the head of the ACLU. Turns SVio And, war turns structural violence Winter 99 – Professor of Psychology, Whitman (Deborah and Dana Leighton, Structural Violence Section Introduction, http://www.psych.ubc.ca/~dleighton/svintro.html) While structural violence often leads to direct violence, the reverse is also true, as brutality often terrorizes bystanders, who then become unwilling or unable to confront social injustice. Increasingly, civilians pay enormous costs of war through death and devastation of neighborhoods and ecosystems. Ruling elites rarely suffer from armed conflict as much as civilian populations do, who endure decades of poverty and disease in war-torn societies. Their causality is backwards—war is the root of dehumanization Goldstein 1 – IR Professor, American U (Joshua, War and Gender, p 412) The evidence in this book suggests that causality runs at least as strongly the other AND on injustice as the main cause of war seems to be empirically inadequate." AT: WOT Fails WOT is effective --- has prevented another major terrorist attack since 9/11 – even if they win the WOT isn’t perfect, the alternative of releasing terrorists is worse – that’s 1NC Goldsmith CT’s effective Kenneth Anderson 13, Professor of International Law at American University, June 2013, “The Case for Drones,” Commentary, Vol. 135, No. 6 If one believes, as many of the critics of drone warfare do, that AND common enemies are examples of the methods that are just of military nature. Drone warfare today is integrated with a much larger strategic counterterrorism target -- one in AND acknowledged in communications, have a significant impact on planning and organizational effectiveness. AT: Retal Inevitable This Bergen card they read says literally nothing – just that AQ is determined to attack the US regardless of how few resources it has WHICH is OUR uniqueness arguments – the aff’s response is to put our heads in the sand and embrace vulnerability and hope that changes the government which emboldens terrorists AT: Ressentiment CTS is wrong---our authors are at least as objective as theirs Verena Erlenbusch 13, Assistant Professor in the Department of Philosophy at the University of Memphis., How (Not) to Study Terrorism, http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13698230.2013.767040 Even though CTS scholars correctly point out some of the major short- comings of AND legitimacy to certain forms of violence while criminalizing oth- ers. Radical approaches AT: Environment Collapse No impact to the environment and no solvency Holly Doremus 2k Professor of Law at UC Davis, "The Rhetoric and Reality of Nature Protection: Toward a New Discourse," Winter 2000 Washington and Lee Law Review 57 Wash and Lee L. Rev. 11, lexis Reluctant to concede such losses, tellers of the ecological horror story highlight how close AND material benefits of destructive decisions frequently will exceed their identifiable material costs. n221 No impact to biodiversity Sagoff 97 Mark, Senior Research Scholar – Institute for Philosophy and Public policy in School of Public Affairs – U. Maryland, William and Mary Law Review, “INSTITUTE OF BILL OF RIGHTS LAW SYMPOSIUM DEFINING TAKINGS: PRIVATE PROPERTY AND THE FUTURE OF GOVERNMENT REGULATION: MUDDLE OR MUDDLE THROUGH? TAKINGS JURISPRUDENCE MEETS THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT”, 38 Wm and Mary L. Rev. 825, March, L/N Note – Colin Tudge - Research Fellow at the Centre for Philosophy at the London School of Economics. Frmr Zoological Society of London: Scientific Fellow and tons of other positions. PhD. Read zoology at Cambridge. Simon Levin = Moffet Professor of Biology, Princeton. 2007 American Institute of Biological Sciences Distinguished Scientist Award 2008 Istituto Veneto di Scienze Lettere ed Arti 2009 Honorary Doctorate of Science, Michigan State University 2010 Eminent Ecologist Award, Ecological Society of America 2010 Margalef Prize in Ecology, etc… PhD Although one may agree with ecologists such as Ehrlich and Raven that the earth stands AND sense, good for mankind. The most valuable things are quite useless.
10/5/13
4 Clay, Doubles vs Fresno
Tournament: Kentucky | Round: Doubles | Opponent: Fresno State Holley-Tate | Judge: Atchison, Gordon, Hall, Manuel, Russell 1nc 1NC – Autobiography, Narrative and Performance Trading autobiographical narrative for the ballot commodifies one’s identity and has limited impact on the culture that one attempt’s to reform – when autobiographical narrative “wins,” it subverts its own most radical intentions by becoming an exemplar of the very culture under indictment Coughlin 95—associate Professor of Law, Vanderbilt Law School. (Anne, REGULATING THE SELF: AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL PERFORMANCES IN OUTSIDER SCHOLARSHIP, 81 Va. L. Rev. 1229)
Although Williams is quick to detect insensitivity and bigotry in remarks made by strangers, AND publication record is itself sufficient evidence of the success of their endeavor. n200 Certainly, publication of a best seller may transform its author's life, with the AND Sacvan Bercovitch, "to have your dissent and make it too." n205
Performance is not a mode of resistance – it gives too much power to the audience because the performer is structurally blocked from controlling the (re)presentation of their representations. Appealing to the ballot is a way of turning over one’s identity to the same reproductive economy that underwrites liberalism Phelan 96—chair of New York University's Department of Performance Studies (Peggy, Unmarked: the politics of performance, ed published in the Taylor and Francis e-Library, 2005, 146-9) 146 Performance’s only life is in the present. Performance cannot be saved, recorded, documented, or otherwise participate in the circulation of representations of representations: once it does so, it becomes something other than performance. To the degree that performance attempts to enter the economy of reproduction it betrays and lessens the promise of its own ontology. Performance’s being, like the ontology of subjectivityproposed here, becomes itself through disappearance. The pressures brought to bear on performance to succumb to thelaws of the reproductive economy AND only a spur to memory, an encouragement of memory to become present. The other arts, especially painting and photography, are drawnincreasingly toward performance. The AND constative utterance) becomes a performative expression when Calle places these commentaries within the 147 representation of the museum. The descriptions fill in, and thus supplement (add AND itrehearses and repeats the disappearance of the subject who longs alwaysto be remembered. For her contribution to the Dislocations show at the Museum of Modern Art in New AND . In this sense, Calle demonstrates the performative quality of all seeing. 148 I Performance in a strict ontological sense is nonreproductive. It is this quality which AND performative utterance by someone else necessarily transforms it into a constative utterance.”4 149 Writing, an activity which relies on the reproduction of the Same(the three AND become performative utterances, rather than, as Benveniste warned, constative utterances. Even if their best intention is to resist the liberal subject, autobiography is understood by its consuming audience as the assertion of the classic autonomous subject – this subverts the political potential of performance by rendering one’s experience legible to the terms of liberalism. This recreates the violence of liberalism that is the root of Western conquest Coughlin 95—associate Professor of Law, Vanderbilt Law School. (Anne, REGULATING THE SELF: AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL PERFORMANCES IN OUTSIDER SCHOLARSHIP, 81 Va. L. Rev. 1229) The outsider narratives do not reflect on another feature of autobiographical discourse that is perhaps AND , rather than subvert, autobiographical protagonists that serve the values of liberalism. 1NC – Embodiment Corporeal politics are inevitably coopted by the dominant order---starting politics with the marker of blackness can never achieve emancipation Terry Eagelton 90, Distinguished Professor of English Literature at Lancaster University, The Ideology of the Aesthetic, Pages 27-8 The aesthetic, then, is from the beginning a contradictory, double-edged AND be eradicated by extirpating along with it the capacity to authenticate power itself.
1NC – Resistance Through Ballot Resistance via the ballot can only instill an adaptive politics of being and effaces the institutional constraints that reproduce structural violence Brown 95—prof at UC Berkeley (Wendy, States of Injury, 21-3) For some, fueled by opprobrium toward regulatory norms or other mo- dalities of AND so forms an important element of legitimacy for the antidemocratic dimensions of liberalism. *skip if no time* The politics of identity is reactionary which ultimately creates an attachment to the status of oppression---the affirmative’s emphasis on anti-blackness and exclusion from Whiteness perversely recreate those as valorized ideals 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_) 2 The Reification of Identity We wish to turn now to a related problem within AND to the identity being foreclosed through its attention to past-based grievances.
1NC – Alternative
Identity arguments are only ever implicit explanations of the constitutive effects of the social order, never a manifestation of some metaphysical status. Experience does not create us; we constitute experience and identity in concert with others. Knowledge of experience is therefore not the province of the individual; instead, we can only know identity through the shared practices that make communities the locus of knowledge production 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_) We suggest that alternative models of identity and community are required from those put forward AND ” since they are produced by very real actions, practices and projects. Our alternative is to recognize debate as a site of contingent commonality in which we can forge bonds of argumentation beyond identity---the affirmative’s focus on subjectivity abdicates the flux of politics and debate for the incontestable truth of identity Brown 95—prof at UC Berkeley (Wendy, States of Injury, 47-51) The postmodern exposure of the imposed and created rather than dis- covered character of AND identity, and morality and to redress our underdeveloped taste for political argument.
Block
Consciousness Raising Link Consciousness raising is the affirmative’s positivist moment---it calls forth confession as its primary means of political strategy, which necessitates confirming one’s status as oppressed and serves those in power Brown 95—prof at UC Berkeley (Wendy, States of Injury, 40-2) In fact, postmodern decentcring, disunifying, and denaturalizing of the subject is far AND while femininity itself is submitted to a methodology elaborating its fully fabricated nature.
Maybe Read Inclusion in the debate space is a empty act of tolerance that ensures that nothing really changes Zizek 8—Institute for Social Sciences, Ljubljana (Slavoj, The Prospects of Radical Politics Today, Int’l Journal of Baudrillard Studies, 5;1) ellipses in orig Let us take two predominant topics of to day's American radical academia: postcolonial and AND critical theory are imperceptibly translated into the benign universe of Cultural Studies chic. My personal experience is that practically all of the "radical" academics silently count AND to an empty gesture which obligates no one to anything determinate. II. From Human to Animal Rights We live in the "postmodern" era in which truth claims as such AND of suffering and humiliation.2 Singer then provides the Darwinian background.3 Active Vanishing Alt Refusing the permanence of the ballot is the only way to maintain the singularity of the aff’s performance---voting aff commodifies their performance which can only result in its fetishization by external forces Phelan 96—chair of New York University's Department of Performance Studies (Peggy, Unmarked: the politics of performance, ed published in the Taylor and Francis e-Library, 2005, 19) I am speaking here of an active vanishing, a deliberate and conscious refusal to take the payoff of visibility. For the moment, active disappearance usually requires at least some recognition of what and who is not there to be effective. (In short, this has largely been apossibility for white middle- and upper-class women.) A group of women artists and feminist theorists in New York callthemselves the Guerrilla Girls AND the real in view, representation papers it over and reproduces other representations.
2NC Ballot Commodification – Moral Currency
The claim that oppression should be the basis for winning a debate round is a pretty good example of our link argument---the ballot is not a tool of emancipation, but rather a tool of revenge---it serves as a palliative that denies their investment in oppression as a means by which to claim the power of victory Enns 12—Professor of Philosophy at McMaster University (Dianne, The Violence of Victimhood, 28-30)
Guilt and Ressentiment We need to think carefully about what is at stake here. AND morality rooted in ressentiment is the denial that it has any access to power
or contains a will to power. Politicized identities arise as both product of and AND . 23 Let us turn now to an exploration of this third outcome.
Off-Case 1NC T – Restriction Restrictions are prohibitions on action -~-- the aff is oversight Jean Schiedler-Brown 12, Attorney, Jean Schiedler-Brown and 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 the reporting and monitoring or supervising terms and conditions that are included in the 2001 Stipulation. Black's Law Dictionary, 'fifth edition,(1979) defines "restriction" as; A limitation often imposed in a deed or lease respecting the use to which the AND or by interposing obstacle, to repress or suppress, to curb. In contrast, the terms "supervise" and "supervisor" are defined as AND merely routine or clerical nature, but required the use of independent judgment. Comparing the above definitions, it is clear that the definition of "restriction" is very different from the definition of "supervision"-very few of the same words are used to explain or define the different terms. In his 2001 stipulation, Mr. Kincheloe essentially agreed to some supervision conditions, but he did not agree to restrict his license. Restrictions on authority are distinct from conditions William Conner 78, former federal judge for the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York United States District Court, S. D. New York, CORPORACION VENEZOLANA de FOMENTO v. VINTERO SALES, http://www.leagle.com/decision/19781560452FSupp1108_11379 Plaintiff next contends that Merban was charged with notice of the restrictions on the authority AND were not authorized to act except upon the fulfillment of the specified conditions.
Vote neg-~-- Neg ground-~--only prohibitions on particular authorities guarantee links to every core argument like flexibility and deference Precision-~--only our interpretation defines “restrictions on authority”-~--that’s key to adequate preparation and policy analysis 1NC K Security is a psychological construct—the aff’s scenarios for conflict are products of paranoia that project our violent impulses onto the other Mack 91 – Doctor of Psychiatry and a professor at Harvard University (John, “The Enemy System” http://www.johnemackinstitute.org/eJournal/article.asp?id=23 *Gender modified)
The threat of nuclear annihilation has stimulated us to try to understand what it is AND , taking their cues from the leadership, contribute powerfully to the process. Our response is to interrogate the psychological underpinnings of enemy creation–prevents war Byles 3—English, U Cyprus (Joanna, Psychoanalysis and War: The Superego and Projective Identification, http://www.clas.ufl.edu/ipsa/journal/articles/art_byles01.shtml)
The problem of warfare which includes genocide, and its most recent manifestation, international AND adaptation to the other within the self and the self within the other. Debt Ceiling Politics Debt ceiling will be raised now but it’s not certain -~-- Obama’s ironclad political capital is forcing the GOP to give in Brian Beutler 10/3/13, “Republicans finally confronting reality: They’re trapped!,” Salon http://www.salon.com/2013/10/03/republicans_finally_confronting_reality_theyre_trapped/ After struggling for weeks and weeks in stages one through four, Republicans are finally AND final act, and revealed who’s being fitted with the red dye packet. Plan wrecks PC Douglas L. Kriner 10, Assistant Professor of Political Science at Boston University, 2010, After the Rubicon: Congress, Presidents, and the Politics of Waging War, p. 68-69 Raising or Lowering Political Costs by Affecting Presidential Political Capital Shaping both real and anticipated public opinion are two important ways in which Congress can AND to its costs than if Congress stood behind him in the international arena. Obama’s PC is key Jonathan Allen 9/19, Politico, 9/19/13, GOP battles boost President Obama, dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=17961849-5BE5-43CA-B1BC-ED8A12A534EB There’s a simple reason President Barack Obama is using his bully pulpit to focus the AND the government shouldn’t shut down and that the country should pay its bills. Collapses economy Adam Davidson 9/10/13, economy columnist for The New York Times, co-founder of Planet Money, NPR’s team of economics reporters, “Our Debt to Society,” NYT, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/15/magazine/our-debt-to-society.html?pagewanted=alland_r=0 If the debt ceiling isn’t lifted again this fall, some serious financial decisions will AND free asset more risky, the entire global economy becomes riskier and costlier.
Nuclear war Cesare Merlini 11, nonresident senior fellow at the Center on the United States and Europe and chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Italian Institute for International Affairs, May 2011, “A Post-Secular World?”, Survival, Vol. 53, No. 2 Two neatly opposed scenarios for the future of the world order illustrate the range of AND theocratic absolutes, competing or converging with secular absolutes such as unbridled nationalism. 1NC
Accepting limited restrictions triggers a slippery slope towards full disclosure-~--ultimately collapses the entire drone program Omar S. Bashir 12, Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Politics at Princeton University and a graduate of the Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, 9/24/12, "Who Watches the Drones?" Foreign Affairs,www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/138141/omar-s-bashir/who-watches-the-drones First, imagine that the government opted for full transparency in its drone programs. AND the courts that might render one of its most potent counterterrorism weapons unusable.
Targeted killing’s vital to counterterrorism-~--disrupts leadership and makes carrying out attacks impossible Kenneth Anderson 13, Professor of International Law at American University, June 2013, “The Case for Drones,” Commentary, Vol. 135, No. 6 Targeted killing of high-value terrorist targets, by contrast, is the end result of a long, independent intelligence process. What the drone adds to that intelligence might be considerable, through its surveillance capabilities -- but much of the drone's contribution will be tactical, providing intelligence that assists in the planning and execution of the strike itself, in order to pick the moment when there might be the fewest civilian casualties. Nonetheless, in conjunction with high-quality intelligence, drone warfare offers an unparalleled means to strike directly at terrorist organizations without needing a conventional or counterinsurgency approach to reach terrorist groups in their safe havens. It offers an offensive capability, rather than simply defensive measures, such as homeland security alone. Drone warfare offers a raiding strategy directly against the terrorists and their leadership. If one believes, as many of the critics of drone warfare do, that AND common enemies are examples of the methods that are just of military nature. Drone warfare today is integrated with a much larger strategic counterterrorism target -- one in AND acknowledged in communications, have a significant impact on planning and organizational effectiveness.
Constraining targeted killing’s role in the war on terror causes extinction Louis Rene Beres 11, Professor of Political Science and International Law at Purdue, 2011, “After Osama bin Laden: Assassination, Terrorism, War, and International Law,” Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law, 44 Case W. Res. J. Int'l L. 93 Even after the U.S. assassination of Osama bin Laden, we are AND that it could represent distinctly, even especially, law-enforcing behavior. For this to be the case, a number of particular conditions would need to AND populations than would all of the alternative forms of anticipatory self-defense. Such an argument may appear manipulative and dangerous; permitting states to engage in what AND international law may sometimes still require extraordinary methods of law-enforcement. n71 Let us suppose, for example, that a particular state determines that another state AND assassination could prove reasonable, life-saving, and cost-effective. What of another, more common form of anticipatory self-defense? Might a conventional military strike against the prospective attacker's nuclear, biological or chemical weapons launchers and/or storage sites prove even more reasonable and cost-effective? A persuasive answer inevitably depends upon the particular tactical and strategic circumstances of the moment, and on the precise way in which these particular circumstances are configured. But it is entirely conceivable that conventional military forms of preemption would generate tangibly greater harms than assassination, and possibly with no greater defensive benefit. This suggests that assassination should not be dismissed out of hand in all circumstances as a permissible form of anticipatory self-defense under international law. *115 What of those circumstances in which the threat to particular states would not involve higher AND , it could be followed, in certain circumstances, by unconventional attacks.
Nuclear terrorism is feasible-~--high risk of theft and attacks escalate 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 a common understanding of these threats and develop a strategy to combat them.
Extinction-~--equivalent to full-scale nuclear war Owen B. Toon 7, chair of the Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences at CU-Boulder, et al., April 19, 2007, “Atmospheric effects and societal consequences of regional scale nuclear conflicts and acts of individual nuclear terrorism,” online: http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/pdf/acp-7-1973-2007.pdf To an increasing extent, people are congregating in the world’s great urban centers, AND should be carried out as well for the present scenarios and physical outcomes.
1NC The Executive branch should publicly articulate its legal rationale for its targeted killing policy, including the process and safeguards in place for target selection. The United States Congress should enact a resolution and issue a white paper stating that, in the conduct of its oversight it has reviewed ongoing targeted killing operations and determined that the United States government is conducting such operations in full compliance with relevant laws, including but not limited to the Authorization to Use Military Force of 2001, covert action findings, and the President’s inherent powers under the Constitution. The CP’s the best middle ground-~--preserves the vital counter-terror role of targeted killings while resolving all their downsides Daniel Byman 13, Professor in the Security Studies Program at the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University and a Senior Fellow at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution, July/August 2013, “Why Drones Work,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 92, No. 4 Despite President Barack Obama's recent call to reduce the United States' reliance on drones, AND , and with fewer civilian casualties than many alternative methods would have caused. Critics, however, remain skeptical. They claim that drones kill thousands of innocent AND comparatively low-risk way of targeting these areas while minimizing collateral damage. So drone warfare is here to stay, and it is likely to expand in AND drone warfare risks dragging the United States into conflicts it could otherwise avoid. Solves-~--the combination of executive disclosure and Congressional support boosts accountability and legitimacy Gregory McNeal 13, Associate Professor of Law, Pepperdine University, 3/5/13, “Targeted Killing and Accountability,” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1819583 Perhaps the most obvious way to add accountability to the targeted killing process is for AND post 9/11 targeted killings. In fact, James Baker once noted "In my experience, the United States does a better job at incorporating intelligence AND the decision cycle for that subset of targets raising the hardest issues…"519 Publicly defending the process is a natural fit for public accountability mechanisms. It provides AND control, thus their caution is understandable (albeit self-serving).520 It’s not just the Executive branch that can benefit from a healthier defense of the process. Congress too can bolster the legitimacy of the program by specifying how they have conducted their oversight activities. The best mechanism by which they can do this is through a white paper. That paper could include: A statement about why the committees believe the U.S. government's use of AND publicly withdraw our support for the program, and terminate funding for it." A statement detailing the breadth and depth of Congressional oversight activities. When Senator Feinstein AND improper targeting? Are the members satisfied that internal disciplinary procedures are adequate? 3) Congressional assessment of the foreign relations implications of the program. The Constitution AND us to question the wisdom and perhaps even the legality of the program." 1NC Dems will win the 2014 Midterms now – GOP is doing poorly with swing voters, despite structural advantages Mike Allen And Jim Vandehei, 8-15-2013, "Behind the Curtain: Eve of Destruction," POLITICO, http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/behind-the-curtain-eve-of-destruction-95594.html It is almost impossible to find an establishment Republican in town who’s not downright morose AND bleak — unless elected GOP officials in Washington change course, and fast. GOP is losing the Muslim vote now despite matching ideology, which swings the midterms for the Dems-~--aligning with the anti-drone parts of the GOP can swing them Zack Brown, 9-14-2013, "How Republicans Can Get the Muslim Vote in 2014," PolicyMic, http://www.policymic.com/articles/63421/midterm-elections-2014-how-republicans-can-get-the-muslim-vote Fresh off a 2012 election that didn’t return the White House to the hands of AND the GOP to its roots and its protection of individual and civil liberties. Democratic win means Obama can get a carbon tax passed Ben Wolfgang 13, The Washington Times, 3-13, “Issue of carbon tax rears up once again,” http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/13/issue-of-carbon-tax-rears-up-once-again/#ixzz2NrEfFHxI , accessed 5-10-2013 Business leaders joined a group of House Republicans on Wednesday to denounce a tax on AND yet clear whether the resolution will get a vote on the House floor. Solves warming Kevin Massy 13, associate director and associate fellow at Brookings, 2-28, “Fluid and Gases: How Obama Can Balance Energy and Environmental Priorities,” Brookings, http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/up-front/posts/2013/02/28-obama-energy-environment-massy, accessed 5-10-2013 In exchange for these measures, the Administration should implement a modest but meaningful carbon AND in the supply of these essential technologies to the rest of the world. Extinction Don Flournoy 12, Citing Feng Hsu, PhD NASA Scientist @ the Goddard Space AND January 2012, Springer Briefs in Space Development, p. 10-11 In the Online Journal of Space Communication , Dr. Feng Hsu, a NASA AND simply too high for us to take any chances” (Hsu 2010 ). Case Solvency Circumvention Congress will ignore presidential circumvention -~-- strong political incentives Druck 12 Judah A. Druck, law associate at Sullivan and Cromwell LLP, Cornell Law School graduate, magna cum laude graduate from Brandeis University, “Droning On: The War Powers Resolution and the Numbing Effect of Technology-Driven Warfare,” http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/research/cornell-law-review/upload/Druck-final.pdf Of course, despite these various suits, Congress has received¶ much of the AND , and congresspersons looking to continue the¶ system of passivity and deferment.
Targeted killing regulation is impossible -~-- plenty of avenues for circumvention Alston 11, professor – NYU Law (Philip, 2 Harv. Nat'l Sec. J. 283) Despite the existence of a multiplicity of techniques by which the CIA might be held AND turn now to examine the feasibility and desirability of pursuing such an option. Narrow Reform Fails Narrow reforms fail – comprehensive overhaul of surveillance and warmaking practices is key Bruce Ackerman 6/11, Sterling Professor of Law and Political Science at Yale, 6/11/13, “Oversight Now,”http:www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/06/11/oversight_now_FISA_executive_congress?page=full But one thing should be clear. It isn't enough to pass a few narrow AND Congress can only do better this time if it learns from past mistakes. Enforcement Congress lacks will and mechanism to enforce consultation Charles A. Stevenson 8, author of "Congress at War: The Politics of Conflict since 1789," 7/11/08, “Congress in Retreat on War Powers Reform, http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/07/11/congress_in_retreat_on_war_powers_reform/ The commission calls the 1973 law "impractical and ineffective." That's half right. AND that future presidents will be any more forthcoming with lawmakers than their predecessors. Legitimacy
No Solve
Alternatives to drones are worse for credibility-~--and even eliminating them’s not enough to solve Amitai Etzioni 12, senior advisor to the Carter White House; taught at Columbia University, Harvard and The University of California at Berkeley; and is a university professor and professor of international relations at The George Washington University, 4/2/12, “In Defense of Drones,” http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/defense-drones-6715 Rohde acknowledges that we are dealing with people who make and plant bombs and train AND a reason we should not order more drones rather than stand them down. Why are drones so bad? Mr. Rohde, who was kidnapped by the AND adversaries, making them nervous and preventing them from training in large groups? In addition, Rohde argues that drones are bad for public relations. He says AND and above all, American attempts to much change their ways of life. Moreover, few things agitate Muslims around the world, polls show, more than AND do if we are going to fight terrorists and those who harbor them.
No Impact
No heg impact Fettweis, 11 Christopher J. Fettweis, Department of Political Science, Tulane University, 9/26/11, Free Riding or Restraint? Examining European Grand Strategy, Comparative Strategy, 30:316–332, EBSCO It is perhaps worth noting that there is no evidence to support a direct relationship AND global policeman. Those who think otherwise base their view on faith alone.
NOT KEY Legit not key to heg Brooks and Wohlforth, 9 (Stephen Brooks and William Wohlforth, both are professors of Government at Dartmouth, “Reshaping the world order: how Washington should reform international institutions,” Foreign Affairs, March-April) FOR ANALYSTS such as Zbigniew Brzezinski and Henry Kissinger, the key reason for skepticism AND UnitedStates today has the necessary legitimacy to shepherd reform of the international system.
Alt Causes PRISM destroyed legitimacy Migranyan 7/5 (Andranik is the director of the Institute for Democracy and Cooperation in New York. He is also a professor at the Institute of International Relations in Moscow, a former member of the Public Chamber and a former member of the Russian Presidential Council. “Scandals Harm U.S. Soft Power,” 2013, http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/scandals-harm-us-soft-power-8695) For the past few months, the United States has been rocked by a series AND the United States. They have circumscribed its ability to exert soft power;
the same influence that made the U.S. model very attractive to AND America—and its model for governance—with a more critical eye.
Drone Wars AT: Wars No impact to global drone prolif and it’s impossible to solve Alejandro Sueldo 12, J.D. candidate and Dean’s Fellow at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law and a PhD candidate at the Department of War Studies at King’s College London of the University of London, 4/11/12, “The coming drone arms race,” http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=70B6B991-ECA7-4E5F-BE80-FD8F8A1B5E90 Of particular concern are the legal and policy challenges posed if other states imitate the U.S. targeted killing program. For Washington is setting a precedent whereby states can send drones, often over sovereign borders, to kill foreigners or their own citizens, who are deemed threats. Other states may also follow Washington’s example and develop their own criteria to define imminent threats and use drones to counter them. Washington will find it increasingly difficult to protest other nations’ targeted killing programs — particularly when the United States has helped define this lethal practice. U.S. opposition will prove especially difficult when other states justify targeted killings as a matter of domestic affairs. Should enough states follow the U.S. example, the practice of preemptively targeting and killing suspected threats may develop into customary international law. Such a norm, however, which requires consistent state practice arising out of a sense of legal obligation, now looks unlikely. While targeted killing policies are arguably executed by states citing a legal obligation to protect themselves from imminent threats, widespread state practice is still uncommon. But international law does not forbid drones. And given the lack of an international regime to control drones, state and non-state actors are free to determine their future use. This lack of international consensus about how to control drones stems from a serious contradiction in incentives. Though drones pose grave challenges, they also offer states lethal and non-lethal capabilities that are of great appeal. Because the potential for drone technology is virtually limitless, states are now unwilling to control how drones evolve.
1NC Precedent Answers
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.
Ashutosh Varshney – Professor of Political Science and South Asia expert at the University of Michigan
Paul Huth – Professor of International Conflict and Security Affairs at the University of Maryland
Kenneth Lieberthal – Professor of Political Science at the University of Michigan. Former special assistant to President Clinton at the National Security Council University political science Prof. Ashutosh Varshney becomes animated when asked about the likelihood of AND command control system has strengthened. The trigger is in very safe hands." AT: Turkey Turkey model fails Soner Cagaptay 11, Senior Fellow and Director of the Turkish Reseaerch Program – Washington Institute for Near East Policy, “Turkey's Future Role in the 'Arab Spring',” inFocus Quarterly, 5(4), Winter, http://www.jewishpolicycenter.org/2814/turkey-arab-spring Turkey ruled the Arab Middle East until World War I, and it must now AND part of the divided island of Cyprus (Turkish Cypriots control the north). AT: Central Asia Structural barriers prevent instability Weitz 12 (Richard, writes a weekly column on Asia-Pacific strategic and security issues. He is director of the Center for Political-Military Analysis and a Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute. His commentaries have appeared in the International Herald Tribune, The Guardian and Wall Street Journal (Europe), among other publications. “Stabilizing the Stans”, 6/1, http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/stabilizing-the-stans) Social disorder in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and other Arab countries has invariably AND and social-media networks are less well developed; economic performance remains high
in some countries; and a previous wave of revolutions produced disappointing results in Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan.
Block
S
S
Obama will circumvent the plan Anita Kumar 13, White House correspondent for McClatchy Newspapers, former writer for The Washington Post, covering Virginia politics and government, and spent a decade at the St. Petersburg Times, writing about local, state and federal government both in Florida and Washington, “Obama turning to executive power to get what he wants,” 3/19 http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/03/19/186309/obama-turning-to-executive-power.html#.Ue18CdK1FSE Yet Obama’s use of power echoes that of his predecessors. For example, he AND protect future generations,” he told Congress last month, “I will.”
WPR emp wrogn Garrison 12—Professor of Criminal Justice at Kutztown University Dr. Arthur H. Garrison, “History of Executive Branch Legal Opinions on the Power of the President as Commander-in-Chief from Washington to Obama,” Cumberland Law Review, Vol. 43, Issue 3 (2012-2013), pp. 375-494 IV. CONCLUSION Historically the State Department, 388 various Attorneys General, and the OLC, from AND and military affairs as Commander in Chief.39' pg. 478-479
Pressure to fight terror o/w pub pressure Dickinson 11—Professor of political science @ Middlebury College. Dr. Matthew Dickinson (Expert on presidential powers with a PhD from Harvard), “Will You End Up in Guantanamo Bay Prison?,” Presidential Power, December 3, 2011 pg. http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/2011/12/03/will-you-end-up-in-guantanamo-bay/ Despite the overwhelming Senate support for passage (the bill passed 93-7 and AND the current authorization language remains unchanged, Obama will stick to his guns.
2NC-~--AT: “Signal” is Sufficient Signal arguments are wrong -~-- nations won’t perceive it Douglas Kriner 10, Assistant Profess of Political Science at Boston University, 2010, After the Rubicon: Congress, Presidents, and the Politics of Waging War, p. 81-2 First, in many cases congressional signals will likely have only a modest influence on AND that their cost-benefit calculations should be more impervious to congressional signals.
Self Defense Shift Restricting targeted killing authority causes the Executive to shift justifications to inherent self-defense authority-~--that’s a huge loophole which destroys the plan’s signal and norms, and causes global instability Barnes 12 – JD Candidate @ Boston University School of Law (13) and MA Candidate in Law and Diplomacy @ The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University (13) Barnes, Beau D., “Reauthorizing the War on Terror: The Legal and Policy Implications of the AUMF's Coming Obsolescence,” Military Law Review, Vol. 211, 211 Mil. L. Rev. 57 (2012) pp. 57-114 A failure to reauthorize military force would lead to significant negative consequences on the international AND international law of self defense would likely lead to precisely such a result. The slippery slope problem, however, is not just limited to the United States’s AND to kill people anywhere, anytime, the result would be chaos.”148 Encouraging the proliferation of an expansive law of international self-defense would not only AND and rooting counterterrorism efforts within a more durable, legal foundation.”152 This turns allies and norms Barnes 12 – JD Candidate @ Boston University School of Law (13) and MA Candidate in Law and Diplomacy @ The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University (13) Barnes, Beau D., “Reauthorizing the War on Terror: The Legal and Policy Implications of the AUMF's Coming Obsolescence,” Military Law Review, Vol. 211, 211 Mil. L. Rev. 57 (2012) pp. 57-114 Widely accepted legal arguments also facilitate cooperation from U.S. allies, especially AND , but facilitating that rationale’s destabilizing adoption by nations around the world.158 United States efforts to entrench stabilizing global norms and oppose destabilizing international legal interpretations— AND the continued successful targeting of Al Qaeda members, is rapidly approaching zero. The plan causes a shift to use of self-defense to justify targeted killings-~--that destroys credibility and causes judicial review which collapses the overall TK program Barnes 12 – JD Candidate @ Boston University School of Law (13) and MA Candidate in Law and Diplomacy @ The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University (13) Barnes, Beau D., “Reauthorizing the War on Terror: The Legal and Policy Implications of the AUMF's Coming Obsolescence,” Military Law Review, Vol. 211, 211 Mil. L. Rev. 57 (2012) pp. 57-114 Therefore, the more likely result is that the Executive Branch, grappling with the AND cooperation with allies and hindering negotiations with adversaries. Pg. 88-89 Turns Drone Norms Self-defense justification turns drone norms and prolif Barnes 12 – JD Candidate @ Boston University School of Law (13) and MA Candidate in Law and Diplomacy @ The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University (13) Barnes, Beau D., “Reauthorizing the War on Terror: The Legal and Policy Implications of the AUMF's Coming Obsolescence,” Military Law Review, Vol. 211, 211 Mil. L. Rev. 57 (2012) pp. 57-114 A new AUMF is the best option available to U.S. policymakers if AND authorizing unlimited, permanent war with whomever the President deems an enemy.8
Cred
TKs
They’re totally different procedures and the distinction is important David Hastings Dunn 13, 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 and 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.
Alt Causes
pub opinon + govt backlash -~-- sopo indistinguishable the same influence that made the U.S. model very attractive to the AND America—and its model for governance—with a more critical eye.
Not Key to Heg Their internal link can’t affect the structural reasons why heg solves war Maher 11-~--adjunct prof of pol sci, Brown. PhD expected in 2011 in pol sci, Brown (Richard, The Paradox of American Unipolarity: Why the United States May Be Better Off in a Post-Unipolar World, Orbis 55;1)
The United States should start planning now for the inevitable decline of its preeminent position AND view good relations with the United States as indispensable for their own security.
No Heg Impact
U.S. primacy isn’t key to peace-~--their data is flawed Christopher Preble 10, director of Foreign Policy Studies at the CATO Institute, August 3, 2010, “U.S. Military Power: Preeminence for What Purpose?,” online: http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/u-s-military-power-preeminence-for-what-purpose/ Most in Washington still embraces the notion that America is, and forever will be AND in their own defense, and in the security of their respective regions. But while there are credible alternatives to the United States serving in its current dual AND States while the schlubs in fly-over country pick up the tab.
no data suggests a causal link between unipolarity and peace Christopher Fettweis 10, Professor of Political Science at Tulane University, 2010, Dangerous Times? The International Politics of Great Power Peace, p. 172-174 The primary attack on restraint, or justification for internationalism, posits that if the AND ensue. In other words, they depend upon hegemonic-stability logic. Simply stated, the hegemonic stability theory proposes that international peace is only possible when AND S hegemony is not the primary cause of the current era of stability. First of all, the hegemonic-stability argument overstates the role that the United AND already rid itself of crime. Stability and unipolarity may be simply coincidental. In order for U.S. hegemony to be the reason for global stability AND at work. Stability exists in many places where no hegemony is present. Second, the limited empirical evidence we have suggests that there is little connection between AND , one would not have expected an increase in global instability and violence. The verdict from the past two decades is fairly plain: The world grew more AND worth noting for our purposes that the United States was no less safe.
I enjoyed Jack Levy’s comments on how the world would have looked to people writing AND the benefits that emerging powers like China receive from upholding the status quo.
Norms
2NC Doesn’t Set Precedent
Their impacts are all based on drones being used in ways different from current US policy-~--this proves that precedent is irrelevant and that they can’t solve because the plan doesn’t drone-espionage or killing activists Kenneth Anderson 13, Professor of International Law at American University, June 2013, “The Case for Drones,” Commentary, Vol. 135, No. 6 This critique often leads, however, to the further objection that the American use of drones is essentially laying the groundwork for others to do the same. Steve Coll wrote in the New Yorker: "America's drone campaign is also creating an ominous global precedent. Ten years or less from now, China will likely be able to field armed drones. How might its Politburo apply Obama's doctrines to Tibetan activists holding meetings in Nepal?" The United States, it is claimed, is arrogantly exerting its momentary technological advantage AND behaves malignantly, drones will not be responsible. Its leaders will be.
No Drone Wars
Drones will only ever be used in highly permissive environments that lack air defense Michael W. Lewis 12, Associate Professor of Law at Ohio Northern University Pettit College of Law, Spring 2012, “ARTICLE: SYMPOSIUM: THE 2009 AIR AND MISSILE WARFARE MANUAL: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS: Drones and the Boundaries of the Battlefield,” Texas International Law Journal, p. lexis Like any weapons system drones have significant limitations in what they can achieve. Drones AND could severely degrade drone operations if it did not defeat them entirely. n25 These twin vulnerabilities to manned aircraft and signal disruption could be mitigated with massive expenditures AND for drone use will most often be found in counterinsurgency or counterterrorism operations.
IP No war -~-- enders no escalate – multiple experts say media hype
OR INEV -~-- No Indo-Pak conflict- energy cooperation and new governance Sam Tranum 6/25/13, MA from the University of Chicago in IR and a journalist covering energy and politics in South Asia, 6/25/13, "India-Pakistan Energy Cooperation Could Get Boost Under Sharif," World Politics Review, http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/13049/india-pakistan-energy-cooperation-could-get-boost-under-sharif Pakistani and Indian officials met earlier this month to discuss cross-border energy cooperation AND bit more might help to normalize relations and make future conflicts less likely.
Won't escalate Tom Wright '13, reporter for the Wall Street Journal, 1/16/13, "Don't Expect Worsening of India, Pakistan Ties," Wall Street Journal, http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2013/01/16/dont-expect-worsening-of-india-pakistan-ties/ There’s no end for now to the hostile rhetoric between India and Pakistan. But AND noted, have been limited to specific areas of the Line of Control.
AT: Kurds No violent Kurdish push for independence O'Sullivan 11—professor at Harvard's Kennedy School of Gov. PhD in politics from Oxford (Meghan, Kurds May Lead the Way for the Arab Spring, 16 June 2011, http://www.cfr.org/middle-east/kurds-may-lead-way-arab-spring/p25287) Rather than feeding new clamoring for a Kurdish state, an increase in influence may AND many of their aspirations without incurring the ire of the region's larger powers. The U.S. and its allies should favor this outcome, not simply because it would be good for the Kurds, but because it would be good for their own interests. Kurds, perhaps because of their dark history at the hands of extremists, tend to be moderates. While many are devout Muslims, they are more likely to favor secular government. They are among the most pro-American populations in the Middle East, having either watched or benefited from the American-led no-fly zone over northern Iraq for more than a decade. And, if the Kurds of Iraq are any indication, they are also entrepreneurial and welcoming of U.S. and Western investment. No CA
Structural barriers prevent instability Weitz 12 (Richard, writes a weekly column on Asia-Pacific strategic and security issues. He is director of the Center for Political-Military Analysis and a Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute. His commentaries have appeared in the International Herald Tribune, The Guardian and Wall Street Journal (Europe), among other publications. “Stabilizing the Stans”, 6/1, http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/stabilizing-the-stans) Social disorder in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and other Arab countries has invariably AND and social-media networks are less well developed; economic performance remains high
in some countries; and a previous wave of revolutions produced disappointing results in Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan.
Powers will cooperate rather than compete Pantucci and Petersen 5/1/12 (Raffaello, Visiting Scholar at the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences (SASS) and Alexandros, author of The World Island: Eurasian Geopolitics and the Fate of the West, “The New Great Game: Development, Not Domination, in Central Asia”, http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/05/the-new-great-game-development-not-domination-in-central-asia/256578/) It is cliché to talk about Central Asia in great-game terms, with AND have launched new initiatives intended to bring stability and security to the region.
Circumvention Prakash Paragraph RIGHT AFTER their evidence Prakash 12 Saikrishna Prakash 12, professor of law at the University of Virginia and Michael Ramsey, professor of law at San Diego, “The Goldilocks Executive” Feb, SSRN We accept that the President’s lawyers search for legal arguments to justify presidential action, AND of law would trigger censure from Congress, courts, and the public. CARD ENDS C. The Executive Unbound’s Discussion of a Bound Executive The idea that the President AND from emergencies, specifically the war on terror and the 2008 financial crisis. Politics AT: XO Solves Obama won’t use executive action -~-- the debate’s over -~-- even if he did it still collapses the economy Dan Roberts 10/4/13, writer @ the Guardian, “US shutdown: Republicans threaten to take debt limit fight to the brink,” The Guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/03/republicans-debt-limit-treasury-economy The White House has ruled out using a legal veto to force Congress to extend AND raising the debt ceiling and would not be taken seriously by the market." Even if he did, it wouldn’t solve -~-- nobody would buy the bonds Adam Liptak 10/3/2013, correspondent for the New York Times, “Experts See Potential Ways Out for Obama in Debt Ceiling Maze,” NYT, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/04/us/politics/experts-see-potential-ways-out-for-obama-in-debt-ceiling-maze.html However one interprets the Constitution, there remains the practical question of whether the nation’s creditors would continue to lend to the United States if the president did take unilateral action.¶ “I don’t think anyone in their right minds would buy those bonds,” Michael W. McConnell, a law professor at Stanford, said of debt issued without Congressional authorization.
Obama’s consistently rejected this option Margaret Talev 10/1, Bloomberg, “White House Rejects 14th Amendment to Raise Debt Ceiling,” 2013, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-01/white-house-rejects-14th-amendment-to-raise-debt-ceiling.html President Barack Obama has neither the legal authority nor the practical ability to bypass Congress AND rejected using the amendment to justify raising the debt ceiling without Congressional support. AT: Econ D Global economic crisis causes war-~--strong statistical support - Causes power redistributions that are prone to miscalculation - Decreases trade’s dampening effect on conflict - Causes conflict self-reinforcement - Diversionary theory Royal 10 – Jedediah Royal, Director of Cooperative Threat Reduction at the U.S. Department of Defense, 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 such, the view presented here should be considered ancillary to those views.
Destroys US cred Norm Ornstein 13, resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, 9/1/13, Showdowns and Shutdowns, www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/09/01/showdowns_and_shutdowns_syria_congress_obama Then there is the overload of business on the congressional agenda when the two houses AND over fiscal policy will bleed over into the debate about America and Syria. Economic crisis causes Indo-Pak nuclear war Hon Dov S Zakheim 9, before the House Committee on Armed Services. A former Undersecretary of Defense, Dr Zakheim is an FPRI trustee, 3-20-09, Security Challenges from The Crisis, http://www.isn.ethz.ch/isn/Current-Affairs/Security-Watch/Detail/?ots591=4888CAA0-B3DB-1461-98B9-E20E7B9C13D4andlng=enandid=98001 Pakistan’s internal stability has always been tenuous. For the past few years its growing AND , the prospect for a major conflagration in South Asia is very real. Global economic decline causes severe Middle East instability Washington Post, 11-15, 2008, “Experts See Security Risks in Downturn,” online: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/14/AR2008111403864.html Intelligence officials are warning that the deepening global financial crisis could weaken fragile governments in the world's most dangerous areas and undermine the ability of the United States and its allies to respond to a new wave of security threats. U.S. government officials and private analysts say the economic turmoil has heightened the short-term risk of a terrorist attack, as radical groups probe for weakening border protections and new gaps in defenses. A protracted financial crisis could threaten the survival of friendly regimes from Pakistan to the Middle East while forcing Western nations to cut spending on defense, intelligence and foreign aid, the sources said. The crisis could also accelerate the shift to a more Asia-centric globe, as rising powers such as China gain more leverage over international financial institutions and greater influence in world capitals. Some of the more troubling and immediate scenarios analysts are weighing involve nuclear-armed Pakistan, which already was being battered by inflation and unemployment before the global financial tsunami hit. Since September, Pakistan has seen its national currency devalued and its hard-currency reserves nearly wiped out. Analysts also worry about the impact of plummeting crude prices on oil-dependent nations such as Yemen, which has a large population of unemployed youths and a history of support for militant Islamic groups.
UQ Wall We’ll raise the debt ceiling now – Obama’s got the votes Roberta Rampton, 10-7-2013, “Obama says he expects Congress will raise debt ceiling before deadline,” Reuters, http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/07/us-usa-fiscal-obama-interview-idUSBRE99406W20131007 President Barack Obama said he does not expect to have to take any unusual steps AND that the United States doesn't end up being a deadbeat," Obama said. Boehner will give in because of Obama pressure -~-- recent statements prove -~-- he’ll get enough Republicans on board - But uniqueness doesn’t outweigh the link because Dems still need to get a “clean debt ceiling increase” to get it to pass Greg Sargent 10/3/13, writer @ The Washington Post, “John Boehner gives away the game (a bit),” Washington Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/10/03/john-boehner-gives-away-the-game-a-bit/ Multiple reports today inform us that John Boehner is privately telling colleagues that in the AND that’s always been at the heart of his position even more glaringly absurd.
Shutdown consolidated Obama’s momentum -~-- the GOP is running out of steam Ezra Klein 9/28/13, writer @ the Washington Post, “The House GOP’s shutdown plan is great news,” Washington Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/09/28/the-house-gops-shutdown-plan-is-great-news/ House Republicans plan to attach a one-year delay of Obamacare to the continuing AND begin exerting real political pressure to force a resolution before a default happens.
Compromise likely -~-- market predictions prove Cordell Eddings 10/4/13, Bloomberg Business Week, “Markets Suggest Debt-Ceiling Compromise, Pimco’s El-Erian Says,” Bloomberg, http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-10-04/markets-suggest-debt-ceiling-compromise-pimco-s-el-erian-says Financial markets suggest that most investors anticipate that U.S. lawmakers will raise AND quite catastrophic both for the U.S. and the global economy.” AT: Won’t Fight Plan Link outweighs the turn – no ev in the 2AC – Kriner is fantastic Obama would fight restrictions on his authority -~-- fiat means he loses Scheuerman 13 (William, Professor of Political Science at Indiana University, PhD from Harvard, Barack Obama's "war on terror", Eurozine, 3/7, http://www.eurozine.com/pdf/2013-03-07-scheuerman-en.pdf) Given dual democratic legitimacy, holders of executive power face deeply rooted institutional incentives to AND get reelected ?? simultaneously has had¶ deeply troublesome humanitarian and legal consequences.
Disagreements over authority trigger constitutional showdowns – even if the executive wants the plan – it’s about who decides, not the decision itself Posner 10 and Vermeule - *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 resolving the question of authority. We focus on this case for now. Targeted killing restrictions sap political capital – spills over to other issues Vladeck 13 (Steve – professor of law and the associate dean for scholarship at American University Washington College of Law, “Drones, Domestic Detention, and the Costs of Libertarian Hijacking”, 3/14, http://www.lawfareblog.com/2013/03/drones-domestic-detention-and-the-costs-of-libertarian-hijacking/) The same thing appears to be happening with targeted killings. Whether or not Attorney AND cogently explained in this post on Senator Paul and the DPGA from November). TK restrictions would decimate Obama’s domestic agenda HUGHES 2/6/13 White House Correspondent—The Washington Examiner Brian Hughes, 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 AND lawmakers think the president should be able to do whatever he wants." Reducing war powers will end Obama’s credibility with Congress -~-- cause stronger GOP pushback on the debt ceiling Seeking Alpha 9/10/13 (“Syria Could Upend Debt Ceiling Fight”, http://seekingalpha.com/article/1684082-syria-could-upend-debt-ceiling-fight) Unless President Obama can totally change a reluctant public's perception of another Middle-Eastern AND U.S. obligations unless another last minute deal can be struck. 1NC-~--Food Impact Hitting the debt ceiling causes global food price spikes Min 10 – Associate Director for Financial Markets Policy, Center for American Progress (David, "The Big Freeze", 10/28, http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2010/10/big_freeze.html) A freeze on the debt ceiling could erode confidence in U.S. Treasury AND while potentially triggering greater global instability—¶ perhaps even a global economic depression. Extinction Brown 9 (Lester R, Founder of the Worldwatch Institute and the Earth Policy Institute “Can Food Shortages Bring Down Civilization?” Scientific American, May, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=civilization-food-shortages) The biggest threat to global stability is the potential for food crises in poor countries to cause government collapse. Those crises are brought on by ever worsening environmental degradation One of the toughest things for people to do is to anticipate sudden change. Typically we project the future by extrapolating from trends in the past. Much of the time this approach works well. But sometimes it fails spectacularly, and people are simply blindsided by events such as today's economic crisis. For most of us, the idea that civilization itself could disintegrate probably seems preposterous AND shortages could bring down not only individual governments but also our global civilization. I can no longer ignore that risk. Our continuing failure to deal with the AND states disintegrate, their fall will threaten the stability of global civilization itself.
1NC Phelan Performance Link Performance is not a mode of resistance – it gives too much power to the audience because the performer is structurally blocked from controlling the (re)presentation of their representations. Appealing to the ballot is a way of turning over one’s identity to the same reproductive economy that underwrites liberalism Phelan 96—chair of New York University's Department of Performance Studies (Peggy, Unmarked: the politics of performance, ed published in the Taylor and Francis e-Library, 2005, 146-9) 146 Performance’s only life is in the present. Performance cannot be saved, recorded, documented, or otherwise participate in the circulation of representations of representations: once it does so, it becomes something other than performance. To the degree that performance attempts to enter the economy of reproduction it betrays and lessens the promise of its own ontology. Performance’s being, like the ontology of subjectivityproposed here, becomes itself through disappearance. The pressures brought to bear on performance to succumb to thelaws of the reproductive economy AND only a spur to memory, an encouragement of memory to become present. The other arts, especially painting and photography, are drawnincreasingly toward performance. The AND constative utterance) becomes a performative expression when Calle places these commentaries within the 147 representation of the museum. The descriptions fill in, and thus supplement (add AND itrehearses and repeats the disappearance of the subject who longs alwaysto be remembered. For her contribution to the Dislocations show at the Museum of Modern Art in New AND . In this sense, Calle demonstrates the performative quality of all seeing. 148 I Performance in a strict ontological sense is nonreproductive. It is this quality which AND performative utterance by someone else necessarily transforms it into a constative utterance.”4 149 Writing, an activity which relies on the reproduction of the Same(the three AND become performative utterances, rather than, as Benveniste warned, constative utterances. 1NC – Embodiment Corporeal politics are inevitably coopted by the dominant order---starting politics with the marker of blackness can never achieve emancipation Terry Eagelton 90, Distinguished Professor of English Literature at Lancaster University, The Ideology of the Aesthetic, Pages 27-8 The aesthetic, then, is from the beginning a contradictory, double-edged AND be eradicated by extirpating along with it the capacity to authenticate power itself.
1NC – Resistance Link Resistance via the ballot can only instill an adaptive politics of being and effaces the institutional constraints that reproduce structural violence Brown 95—prof at UC Berkeley (Wendy, States of Injury, 21-3) For some, fueled by opprobrium toward regulatory norms or other mo- dalities of AND so forms an important element of legitimacy for the antidemocratic dimensions of liberalism. The politics of identity is reactionary which ultimately creates an attachment to the status of oppression---the affirmative’s emphasis on anti-blackness and exclusion from Whiteness perversely recreate those as valorized ideals 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_) 2 The Reification of Identity We wish to turn now to a related problem within AND to the identity being foreclosed through its attention to past-based grievances.
1NC – Wendy B Alternative Our alternative is to recognize debate as a site of contingent commonality in which we can forge bonds of argumentation beyond identity---the affirmative’s focus on subjectivity abdicates the flux of politics and debate for the incontestable truth of identity Brown 95—prof at UC Berkeley (Wendy, States of Injury, 47-51) The postmodern exposure of the imposed and created rather than dis- covered character of AND identity, and morality and to redress our underdeveloped taste for political argument.
1NC Identity = Relational / AT Experience
Identity arguments are only ever implicit explanations of the constitutive effects of the social order, never a manifestation of some metaphysical status. Experience does not create us; we constitute experience and identity in concert with others. Knowledge of experience is therefore not the province of the individual; instead, we can only know identity through the shared practices that make communities the locus of knowledge production 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_) We suggest that alternative models of identity and community are required from those put forward AND ” since they are produced by very real actions, practices and projects.
1NC Coughlin (Just in case ya’ll care)
Trading autobiographical narrative for the ballot commodifies one’s identity and has limited impact on the culture that one attempt’s to reform – when autobiographical narrative “wins,” it subverts its own most radical intentions by becoming an exemplar of the very culture under indictment Coughlin 95—associate Professor of Law, Vanderbilt Law School. (Anne, REGULATING THE SELF: AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL PERFORMANCES IN OUTSIDER SCHOLARSHIP, 81 Va. L. Rev. 1229)
Although Williams is quick to detect insensitivity and bigotry in remarks made by strangers, AND publication record is itself sufficient evidence of the success of their endeavor. n200 Certainly, publication of a best seller may transform its author's life, with the AND Sacvan Bercovitch, "to have your dissent and make it too." n205
Even if their best intention is to resist the liberal subject, autobiography is understood by its consuming audience as the assertion of the classic autonomous subject – this subverts the political potential of performance by rendering one’s experience legible to the terms of liberalism. This recreates the violence of liberalism that is the root of Western conquest Coughlin 95—associate Professor of Law, Vanderbilt Law School. (Anne, REGULATING THE SELF: AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL PERFORMANCES IN OUTSIDER SCHOLARSHIP, 81 Va. L. Rev. 1229) The outsider narratives do not reflect on another feature of autobiographical discourse that is perhaps AND , rather than subvert, autobiographical protagonists that serve the values of liberalism.
Block 1nr forgetting alt
The alternative is to embrace Nietzschean forgetting---this turn to the future does not require a rejection of identity, but rather using debate as a site for agonistic engagement Brown 93—prof at UC Berkeley (Wendy, Wounded Attachments, Political Theory, Vol. 21, No. 3 (Aug., 1993), pp. 390-410)
What might be entailed in transforming these investments in an effort to fashion a more AND as we acknowledge the elements of suffering and healing we might be negotiating. What if it were possible to incite a slight shift in the character of political AND instinct for freedom pushed back and repressed . . . incarcerated within."' Such a slight shift in the character of the political discourse of identity eschews the AND present, inhabited the necessarily agonistic theater of discursively forging an alternative future.
1nr Chandler Evasiveness Link Shifting to their politics is a way to dodge fundamental collective debates with the hegemonic forces that underwrite oppression – training an incapacity to engage with institutional power sets activism up to fail against the organized forces of political control – the aff is a modern day Nero who fiddles the night away as Rome burns down around him Chandler 7 – Researcher @ Centre for the Study of Democracy, Chandler. 2007. Centre for the Study of Democracy, Westminster, Area, Vol. 39, No. 1, p. 118-119 This disjunction between the human/ethical/global causes of post-territorial political AND organize opposition, the ephemeral and incoherent character of protest is immediately apparent.
1nr Zizek Nothing Changes Link Inclusion in the debate space is a empty act of tolerance that ensures that nothing really changes Zizek 8—Institute for Social Sciences, Ljubljana (Slavoj, The Prospects of Radical Politics Today, Int’l Journal of Baudrillard Studies, 5;1) ellipses in orig Let us take two predominant topics of to day's American radical academia: postcolonial and AND of suffering and humiliation.2 Singer then provides the Darwinian background.3
Most predictable—the agent and verb indicate a debate about hypothetical government action Jon M Ericson 3, Dean Emeritus of the College of Liberal Arts – California Polytechnic U., et al., The Debater’s Guide, Third Edition, p. 4 The Proposition of Policy: Urging Future Action In policy propositions, each topic contains AND compelling reasons for an audience to perform the future action that you propose.
A general subject isn’t enough—debate requires a specific point of difference Steinberg and Freeley 8 *Austin J. Freeley is a Boston based attorney who focuses on criminal, personal injury and civil rights law, AND David L. Steinberg , Lecturer of Communication Studies @ U Miami, Argumentation and Debate: Critical Thinking for Reasoned Decision Making pp45- Debate is a means of settling differences, so there must be a difference of AND particular point of difference, which will be outlined in the following discussion.
b. Vote neg
Preparation and clash—changing the topic post facto manipulates balance of prep, which structurally favors the aff because they speak last and permute alternatives—strategic fairness is key to engaging a well-prepared opponent Topical fairness requirements are key to effective dialogue—monopolizing strategy and prep makes the discussion one-sided and subverts any meaningful neg role Galloway 7—Samford Comm prof (Ryan, Contemporary Argumentation and Debate, Vol. 28, 2007) Debate as a dialogue sets an argumentative table, where all parties receive a relatively AND substitutes for topical action do not accrue the dialogical benefits of topical advocacy.
2. Substantive constraints on the debate are key to actualize effective pluralism and agonistic democracy John Dryzek 6, Professor of Social and Political Theory, The Australian National University, Reconciling Pluralism and Consensus as Political Ideals, American Journal of Political Science,Vol. 50, No. 3, July 2006, Pp. 634–649 A more radical contemporary pluralism is suspicious of liberal and communitarian devices for reconciling difference AND ofliberal theory that looks neutral but in practice supports and serves the powerful. Difference democrats are hostile to consensus, partly because consensus decisionmaking (of the sort AND which Young also subscribes; 2000, 49–51), Mouffe states: To negate the ineradicable character of antagonism and aim at a universal rational consensus— that is the real threat to democracy. Indeed, this can lead to violence being unrecognized and hidden behind appeals to “rationality,” as is often the case in liberal thinking. (1996, 248) Mouffe is a radical pluralist: “By pluralism I mean the end of a AND respect” as “a critical pluralist ethos” (1999, 70). Mouffe and Young both want pluralism to be regulated by a particular kind of attitude AND need principles to regulate the substance of what rightfully belongs in democratic debate.
Constraints on deliberation are necessary to re-found the political---an untamed agon eviscerates political action and judgment skills Dana Villa 96—prof of political science, Amherst, Beyond Good and Evil: Arendt, Nietzsche, and the Aestheticization of Political Action, Political Theory, Vol. 20, No. 2 (May, 1992), pp. 274-308 The representative thinking made possible by disinterested judgment is Arendt‘s Kantian version of AND conditions,” thereby freeing us for the purely public aspect of the phenomenon. The difference between genealogical "objectivity" and representative judgment, between the kind of AND in Nietzsche's phrase, with the "yay and nay of the palate.""° For Kant, the significance and implications of aesthetic distance are quite opposite. As AND Indeed, Kant describes taste itself as “a kind of sensus communism“ The aesthetic distance achieved by representative thought thus points to the “grounding” of AND look and sound, what we will see and what men will hear in Kant‘s theory of judgment thus opens a space between the false objectivism of AND Arendt’s opinion, because it preserves appearance and perspective without abolishing the world. We can sum up the achievement of Kant’s theory of judgment by saying that it AND everyone else’ in the hope of coming to an agreement with him eventually.”"° Taste judgments are, in a word, redeemed deliberatively. Kant's conception of aesthetic judgment—departing from the exchange of viewpoints necessary for representative thinking and culminating in the persuasive exchange that accompanies the rendering of each judgment—is thus, for Arendt, political through and through.‘51 It requires an ongoing process of exchange and deliberation, one "without criteria," as Lyotard would say)“ This is yet another reason why Kantian taste judgment is the appropriate model for Arendt’s AND action and judgment but, at best. a kind of regulative ideal. The turn to Kant thus enables Arendt to avoid the antipolitical tendencies encountered in the AND in validity to the degree that it has liberated itself from merely individual idiosyncrasiesm’ The agon is tamed, then, not by retreating from the aestheticization of action but by following its anti-Platonic impulse through to the end. The "completion" of the theory of action by a Kant-inspired theory of judgment retains the focus on action as something heroic or extraordinary, as beyond good and evil. It does so, however, by shifting the emphasis from AND that Arendt draws between greatness and beauty in "The Crisis in Culture": Generally speaking, culture indicates that the public realm, which is rendered politically secure AND world, all human life would be futile and no greatness could endure. Arendtian aestheticism, an aestheticism predicated on a love of the world and which admires AND activity itself. The result is that performance is denigrated, action misconceived. Nietzsche, of course, has even less use for homo faber than Arendt, AND in terms of what Lacoue-Labarthe calls a “mimetology,” while Nietzsche repudiates again and again all metaphors of correspondence or adequation, does not alter their AND by plurality and which enables the fullest, most articulated expression of difference. CONCLUSION Arendt resists the Habermasian temptation to seek quasi-transcendental standards of agreement in a AND reflexive discovery of rules in light of indeterminate, transcendent ideas of community” The critique of Aristotelian/oommunitarian thinking is also applicable to the kind of postmodern AND problematic, but it does serve to underline the falseness of this dichotomy. One may grant that Arendl's aesthcticism avoids the trope of the fiction du polin'que, AND , than a recovery of ethos or the legislation of a proceduralist rationality. "Hie simple answer to this objection is mat Arendt completely agrees. Her work stands not only as a comprehensive rethinking of the nature and meaning of political action but as an extended mediation on how the energies of modernity have worked to dissipate our feeling for the world, to alienate us AND in which stable boundaries and distinctions have been dissolved and rendered virtually impossible. The postmodernist will object that Arendtian aestheticism. unlike Nietzsche's, mourns the loss of AND the possibility of meaning created by political action and redeemed by political judgment.
The impact outweighs—deliberative debate models impart skills vital to respond to existential threats Christian O. Lundberg 10 Professor of Communications @ University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, “Tradition of Debate in North Carolina” in Navigating Opportunity: Policy Debate in the 21st Century By Allan D. Louden, p. 311
The second major problem with the critique that identifies a naivety in articulating debate and AND their time and political energies toward policies that matter the most to them. The merits of debate as a tool for building democratic capacity-building take on AND navigate academic search databases and to effectively search and use other Web resources: To analyze the self-report ratings of the instructional and control group students, AND searching, not just in academic databases. (Larkin 2005, 144) Larkin's study substantiates Thomas Worthcn and Gaylcn Pack's (1992, 3) claim that AND cite and rely upon from an easily accessible and veritable cornucopia of materials. There are, without a doubt, a number of important criticisms of employing debate AND to the possibilities of meaningful political engagement and new articulations of democratic life. Expanding this practice is crucial, if only because the more we produce citizens that AND with the existential challenges to democracy in an increasingly complex world.
Guidelines for dialogue are intersubjectively possible and desirable---they are necessary to cultivate democratic habits and political judgment---the affirmative’s rejection of normative constraints goes too far Heimonet 9—Professor of French, American Catholic U (JEAN-MICHEL, THE SACRED: MYSTICISM AND PRAGMATISM, THE MAJOR TRENDS IN CONTEMPORARY THEORY, http://www.crvp.org/book/Series07/VII-6/chapter-6.htm)
Beginning with Foucault these were concerned with carrying out an archeology of knowledge with a AND efficacity and utility are understood on the basis of results in daily life.
Debate inevitably involves exclusions---making sure that those exclusions occur along reciprocal lines is necessary to foster democratic habits and critical thinking---this process outweighs the content of the aff Anderson 6—prof of English at Johns Hopkins (Amanda, The Way We Argue Now, 25-8) 25¶ Whether such a procedural approach actually helps to yield any substantive normative guidance AND by the principles of recognition and respect that underpin democratic institutions and practices.
Their strategy of opening up to radical uncertainty goes too far in decentering provisional communal identities necessary for politics in a world of speed---minimal guidelines are necessary to help pluralism flourish David McIvor 10, research associate at the Kettering Foundation, The Politics of Speed: Connolly, Wolin, and the Prospects for Democratic Citizenship in an Accelerated Polity, Polity (2011) 43, 58–83 So, what is the point? Connolly does not describe or define it in AND intense micro-political efforts to recalibrate our attentiveness to becoming and flux. Yet there is another and perhaps a more damning way in which Connolly might be AND will desiccate, but that their loss will not be recognized or mourned. Connolly's recoil from collective identity also keeps him from fully appreciating the implications of his AND accommodations and products to the arduous labors of collective negotiation and public action. Perhaps, then, we are already past the point when social acceleration yielded beneficent AND spinning and dancing like a toy top: moving fast but going nowhere. Wolin: Democratic Citizenship as a Fugitive Experience A society … caught in the frenzy of rapid change has difficulty knowing how to think about the consequences of loss, especially of things widely shared … rapid change not only blunts the collective conscience but dims the collective memory. —Sheldon Wolin, Democracy Incorporated Connolly argues that we should embrace speed for the work it does on our cultural AND principle, then Wolin's unstated political ontology more closely resembles the death drive. Democratic power, then, is fugitive, but it is still possible for ephemeral moments of collective action to protest the limits of the institutional order and reveal possibilities for new modes of political practice and being. This action takes place despite intransigent heterogeneity—different constituencies valuing different outcomes at different times through different means. Fugitive democracy (“the carrier of commonality”) is the temporary suspension of this heterogeneity
Marked in 1nc but finished in 2nc
in the interests of collective power.71 These exceptional points in time— AND can find redress through the concerted efforts of ordinary men and women.75 Democratic citizenship, on the other hand, is a “discordant” but limit AND a will to generality, an aspiration of “commonality amid difference.”77
Block 2NC McIvor
Debates about state-policy don’t flatten or exclude difference---they help foster political advocacy and critical habits necessary for navigating inevitable differences in democracy---the affirmative’s emphasis on flux makes negotiating plurality impossible David McIvor 10, research associate at the Kettering Foundation, The Politics of Speed: Connolly, Wolin, and the Prospects for Democratic Citizenship in an Accelerated Polity, Polity (2011) 43, 58–83 In some ways Wolin's description of revolution seems to converge with Connolly's emphasis on speed AND through the “troika effect,” which unites capital, technology and science: By enlisting technological innovation and scientific discovery and joining them with its own impulses, capital has produced an unprecedented form of power. The combination has quickened the rate of change throughout the world … . Globalized capital … may be said to monopolize agitation … thus corporate capital is the agitator, the exemplar of permanent revolution, of normalized agitation.85 Speedy agitation has been co-opted by corporate capital, which in turn “ AND political activities, it alters the status quo in powerful, lasting ways. Again, Wolin does not look to slow time practices and local sites of action AND Some habits and practices are fundamental to the honoring and negotiating of plurality. In order to develop these habits, Wolin wants to direct attention away from the AND These moments, in turn, can help to slow the world down. Political theorists and social actors inspired by Wolin's example and worried about the inegalitarian consequences AND and learning to honor the differences we encounter within a shared space.96 The differences drawn above between Wolin and Connolly—and the choice that they seem AND convergence or commonality—what Wolin calls the “sense of shared destiny.” The dispositions of agonistic respect and critical responsiveness can clearly resonate with and reinforce the AND say rather that it requires “massive energy” in order to persist.
2NC T Version
Requiring the affirmative to anchor their analysis of social acceleration around specific institutional policy reforms is key to solve the case---liberal institutions are inevitably making decisions that affect our ability to cope with speed---only analysis of how policymakers should respond makes debate’s political subjectivity relevant and effective William E. Scheuerman 4, Associate Professor of Political Science, University of Minnesota, 2004, Liberal Democracy and the Social Acceleration of Time, p. 225-227 Social acceleration places many familiar legal and political concerns in a fresh light. A AND to situate the problem of social speed at the top of their agenda. Perhaps it is fitting that my discussion of reflexive law tentatively raised the issue of AND cries out for transnational governance while simultaneously undermining normatively acceptable forms of it. Fortunately, a formidable body of scholarly literature shows that many scholars are already busy AND might provide a better basis for regulating an increasingly high-speed capitalism? If I am not mistaken, much more than the deepening of (existing) AND a real chance of successfully confronting the awesome problems posed by social acceleration?
2NC Meta-Consesus Key to Pluralism
Meta-consensus kt actualize pluralism John Dryzek 6, Professor of Social and Political Theory, The Australian National University, Reconciling Pluralism and Consensus as Political Ideals, American Journal of Political Science,Vol. 50, No. 3, July 2006, Pp. 634–649 Epistemic meta-consensus for its part could be desirable on the grounds of deliberative AND a wholly new way of looking at decision in the context of risk.
Hassan=Neg
Dear god this evidence goes neg --- it says that we should use debate to develop information-processing skills and political awareness --- debate should be a site to contest PROVISIONAL TRUTHS anchored in some meta-consensus Hassan 9 (Robert Hassan, ARC Senior Research Fellow, Media and Communications at University of Melbourne, “Pathologies of Speed” in Empires of Speed: Time and the Acceleration of Politics and Society, pub. BRILL, 2009) Critical thinking, or critical reason, functions dialectically and is able not only to AND
the worse it gets, the less we are aware of it.
Decision Making KT Ethics
decision making is an essential framework for including others into your decision calculus---it’s an ethical process that we can learn in debate to SUPPLEMENT ethical theories we come up with outside of the game Hooker 8—Tepper School of Business, Carnegie Mellon University (John, Ethics as Rational Choice, http://web.tepper.cmu.edu/ethics/rationalchoice.pdf) Ethics can be viewed as rational choice. A decision must have a consistent rationale AND wisdom must be built on a foundation of rigorous analysis and clear thinking.
Predictability Bad Double Turn
Breaking down predictability is self-defeating and impossible---creativity inevitably depends upon constraints, the attempt to wish away the structure of predictability collapses the very structure their aff depends on---it’s better to retain predictability and be creative within it Armstrong 2K – Paul B. Armstrong, Professor of English and Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences at the State University of New York at Stony Brook, Winter 2000, “The Politics of Play: The Social Implications of Iser's Aesthetic Theory,” New Literary History, Vol. 31, No. 1, p. 211-223 Such a play-space also opposes the notion that the only alternative to the AND makes it dependent on the forms it opposes. End Page 220 The radical presumption of the sublime is not only terroristic in refusing to recognize the AND conditions of exchange would be provided by the nonconsensual reciprocity of Iserian play. Iser's notion of play offers a way of conceptualizing power which acknowledges the necessity and AND combination of constraint and possibility, limitation and unpredictability, discipline and spontaneity.
Aff Links to their Offense
Voting aff necessitates utilizing every procedure they critique---evaluating that their arguments are better than ours requires an inter-subjective frame for language, some rational standard for what arguments are better, etc---only making these procedures clear up front can allow for fruitful discussion, while the aff insidiously re-creates them POST-HOC which links to all of their offense but can’t solve any of ours Friedrich 11—Department of Classics, Dalhousie University (Rainer, The Enlightenment Gone Mad (I) The Dismal Discourse of Postmodernism’s Grand Narratives, http://www.bu.edu/arion/the-enlightenment-gone-mad-i-the-dismal-discourse-of-postmodernisms-grand-narratives/)
Yet the sweeping proclamation of the death of all metanarratives is itself a totalizing metanarrative AND reason. Here is Derridaon the Nietzschean and Heideggerian anti-metaphysical discourses:¶ Derrida Quote Begins But all these discourses and all their analogues are trapped in a kind of circle AND and the implicit postulations of precisely what it seeks to contest.29¶ Derrida Quote Ends Postmodernism’s wholesale critique of enlightenment reason, arising from these roots, faces a similar AND Stanley Rosen’s striking aphorism, that renders postmodernism “the enlightenment gone mad.”
1NR FG Definition
Central government AHD 92 (American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, p. 647) federal—3. Of or relating to the central government of a federation as distinct from the governments of its member units.
Off-Case 1NC Security is a psychological construct—the aff’s scenarios for conflict are products of paranoia that project our violent impulses onto the other Mack 91 – Doctor of Psychiatry and a professor at Harvard University (John, “The Enemy System” http://www.johnemackinstitute.org/eJournal/article.asp?id=23 *Gender modified)
The threat of nuclear annihilation has stimulated us to try to understand what it is AND , taking their cues from the leadership, contribute powerfully to the process.
Our response is to interrogate the epistemological failures of the 1ac---this is the only way to solve inevitable extinction Ahmed 12 Dr. Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed is Executive Director of the Institute for Policy Research and Development (IPRD), an independent think tank focused on the study of violent conflict, he has taught at the Department of International Relations, University of Sussex "The international relations of crisis and the crisis of international relations: from the securitisation of scarcity to the militarisation of society" Global Change, Peace and Security Volume 23, Issue 3, 2011 Taylor Francis
While recommendations to shift our frame of orientation away from conventional state-centrism toward AND of state security planning in the context of counter-terrorism operations abroad. The intensifying problematisation and externalisation of Muslim-majority regions and populations by Western security AND the efficacy of the prevailing geopolitical and economic order is ideologically beyond question. As much as this analysis highlights a direct link between global systemic crises, social polarisation and state militarisation, it fundamentally undermines the idea of a symbiotic link between natural resources and conflict per se. Neither 'resource shortages' nor 'resource abundance' (in ecological, energy, food and monetary terms) necessitate conflict by themselves. There are two key operative factors that determine whether either condition could lead to conflict AND to externalisation of those groups, and the legitimisation of violence towards them. Ultimately, this systems approach to global crises strongly suggests that conventional policy 'reform' is AND of the post-carbon era through social, political and economic transformation. Yet conventional theoretical and policy approaches fail to (1) fully engage with the AND , effective, and joined-up policy-making on these issues. 1NC Restrictions are prohibitions --- the aff is distinct Jean Schiedler-Brown 12, Attorney, Jean Schiedler-Brown and 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 the reporting and monitoring or supervising terms and conditions that are included in the 2001 Stipulation. Black's Law Dictionary, 'fifth edition,(1979) defines "restriction" as; A limitation often imposed in a deed or lease respecting the use to which the AND or by interposing obstacle, to repress or suppress, to curb. In contrast, the terms "supervise" and "supervisor" are defined as AND merely routine or clerical nature, but required the use of independent judgment. Comparing the above definitions, it is clear that the definition of "restriction" is very different from the definition of "supervision"-very few of the same words are used to explain or define the different terms. In his 2001 stipulation, Mr. Kincheloe essentially agreed to some supervision conditions, but he did not agree to restrict his license. Restrictions on authority are distinct from conditions William Conner 78, former federal judge for the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York United States District Court, S. D. New York, CORPORACION VENEZOLANA de FOMENTO v. VINTERO SALES, http://www.leagle.com/decision/19781560452FSupp1108_11379 Plaintiff next contends that Merban was charged with notice of the restrictions on the authority AND were not authorized to act except upon the fulfillment of the specified conditions. Authority is power delegated to an agent by a principle Kelly 3 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. Vote neg--- Neg ground---only prohibitions on particular authorities guarantee links to every core argument like flexibility and deference Precision---only our interpretation defines “restrictions on authority”---that’s key to adequate preparation and policy analysis Limits---there are an infinite number of small hoops they could require the president to jump through---overstretches our research burden
1NC
The United States Congress should substantially increase environmental restrictions on the introduction of non-nuclear armed forces into hostilities. The United States federal judiciary should substantially increase its global judicial-exchanges, including but not limited to with the Chinese Judiciary and including but not limited to the subject of environmental destruction within the Chinese military, and undertake all possible research about environmental issues necessary to conduct those exchanges with the aim of reducing environmental destruction in China including but not limited to within its military.
1NC
Plan wrecks warfighting and naval training Major Charles Gartland 12, J.D., United States Air Force judge advocate currently serving as the Environmental Liaison Officer for the Air Force Materiel Command, “AT WAR AND PEACE WITH THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT: WHEN POLITICAL QUESTIONS AND THE ENVIRONMENT COLLIDE,” 68 A.F. L. Rev. 27 The preceding cases illustrate, at best, inconsistent application of injunction analyses and the AND decides a question that the Constitution and statute intended to be handled differently.
Naval training key to global sea-lanes---key to the economy John Kirby 12, Rear Adm., U.S. Navy, Chief of Information, 11/14/12, “Keeping the Sea Lanes Open: Mine Countermeasures,” http://navylive.dodlive.mil/2012/11/14/keeping-the-sea-lanes-open-mine-countermeasures-2/ At the most basic level, the mission of our Navy is to defend our homeland while keeping global sea lanes open and free. In fact, the latter actually helps us do the former, since so much of our nation’s prosperity and security comes for the free flow of maritime commerce. Naval strategist Rear Adm. Bradley Fiske said it best, way back in 1916 AND municipal or national law, as an army does, but international law.” To enforce that law and to defend those highways, the Navy must expend the appropriate effort, training and resources on the threats and obstacles which hinder this flow of commerce. One such threat — cheap and deadly — is the naval mine. Mines are indiscriminate, easily procured and laid. And they have a potent psychological effect on commercial shippers. Not only can they sink vessels, they can grind the gears of international business to a halt. By limiting our access, naval mines can also put at jeopardy our ability to defend national interests in a given area or chokepoint. And there are vital chokepoints all over the world. Consistent with the new Defense Strategy, we will place a renewed emphasis on those chokepoints in the Asia-Pacific region while continuing to focus on the same in the Middle East. We need the capability to find and clear mines in both these critical regions — and we’ve got it. The Navy has four MCM ships forward deployed to Japan to meet these requirements in the Pacific. And in the CENTCOM region, we counter the mine threat with eight MCM ships. Four of these are based in Bahrain; the other four are deployed there from San Diego.
Economic collapse causes global nuclear war Cesare Merlini 11, nonresident senior fellow at the Center on the United States and Europe and chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Italian Institute for International Affairs, May 2011, “A Post-Secular World?”, Survival, Vol. 53, No. 2 Two neatly opposed scenarios for the future of the world order illustrate the range of AND theocratic absolutes, competing or converging with secular absolutes such as unbridled nationalism.
1NC
Judicial deference is stable now but the plan’s precedent collapses it John O’Connor 7, Former officer in the Marine Corp and Judge Advocate; JD, U Maryland Law School. Statistics and the Military Deference Doctrine: a Response to Professor Lichtman, 66 Md. L. Rev. 668, Lexis As I have written elsewhere, one of the most important aspects of the military AND or no actual deference to the policy determinations of Congress and the President. But early indications from the Roberts Court, with Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito AND when Congress legislates pursuant to its constitutional power to raise and support armies: The Constitution grants Congress the power to “provide for the common Defence,” “ AND ” when Congress legislates under its authority to raise and support armies.179 While it is always dangerous to draw conclusions from a single case, all participating AND every other member of the Court joined an opinion applying it in FAIR. V. Conclusion This Article is by no means an attempt to catalogue every military deference case decided AND not - apply to statutes and regulations burdening civilians instead of military personnel. The military deference doctrine is, at once, both historically immature and limited, AND there is no sign that such an upheaval is anywhere on the horizon.
Deference is vital to effective executive crisis response --- solves terror, rogue states, and prolif Robert Blomquist 10, Professor of Law, Valparaiso University School of Law, THE JURISPRUDENCE OF AMERICAN NATIONAL SECURITY PRESIPRUDENCE, 44 Val. U.L. Rev. 881 Supreme Court Justices--along with legal advocates--need to conceptualize and prioritize big AND hyper-energy in the Executive branch in responding to these threats. n16 The Justices should also consult Professor Robert S. Summers's masterful elaboration and amplification of AND of Congress) to preserve, protect, and defend the Nation. n22 *886 B. Geopolitical Strategic Considerations Bearing on Judicial Interpretation Before the United States Supreme Court Justices form an opinion on the legality of national AND security facts and conceptions before sitting in judgment on presiprudential national security determinations. (1) "National security policy . . . is harder today because the AND -traffickers support terrorists, and terrorists align themselves with regional powers." n27 (2) "Yet, as worrisome as these immediate concerns may be, the long-term challenges are even harder to deal with, and the stakes are higher. Whereas the main Cold War threat--the Soviet Union--was brittle, most of the potential adversaries and challengers America now faces are resilient." n28 (3) "The most important task for U.S. national security AND When you do not hold the strategic advantage, they do not." n30 (4) While "keeping the strategic advantage may not have the idealistic ring of making the world safe for democracy and does not sound as decisively macho as maintaining American hegemony," n31 maintaining the American "strategic advantage is critical, because it is essential for just about everything else America hopes to achieve--promoting freedom, protecting the homeland, defending its values, preserving peace, and so on." n32 (5) The United States requires national security "agility." n33 It not only needs "to refocus its resources repeatedly; it needs to do this faster than an adversary can focus its own resources." n34 *888 As further serious preparation for engaging in the jurisprudence of American AND stake. This is the kind of knowledge suited to a Jacksonian." n39 Turning to how the Supreme Court should view and interpret American presidential measures to oversee AND ," n48 as determined by the POTUS and his national security executive subordinates.
1NC
The Court’s pursuing an incremental strategy in regards to War Powers now---the plan causes massive backlash and executive non-acquiescence Neavl Devins 10, Goodrich Professor of Law and Professor of Government, College of William and Mary., Talk Loudly and Carry a Small Stick: The Supreme Court and Enemy Combatants, 12 U. Pa. J. Const. L. 491 Congress, the President, and the Court. Throughout the enemy combatant litigation, AND without setting meaningful boundaries on what the administration could or could not do.
Congress will backlash against the plan and cut judicial pay Philip A. Talmadge 99, Justice, Washington State Supreme Court, Winter, Seattle University Law Review, 22 Seattle Univ. L. R. 695, p. 701-704 The doctrine of judicial restraint has been encrusted in recent years with considerable ideological cant AND in the principles of restraint employed in the federal and state court systems. Adequate funding for the judiciary is key to the rule of law – it’s watched internationally Testimony of Associate Justice Anthony M. Kennedy 7 before the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary Judicial Security and Independence February 14, http://judiciary.senate.gov/testimony.cfm?id=2526andwit_id=6070 The provision of judicial resources by Congress over the years is admirable in most respects AND of views. Please permit me to make some remarks on the subject. That causes nuclear war gender paraphrased. Charles S. Rhyne 58, Founder and Senior Partner of Rhyne and Rhyne law firm. “Law Day Speech for Voice of America.” May 1. American Bar Association. http://www.abanet.org/publiced/lawday/rhyne58.html In these days of soul-searching and re-evaluation and inventorying of basic AND to replace weapons before the dreadful holocaust of nuclear war overtake our people.
Case Solvency
1NC No Spillover
There’s no chance the plan spills over---all federal courts are either siding with the executive’s terror policies through narrow rulings or declining to even hear the cases---the plan will just be distinguished away Jonathan L. Entin 12, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs (School of Law), David L. Brennan Professor of Law, and Professor of Political Science, Case Western Reserve University. War Powers, Foreign Affairs, and the Courts: Some Institutional Considerations, 45 Case W. Res. J. Int'l L. 443 Although these procedural and jurisdictional barriers to judicial review can be overcome, those who AND both rulings, n108 the Supreme Court declined to review either case. n109
The plan can’t set a precedent---Roberts is a sly dog William D. Araiza, Law Prof @ Brooklyn, Summer 2012, “PLAYING WELL WITH OTHERS-BUT STILL WINNING,” 46 Ga. L. Rev. 1059, ln How can a judge undermine precedent while still following it? This Essay considers the AND as faithful to stare decisis while nevertheless pushing the law away from precedents.
Environment AT: Military I/L They don’t solve other countries military emissions which makes their impacts inevitable No internal link-environmentalists using the legal system and the military changed its policy Russell McLendon 8/13/13, Science editor at Mother Nature Network, 8/13/13, "American military, wildlife learning to coexist," http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/animals/blogs/american-military-wildlife-learning-to-coexist This coexistence isn't necessarily selfless, as the AP points out: If endangered species AND more than to be able to do our mission while protecting our environment." Status quo solves- new military programs help the environment Russell McLendon 8/13/13, Science editor at Mother Nature Network, 8/13/13, "American military, wildlife learning to coexist," http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/animals/blogs/american-military-wildlife-learning-to-coexist ¶ War is hell for everyone involved, including wildlife. But beyond the heat AND habitat for Mazama pocket gophers, Taylor's checkerspot butterflies and other native species.
AT: Biodiversity No impact to biodiversity Sagoff 97 Mark, Senior Research Scholar – Institute for Philosophy and Public policy in School of Public Affairs – U. Maryland, William and Mary Law Review, “INSTITUTE OF BILL OF RIGHTS LAW SYMPOSIUM DEFINING TAKINGS: PRIVATE PROPERTY AND THE FUTURE OF GOVERNMENT REGULATION: MUDDLE OR MUDDLE THROUGH? TAKINGS JURISPRUDENCE MEETS THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT”, 38 Wm and Mary L. Rev. 825, March, L/N Note – Colin Tudge - Research Fellow at the Centre for Philosophy at the London School of Economics. Frmr Zoological Society of London: Scientific Fellow and tons of other positions. PhD. Read zoology at Cambridge. Simon Levin = Moffet Professor of Biology, Princeton. 2007 American Institute of Biological Sciences Distinguished Scientist Award 2008 Istituto Veneto di Scienze Lettere ed Arti 2009 Honorary Doctorate of Science, Michigan State University 2010 Eminent Ecologist Award, Ecological Society of America 2010 Margalef Prize in Ecology, etc… PhD Although one may agree with ecologists such as Ehrlich and Raven that the earth stands AND sense, good for mankind. The most valuable things are quite useless. AT: Environment Collapse No impact to the environment and no solvency Holly Doremus 2k Professor of Law at UC Davis, "The Rhetoric and Reality of Nature Protection: Toward a New Discourse," Winter 2000 Washington and Lee Law Review 57 Wash and Lee L. Rev. 11, lexis Reluctant to concede such losses, tellers of the ecological horror story highlight how close AND material benefits of destructive decisions frequently will exceed their identifiable material costs. n221 AT: Heg Environment not key to leadership Brooks 5—Prof Government, Dartmouth. BA in economics and politics, UC Santa Cruz. MA, MPhil, PhD in pol sci, Yale. (Stephen and William Wohlforth, Perspectives on Politics 3:509-524) Drawing on rational choice theory, Downs and Jones show that a far more compelling AND that will strongly influence how other states relate across different issue areas. 69 No impact to hegemony Friedman 10 Ben, research fellow in defense and homeland security, Cato. PhD candidate in pol sci, MIT, Military Restraint and Defense Savings, 20 July, http://www.cato.org/testimony/ct-bf-07202010.html Another argument for high military spending is that U.S. military hegemony underlies AND and threaten to drag us into wars, while providing no obvious benefit.
AT: SoPo Soft power resilient — overcomes their legitimacy internals Brooks and Wohlforth 9 (Stephen Brooks and William Wohlforth, both are professors of Government at Dartmouth, “Reshaping the world order: how Washington should reform international institutions,” Foreign Affairs, March-April) FOR ANALYSTS such as Zbigniew Brzezinski and Henry Kissinger, the key reason for skepticism AND UnitedStates today has the necessary legitimacy to shepherd reform of the international system.
AT: Warming No impact---mitigation and adaptation will solve---no tipping point or “1 risk” args Robert O. Mendelsohn 9, the Edwin Weyerhaeuser Davis Professor, Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Yale University, June 2009, “Climate Change and Economic Growth,” online: http://www.growthcommission.org/storage/cgdev/documents/gcwp060web.pdf The heart of the debate about climate change comes from a number of warnings from AND economic growth and well?being may be at risk (Stern 2006). These statements are largely alarmist and misleading. Although climate change is a serious problem AND range climate risks. What is needed are long?run balanced responses. New Adv China Won’t Model Chinese judiciary won’t listen on the environment China won’t model – even if they do, can’t solve Yvonne Chan 9 in Hong Kong, BusinessGreen, 9/17/09, China's rapid growth imperils global climate change goal, says study, http://www.businessgreen.com/business-green/news/2249644/china-rapid-growth-imperils China's booming economic growth imperils a global target to limit global warming to two degrees, according to a major new report from an influential government think-tank. Released yesterday by the Energy Research Institute, China's Low Carbon Development Pathways by 2050 says that even if the nation were to embark on an aggressive strategy to cut greenhouse gas emissions, halting CO2 growth would be difficult given the country's current stage of rapid economic development. "There is a huge number of cities to be built," study co-author He Jiankun told reporters. "They will consume a large amount of steel and cement. This means that emissions will not be reduced for some time." The problem with the global target, according to the report, was that the two-degree limit – which was formally adopted by G8 nations in July – does not make adequate concessions for the industrialisation of developing countries. The report said that in order to even get close to the target, it was up to wealthy nations to make carbon emission cuts of at least 90 per cent on 1990 levels by 2050. Otherwise, global temperatures will rise between 2.8 and 3.2 degrees above the pre-industrial average, estimated the report, which was conducted over a two-year period and had involved 10 independent institutes, including WWF and the US-based Energy Foundation.
AT: CCP Collapse No lashout – CCP knows it would be suicide and PLA wouldn’t support it Gilley 4 Bruce, former contributing editor at the Far Eastern Economic Review, M.A. Oxford, 2004, China’s Democratic Future, p. 114 Yet the risks, even to a dying regime, may be too high. AND about its future, the resort to nuclear confrontation would not make sense. AT: Bioweapons No impact O’Neill 4 O’Neill 8/19/2004 Brendan, “Weapons of Minimum Destruction” http://www.spiked-online.com/Articles/0000000CA694.htm David C Rapoport, professor of political science at University of California, Los Angeles AND tend to be far less destructive than conventional weapons. 'If we stopped speculating
about things that might happen in the future and looked instead at what has happened AND attacker as to the attacked'. The Tigers have not used WMD since.
Block
CP
Da
Deference Now---Legal Clarification Key
SQ rulings haven’t clarified the legal debate---the plan does Jonathan L. Entin 12, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs (School of Law), David L. Brennan Professor of Law, and Professor of Political Science, Case Western Reserve University. War Powers, Foreign Affairs, and the Courts: Some Institutional Considerations, 45 Case W. Res. J. Int'l L. 443 To be sure, the Supreme Court has decided some well-known national security AND other legal issues that pervade the debate about presidential power and foreign affairs. Beyond the limitations of the Supreme Court rulings, the judiciary probably will not contribute very much to the debate. Various procedural and jurisdictional obstacles make it difficult for courts to address the merits of disputes about war powers and foreign affairs. Even if those obstacles can be surmounted, those who decry what they view as presidential excess should note that the judiciary typically has taken a deferential role in reviewing challenges to executive action.
Deference Now---Broad Trends
Prefer our uniqueness---only our authors analyze the relative importance of rulings on deference while theirs assumes they’re all the same John O’Connor 7, Former officer in the Marine Corp and Judge Advocate; JD, U Maryland Law School. Statistics and the Military Deference Doctrine: a Response to Professor Lichtman, 66 Md. L. Rev. 668, Lexis *670 Professor Lichtman's article is a useful contribution to the existing literature on AND arrives at substantive conclusions that are not justified by the existing case law. As Part II of this Article explains, Professor Lichtman's analysis is flawed in that AND of cases, the vast majority of which would never trigger deferential review.
Salaries Key Judicial Independence Cutting judicial salaries wrecks court legitimacy and independence – prevents life tenure Stephen L. Carter, law prof @ Yale, 2-21-2013, “The Other Crisis Facing the Federal Judiciary,” Bloomberg, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-21/the-other-crisis-facing-the-federal-judiciary.html The problem isn’t going away. A recent survey asked retired federal judges why they AND not, however, the courts will eventually face a crisis of legitimacy. Judicial salaries are the biggest internal link to judicial independence Karissa M. Schwartz, Ed. Cardozo L.R. and JD Candidate Cardozo, 2012, “SOUND THE ALARM: THE CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS OF JUDICIAL COMPENSATION,” 2012 Cardozo L. Rev. De Novo 101, ln When legal scholars refer to a "constitutional crisis," they speak about a substantive AND judiciary lest we lose the most qualified individuals to higher paying occupations. n14 BACKLASH
Court involvement in national security causes massive blowback that crushes judicial legitimacy Robert M. Chesney 9, Professor, University of Texas School of Law, NATIONAL SECURITY FACT DEFERENCE, 95 Va. L. Rev. 1361 Judicial involvement in national security litigation, as noted at the outset, poses unusual AND and authority or perhaps even by triggering some form of concrete political response.
Court stripping destroys judicial legitimacy and separation of powers---even unsuccessful backlash can put the entire edifice of judicial review in question Andrew D. Martin 1, Prof of Political Science at Washington University 2001. Statuatory Battles and Constitutional Wars: Congress and the Supreme Court But the large policy payoff in the constitutional cases. What does the ability of AND which the justices may feel in the not-so-distant future.
2NC Link / UQ
The SQ is goldilocks---it carves out enough room for judicial review of War Powers to solve Court influence, but doesn’t impose any meaningful checks on the Executive so it allows for flexibility---the plan sends a signal of judicial over-reach that causes political blowback Neavl Devins 10, Goodrich Professor of Law and Professor of Government, College of William and Mary., Talk Loudly and Carry a Small Stick: The Supreme Court and Enemy Combatants, 12 U. Pa. J. Const. L. 491 In Part III of this Essay, I will argue that the Court's actions in AND as to protect its turf without risking national security or elected government backlash.
CASE
T Overview There's a clear brightline---restrictions require a floor and a ceiling---plan is a floor but doesn't set a cap on the President's potential actions USCA 77, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 564 F.2d 292, 1977 U.S. App. LEXIS 10899,. 1978 Fire and Casualty Cases (CCH) P317 Continental argues that even if the Aetna and Continental policies provide coverage for the Cattuzzo accident, that coverage should 8 be limited to a total of $300,000 because Atlas agreed to procure "not less than" $300,000 coverage. The District Court properly found that the subcontract language does not support a restriction on the terms of Continental's policy because the subcontract only sets a floor, not a ceiling, for coverage. AT: We Meet Contextual definitions bad – intent to define outweighs Eric Kupferbreg 87, University of Kentucky, Senior Assistant Dean, Academic and Faculty Affairs at Northeastern University, College of Professional Studies Associate Director, Trust Initiative at Harvard School of Public Health 1987 “Limits - The Essence of Topicality” http://groups.wfu.edu/debate/MiscSites/DRGArticles/Kupferberg1987LatAmer.htm Often, field contextual definitions are too broad or too narrow for debate purposes. AND is a unique context, then additional considerations enter into our definitional analysis. “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; AT: C/I Restriction narrower than regulation Judge Thomas E. Johnson 9, District Court Judge, US District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, "Stover v. Fingerhut Direct Marketing, Inc. - Document 33," 8/26/2009 http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/west-virginia/wvsdce/5:2009cv00152/61171/33 9 The fourth prong of the Central Hudson test refers to "regulation" of AND more broad or no more expansive than 'necessary' to serve its substantial interests"). Their ev only defines "restrictions," not "restrictions on authority" - that kills predictability J.A.D. Haneman 59, justice of the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division. “Russell S. Bertrand et al. v. Donald T. Jones et al.,” 58 NJ Super. 273; 156 A.2d 161; 1959 N.J. Super, Lexis HN4 In ascertaining the meaning of the word "restrictions" as here employed AND be construed as being used in the same limited fashion as "zoning." And, substantial requires an objective, absolute measurement--- there's no way to quantify the impact oversight has on War Powers which means that their interpretation has no coherent way to account for an entire word in the topic Words and Phrases 64, 40 WandP 759 The words "outward, open, actual, risible, substantial, and exclusive AND . Bass v. Pease, 79 111. App. 308, 31R They conflate management and restrictions BEREC 12, Guidelines for quality of service in the scope of net neutrality, Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications The concept of “traffic management” is sometimes used as a synonym of “restrictions”, but in these guidelines BEREC seeks to avoid misunderstanding by using the term “restrictions” to refer to all limitations, including those which are contractually binding and/or technically implemented limitations. The affirmative sets conditions under which the President may use his authority; it doesn’t restrict the uses to which his authority may be put---that distinction matters Morris Pashman 63, justice on the New Jersey Supreme Court. “ISIDORE FELDMAN, PLAINTIFF AND THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFF, v. URBAN COMMERCIAL, INC., AND OTHERS, DEFENDANT,” 78 N.J. Super. 520; 189 A.2d 467; 1963 N.J. Super. Lexis HN3A title insurance policy "is subject to the same rules of construction as are AND against the person or persons seeking to enforce them." (Emphasis added) AT: Authority Authority is the exercise of power over others OED 13 (http://www.oed.com/viewdictionaryentry/Entry/13349)
authority, n. I. Power to enforce obedience. a. Power or right to enforce obedience; moral or legal supremacy; the right to command, or give an ultimate decision. b. in authority: in a position of power; in possession of power over others.
Adv 2 AT: China-Russia War Deterrence checks and no extinction Karlin 10 (8/17/10, Anatoly Karlin is a San Francisco based independent writer, political analyst and media critic. He is the author of the blog Sublime Oblivion focusing on the Russia, geopolitics and future global trends. “Why China and Russia won’t fight” http://www.sublimeoblivion.com/2010/10/17/russia-china-no-war/) Every so often there appear claims, not only in the Western press but the AND made that, understanding this, the Kremlin will not use nuclear weapons.
Therefore nuclear deterrenece with respect to China is a complete myth. This is AND decades is very close to zero – no matter what the sensationalists claim.
10/5/13
5 Harvard vs Gtown AM
Tournament: Harvard | Round: Finals | Opponent: Georgetown | Judge: Off 1NC Security is a psychological construct—the aff’s scenarios for conflict are products of paranoia that project our violent impulses onto the other Mack 91 – Doctor of Psychiatry and a professor at Harvard University (John, “The Enemy System” http://www.johnemackinstitute.org/eJournal/article.asp?id=23 *Gender modified)
The threat of nuclear annihilation has stimulated us to try to understand what it is AND , taking their cues from the leadership, contribute powerfully to the process. Our response is to interrogate the psychological underpinnings of enemy creation–prevents war Byles 3—English, U Cyprus (Joanna, Psychoanalysis and War: The Superego and Projective Identification, http://www.clas.ufl.edu/ipsa/journal/articles/art_byles01.shtml)
The problem of warfare which includes genocide, and its most recent manifestation, international AND adaptation to the other within the self and the self within the other. 1NC Restrictions are prohibitions on action --- the aff is oversight Jean Schiedler-Brown 12, Attorney, Jean Schiedler-Brown and 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. Restrictions on authority are distinct from conditions William Conner 78, former federal judge for the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York United States District Court, S. D. New York, CORPORACION VENEZOLANA de FOMENTO v. VINTERO SALES, http://www.leagle.com/decision/19781560452FSupp1108_11379 Plaintiff next contends that Merban was charged with notice of the restrictions on the authority AND were not authorized to act except upon the fulfillment of the specified conditions. Substantially” means the plan must be across the board Brian Anderson 5, Becky Collins, Barbara Van Haren and Nissan Bar-Lev, WCASS Research / Special Projects Committee* Report on: A Conceptual Framework for Developing a 504 School District Policy, http://www.specialed.us/issues-504policy/504.htm A substantial limitation is a significant restriction as to the condition, manner, or AND manifested in all facets of the student’s life, not only in school. Vote neg--- Neg ground---only prohibitions on particular authorities guarantee links to every core argument like flexibility and deference Precision---only our interpretation defines “restrictions on authority”---that’s key to adequate preparation and policy analysis
1nc
Court interference in national security decks effective executive responses to prolif, terror, and the rise of hostile powers---link threshold is low Robert Blomquist 10, Professor of Law, Valparaiso University School of Law, THE JURISPRUDENCE OF AMERICAN NATIONAL SECURITY PRESIPRUDENCE, 44 Val. U.L. Rev. 881 Supreme Court Justices--along with legal advocates--need to conceptualize and prioritize big AND hyper-energy in the Executive branch in responding to these threats. n16 The Justices should also consult Professor Robert S. Summers's masterful elaboration and amplification of AND of Congress) to preserve, protect, and defend the Nation. n22 *886 B. Geopolitical Strategic Considerations Bearing on Judicial Interpretation Before the United States Supreme Court Justices form an opinion on the legality of national AND security facts and conceptions before sitting in judgment on presiprudential national security determinations. (1) "National security policy . . . is harder today because the AND -traffickers support terrorists, and terrorists align themselves with regional powers." n27 (2) "Yet, as worrisome as these immediate concerns may be, the long-term challenges are even harder to deal with, and the stakes are higher. Whereas the main Cold War threat--the Soviet Union--was brittle, most of the potential adversaries and challengers America now faces are resilient." n28 (3) "The most important task for U.S. national security AND When you do not hold the strategic advantage, they do not." n30 (4) While "keeping the strategic advantage may not have the idealistic ring of making the world safe for democracy and does not sound as decisively macho as maintaining American hegemony," n31 maintaining the American "strategic advantage is critical, because it is essential for just about everything else America hopes to achieve--promoting freedom, protecting the homeland, defending its values, preserving peace, and so on." n32 (5) The United States requires national security "agility." n33 It not only needs "to refocus its resources repeatedly; it needs to do this faster than an adversary can focus its own resources." n34 *888 As further serious preparation for engaging in the jurisprudence of American AND stake. This is the kind of knowledge suited to a Jacksonian." n39 Turning to how the Supreme Court should view and interpret American presidential measures to oversee AND ," n48 as determined by the POTUS and his national security executive subordinates.
1NC The United States federal judiciary should restrict the President’s war powers authority to imprison individuals that have won their habeas hearing on the grounds that human rights treaties ratified by the United States are self-executing. Using the word “detain” is unethical and turns solvency—“imprison” is more accurate—hold the 1ac accountable Margaret Sullivan 13, April 12, “‘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 If it’s torture, why call it a “harsh interrogation technique”? If it’s AND thoughtful consideration – and, at times, some institutional soul-searching. 1NC
The United States Executive Branch should make a public declaration that the United States’ indefinite detention policy guarantees Article 75 protections of the First Geneva Protocol. The United States Congress should - ratify the Second Geneva Protocol. - release individuals that have won their habeas hearing. - Pronounce that the United states supports a right to water
Solves HR cred and treaty leadership John Bellinger 10, headed the U.S. delegation for the negotiation of the Third Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions; an adjunct senior fellow in International and National Security Law at the Council on Foreign Relations. As the legal adviser for Department of State from 2005 to 2009. Obama, Bush, and the Geneva Conventions, shadow.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/08/11/obama_bush_and_the_geneva_conventions Today, 12 August, is the 61st anniversary of the signing of the Geneva AND international community to clarify and expand the international law applicable to modern warfare. Court ILAW rulings cause massive Congressional backlash that turns the case Eric Posner 8, professor at the University of Chicago Law School, Medellin and America's Ability To Comply With International Law, www.slate.com/content/slate/blogs/convictions/2008/03/25/medellin_and_america_s_ability_to_comply_with_international_law.html There is an academic theory that holds that the type of litigation (sometimes called AND it will do so even when its national government does not want to.
That demolishes hegemony and turns cred J. Harvie Wilkinson 4, Circuit Judge for the 4th Circuit, DEBATE: THE USE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW IN JUDICIAL DECISIONS, 27 Harv. J.L. and Pub. Pol'y 423 So of course international law should play a part in American judicial reasoning. It AND make such precedents relevant, we are dealing with an entirely different question. So judges must not wade, sua sponte, into international law's deep blue sea AND in foreign and military matters were later repudiated and contradicted by judicial decree. Where courts go too far, in my view, is where they rely upon international (and mostly European) precedents when resolving important and contentious social issues. This "internationalization" of the Constitution on domestic social issues raises three types of problems. 1NC Independent judicial interpretation of international law undermines Congressional treaty power Gerald Neuman 4, professor of jurisprudence at Columbia University, 98 A.J.I.L. 82, “THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION AND INTERNATIONAL LAW: The Uses of International Law in Constitutional Interpretation”, January, lexis Normative reasoning borrowed from international human rights sources will not necessarily prevail in the process AND . They certainly cannot control constitutional interpretation, but they may inform it. The use of human rights treaties as an aid in construing constitutional rights might seem AND treaty implementation, and would not be consistent with current constitutional understandings. 33
The Court’s not using treaties to limit political branch’s authority---the plan creates a doctrine of judicial enforceability that collapses the PQD and SOP---it also functionally renders treaties self-executing Curtis Bradley 9, Horvitz Professor of Law, Duke Law School, SELF-EXECUTION AND TREATY DUALITY, http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5505andcontext=faculty_scholarship Nothing in this history, however, suggests that treaties were included in the Supremacy AND . As Professor Christopher Drahozal notes in his book on the Supremacy Clause: “Certainly the Supremacy Clause does away with the question under the Articles of Confederation of whether states have to implement treaties before they take effect. That possibility, the subject of debate and federal action in connection with the Treaty of Peace with Great Britain, is conclusively rejected by the Supremacy Clause. Beyond that, however, the resolution of the self-execution debate is less clear, at least with respect to the preemption of state law.”58 To put it differently, there is no reason to think that the Supremacy Clause removes the international political dimension of treaties, which leaves to national governments the ultimate responsibility for deciding whether and how to comply with treaty obligations, and for accepting whatever international consequences may flow from that decision. The Supremacy Clause simply ensures that in the United States this responsibility rests at the federal rather than state level. The federalism orientation of the Supremacy Clause is further reflected in the fact that it AND show who is meant to be responsible for enforcing a given treaty.”62 Once the concept of supreme law of the land is viewed as potentially separate from AND nothing in the history of the Supremacy Clause that suggests such a mandate.
That creates unlimited legislative role for the Courts in treaty enforcement---collapses effective international political responses to environment, terrorism, rogues, and collapses the economy and trade---it also kills the cred of informal treaties which will solve the case in the SQ John Yoo 8, Cal Berkeley law prof, The Powers of War and Peace, 244-9 Non-self-execution provides a ready means to solve some of the tensions AND as ?nance and economics, security, the environment, and human rights.
Extinction Michael Panzer 8, 25-year veteran of the markets who has worked for for HSBC, Soros Funds, ABN Amro, Dresdner Bank, and J.P. Morgan Chase. New York Institute of Finance faculty member and a graduate of Columbia University. Financial Armageddon, 136-8 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.
Effective presidential treaty power key to solve rogue-prolif and terrorism---but, there’s no risk of their overreach impacts John Yoo 8, Cal Berkeley law prof, The Powers of War and Peace, 204-5 Events such as the Neutrality Proclamation, the termination of the Mutual Defense Treaty with AND ensured that Congress has the ability to block policies with which it disagrees.
Extinction Kroenig 12 – Matthew Kroenig is an Assistant Professor of Government at Georgetown University and a Stanton Nuclear Security Fellow on the Council on Foreign Relations, May 26th, 2012, “The History of Proliferation Optimism: Does It Have A Future?” http://www.npolicy.org/article.php?aid=1182andtid=30 What’s Wrong with Proliferation Optimism? The proliferation optimist position, while having a distinguished pedigree, has several major flaws AND war in an attempt to force less-resolved opponents to back down.
1nc
The United States federal judiciary should rule that individuals that have won their habeas hearings be released on the grounds that human rights treaties ratified by the United States inform the war powers authority of the President.
Key distinction between saying his authority is restricted vs informed by Geneva Jack L. Goldsmith 5, and Curtis A. Bradley, * Professor, Harvard Law School Professor, University of Virginia School of Law. CONGRESSIONAL AUTHORIZATION AND THE WAR ON TERRORISM, Harvard Law Review, VOLUME 118 MAY 2005 NUMBER 7 The fact that the international laws of war can inform the boundaries of the powers AND mean that he lacked authority to treat the prisoner in this manner.213
Case Advantage 1
No Model No modeling and no impact---democratic states will only model good US laws and authoritarian ones won’t model no matter what John O. McGinnis 7, Professor of Law, Northwestern University School of Law. Ilya Somin Assistant Professor of Law, George Mason University School of Law. GLOBAL CONSTITUTIONALISM: GLOBAL INFLUENCE ON U.S. JURISPRUDENCE: Should International Law Be Part of Our Law? 59 Stan. L. Rev. 1175 The second benefit to foreigners of distinctive U.S. legal norms is information AND nations can decide to adopt our good norms and avoid our bad ones. The only noteworthy counterargument is the claim that U.S. norms will have AND political processes to screen out American norms that might cause harm if copied. Of course, many nations remain authoritarian. n270 But our norms are not likely AND compared to the harm of allowing raw international law to trump domestic law. AT: Human Rights Cred Human Rights Cred is irrelevant — public opinion, global norms, and NGO networks outweigh US policy Andrew Moravcsik 5, PhD and a Professor of Politics and International Affairs at Princeton, 2005, "The Paradox of U.S. Human Rights Policy," American Exceptionalism and Human Rights, http://www.princeton.edu/~amoravcs/library/paradox.pdf It is natural to ask: What are the consequences of U.S. AND seem to have little to do with U.S. multilateral policy.
US judiciary isn’t modeled on human rights issues Adam Liptak 8, J.D. from Yale, an instructor in law and journalism and the Supreme Court correspondent for the NYT, 9/17/2008, "U.S. Court is Not Guiding Fewer Nations," The New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/18/us/18legal.html?pagewanted=alland_r=0 WASHINGTON — Judges around the world have long looked to the decisions of the United AND Ginsburg, who teaches comparative and international law at the University of Chicago.
No Impact Doesn’t cause global war---no WMD prolif absent human rights, doesn’t make sense – their ev from 2004 emp denied
Advantage 2 1NC Resource Wars—No War No resource wars Tetrais 12—Senior Research Fellow at the Fondation pour la Recherche Stratgique (FRS). Past positions include: Director, Civilian Affairs Committee, NATO Assembly (1990-1993); European affairs desk officer, Ministry of Defense (1993-1995); Visiting Fellow, the Rand Corporation (1995-1996); Special Assistant to the Director of Strategic Affairs, Ministry of Defense (1996-2001).(Bruno, The Demise of Ares, csis.org/files/publication/twq12SummerTertrais.pdf)
The Unconvincing Case for ‘‘New Wars’’ ¶ Is the demise of war reversible? AND will be driven by nationalist passions, not the desperate hunger for hydrocarbons. AT: Water Wars No water wars---zero empirical or theoretical support and their authors have self-reinforcing incentives to exaggerate risk David Katz 11, Director of the Akirov Institute for Business and Environment at Tel Aviv University and Adjunct Lecturer at Tel Aviv University’s Recanati School of Management and Porter School of Environmental Studies, February 2011, “Hydro-Political Hyperbole: Examining Incentives for Overemphasizing the Risks of Water Wars,” Global Environmental Politics, Vol. 11, No. 1, p. 12-33 Reference to linkages between natural resource scarcity and the potential for violent conflict is now AND outcomes are “certain”5 and only a matter of time.6 While the claim that increasing water scarcity will lead to increased outbreaks of wars— AND is scant evidence that violent conflict over water is becoming more frequent.9 Despite weak supporting evidence and numerous theoretical challenges to the water wars hypothesis, proclamations AND likely relevant to much of the discourse in the field of environmental security. AT: Water Wars---Author Indicts/Exaggeration Their authors have incentives to overstate the risk and impact David Katz 11, Director of the Akirov Institute for Business and Environment at Tel Aviv University and Adjunct Lecturer at Tel Aviv University’s Recanati School of Management and Porter School of Environmental Studies, February 2011, “Hydro-Political Hyperbole: Examining Incentives for Overemphasizing the Risks of Water Wars,” Global Environmental Politics, Vol. 11, No. 1, p. 12-33 Observers have noted that various actors may have incentives to stress or even exaggerate the AND disproportionate popularity of such messages and help to evaluate such warnings more critically. Mueller offers a general explanation for a focus on violence in public discourse by postulating that, following the end of the Cold War, policy-makers, the press, and various analysts seek to fill a “catastrophe quota.”50 According to this theory, various actors seek out new areas of potential violence to justify fears that had become commonplace during the Cold War period. Simon, while not specifically addressing environmental conflict, suggests four possible reasons for academic AND a belief that sounding alarm bells can mobilize action to improve environmental issues. Haas offers two reasons why “exaggerated beliefs about resource scarcity and their possible threats AND risks of water wars in order to promote water-related infrastructure.53
No War Empirically disproven and shortages incentivize cooperation Ken Conca 12, professor at American University's School of International Service, where he directs the Global Environmental Politics Program, "Decoupling Water and Violent Conflict," Fall, Issues in Science and Technology, Vol. 29 Issue 1, Academic Search Premier The good news is that although countries may sometimes use bellicose rhetoric when discussing water AND a long way toward managing shared rivers in a fair and peaceful manner. Advantage 3 SQ Solves
Sq solves Aaron B. Aft 11, J.D., Indiana University Maurer School of Law, Winter 2011, Respect My Authority: Analyzing Claims of Diminished U.S. Supreme Court Influence Abroad, Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, Vol. 18, No. 1 Considering the role cast for foreign precedent by its proponents and the trepidation of its AND background information, rather than serving a dispositive role in a given case. Lastly, it may be tempting to infer from the preceding discussion that the hostility of some prominent U.S. judges to the use of foreign precedent may leave foreign jurists less inclined to cite U.S. precedent. However, that conclusion is premature, and to accurately assess the extent of the U.S. Supreme Court's influence abroad, it is necessary to examine the use of U.S. precedent overseas. *431 B. Use of U.S. Supreme Court Precedent Abroad In contrast to the vigorous debate that characterizes the U.S. Supreme Court's AND their comparative endeavors similar to those advanced by Justices Breyer and Kirby. n63 In Canada, citation to U.S. precedent is seen as "an AND benefit from expertise acquired by longstanding non-Canadian constitutional jurisprudence." n66 Justices from Australia have advanced similar arguments. For example, Justice Kirby has been AND a means of elucidating the meaning of the Australian Constitution remains unquestioned. n70 Although courts in many countries commonly refer to foreign precedent, Canada and Australia are AND S. Supreme Court is waning due to hostility toward comparative practice. n72 As noted above, the relative influence (measured by citation analysis) of U AND how" are less thorough than the studies of "how often." n192 C. Informal Judicial Meetings and Exchanges Though important, empirical study alone is insufficient to fully capture the U.S. Supreme Court's influence abroad. Advances in telecommunications have placed many court decisions at the fingertips of judges the world over, enabling a curious jurist to access decisions almost as soon as they are released. n193 Beyond technology, it is also important to consider the "informal" contacts- AND of such contacts, n197 and the following merely supplements her valuable work. Slaughter observes that judges around the world are meeting at inter-judicial conferences, AND , n205 and the Court has paid tribute to fallen colleagues abroad. n206
1NC No Model
No one cites the US for anything---there are too many other countries to look to---*but the SQ solves their impacts because other countries reject excessive Presidentialism now Mila Versteeg 13, Associate Professor at the University of Virginia School of Law. Model, Resource, or Outlier? What Effect Has the U.S. Constitution Had on the Recently Adopted Constitutions of Other Nations?, 29 May 2013, www.heritage.org/research/lecture/2013/05/model-resource-or-outlier-what-effect-has-the-us-constitution-had-on-the-recently-adopted-constitutions-of-other-nations Unsurprisingly, attempting to gauge one constitution’s “influence” on another involves various conceptual and methodological challenges. To illustrate, a highly generic constitution may be generic because others have followed its lead, because it has modeled others, or simply by coincidence. That said, if two constitutions are becoming increasingly dissimilar, by definition, one cannot be following the other. That is, neither is exerting influence on the other (at least not in a positive way). This is the phenomenon we observed in comparing the U.S. Constitution to AND World War II, but even that similarity has decreased since the 1960s. Rights provisions are not the only constitutional elements that have lost favor with the rest of the world; structural provisions pioneered by American constitutionalism—such as federalism, presidentialism, and judicial review—have also been losing their global appeal. For instance, in the early 20th century, 22 percent of constitutions provided for federalistic systems, while today, just 12 percent do. A similar trend has occurred for presidentialism, another American innovation. Since the end of World War II, the percentage of countries employing purely presidential systems has declined, mainly in favor of mixed systems, which were a favorite of former Soviet bloc countries. Finally, though judicial review is not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution AND exercised American-style constitutional review; today, fewer than half do. Reasons for the Decline It appears that several factors are driving the U.S. Constitution’s increasing atypicality. First, while in 2006 the average national constitutions contained 34 rights (of the 60 we identify), the U.S. Constitution contains relatively few—just 21—and the rights it does contain are often themselves atypical. Just one-third of constitutions provide for church and state separation, as does the U.S. Establishment Clause, and only 2 percent of constitutions (including, e.g., Mexico and Guatemala) contain a “right to bear arms.” Conversely, the U.S. Constitution omits some of the most globally popular rights, such as women’s rights, the right to social security, the right to food, and the right to health care. These peculiarities, together with the fact that the U.S. Constitution is both old and particularly hard to amend, have led some to characterize the Constitution as simply antiquated or obsolete.
Model Fails Modeling fails – constitutions must be endogenous Mila Versteeg 13, Associate Professor at the University of Virginia School of Law. Model, Resource, or Outlier? What Effect Has the U.S. Constitution Had on the Recently Adopted Constitutions of Other Nations?, 29 May 2013, www.heritage.org/research/lecture/2013/05/model-resource-or-outlier-what-effect-has-the-us-constitution-had-on-the-recently-adopted-constitutions-of-other-nations As I describe above, our article conceptualizes a “generic constitution”—that is AND There is no “one-size-fits-all” constitution. Indeed, history and the literature have documented the adverse effects of foreign values being AND to the deep ethnic tensions and persistent poverty, became a grand failure. AT: Democracy Impact Judicial independence doesn’t solve democratic transitions – self interest guarantees failure of the rule of law. Frank B. Cross – Prof of Law and Business Law at the University of Texas – 03 (64 Ohio St. L.J. 195) *198 One potential problem with judicial independence is that judges may have their AND sincerely seek to apply neutral legal principles to the cases they decide.
Africa---Yes African Democracy African democratization is up – overall trend solves the aff Joseph Siegle, Working Group Chair, Africa Center for Strategic Studies, et al, 11-3-2011, “African Spring: a new era of democratic expectations?” Democracy Digest, http://www.demdigest.net/blog/2011/11/african-spring-a-new-era-of-democratic-expectations/ A question often asked since the launch of the Arab Spring in January 2011 is AND ever, and elections are becoming increasingly common, transparent, and meaningful. Africa---Alt-Causes Lots of alt-causes to African judicial independence Brian Odhiambo, 1-31-2012, “On Judicial Independence in Africa,” Yale Undergraduate Law Review, http://yulr.org/on-judicial-independence-in-africa/ Given the disparity between the theoretical and practical aspects of the African judicial process, AND the truth and do justice and promote political, social and economic progress.
Block
Treaties
Link
Neuman – positive force The Court’s not using treaties to limit political branch’s authority---the plan creates a doctrine of judicial enforceability that collapses the PQD and SOP---it also functionally renders treaties self-executing Curtis Bradley 9, Horvitz Professor of Law, Duke Law School, SELF-EXECUTION AND TREATY DUALITY, http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5505andcontext=faculty_scholarship Nothing in this history, however, suggests that treaties were included in the Supremacy AND . As Professor Christopher Drahozal notes in his book on the Supremacy Clause: “Certainly the Supremacy Clause does away with the question under the Articles of Confederation of whether states have to implement treaties before they take effect. That possibility, the subject of debate and federal action in connection with the Treaty of Peace with Great Britain, is conclusively rejected by the Supremacy Clause. Beyond that, however, the resolution of the self-execution debate is less clear, at least with respect to the preemption of state law.”58 To put it differently, there is no reason to think that the Supremacy Clause removes the international political dimension of treaties, which leaves to national governments the ultimate responsibility for deciding whether and how to comply with treaty obligations, and for accepting whatever international consequences may flow from that decision. The Supremacy Clause simply ensures that in the United States this responsibility rests at the federal rather than state level. The federalism orientation of the Supremacy Clause is further reflected in the fact that it AND show who is meant to be responsible for enforcing a given treaty.”62 Once the concept of supreme law of the land is viewed as potentially separate from AND nothing in the history of the Supremacy Clause that suggests such a mandate.
2NC Exec Agreements Turn Case
Executive agreements are more likely to solve their impacts than treaties because the US actually uses them---judicial application of treaties isn’t necessary Curtis Bradley 9, Horvitz Professor of Law, Duke Law School, SELF-EXECUTION AND TREATY DUALITY, http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5505andcontext=faculty_scholarship The rise of congressional-executive agreements also may reduce the need for and desirability AND agreements to statutes for purposes of judicial enforceability because they actually are statutes.
Non-Self-Execution Now
Medillin locked in non-self-execution---political branches have to give a green-light to treaty interpretation---solves exec flex James Turner 10, JD, American University (candidate at time), THE POST-MEDELLÍN CASE FOR LEGISLATIVE STANDING, www.wcl.american.edu/journal/lawrev/59/turner.pdf The Supreme Court’s 2008 Medellín v. Texas 5 decision appeared to be an example AND avenue for the President to exercise his authority with regard to treaty interpretation. Since its earliest days, the Court has recognized a distinction between treaty terms that AND indicates that the parties intended the term to be self-executing.10 This Comment argues that this approach to treaty interpretation creates a presumption of non-self-execution and effectively grants the executive the final say in deciding whether to enforce treaty obligations within the United States, thereby increasing executive power.11 This Comment further argues that this increase in executive power could undermine the constitutional role of legislators in the treaty-making process.12
Non-self-execution is authoritative Philip Dore 11, JD from Louisiana Law, Law Clerk at United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, Greenlighting American Citizens: Proceed with Caution, Louisiana Law Review 72;1, Fall 2011 This section discusses the domestic status of treaties in the United States. The contemporary AND invoke to justify violating the foreign-murder statute lack binding domestic force.
Courts defer to non-self-execution now, which the plan reverses by making treaties directly enforceable in US courts Curtis Bradley 9, Horvitz Professor of Law, Duke Law School, SELF-EXECUTION AND TREATY DUALITY, http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5505andcontext=faculty_scholarship In any event, the decision has had essentially no influence. Not a single AND have treaty validity turn on the domestic-versus-international distinction.81 The intent-of-the-U.S. approach is not only AND pause before committing to the intent-of-the-parties approac 86 The intent-of-the-U.S. approach also explains why AND judicial reliance on treaty text in discerning whether treaties are self-executing: “Because nations negotiating treaties rarely, if ever, select the wording of a treaty with the question of legislative implementation in mind, judges who draw conclusions about this question from treaty text are very likely attributing to the words a meaning that was not intended by the parties.”87
2NC Link Wall
Courts are deferring to Congress’ non-self-executing stance on HR treaties now---ruling directly on a treaty sets a precedent that ends Congressional treaty power and causes a flood of litigation Curtis Bradley 9, Horvitz Professor of Law, Duke Law School, SELF-EXECUTION AND TREATY DUALITY, http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5505andcontext=faculty_scholarship Assuming this reluctance to allow treaties to displace Congress’s legislative role is justified, it AND multilateral treaties and other treaties not covered by prior lines of precedent.110
Court deference to executive treaty interpretation now---the plan sets a precedent for upcoming rulings that collapse deference---kills credible foreign policy Curtis Bradley 13, William Van Alstyne Professor of Law, Professor of Public Policy Studies, and Senior Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, “Terrorists, Pirates, and Drug Traffickers: Customary International Law and U.S. Criminal Prosecutions,” Jan. 11, http://www.lawfareblog.com/2013/01/terrorists-pirates-and-drug-traffickers-customary-international-law-and-u-s-criminal-prosecutions/ The Supreme Court has stated on a number of occasions that it will give “ AND concern would also apply in some cases involving criminal statutes that implement treaties). On the other hand, for both treaties and customary international law it may be AND the issue of deference is likely to emerge as a more significant issue.
Treaty enforcement’s a key political question --- judicial enforcement decks political branch foreign affairs policy Curtis Bradley 9, Horvitz Professor of Law, Duke Law School, SELF-EXECUTION AND TREATY DUALITY, http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5505andcontext=faculty_scholarship Finally, the Court’s discussion of the “option of noncompliance” demonstrated its recognition AND invoked by the Court in Medellín, also takes account of this proposition. CONCLUSION The Supreme Court’s decision in Medellín is unlikely to result in a significant change in AND to be subject to domestic judicial enforcement, especially in the modern era.
Judicial enforceability is the key determining factor in determining the doctrine of self-execution Philip Dore 11, JD from Louisiana Law, Law Clerk at United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, Greenlighting American Citizens: Proceed with Caution, Louisiana Law Review 72;1, Fall 2011
Pre-Medellin Treaty Status in US. Domestic Law The U.S. Constitution mentions "treaties" several times. One important AND doing so, provided a framework for analyzing the domestic effect of treaties.
AT No Spillover
Their link-defense about not spilling-over actually bolsters our link---the aff creates an arbitrary, ad-hoc approach to treaty enforcement that grants the Courts a political role---the mish-mash they create only means that they can’t access any link turns or solve anything Curtis Bradley 9, Horvitz Professor of Law, Duke Law School, SELF-EXECUTION AND TREATY DUALITY, http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5505andcontext=faculty_scholarship Finally, the Court observed that the consequences of giving direct effect to ICJ judgments “give pause.”129 The Court expressed particular concern that, under such regime, even erroneous ICJ decision ns could override state law, and potentially even federal law.130 The Court also worried that the ICJ would have the ability to bind U.S. courts to extreme remedies, such as “annulling criminal convictions and sentences, for any reason deemed sufficient by the ICJ.”131 For these reasons, the Court suggested that it was unlikely that the U.S. political branches had intended for the obligation to comply ents to be self-executing. In reaching its conclusion, the Court rejected what it called the “multifactor judgment AND the power not only to interpret but also to create the law.”135
SQ Charming Betsy=Inform Not Restrict
*note in restrictions PIC* Charming Betsy’s application is limited now---it isn’t affirmatively used to implement restrictions Rebecca Crootof 11, 1ac author, J.D. Yale Law School Judicious influence: non-self-executing treaties and the Charming Betsy canon. www.thefreelibrary.com/Judicious+influence3A+non-self-executing+treaties+and+the+Charming...-a0256684853 The Charming Betsy canon plays a modest role in statutory interpretation. (125) AND apply Charming Betsy as an affirmative indicator of statutory meaning." (131)
Yes Prolif
Optimists ignore recent developments in IR theory Matthew Kroenig 12, Assistant Professor of Government, Georgetown University and Stanton Nuclear Security Fellow, Council on Foreign Relations, “The History of Proliferation Optimism: Does It Have A Future?” Prepared for the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, May 26, 2012, http://www.npolicy.org/article.php?aid=1182andtid=30 The proliferation optimist position, while having a distinguished pedigree, has several major problems AND prevail, but only at the risk of suffering a possible nuclear exchange.
Impact
Proliferation cascades---causes nuclear war and terrorism Matthew Kroenig 12, Assistant Professor of Government, Georgetown University and Stanton Nuclear Security Fellow, Council on Foreign Relations, “The History of Proliferation Optimism: Does It Have A Future?” Prepared for the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, May 26, 2012, http://www.npolicy.org/article.php?aid=1182andtid=30 Further proliferation. Nuclear proliferation poses an additional threat to international peace and security because AND , giving us all good reason to fear the spread of nuclear weapons.
Congress
2NC Solves Cred
Solves ILAW leadership and cred---allows the US to lead by example John Bellinger 11, Obama’s Announcements on International Law, www.lawfareblog.com/2011/03/obamas-announcements-on-international-law/ Either way, both of these announcements are important assertions of U.S. AND lead by example by attempting to create customary international law through state practice.
2NC Courts Not Key
*in Cong Cp* Congressional enforcement of treaties solves ILAW---court key and perception arguments are made up nonsense---other countries care about US compliance with treaties, not which actor causes that compliance Curtis Bradley 9, Horvitz Professor of Law, Duke Law School, SELF-EXECUTION AND TREATY DUALITY, http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5505andcontext=faculty_scholarship My second claim is that, in discerning whether a treaty is self-executing, the relevant intent is that of the U.S. treatymakers (i.e., the Senate and President), not the collective intent of the treaty parties. As I will explain, my claim does not depend on any particular view about the relevance of ratification history or other non-textual materials in the self-execution analysis. Indeed, my claim is compatible even with a pure “public meaning” approach to interpretation.64 As Professor Vázquez has noted, “Courts and commentators seem to agree that a AND U.S. treatymakers should be dispositive. As the Restatement explains: “In the absence of special agreement, it is ordinarily for the United States to decide how it will carry out its international obligations. Accordingly, the intention of the United States determines whether an agreement is to be self-executing in the United States or should await implementation by legislation or appropriate executive or administrative action.”68 Although I do not always agree with the Restatement’s claims, on this issue AND intent of the parties, it would almost always be a meaningless exercise.
2NC Backlash NB
Judicial review of treaties causes the US to comply less with human rights on a scale that qualitatively outweighs their internal link---we control uniqueness because the Court doesn’t restrict political authority now and Court enforcement isn’t key to US treaty compliance Curtis Bradley 9, Horvitz Professor of Law, Duke Law School, SELF-EXECUTION AND TREATY DUALITY, http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5505andcontext=faculty_scholarship The argument for more mandatory judicial review of treaty obligations depends on a separation of AND S. ratification of human rights treaties) ¶ Footnote 48 Ends
Executive promotion of I-Law is comparatively better than the courts---the plan/perm cause executive backlash to adoption which turns the case Daniel Abebe and Eric A. Posner 11, Assistant Professor and Kirkland and Ellis Professor, University of Chicago Law School, The Flaws of Foreign Affairs Legalism, 51 Va. J. Int'l L. 507 Let us now compare the judiciary's record with that of the executive. To keep the discussion short, we will focus on post-World War II activity. The executive has been the leading promoter of international law. It has negotiated and AND GATT/WTO system, the World Bank, and the IMF. n156 Much of what we said might seem too obvious to mention. One can hardly AND United States has not ratified and sometimes cites the laws of foreign nations. The claim that the judiciary can, and even does, play a primary role AND the Senate to ensure that those treaties would not have domestic legal effect.
The plan goes about incorporating ILAW in reverse---picking a controversial area like War Powers to issue rulings in causes massive political backlash---only the CP can smooth the transition Peter B. Rutledge 8, Columbus School of Law, Catholic University of America, Medellin v. Texas: Presidential Power and International Tribunals, 6 Geo. J.L. and Pub. Pol'y 129 I want to be careful here because I do not want to stretch the European AND , as a result, the mechanism of domestic absorption was relatively uncontroversial. Contrast that with what is going on in Medellin where you have a real divergence AND not the international judgment is going to be reduced to a domestic judgment. Does that mean that these international judgments do not have any effect whatsoever? No AND response to some of the pressure that comes from these international tribunals. n117 The interesting thing to watch will not necessarily be how Medellin comes out but instead AND order to ease the transition as occurred in the EU. Thank you.
Turns solvency---causes courts to back down Daniel Abebe and Eric A. Posner 11, Assistant Professor and Kirkland and Ellis Professor, University of Chicago Law School, The Flaws of Foreign Affairs Legalism, 51 Va. J. Int'l L. 507 The second body of law involves constitutional interpretation. In a series of cases, AND foreign law, or foreign institutional practices as support for its holding. n143 The U.S. government has never agreed by treaty that executing mentally retarded AND Supreme Court has backed away from the practice of citing foreign sources. n146 We should also mention recent developments that postdate the rise of foreign affairs legalism - AND institution that many people regarded as an affront to international norms of legality. These cases were qualified victories for foreign affairs legalism, but their immediate impact was limited. Very few detainees have been released as a direct result of legal process, n151 and, in fact, the Supreme Court followed its historical practice of temporizing until the emergency had passed. More generally, from 2001 until the present, courts have been largely deferential to the executive branch. n152
Tc
DA turns the case --- releasing detainees based on immigration rulings makes future pro-detainee war powers rulings less likely Samuel Chow 11, Juris Doctor, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, Summer 2011, “NOTE: THE KIYEMBA PARADOX: CREATING A JUDICIAL FRAMEWORK TO ERADICATE INDEFINITE, UNLAWFUL EXECUTIVE DETENTIONS,” Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law, 19 Cardozo J. Int'l and Comp. L. 775 There are also criticisms not that the judiciary should not be involved with terrorist detentions AND a framework for terrorist detentions where the detainees' liberty interests are adequately protected.
Yes Trade Yes trade impact Jeffrey E. Garten 9, 3-3-09, professor at the Yale School of Management and chairman of Garten Rothkopf, a global advisory firm. He held economic- and foreign-policy posts in the Nixon, Ford, Carter and Clinton administrations, The Dangers of Turning Inward, Truth About Trade and Technology, 3-3-09, http://www.truthabouttrade.org/content/view/13454/54/lang,en/ The point is, economic nationalism, with its implicit autarchic and save-yourself character, embodies exactly the wrong spirit and runs in precisely the wrong direction from the global system that will be necessary to create the future we all want. As happened in the 1930s, economic nationalism is also sure to poison geopolitics. AND war with Cold War overtones between Europe and Russia be in the cards? And beyond all that, how will economically embattled and inward-looking governments be able to deal with the critical issues that need global resolution such as control of nuclear weapons, or a treaty to manage climate change, or help to the hundreds of millions of people who are now falling back into poverty?
Modeling Adv
SQ Solves U.S. judicial influence high---zero risk of any of their advantage---prefer our ev Aaron B. Aft 11, J.D., Indiana University Maurer School of Law, Winter 2011, “Respect My Authority: Analyzing Claims of Diminished U.S. Supreme Court Influence Abroad,” Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, Vol. 18, No. 1 Similarly, skepticism should extend to assertions that the United States risks lagging behind global AND judicial community. Thus, the risk of lagging behind may be exaggerated. In sum, when one looks past the anecdotal evidence and considers the verifiable metric AND the U.S. Supreme Court abroad. End Page 454
U.S. judicial influence high now---prefer our ev Aaron B. Aft 11, J.D., Indiana University Maurer School of Law, Winter 2011, “Respect My Authority: Analyzing Claims of Diminished U.S. Supreme Court Influence Abroad,” Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, Vol. 18, No. 1 According to some observers, the legal influence of the United States in the world AND by anecdotal evidence in the hope that further empirical study will be conducted.
Model Fails Modeling fails – constitutions must be endogenous Mila Versteeg 13, Associate Professor at the University of Virginia School of Law. Model, Resource, or Outlier? What Effect Has the U.S. Constitution Had on the Recently Adopted Constitutions of Other Nations?, 29 May 2013, www.heritage.org/research/lecture/2013/05/model-resource-or-outlier-what-effect-has-the-us-constitution-had-on-the-recently-adopted-constitutions-of-other-nations As I describe above, our article conceptualizes a “generic constitution”—that is AND There is no “one-size-fits-all” constitution. Indeed, history and the literature have documented the adverse effects of foreign values being AND to the deep ethnic tensions and persistent poverty, became a grand failure.
AT: Disease No extinction Posner 5—Senior Lecturer, U Chicago Law. Judge on the US Court of Appeals 7th Circuit. AB from Yale and LLB from Harvard. (Richard, Catastrophe, http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-4150331/Catastrophe-the-dozen-most-significant.html) Yet the fact that Homo sapiens has managed to survive every disease to assail it AND wider human contacts that make it more difficult to localize an infectious disease. Intervening actors check Zakaria 9—Editor of Newsweek, BA from Yale, PhD in pol sci, Harvard. He serves on the board of Yale University, The Council on Foreign Relations, The Trilateral Commission, and Shakespeare and Company. Named "one of the 21 most important people of the 21st Century" (Fareed, “The Capitalist Manifesto: Greed Is Good,” 13 June 2009, http://www.newsweek.com/id/201935) Note—Laurie Garrett=science and health writer, winner of the Pulitzer, Polk, and Peabody Prize It certainly looks like another example of crying wolf. After bracing ourselves for a AND , swine flu was met by an extremely vigorous response at its epicenter,
Mexico. The Mexican government reacted quickly and massively, quarantining the infected population, AND far better than anything Britain or France had in the early 20th century. Human Rights Advantage No Model No modeling---their evidence is delusional Eric Black 12, former reporter for the Star Tribune and Twin Cities blogger, Some ideas to limit the ‘supremacy’ of the U.S. Supreme Court, 11/27/12, www.minnpost.com/eric-black-ink/2012/11/some-ideas-limit-supremacy-us-supreme-court It seems to be part of our national DNA. We see ourselves as so unlike the rest of the world that we have developed a semi-religious belief in what we call “American exceptionalism.” Maybe the upside is some kind of boost to our collective self-esteem. But one of the downsides is a reluctance to look around the world and see if anyone (especially not France) has a good idea from which we might benefit. Especially on democracy. We see ourselves as the world’s model for democracy and the “rule of law.” We expect others to copy us, although they have long since stopped doing so with reference to the specifics of how to design a government. We grumble a good deal about the breakdowns in our system, but we are not much open to ideas for improving it. University of Minnesota political scientist Lisa Hilbink, whose specialties include comparative constitutional systems around the world, said that basically, since the end of World War II, most of the world outside of Latin America came to the conclusion that the U.S. system was “pretty crazy.” No HR Cred Impact Human rights leadership is impossible---alt causes overwhelm and the US won’t exercise its influence Alemayehu Mariam 13, 8/18/13 PhD, JD, teaches political science at California State University, San Bernardino “Is America Disinventing Human Rights?,” http://www.ethiopianreview.us/48632 In a New York Times op-ed piece in June 2012, Carter cautioned AND start by reflecting on the words he spoke during his first inauguration speech: Legitimacy not key to human rights pressure – backlash isn’t prohibitive Michael Ignatieff 2, Carr professor of human rights, Kennedy School of Government @ Harvard, “NO EXCEPTIONS?” Legal Affairs, May/June This defense of the United States does not, however, address the charge of AND . Perceived legitimacy eases but it isn't essential to the exercise of power. Being seen as hypocritical or double-dealing may impose some costs on a superpower AND are likely to remain, in American custody and subject to American justice. In another example, Slobodan Milosevic is in detention in The Hague, thanks in AND however, that this prevents American support for these tribunals from being effective.
Water Advantage
Zero Impact
Trade solves Wendy Barnaby 9 is editor of People and Science, the magazine published by the British Science Association "Do nations go to war over water?" Nature 458, 282-283 (19 March 2009) www.nature.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/nature/journal/v458/n7236/full/458282a.html Allan's earlier thinking about water wars began to change after meeting the late Gideon Fishelson AND be important in explaining the absence of conflict over water in the region. As a global average, people typically drink one cubic metre of water each per AND food, in particluar, saves on the water required to cultivate crops. The relationship of food trade to water sustainability is often not obvious, and often remains invisible: no political leader will gain any popularity by acknowledging that their country makes up the water budget only by importing food. Allan saw through this to document how the water budgets of the Middle East were accounted for without conflict. Allan wrote about embedded water for a few years without it exciting any comment. Then, on a dark Monday afternoon in November 1992, during a routine SOAS seminar, somebody used the term 'virtual' water to describe the same concept. Allan realized this attention-grabbing word, in vogue with the computer-literate younger generation, would catch on better than his own term. And he was right: "From there on it flew," he says. Allan's work explained how, as poor countries diversify their economies, they turn away from agriculture and create wealth from industries that use less water. As a country becomes richer, it may require more water overall to sustain its booming population, but it can afford to import food to make up the shortfall5. Areas seemingly desperate for water arrive at sustainable solutions thanks to the import of food, reducing the demand for water and giving an invisible boost to domestic supplies. Political leaders can threaten hostile action if their visible water supplies are threatened (a potentially useful political bluff), while not needing to wage war thanks to the benefits of trade.
AT: Nile Nile’s no different Wendy Barnaby 9 is editor of People and Science, the magazine published by the British Science Association "Do nations go to war over water?" Nature 458, 282-283 (19 March 2009) www.nature.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/nature/journal/v458/n7236/full/458282a.html Israel ran out of water in the 1950s: it has not since then produced AND each year embedded in grain than flows down the Nile to Egyptian farmers. Perhaps the most often quoted example of a water war is the situation in the West Bank between Palestinians and Israel. But as Mark Zeitoun, senior lecturer in development studies at the University of East Anglia in Norwich, UK, has explained, contrary to what both the mass media and some academic literature say on the subject, while there is conflict and tension — as well as cooperation — there is no 'water war' here either6. Ten million people now live between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. If AND than Berlin. But today, water for even these needs is scarce. More ev Wendy Barnaby 9 is editor of People and Science, the magazine published by the British Science Association "Do nations go to war over water?" Nature 458, 282-283 (19 March 2009) www.nature.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/nature/journal/v458/n7236/full/458282a.html The Nile Basin Initiative, launched in 1999 and encompassing nine nations, is another AND , power-sharing cooperatives, river regulation and water-resources management.
AT: Water Wars---Author Indicts/Exaggeration Prefer our authors’ studies---theirs aren’t peer reviewed Wendy Barnaby 9 is editor of People and Science, the magazine published by the British Science Association "Do nations go to war over water?" Nature 458, 282-283 (19 March 2009) www.nature.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/nature/journal/v458/n7236/full/458282a.html Yet the myth of water wars persists. Climate change, we are told, will cause water shortages. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimates that up to 2 billion people may be at risk from increasing water stress by the 2050s, and that this number could rise to 3.2 billion by the 2080s7. Water management will need to adapt. But the mechanisms of trade, international agreements and economic development that currently ease water shortages will persist. Researchers, such as Aaron Wolf at Oregon State University, Corvallis, and Nils Petter Gleditsch at the International Peace Research Institute in Oslo, point out that predictions of armed conflict come from the media and from popular, non-peer-reviewed work.
Their authors have incentives to overstate the risk and impact David Katz 11, Director of the Akirov Institute for Business and Environment at Tel Aviv University and Adjunct Lecturer at Tel Aviv University’s Recanati School of Management and Porter School of Environmental Studies, February 2011, “Hydro-Political Hyperbole: Examining Incentives for Overemphasizing the Risks of Water Wars,” Global Environmental Politics, Vol. 11, No. 1, p. 12-33 Observers have noted that various actors may have incentives to stress or even exaggerate the AND disproportionate popularity of such messages and help to evaluate such warnings more critically. Mueller offers a general explanation for a focus on violence in public discourse by postulating that, following the end of the Cold War, policy-makers, the press, and various analysts seek to fill a “catastrophe quota.”50 According to this theory, various actors seek out new areas of potential violence to justify fears that had become commonplace during the Cold War period. Simon, while not specifically addressing environmental conflict, suggests four possible reasons for academic AND a belief that sounding alarm bells can mobilize action to improve environmental issues. Haas offers two reasons why “exaggerated beliefs about resource scarcity and their possible threats AND risks of water wars in order to promote water-related infrastructure.53 AT: Water Wars---Signaling States threaten water wars as a method of signaling, but they don’t actually fight them David Katz 11, Director of the Akirov Institute for Business and Environment at Tel Aviv University and Adjunct Lecturer at Tel Aviv University’s Recanati School of Management and Porter School of Environmental Studies, February 2011, “Hydro-Political Hyperbole: Examining Incentives for Overemphasizing the Risks of Water Wars,” Global Environmental Politics, Vol. 11, No. 1, p. 12-33 Political leaders and policy-makers have several other, unique, reasons to voice water war risks. Indeed, given that research has shown that public threats are more often met with defiance rather than compliance,73 other reasons may in fact be primary ones. Signal Co-riparians that Water is Considered High-level Politics Actors may use the language of securitization in order to elevate an issue from low AND even if parties recognize the likelihood of the threat being realized as minor.
Off Security is a psychological construct—the aff’s scenarios for conflict are products of paranoia that project our violent impulses onto the other Mack 91 – Doctor of Psychiatry and a professor at Harvard University (John, “The Enemy System” http://www.johnemackinstitute.org/eJournal/article.asp?id=23 *Gender modified)
The threat of nuclear annihilation has stimulated us to try to understand what it is AND , taking their cues from the leadership, contribute powerfully to the process.
Security threats are political constructions by experts to justify constant militarism Aziz Rana 12, Assistant Professor of Law, Cornell University Law School; A.B., Harvard College; J.D., Yale Law School; PhD., Harvard University, July 2012, “NATIONAL SECURITY: LEAD ARTICLE: Who Decides on Security?,” 44 Conn. L. Rev. 1417 Despite such democratic concerns, a large part of what makes today's dominant security concept AND central and routine instrument for incorporating mass voice into state decision-making.
Hegemony is a paranoid fantasy---the strategy omnipotence sees threats to empire everywhere, which necessitates constant violence---you have an obligation to place the structural violence that hegemony invisibilizes at the core of your decision calculus McClintock 9—chaired prof of English and Women’s and Gender Studies at UW–Madison. MPhil from Cambridge; PhD from Columbia (Anne, Paranoid Empire: Specters from Guantánamo and Abu Ghraib, Small Axe Mar2009, Issue 28, p50-74)
By now it is fair to say that the United States has come to be AND cost of catastrophic self-delusion and the infliction of great calamities elsewhere. I have come to feel that we urgently need to make visible (the better AND come to characterize the United States as a super-carceral state. 5 Can we, the uneasy heirs of empire, now speak only of national things AND beyond the nation-state who, in turn, constitute “us”? We now inhabit a crisis of violence and the visible. How do we insist AND oppose the violence without becoming beguiled by the seductions of spectacle alone. 6 Perhaps in the labyrinths of torture we must also find a way to speak with ghosts, for specters disturb the authority of vision and the hauntings of popular memory disrupt the great forgettings of official history. Paranoia Even the paranoid have enemies. —Donald Rumsfeld Why paranoia? Can we fully understand the proliferating circuits of imperial violence—the AND , lies in its peculiarly intimate and peculiarly dangerous relation to violence. 8 Let me be clear: I do not see paranoia as a primary, structural AND oppose) the contradictory flashpoints of violence that the state tries to conceal. Paranoia is in this sense what I call a hinge phenomenon, articulated between the AND unspeakable violence. For how else can we understand such debauches of cruelty? A critical question still remains: does not something terrible have to happen to ordinary AND contradictory sites where imperial racism, sexuality, and gender catastrophically collide. 11 The Enemy Deficit: Making the “Barbarians” Visible Because night is here but the barbarians have not come. Some people arrived from the frontiers, And they said that there are no longer any barbarians. And now what shall become of us without any barbarians? Those people were a kind of solution. —C. P. Cavafy, “Waiting for the Barbarians” The barbarians have declared war. —President George W. Bush C. P. Cavafy wrote “Waiting for the Barbarians” in 1927, AND vanishes like a disappearing phantom. Those people were a kind of solution. With the collapse of the Soviet Union in December 1991, the grand antagonism of AND “a catastrophic and catalyzing event—like a new Pearl Harbor.” 12 The 9/11 attacks came as a dazzling solution, both to the enemy AND . “It will henceforth be known as the age of terrorism.” 13
Their paranoid projections guarantee unending wars Hollander 3 – professor of Latin American history and women's studies at California State University (Nancy, "A Psychoanalytic Perspective on the Politics of Terror:In the Aftermath of 9/11" www.estadosgerais.org/mundial_rj/download/FLeitor_NHollander_ingl.pdf)
In this sense, then, 9-11 has symbolically constituted a relief in AND believes that such denial only increases reliance on projective mechanisms and stimulates paranoia.
The aff places their faith in the big other of Congress to legitimize their conception of the symbolic --- masks the nothingness underlying all their claims Stavrakakis 99—Ideology and Discourse, U Essex. (Yannis, Encircling the Political, from Lacan and the Political, 276-8, AMiles)
The field of social construction and political reality is the field in which the symbolisation AND articulation and dislocation, order and disorder, politics and the political.2
The plan identifies the non-Western world as a space devoid of the rule of law---that sets the stage for aggressive intervention and colonial plunder, which locks in neoliberal structural violence Ugo Mattei 9, Professor at Hastings College of the Law and University of Turin; and Marco de Morpurgo, M.Sc. Candidate, International University College of Turin, LL.M. Candidate, Harvard Law School, 2009, “GLOBAL LAW and PLUNDER: THE DARK SIDE OF THE RULE OF LAW,” online: http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1014andcontext=bocconi_legal_papers Within this framework, Western law has constantly enjoyed a dominant position during the past AND , behaving as a neo-colonialist within the ideology known as neoliberalism. Western countries identify themselves as law-abiding and civilized no matter what their actual AND lack’ the minimal institutional systems necessary for the unfolding of a market economy. The theory of ‘lack’ and the rhetoric of the rule of law have justified AND is today by the WTO in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Foreign-imposed privatization laws that facilitate unconscionable bargains at the expense of the people have been vehicles of plunder, not of legality. In all these settings the tragic human suffering produced by such plunder is simply ignored. In this context law played a major role in legalizing such practices of powerful actors against the powerless.5 Yet, this use of power is scarcely explored in the study of Western law. The exportation of Western legal institutions from the West to the ‘rest’ has systematically AND proactive: more succinctly, a technological framework for an ‘efficient’ market. The rule of law has a bright and a dark side, with the latter progressively conquering new ground whenever the former is not empowered by a political soul. In the absence of such political life, the rule of law becomes a cold technology. Moreover, when large corporate actors dominate states (affected by a declining regulatory role), law becomes a product of the economy, and economy governs the law rather than being governed by it.
Notions of US legal prestige and modeling solidify global inequality by replacing political violence with legal violence---turns the case because it subordinates effective domestic systems to predatory rule of law models Ugo Mattei 3, Alfred and Hanna Fromm Professor of International and Comparative Law, ¶ U.C. Hastings; Professore Ordinario di Diritto Civile, Università di Torino A Theory of Imperial Law: A Study on U.S. Hegemony and the Latin Resistance, ic.ucsc.edu/rlipsch/pol160A/Mattei.pdf This essay attempts to develop a theory of imperial law that is able to explain AND imperial law. Factors of resistance need to be fully appreciated as well. I. AMERICAN LAW: FROM LEADERSHIP TO DOMINANCE The years following the Second World AND general aspects about the nature of law as a device of global governance. Observing historical patterns of legal hegemony allows us to critique the distinction between two main AND stressing on the idea of consent within a notion of “prestige.”8 Little effort is necessary to challenge the sufficiency of this basic taxonomy in introducing legal AND of consent to the present pattern of international economic and political dominance.9 In this essay I suggest that a fundamental cultural construct of presumed consent is the AND proactive politically accountable institutions such as direct administrative apparatuses of the State.11 This essay attempts to open a radical revision of some accepted modes of thought about AND in the well-known parable of the tragedy of the commons.13 My object of observation is a legal landscape in transition. I wish to analyze AND globalization and of economic Empire political violence has been transformed into legal violence.
The impact’s is a confluence of crises that place the globe in jeopardy---the plan’s consolidation of neoliberal hegemony collapses democracy, causes resource wars, and environmental collapse Vandana Shiva 3-1, founder of the Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology, Ph.D. in Philosophy from the University of Western Ontario, chairs the Commission on the Future of Food set up by the Region of Tuscany in Italy and is a member of the Scientific Committee which advises President Zapatero of Spain, March 1, 2012, “Imposed Austerity vs Chosen Simplicity: Who Will Pay For Which Adjustments?,” online: http://www.ethicalmarkets.com/2012/03/01/imposed-austerity-vs-chosen-simplicity-who-will-pay-for-which-adjustments/ The dominant economic model based on limitless growth on a limited planet is leading to AND have started to say “No to the Green Economy of the 1”. But an ecological adjustment is possible, and is happening. This ecological adjustment involves AND based on the recovery of the commons and the creation of Earth Democracy. The dominant economic model based on resource monopolies and the rule of an oligarchy is AND homeland security in U.S., and multiple security laws in India. The calls for a democratic adjustment from below are witnessed worldwide in the rise of non-violent protests, from the Arab spring to the American autumn of “Occupy” and the Russian winter challenging the hijack of elections and electoral democracy. And these movements for democratic adjustment are also rising everywhere in response to the “ AND houses, manicure the fingernails, and maintain the lawn of the affluent”. Forced austerity based on the old paradigm allows the 1 super rich, the AND imposed austerity built into the trade liberalization and “economic reform” policies. There is another paradigm emerging which is shared by Gandhi and the new movements of AND and it creates a path for economic adjustment based on justice and equity. Forced austerity makes the poor and working families pay for the excesses of limitless greed and accumulation by the super rich. Chosen simplicity stops these excesses and allow us to flower into an Earth Democracy where the rights and freedoms of all species and all people are protected and respected.
The international human rights regime bolsters the violence of liberalism by demarcating half the world as inhuman William Rasch, Henry H. H. Remak Professor of Germanic Studies at Indiana University, Spring 2003, Cultural Critique, Vol. 54, p. 141-144 For Schmitt, to assume that one can derive morally correct political institutions from abstract AND the negative image of the relentless search for the "inhuman" other.
Our alternative is to refuse the affirmative’s technical fix for war powers in favor of subjecting the 1ac’s discourse to rigorous democratic scrutiny Aziz Rana 12, Assistant Professor of Law, Cornell University Law School; A.B., Harvard College; J.D., Yale Law School; PhD., Harvard University, July 2012, “NATIONAL SECURITY: LEAD ARTICLE: Who Decides on Security?,” 44 Conn. L. Rev. 1417 If the objective sociological claims at the center of the modern security concept are themselves AND , we can expect our prevailing security arrangements to become ever more entrenched.
Critical intellectualism key to solve extinction---voting negative outweighs hypothetical plan consequences Jones 99—IR, Aberystwyth (Richard, “6. Emancipation: Reconceptualizing Practice,” Security, Strategy and Critical Theory, http://www.ciaonet.org/book/wynjones/wynjones06.html, AMiles)
The central political task of the intellectuals is to aid in the construction of a AND should act as both an inspiration and a challenge to critical security studies.
Case Intervention AT: Groupthink Groupthink theory is wrong Anthony Hempell 4, User Experience Consulting Senior Information Architect, “Groupthink: An introduction to Janis' theory of concurrence-seeking tendencies in group work., http://www.anthonyhempell.com/papers/groupthink/, March 3 In the thirty years since Janis first proposed the groupthink model, there is still AND 1986, p. 399; cited by Choi and Kim, 1999). AT: Accidents Safeguards check---no accidental war Ryabikihn, Koltunov, Miasnikov, 9 Dr. Leonid Ryabikhin, Executive Secretary, Committee of Scientist for Global Security and Arms Control; Senior Fellow, EastWest Institute, General (Ret.) Viktor Koltunov, Deputy Director, Institute for Strategic Stability of Rosatom, and Dr. Eugene Miasnikov, Senior Research Scientist, Center for Arms Control, Energy and Environmental Studies, 21-23 June 2009, “De-alerting: Decreasing the Operational Readiness of Strategic Nuclear Forces*” Discussion paper presented at the seminar on “Re-framing De-Alert: Decreasing the Operational Readiness of Nuclear Weapons Systems in the U.S.-Russia Context” in Yverdon, Switzerland, http://www.ewi.info/system/files/RyabikhinKoltunovMiasnikov.pdf The issue of the possibility of an “accidental” nuclear war itself is hypothetical AND and the United States have developed proper measures to observe the agreed requirements. AT: Adventurism Doesn’t solve “better wars” Jide Nzelibe 6, Asst. Profesor of Law @ Northwestern, and John Yoo, Emanuel S. Heller Professor of Law @ UC-Berkeley Law, “Rational War and Constitutional Design,” Yale Law Journal, Vol. 115, SSRN But before accepting this attractive vision, we should ask whether the Congress first system AND have produced sharp division in American domestic politics and proven to be mistakes. The other side of the coin here usually goes little noticed, but is just AND might be American policy in the Balkans during the middle and late 1990s. Warfighting AT: Power Projection Hegemonic retrenchment’s key to avoid great power war---maintaining unipolarity’s self-defeating which internal link-turns their offense Nuno P. Monteiro 12, Assistant Professor of Political Science at Yale University, “Unrest Assured: Why Unipolarity is Not Peaceful,” International Security, Winter 2012, Vol. 36, No. 3, p. 9-40 From the perspective of the overall peacefulness of the international system, then, no AND will continue for as long as U.S. power remains preponderant. From the narrower perspective of the unipole’s ability to avoid being involved in wars, AND and a strategy of disengagement, which allows conflict between others to fester. In a sense, then, strategies of defensive and offensive dominance are self- AND . ability to convert power into favorable outcomes peacefully will be constrained.117 This last point highlights one of the crucial issues where Wohlforth and I differ— AND preponderance, displaying the limited pacifying effects of U.S. power. What, then, is the value of unipolarity for the unipole? What can AND any event, the polarity of the system may become less important.”120 At the same time, nothing in my argument determines the decline of U. AND must acknowledge the possibility of frequent conflict in a nonetheless durable unipolar system. Finally, my argument points to a “paradox of power preponderance.”121 By AND peacefully. In effect, unparalleled relative power requires unequaled self-restraint.
SOP AT: HR Norms Human rights cred is irrelevant---no US model Andrew Moravcsik 5, PhD and a Professor of Politics and International Affairs at Princeton, 2005, "The Paradox of U.S. Human Rights Policy," American Exceptionalism and Human Rights, http://www.princeton.edu/~amoravcs/library/paradox.pdf It is natural to ask: What are the consequences of U.S. AND seem to have little to do with U.S. multilateral policy.
Block
K Perm---2NC
complete rejection is critical Neocleous 8 Mark Neocleous, Prof. of Government @ Brunel, Critique of Security, 185-6
The only way out of such a dilemma, to escape the fetish, is AND
it requires us to be brave enough to return the gift.143
1AC links swamp the alternative --- our all arguments prove they instill a cognitive dissonance about the true state of security Inan 4—dr. A. (Annette) Freyberg Inan Associate Professor, AND
The Realist Theory of International Relations and Its Judgment of Human Nature 2004
Cognitive approaches concede that real-life decision makers cannot comply with the expectation of AND process are reinterpreted as evidence of confirmation.66 (128-130)
Short TF Bad---Bilgin---2NC
We have time to think about it---its your role to expose the fantasy of short-termism Pinar Bilgin 4 IR @ Bilikent AND Adam David MORTON Senior Lecturer and Fellow of the Centre for the Study of Social and Global Justice IR @ Nottingham“From ‘Rogue’ to ‘Failed’ States? The Fallacy of Short-termism” Politics 24 (3) p. Wiley Interscience Calls for alternative approaches to the phenomenon of state failure are often met with the AND demand lasting and delicate attention frompractitioners across the academy and policymaking communities alike.
Impact Block---2NC
Their threat discourse mass structural violence---rational impact calc goes neg Jackson 12—Director of the National Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, the University of Otago. Former. Professor of International Politics at Aberystwyth University (8/5/12, Richard, The Great Con of National Security, http://richardjacksonterrorismblog.wordpress.com/2012/08/05/the-great-con-of-national-security/)
It may have once been the case that being attacked by another country was a AND terrorism. Somehow, we need to challenge the politicians on this fact.
AT GT Kaufman
Kaufman goes neg---image of the enemy causes violence Kaufman 9 (Stuart J, Prof Poli Sci and IR – U Delaware, “Narratives and Symbols in Violent Mobilization: The Palestinian-Israeli Case,” Security Studies 18:3, p. 433) There are no heroes in this story. Before Camp David, both sides undermined AND negotiators on either side, while violence was a popular alternative for both. In sum, narratives of national identity justifying hostility, fears of extinction, and AND Israelis that Palestinians did not accept real peace or Israel’s right to exist.
Food Security
Food security pays lip service to the hungry while serving as a justification for the violent expansion of global governance Alcock 9 (Rupert, graduated with a distinction in the MSc in Development and Security from the Department of Politics, University of Bristol in 2009, MSc dissertation prize joint winner 2009, “Speaking Food: A Discourse Analytic Study of Food Security” 2009, pdf available online, p. 10-14 MT)
Since the 1970s, the concept of ‘food security’ has been the primary lens AND notions of risk, threat and permanent emergency that constitute its governmental rationale.
Applies to States
Psychoanalysis does apply to the state Kaplowitz 90 is a research associate at the Institute of Governmental Affairs, University of California at Davis in International Relations. Noel, National Self-Images, Perception of Enemies, and Conflict Strategies: Psychopolitical Dimensions of International Relations Political Psychology Vol. 11, No. 1 (Mar., 1990), pp. 39-82 JSTOR
How a People Sees Itself Robert Lane (1969, p. 1), in AND substantial degree psychoanalytically oriented-an approach subsequently resisted in the social sciences.
AT No Eco Impact
scientific consensus goes aff Mark Swilling 12, Professor, Sustainability Institute and School of Public Leadership, Stellenbosch University, programme coordinator of the Sustainable Development Programme in the School of Public Leadership, Stellenbosch University, project leader of the Centre for the Transdisciplinary Study of Sustainability and Complexity, and Academic Director of the Sustainability Institute, 2012, “So what is so unsustainable about the global economy?,” Continuing Medical Education, Vol. 30, No. 3, p. 68-71 Seven globally significant, mainstream documents will, in one way or another, shape the way our generation sees the world which we need to change. These are as follows: • Ecosystem degradation. The United Nations (UN) Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, compiled by 1,360 scientists from 95 countries and released in 2005 (with virtually no impact beyond the environmental sciences), has confirmed for the first time that 60 of the ecosystems upon which human systems depend for survival are degraded.7 • Global warming. The broadly accepted reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change AND worse, and the world’s poor will experience the most destructive consequences.17 • Oil peak. The 2008 World Energy Outlook, published by the International Energy AND fundamental rethink of the assumptions underpinning nearly a century of urban planning dogma. • Inequality. According to the UN Human Development Report for 1998, 20 of the global population who live in the richest countries account for 86 of total private consumption expenditure, whereas the poorest 20 account for 1.3.19 Only the most callous still ignore the significance of inequality as a driver of many threats to social cohesion and a decent quality of life for all. • Urban majority. According to generally accepted UN reports, the majority (i AND slums or what we refer to in South Africa as informal settlements.20 • Food insecurity. The International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development21 is AND ‘23 of all used land is degraded to some degree’.21 • Material flows. According to a 2011 report by the International Resource Panel (http://www.unep.org/resourcepanel), by 2005 the global economy depended on 60 billion tonnes of primary resources (biomass, fossil fuels, metals and industrial and construction minerals) and 500 exajoules of energy, an increase of 36 since 1980.22 The above trends combine to conjure up a picture of a highly unequal urbanised world, dependent on rapidly degrading ecosystem services, with looming threats triggered by climate change, high oil prices, food insecurities and resource depletion. This is what the mainstream literature on unsustainable development is worried about. This marks what is now increasingly referred to as the Anthropocene – the era in which humans have become the primary force of historico-geophysical evolution.23 Significantly, although these seven documents are in the policy domain they reflect the outcomes AND that paved the way for the Enlightenment and the industrial epoch that followed. Clark et al. date the second Copernican revolution to the meeting in 2001 when AND appropriate for a more sustainable world and the associated ethics would be unviable.
Case
Warfighting *AT: Heg Solves War More ev---their data’s flawed Christopher Preble 10, director of Foreign Policy Studies at the CATO Institute, August 3, 2010, “U.S. Military Power: Preeminence for What Purpose?,” online: http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/u-s-military-power-preeminence-for-what-purpose/ Most in Washington still embraces the notion that America is, and forever will be AND in their own defense, and in the security of their respective regions. But while there are credible alternatives to the United States serving in its current dual AND States while the schlubs in fly-over country pick up the tab. No data suggests a causal link between unipolarity and peace Christopher Fettweis 10, Professor of Political Science at Tulane University, 2010, Dangerous Times? The International Politics of Great Power Peace, p. 172-174 The primary attack on restraint, or justification for internationalism, posits that if the AND ensue. In other words, they depend upon hegemonic-stability logic. Simply stated, the hegemonic stability theory proposes that international peace is only possible when AND S hegemony is not the primary cause of the current era of stability. First of all, the hegemonic-stability argument overstates the role that the United AND already rid itself of crime. Stability and unipolarity may be simply coincidental. In order for U.S. hegemony to be the reason for global stability AND at work. Stability exists in many places where no hegemony is present. Second, the limited empirical evidence we have suggests that there is little connection between AND , one would not have expected an increase in global instability and violence. The verdict from the past two decades is fairly plain: The world grew more AND worth noting for our purposes that the United States was no less safe. AT: Benevolence States won’t bandwagon---capabilities outweigh intentions---it’s impossible to make heg seem benevolent Layne and Schwarz 2 – Christopher Layne, professor and Robert M. Gates Chair in National Security at Texas A and M University’s George H. W. Bush School of Government and Public Service; and Benjamin Schwarz, National Editor of The Atlantic, January 2002, “A New Grand Strategy,” The Atlantic, Vol. 289, No. 1, p. 36-42 Like some optimistic Britons in the late eighteenth century, many American strategists today assert AND good of the international system rather than to advance its own selfish aims. But states must always be more concerned with a predominant power's capabilities than with its AND the European Union should make itself "a counterweight to the United States." *AT: Intervention Inevitable The U.S. won’t attempt to maintain hegemony---policymakers respond rationally to great-power decline Paul K. MacDonald 11, Assistant Professor of Political Science at Williams College, and Joseph M. Parent, Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Miami, Spring 2011, “Graceful Decline?: The Surprising Success of Great Power Retrenchment,” International Security, Vol. 35, No. 4, p. 7-44 For Gilpin and Copeland, retrenchment is a policy that states should avoid. Other AND decisionmakers resulted in an uncoordinated, incremental policy response to British weakness.30 Similarly, in a series of works Paul Kennedy contends that states have difficulty retrenching AND sideline great power policies such as retrenchment.33 End Page 16 Although useful in many contexts, domestic constraint arguments suffer from several problems. First, domestic political theories assume that interest groups predominantly push for more expansive overseas commitments. Yet domestic interest groups possess much more complicated and nuanced preferences than is commonly assumed. For example, many domestic interest groups oppose overseas commitments, favoring expenditure on domestic programs rather than adventures abroad. Second, groups favoring assertive foreign policies do not speak with one voice or assign equal priority to all interests. Different interest groups will place different weight on particular regions, economic sectors, or types of international challenges.34 The heterogeneity of domestic interests is critical because it opens up space for politicians to outmaneuver domestic groups and force trade-offs on unwilling lobbies. Third, domestic political theories are unclear about when domestic interests are able to hijack AND specifying which veto points are most significant and when they will prove decisive. Fourth, domestic political theories tend to downplay or ignore the ability of international context AND relative decline that one should expect partisan rancor and sectoral rivalry to recede. The U.S. won’t cling to hegemony---momentum’s growing for retrenchment but not solidified yet Paul K. MacDonald 11, Assistant Professor of Political Science at Williams College, and Joseph M. Parent, Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Miami, November/December 2011, “The Wisdom of Retrenchment: America Must Cut Back to Move Forward,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 90, No. 6 Others warn that the U.S. political system is too fragmented to implement AND of which is likely to usher in an era of self-restraint. Despite deep partisan divides, however, Republicans and Democrats have often put aside their AND policies, sometimes expanding the United States' global commitments and sometimes contracting them. Today, electoral pressures support a more modest approach to foreign affairs. According to AND average cut of $109 billion to the base-line defense budget. Institutional barriers to reform do remain. Yet when presidents have led, the bureaucrats AND destroyers and various components of the army's next generation of manned ground vehicles. Thus, claims that retrenchment is politically impractical or improbable are unfounded. Just as a more humble foreign policy will invite neither instability nor decline, domestic political factors will not inevitably prevent timely reform. To chart a new course, U.S. policy - makers need only possess foresight and will. *AT: US Goes Down Swinging No U.S. reintervention Paul K. MacDonald 11, Assistant Professor of Political Science at Williams College, and Joseph M. Parent, Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Miami, Spring 2011, “Graceful Decline?: The Surprising Success of Great Power Retrenchment,” International Security, Vol. 35, No. 4, p. 7-44 With regard to militarized disputes, declining great powers demonstrate more caution and restraint in AND allows vulnerable powers to effectively recover from decline and still deter potential challengers. Zero empirical support for either declining powers reintervening Lebow 10 – Richard Ned Lebow, the James O. Freedman Presidential Professor of Government at Dartmouth College and Centennial Professor of International Relations at the London School of Economics and Political Science, September 2010, “The Past and Future of War,” International Relations, Vol. 24, No. 3, p. 245-246 There is no support for power transition theories. They are based on the premise AND long as a consensus holds among the major powers responsible for them.65
AT: Transition Wars No transition wars Parent 11—assistant for of pol sci, U Miami. PhD in pol sci, Columbia—and—Paul MacDonald—assistant prof of pol sci, Williams (Joseph, Graceful Decline?;The Surprising Success of Great Power Retrenchment, Intl. Security, Spring 1, p. 7) Some observers might dispute our conclusions, arguing that hegemonic transitions are more conflict prone than other moments of acute relative decline. We counter that there are deductive and empirical reasons to doubt this argument. Theoretically, hegemonic powers should actually find it easier to manage acute relative decline. Fallen hegemons still have formidable capability, which threatens grave harm to any state that tries to cross them. Further, they are no longer the top target for balancing
coalitions, and recovering hegemons may be influential because they can play a pivotal role AND ability to sustain its economic performance or engage in foreign policy adventurism. 94 *AT: Wohlforth Wohlforth’s wrong---unipolarity contains several avenues for conflict---prefer our ev which takes theirs into account Nuno P. Monteiro 12, Assistant Professor of Political Science at Yale University, “Unrest Assured: Why Unipolarity is Not Peaceful,” International Security, Winter 2012, Vol. 36, No. 3, p. 9-40 This article has laid out a theory of unipolarity that accounts for how a unipolar AND unipolarity’s peace but its durability that is in dispute.”112 Not anymore. It is not that the core of Wohlforth’s widely shared argument is wrong, however AND . This requires a look at how these two additional strategies facilitate conflict. After correcting for these two limitations, it becomes clear that unipolarity possesses much potential AND major and minor powers. That is the central prediction of my theory.
AT: Multilat Alliances will fail regardless of their internal link Barma et al., 13 (Naazneen, assistant professor of national-security affairs at the Naval Postgraduate School; Ely Ratner, a fellow at the Center for a New American Security; and Steven Weber, professor of political science and at the School of Information at the University of California, Berkeley, March/April 2013, “The Mythical Liberal Order,” The National Interest, http://nationalinterest.org/print/article/the-mythical-liberal-order-8146) Assessed against its ability to solve global problems, the current system is falling progressively AND era, and they approach the global system in a meaningfully different way.
Intervention Groupthink K Link Securitized threat construction is the root cause of groupthink Christopher Daase, IR Prof @ Munich, and Oliver Kessler, Poly Sci Prof @ Bielefeld, December 2007, “Knowns and Unknowns in the ‘War on Terror’: Uncertainty and the Political Construction of Danger,” Security Dialogue vol. 38, no. 4, sage To complete our discussion, a fourth form needs to be mentioned – the one AND that an acknowledgement of one’s own, but contingent, position would require. SOP XT No Modeling Modeling fails – different cultures and resources Jeremy Rabkin 13, Professor of Law at the George Mason School of Law. Model, Resource, or Outlier? What Effect Has the U.S. Constitution Had on the Recently Adopted Constitutions of Other Nations?, 29 May 2013, www.heritage.org/research/lecture/2013/05/model-resource-or-outlier-what-effect-has-the-us-constitution-had-on-the-recently-adopted-constitutions-of-other-nations Even when people are not ambivalent in their desire to embrace American practices, they AND be imported into different cultures as easily as cell phones or Internet connections.
AT: SOP Violations No impact (to SOP violations) Constitutional Commentary 96 (Winter, p. 343-345) A second, perhaps more interesting, difficulty with the prophylactic approach is that it AND change its approach to separation of powers to prevent a slide into tyranny.
9/22/13
Cites vs Wake HS, GSU Round 2
Tournament: GSU | Round: 2 | Opponent: Wake HS | Judge: Butt, Neil 1nc
Off-Case Off Security is a psychological construct—the aff’s scenarios for conflict are products of paranoia that project our violent impulses onto the other Mack 91 – Doctor of Psychiatry and a professor at Harvard University (John, “The Enemy System” http://www.johnemackinstitute.org/eJournal/article.asp?id=23 *Gender modified)
The threat of nuclear annihilation has stimulated us to try to understand what it is AND , taking their cues from the leadership, contribute powerfully to the process.
our response is to interrogate the epistemological failures of the 1ac---this is a prereq to successful policy Ahmed 12 Dr. Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed is Executive Director of the Institute for Policy Research and Development (IPRD), an independent think tank focused on the study of violent conflict, he has taught at the Department of International Relations, University of Sussex "The international relations of crisis and the crisis of international relations: from the securitisation of scarcity to the militarisation of society" Global Change, Peace and Security Volume 23, Issue 3, 2011 Taylor Francis
While recommendations to shift our frame of orientation away from conventional state-centrism toward AND of state security planning in the context of counter-terrorism operations abroad. The intensifying problematisation and externalisation of Muslim-majority regions and populations by Western security AND the efficacy of the prevailing geopolitical and economic order is ideologically beyond question. As much as this analysis highlights a direct link between global systemic crises, social polarisation and state militarisation, it fundamentally undermines the idea of a symbiotic link between natural resources and conflict per se. Neither 'resource shortages' nor 'resource abundance' (in ecological, energy, food and monetary terms) necessitate conflict by themselves. There are two key operative factors that determine whether either condition could lead to conflict AND to externalisation of those groups, and the legitimisation of violence towards them. Ultimately, this systems approach to global crises strongly suggests that conventional policy 'reform' is AND of the post-carbon era through social, political and economic transformation. Yet conventional theoretical and policy approaches fail to (1) fully engage with the AND , effective, and joined-up policy-making on these issues. Off Interpretation---the plan should specify the newly-restricted legal threshold and accountability mechanism it establishes for targeted killings Legal specificity’s a pre-requisite to productive debates over targeted killing Gregory McNeal 13, Associate Professor of Law, Pepperdine University, 3/5/13, “Targeted Killing and Accountability,” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1819583 Discussing and analyzing the notion of accountability and the practice of targeted killings raises problems AND “unaccountable” while failing to specify what they mean by accountability.12 The literature is far from clear. Commentators might be focusing on instrumental concerns, AND in an analysis of targeted killings without specifying what one means by accountability. Overcoming the problem of theory specification is a necessary precondition for any analysis that claims AND ease of replicability, and grounding in the social science and governance literature. Vote neg: Ground---precise legal standards for killings determine the scope of the plan---we can’t read disad links or generate competition without textual commitment in the 1AC to defend a particular legal standard. Precision---legal education’s the point of forced topic rotation---they undermine it. Off Targeted killings are strikes carried about against pre-meditated, individually designated targets---signature strikes are distinct Kenneth Anderson 11, Professor at Washington College of Law, American University, Hoover Institution visiting fellow, Non-Resident Visiting Fellow at Brookings, “Distinguishing High Value Targeted Killing and ‘Signature’ Attacks on Taliban Fighters,” August 29 2011, http://www.volokh.com/2011/08/29/distinguishing-high-value-targeted-killing-and-signature-attacks-on-taliban-fighters/ From the US standpoint, it is partly that it does not depend as much 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 Kenneth Anderson 11, Professor at Washington College of Law, American University, Hoover Institution visiting fellow, Non-Resident Visiting Fellow at Brookings, “Efficiency in Bello and ad Bellum: Targeted Killing Through Drone Warfare,” Sept 23 2011, 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. Off Congress will ultimately compromise to avert shutdown – GOP divisions make it more likely, not less Tom Cohen, 9-20-2013, “Congress: will it be a government shutdown or budget compromise?” CNN, http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/19/politics/congress-shutdown-scenarios/index.html?utm_source=feedburnerandutm_medium=feedandutm_campaign=Feed3A+rss2Fcnn_allpolitics+(RSS3A+Politics) There hasn't been a government shutdown in more than 17 years, since the 28 AND changes to provide Boehner and House Republicans with political cover to back it. The plan would trade off with Congress’s ability to avert the shutdown - GOP has momentum and will, but they need literally every hour to get it done Frank James, 9-13-2013, “Congress Searches For A Shutdown-Free Future,” NPR, http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/09/13/221809062/congress-searches-for-a-shutdown-free-future The only thing found Thursday seemed to be more time for negotiations and vote- AND people. When we have something to report, we'll let you know." Shutdown wrecks the economy Yi Wu, 8-27-2013, “Government Shutdown 2013: Still a Terrible Idea,” PolicyMic, http://www.policymic.com/articles/60837/government-shutdown-2013-still-a-terrible-idea Around a third of House Republicans, many Tea Party-backed, sent a AND to demand cancellation of the entire health care reform enacted a year before. Global nuclear war Harris and Burrows 9 Mathew, PhD European History @ Cambridge, counselor of the U.S. 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 Of course, the report encompasses more than economics and indeed believes the future is AND within and between states in a more dog-eat-dog world. Off Targeted killing’s vital to counterterrorism---disrupts leadership and makes carrying out attacks impossible Kenneth Anderson 13, Professor of International Law at American University, June 2013, “The Case for Drones,” Commentary, Vol. 135, No. 6 Targeted killing of high-value terrorist targets, by contrast, is the end result of a long, independent intelligence process. What the drone adds to that intelligence might be considerable, through its surveillance capabilities -- but much of the drone's contribution will be tactical, providing intelligence that assists in the planning and execution of the strike itself, in order to pick the moment when there might be the fewest civilian casualties. Nonetheless, in conjunction with high-quality intelligence, drone warfare offers an unparalleled means to strike directly at terrorist organizations without needing a conventional or counterinsurgency approach to reach terrorist groups in their safe havens. It offers an offensive capability, rather than simply defensive measures, such as homeland security alone. Drone warfare offers a raiding strategy directly against the terrorists and their leadership. If one believes, as many of the critics of drone warfare do, that AND common enemies are examples of the methods that are just of military nature. Drone warfare today is integrated with a much larger strategic counterterrorism target -- one in AND acknowledged in communications, have a significant impact on planning and organizational effectiveness.
Constraining targeted killing’s role in the war on terror causes extinction Louis Rene Beres 11, Professor of Political Science and International Law at Purdue, 2011, “After Osama bin Laden: Assassination, Terrorism, War, and International Law,” Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law, 44 Case W. Res. J. Int'l L. 93 Even after the U.S. assassination of Osama bin Laden, we are AND that it could represent distinctly, even especially, law-enforcing behavior. For this to be the case, a number of particular conditions would need to AND populations than would all of the alternative forms of anticipatory self-defense. Such an argument may appear manipulative and dangerous; permitting states to engage in what AND international law may sometimes still require extraordinary methods of law-enforcement. n71 Let us suppose, for example, that a particular state determines that another state AND assassination could prove reasonable, life-saving, and cost-effective. What of another, more common form of anticipatory self-defense? Might a conventional military strike against the prospective attacker's nuclear, biological or chemical weapons launchers and/or storage sites prove even more reasonable and cost-effective? A persuasive answer inevitably depends upon the particular tactical and strategic circumstances of the moment, and on the precise way in which these particular circumstances are configured. But it is entirely conceivable that conventional military forms of preemption would generate tangibly greater harms than assassination, and possibly with no greater defensive benefit. This suggests that assassination should not be dismissed out of hand in all circumstances as a permissible form of anticipatory self-defense under international law. *115 What of those circumstances in which the threat to particular states would not involve higher AND , it could be followed, in certain circumstances, by unconventional attacks.
Nuclear terrorism is feasible---high risk of theft and attacks escalate 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 a common understanding of these threats and develop a strategy to combat them.
Extinction---equivalent to full-scale nuclear war Owen B. Toon 7, chair of the Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences at CU-Boulder, et al., April 19, 2007, “Atmospheric effects and societal consequences of regional scale nuclear conflicts and acts of individual nuclear terrorism,” online: http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/pdf/acp-7-1973-2007.pdf To an increasing extent, people are congregating in the world’s great urban centers, AND should be carried out as well for the present scenarios and physical outcomes. Off The Executive branch of the United States should make necessary adjustments to its targeted killing policy to ensure compliance with relevant domestic and international law, including principles of necessity, distinction, and proportionality. The Executive branch should publicly articulate its legal rationale for its targeted killing policy, including the process and safeguards in place for target selection. The CP’s the best middle ground---preserves the vital counter-terror role of targeted killings while resolving all their downsides Daniel Byman 13, Professor in the Security Studies Program at the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University and a Senior Fellow at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution, July/August 2013, “Why Drones Work,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 92, No. 4 Despite President Barack Obama's recent call to reduce the United States' reliance on drones, AND , and with fewer civilian casualties than many alternative methods would have caused. Critics, however, remain skeptical. They claim that drones kill thousands of innocent AND comparatively low-risk way of targeting these areas while minimizing collateral damage. So drone warfare is here to stay, and it is likely to expand in AND drone warfare risks dragging the United States into conflicts it could otherwise avoid. Case Civilian Casualties---1NC Casualties are way down and drones are far more precise than alternatives---our ev uses the best data Michael Cohen 13, Fellow at the Century Foundation, 5/23/13, “Give President Obama a chance: there is a role for drones,” The Guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/may/23/obama-drone-speech-use-justified Drone critics have a much different take. They are passionate in their conviction that AND , drone strikes are a far more humane method of war-fighting. Pakistan---Drone Alternatives Worse The alternative to drones in Pakistan is full-scale military operations---obviously worse for all their impacts Michael Llenza 11, Senior Navy Fellow at the Atlantic Council and Foreign Affairs Specialist, NATO ISAF, Spring 2011, “Targeted Killings in Pakistan: A Defense,” Global Security Studies, Vol. 2, No. 2, http://globalsecuritystudies.com/Targeted20Killings.pdf Regardless of the possibility of civilian deaths, if the United States continues its policy AND more collateral damage (Anderson, 2009, pp.7-8). Although some may see military action on the ground more palatable than a standoff killing AND , costlier and undesirable conflict (Anderson, 2010, p.32). Some critics of the drone operations would rather see Pakistan go after these terrorists, AND deaths than those by drones with relatively no success (Rodriguez and Zucchino).
Pakistan---1NC Limiting targeted killings in Pakistan causes a shift to ground assaults---turns the case and collapses the Pakistani government Richard Weitz 11, Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Political-Military Analysis at the Hudson Institute, 1/2/11, “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/ Perhaps the most important argument in favor of using UAV strikes in northwest Pakistan and other terrorist havens is that alternative options are typically worse. The Pakistani military has made clear that it is neither willing nor capable of repressing the terrorists in the tribal regions. Although the controversial ceasefire accords Islamabad earlier negotiated with tribal leaders have formally collapsed, the Pakistani Army has repeatedly postponed announced plans to occupy North Waziristan, which is where the Afghan insurgents and the foreign fighters supporting them and al-Qaeda are concentrated. Such a move that would meet fierce resistance from the region’s population, which has traditionally enjoyed extensive autonomy. The recent massive floods have also forced the military to divert its assets to humanitarian purposes, especially helping the more than ten million displaced people driven from their homes. But the main reason for their not attacking the Afghan Taliban or its foreign allies based in Pakistan’s tribal areas is that doing so would result in their joining the Pakistani Taliban in its vicious fight with the Islamabad government. Yet, sending in U.S. combat troops on recurring raids or a protracted occupation of Pakistani territory would provoke widespread outrage in Pakistan and perhaps in other countries as well since the UN Security Council mandate for the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan only authorizes military operations in Pakistan. On the one known occasion when U.S. Special Forces actually conducted a AND U.S. forces attempting to cross the Afghan-Pakistan border. On several occasions since then, Pakistani troops and militia have fired at what they believed to be American helicopters flying from Afghanistan to deploy Special Forces on their territory, though there is no conclusive evidence that the U.S. military has ever attempted another large-scale commando raid in Pakistan after the September 2008 incident. Further large-scale U.S. military operations into Pakistan could easily rally popular support behind the Taliban and al-Qaeda. It might even precipitate the collapse of the Islambad government and its replacement by a regime in nuclear-armed Pakistan that is less friendly to Washington. Given these alternatives, continuing the drone strikes appears to be the best of the limited options available to deal with a core problem, giving sanctuary to terrorists striking US and coalition forces in Afghanistan and beyond. AT: Pakistan Collapse No Pakistani collapse --- reject Pitt, he’s a NYT writer Sunil Dasgupta 13 Ph.D. in political science and the director of UMBC's Political Science Program and a senior fellow at Brookings, 2/25/13, "How will India respond to civil war in Pakistan," East Asia Forum, http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2013/02/25/how-will-india-respond-to-civil-war-in-pakistan/ Bill Keller of the New York Times has described Pakistani president Asif Ail Zardari as AND out a Pakistani civil war while covertly coordinating policy with the United States. No impact Tepperman 9—Deputy Editor at Newsweek. Frmr Deputy Managing Editor, Foreign Affairs. LLM, i-law, NYU. MA, jurisprudence, Oxford. (Jonathan, Why Obama Should Learn to Love the Bomb, http://jonathantepperman.com/Welcome_files/nukes_Final.pdf) Note – Michael Desch = prof, polsci, Notre Dame As for Pakistan, it has taken numerous precautions to ensure that its own weapons AND be stuffed into a gunnysack and smuggled across the Rio Grande is preposterous.”
AT: Indo-Pak War No Indo-Pak war Mutti 9— Master’s degree in International Studies with a focus on South Asia, U Washington. BA in History, Knox College. over a decade of expertise covering on South Asia geopolitics, Contributing Editor to Demockracy journal (James, 1/5, Mumbai Misperceptions: War is Not Imminent, http://demockracy.com/four-reasons-why-the-mumbai-attacks-wont-result-in-a-nuclear-war/) Fearful of imminent war, the media has indulged in frantic hand wringing about Indian AND and is using its regional influence to bring more diplomatic pressure on Pakistan. War won’t go nuclear Enders 2 (Jan 30, David, Michigan Daily, “Experts say nuclear war still unlikely,” http://www.michigandaily.com/content/experts-say-nuclear-war-still-unlikely)
Ashutosh Varshney – Professor of Political Science and South Asia expert at the University of Michigan
Paul Huth – Professor of International Conflict and Security Affairs at the University of Maryland
Kenneth Lieberthal – Professor of Political Science at the University of Michigan. Former special assistant to President Clinton at the National Security Council University political science Prof. Ashutosh Varshney becomes animated when asked about the likelihood of AND command control system has strengthened. The trigger is in very safe hands."
Adv 2 – Heg AT: Cred Alternatives to drones are worse for credibility---and even eliminating them’s not enough to solve Amitai Etzioni 12, senior advisor to the Carter White House; taught at Columbia University, Harvard and The University of California at Berkeley; and is a university professor and professor of international relations at The George Washington University, 4/2/12, “In Defense of Drones,” http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/defense-drones-6715 Rohde acknowledges that we are dealing with people who make and plant bombs and train AND a reason we should not order more drones rather than stand them down. Why are drones so bad? Mr. Rohde, who was kidnapped by the AND adversaries, making them nervous and preventing them from training in large groups? In addition, Rohde argues that drones are bad for public relations. He says AND and above all, American attempts to much change their ways of life. Moreover, few things agitate Muslims around the world, polls show, more than AND do if we are going to fight terrorists and those who harbor them.
There’s no impact to anti-drones backlash Stephen Holmes 13, the Walter E. Meyer Professor of Law, New York University School of Law, July 2013, “What’s in it for Obama?,” The London Review of Books, http://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n14/stephen-holmes/whats-in-it-for-obama This is the crux of the problem. We stand at the beginning of the AND against which antiwar forces are apparently unable to rally even modest public support. 1NC — Credibility Theory Wrong Zero data supports the resolve or credibility thesis Jonathan Mercer 13, associate professor of political science at the University of Washington in Seattle and a Fellow at the Center for International Studies at the London School of Economics, 5/13/13, “Bad Reputation,” http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/136577/jonathan-mercer/bad-reputation Since then, the debate about what to do in Syria has been sidetracked by discussions of how central reputation is to deterrence, and whether protecting it is worth going to war. There are two ways to answer those questions: through evidence and through logic. AND did indeed worry about their reputations. But their worries were often mistaken. For example, when North Korea attacked South Korea in 1950, U.S AND that the Americans intended to destroy his revolution, perhaps with nuclear weapons. Similarly, Ted Hopf, a professor of political science at the National University of AND these threats seriously. As the record shows, reputations do not matter. 1NC — No Spillover No spillover — lack of credibility in one commitment doesn’t affect others at all Paul K. MacDonald 11, Assistant Professor of Political Science at Williams College, and Joseph M. Parent, Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Miami, Spring 2011, “Graceful Decline?: The Surprising Success of Great Power Retrenchment,” International Security, Vol. 35, No. 4, p. 7-44 Second, pessimists overstate the extent to which a policy of retrenchment can damage a AND up resources and signaled a strong commitment to an area of greater significance. AT: Heg Solves War Impact’s empirically denied Preble 10 – Former prof, history, Temple U. PhD, history, Temple (Christopher, U.S. Military Power: Preeminence for What Purpose?, 3 August, http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/u-s-military-power-preeminence-for-what-purpose/) Goure and the Hadley-Perry commissioners who produced the alternate QDR argue that the AND States while the schlubs in fly-over country pick up the tab. No impact to hegemony Friedman 10 Ben, research fellow in defense and homeland security, Cato. PhD candidate in pol sci, MIT, Military Restraint and Defense Savings, 20 July, http://www.cato.org/testimony/ct-bf-07202010.html Another argument for high military spending is that U.S. military hegemony underlies AND and threaten to drag us into wars, while providing no obvious benefit. AT: Korean War No Korean war---laundry list (rational regime, empirics, military inferiority, and it’s all just domestic propaganda) Fisher 13 Max, Foreign Policy Writer @ Washington Post and Former Editor at the Atlantic, “Why North Korea loves to threaten World War III (but probably won’t follow through)” http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/03/12/why-north-korea-loves-to-threaten-world-war-iii-but-probably-wont-follow-through/ North Korea is indeed a dangerous rogue state that has, in the recent past AND 100 artillery shells at Yeonpyeong Island, killing two civilians and wounding 19. But is North Korea really an irrational nation on the brink of launching “all-out war,” a mad dog of East Asia? Is Pyongyang ready to sacrifice it all? Probably not. The North Korean regime, for all its cruelty, has also shown itself to be shrewd, calculating, and single-mindedly obsessed with its own self-preservation. The regime’s past behavior suggests pretty strongly that these threats are empty. But they still matter. For years, North Korea has threatened the worst and, despite all of its AND to bear the costs of preventing its outbursts from sparking an unwanted war. Starting World War III or a second Korean War would not serve any of Pyongyang’s AND United States, it would almost certainly end with the regime’s total destruction. Still, provocations and threats do serve Pyongyang’s interests, even if no one takes AND death that Kim had made up for North Korea’s weakness with canny belligerence: The shtick of apparent madness flowed from his country’s fundamental weakness as he, like AND nuclear reactor construction, hard cash-earning tourist enclaves and investment zones. At the risk of insulting Kim Jong Eun, it helps to think of North AND because he deserves it, but because you want the tantrum to stop. Heg DA Targeted killing operations are key to a middle ground strategy whereby the U.S. maintains presence in conflict zones without boots on the ground---the alternative is withdrawal triggered by domestic conflict fatigue Elinor June Rushforth 12, J.D. candidate, University of Arizona, James E. Rogers College of Law, Class of 2013, Fall 2012, “NOTE: THERE'S AN APP FOR THAT: IMPLICATIONS OF ARMED DRONE ATTACKS AND PERSONALITY STRIKES BY THE UNITED STATES AGAINST NON-CITIZENS, 2004-2012,” Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law, 29 Ariz. J. Int'l and Comp. Law 623, p. lexis The drone program is a fixture in the Obama administration's fight against terror n163 and the moral and legal defense the administration offers serves as an indication that these attacks will continue. n164 Further, proponents of the drone program argue their use reduces risk to U.S. service members, decreases American weariness at foreign intervention, and minimizes civilian casualties during attacks and missions. First, because asymmetric warfare has increased, the United States has sought out creative AND be impractical for troops, and a single pilot, to venture. n169 However, the analysis of this benefit must be separated between the two organizations employing AND in which conventional U.S. military action would be impossible. n174 During Operation Southern Watch, the military used drones to police no-fly zones AND damage terrorist infrastructure and leadership is central to proponents' view of this program. Second, the American public has grown tired of drawn-out conflicts and foreign AND that its full focus is on protecting and growing our nation at home.
block
T 2NC
They’re totally different procedures and the distinction is important David Hastings Dunn 13, 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 and 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.
The aff kills nuanced debates Kenneth Anderson 11, Professor at Washington College of Law, American University, Hoover Institution visiting fellow, Non-Resident Visiting Fellow at Brookings, “Efficiency in Bello and ad Bellum: Targeted Killing Through Drone Warfare,” Sept 23 2011, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1812124 Speaking to the broad future of the technology, however, and given the direction AND that one-size-fits-all legal analysis is not sufficient.
The government also draws a distinction between the two Micah Zenko 12, the Douglas Dillon Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, 7/16/12, “Targeted Killings and Signature Strikes,” http://blogs.cfr.org/zenko/2012/07/16/targeted-killings-and-signature-strikes/ Although signature strikes have been known as a U.S. counterterrorism tactic for over four years, no administration official has acknowledged or defended them on-the-record. Instead, officials emphasize that targeted killings with drones (the official term is “targeted strikes”) are only carried out against specific individuals, which are usually lumped with terms like “senior” and “al-Qaeda.” Harold Koh: “The United States has the authority under international law, and the responsibility to its citizens, to use force, including lethal force, to defend itself, including by targeting persons such as high-level al-Qaeda leaders who are planning attacks.” John Brennan: “This Administration’s counterterrorism efforts outside of Afghanistan and Iraq are focused on those individuals who are a threat to the United States.” Jeh Johnson: “In an armed conflict, lethal force against known, individual members of the enemy is a long-standing and long-legal practice.” Eric Holder: “Target specific senior operational leaders of al Qaeda and associated forces.” In April, Brennan was asked, “If you could address the issue of AND get into the specifics of the process by which these decisions are made.”
Historical analysis proves Afsheen John Radsan 12, Professor, William Mitchell College of Law, Assistant General Counsel at the Central Intelligence Agency from 2002 to 2004; and Richard Murphy, the ATandT Professor of Law, Texas Tech University School of Law, 2012, “The Evolution of Law and Policy for CIA Targeted Killing,” Journal of National Security Law and Policy, Vol. 5, p. 439-463 Some of the concerns about a CIA drone campaign relate to the personalized nature of AND , videos, voice samples, and biographical information in an intelligence file.
Best consensus definition of targeted killings excludes signature strikes---identification of individual targets is the key defining factor throughout the lit Philip Alston 11, the John Norton Pomeroy Professor of Law, New York University School of Law, was UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions from 2004 until 2010, 2011, “ARTICLE: The CIA and Targeted Killings Beyond Borders,” Harvard National Security Journal, 2 Harv. Nat'l Sec. J. 283 As with many terms that have entered the popular consciousness as though they had a AND sought to be covered by the use of the term-targeted killing. The term was brought into common usage after 2000 to describe Israel's self-declared AND , but instead uses the customary law applicable to international armed conflicts. n41 At the other end of the definitional spectrum is a five-part definition proposed AND definition, Solis proposes one which is unsuitable outside of international humanitarian law. A more flexible approach is needed in order to reflect the fact that "targeted AND , firing from UAVs, the use of car bombs, and poison. There are thus three central requirements for a workable definition. The first is that AND broad range of situations in relation to which it has regularly been applied. The common element in each of the very different contexts noted earlier is that lethal AND of the operation, from its inception, should not be to kill. Although in most circumstances targeted killings violate the right to life, in the exceptional AND specific individual who is not in the physical custody of the perpetrator. n46
Most precise interpretations prove that TKs are premeditated against a specific individual---their interps are normative which kills predictability William Abresch 9, Director, Project on Extrajudicial Executions, Center for Human Rights and Global Justice, New York University School of Law, “Targeted Killing in International Law,” European Journal of International Law, 20 (2): 449-453 Studies of targeted killing are often situated within the politically fraught debate over Hellfire missile AND the implications of the lex lata for the practices covered by his definition. “de lege ferenda” means “what the law should be,” while “lex lata” means “what the law really is”
TKs=/=Drones
They conflate overall drone strategy and tareted killings Kenneth Anderson 13, Professor of International Law at American University, June 2013, “The Case for Drones,” Commentary, Vol. 135, No. 6 This feature of Predators and Reapers -- the two forms of drones really at issue AND as seen most dramatically in the Bin Laden raid by the Navy SEALs. Similarly, drones are useful for more than targeted killing. They have broad, AND by the work to keep a high-speed jet in the air.
AT: Contextual Definitions Contextual definitions bad – intent to define outweighs Eric Kupferbreg 87, University of Kentucky, Senior Assistant Dean, Academic and Faculty Affairs at Northeastern University, College of Professional Studies Associate Director, Trust Initiative at Harvard School of Public Health 1987 “Limits - The Essence of Topicality” http://groups.wfu.edu/debate/MiscSites/DRGArticles/Kupferberg1987LatAmer.htm Often, field contextual definitions are too broad or too narrow for debate purposes. AND is a unique context, then additional considerations enter into our definitional analysis.
Pakistan
Civilians
Tech advances and tighter rules of engagement are substantially reducing civilian casualties---alternatives to drones are worse Rosa Brooks 13, Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center and Bernard L. Schwartz Senior Fellow, New America Foundation, 4/23/13, “The Constitutional and Counterterrorism Implications of Targeted Killing,” http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/pdf/04-23-13BrooksTestimony.pdf *We do not endorse gendered language First, critics often assert that US drone strikes are morally wrong because the kill AND and combatants than close air support or other tactics that receive less attention.
Current checks against civilian casualties are so effective that we divert missiles in the air if there’s a risk they’ll kill civilians Gregory McNeal 13, Associate Professor of Law, Pepperdine University, 3/5/13, “Targeted Killing and Accountability,” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1819583 In contemporary operations, the government has repeatedly emphasized that their planned target lists are AND in the exercise of those responsibilities.272¶ Italics in original
CCs---Pakistan---2NC Official Pakistani statements of civilian casualties are vastly overstated---their military confirms Brian Glyn Williams 11, Associate Professor of Islamic History at the University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth, March 2011, “Accuracy of the U.S. Drone Campaign: The Views of a Pakistani General,” CTC Sentinel, Vol. 4, No. 3, http://www.brianglynwilliams.com/pdfs/Williams-nearfinal.pdf One of the most contentious issues related to the Central Intelligence Agency’s covert drone campaign AND to rely on government statements when trying to assess militant and civilian casualties. Recently, however, the Pakistani general in command of forces in the embattled North Waziristan tribal agency told reporters that “a majority of those eliminated in drone strikes are terrorists, including foreign terrorist elements.” This article explains the significance of the general’s comments, which should serve to temper what appear to be broad misconceptions about the accuracy of the U.S. drone campaign.
SSs---Alternatives Worse Alternatives to signature strikes are worse for all their advantages Dan Trombly 13, National Security/International Affairs Analyst, Caerus Analytics, LLC, 5/29/13, “I Might Need You To Kill: Signatures, Patterns, and Alternatives,” http://www.cnas.org/blogs/abumuqawama/2013/05/i-might-need-you-kill-signatures-patterns-and-alternatives.html Of course, it is important to note these violent dynamics are hardly unique to signature strikes or aerial assassinations. Though improper targeting and munitions selection can rapidly magnify the danger of collateral damage in those operations, it is important to remember the enormous potential costs of seeking to kill or capture militants with any instruments that are unable to ensure security for civilians. Night raids, such as the infamous botched Gardez raid, can easily falter on AND on the Pakistani border, killing as many as two dozen Pakistani soldiers. Even then, a regime of raiding into territories where we are not willing to AND to generate as much actionable intelligence as possible through the raiding process itself. The face of a robust capture program is not the FBI effort which retrieved the AND suspects and highly compliant host government security and intelligence seems less than forthcoming. The face of a capture program in Pakistan’s border regions with Afghanistan, Yemen, AND had even their own President thinking they were running a massive assassination machine. Of course, programs like the CIA-Vietnamese Provincial Reconnaissance Units, for all the reputation they gained as an unstoppable assassination machine, pale in comparison to the sanguinary behavior of other paramilitary efforts to dismantle insurgent infrastructure and disrupt irregular opponents. While the Anbar Awakening receives massive praise, enlisting irregular forces with relatively little opportunity to control their behavior,
and far less “skin in the game” with regard to the political AND wealthy liberal 3rd-party interventions might try to steer their clients towards.
Heg
No internal link Soft power’s inevitable and not key to heg Brooks and Wohlforth, 9 (Stephen Brooks and William Wohlforth, both are professors of Government at Dartmouth, “Reshaping the world order: how Washington should reform international institutions,” Foreign Affairs, March-April) FOR ANALYSTS such as Zbigniew Brzezinski and Henry Kissinger, the key reason for skepticism AND UnitedStates today has the necessary legitimacy to shepherd reform of the international system.
Their internal link can’t affect the structural reasons why heg solves war Maher 11---adjunct prof of pol sci, Brown. PhD expected in 2011 in pol sci, Brown (Richard, The Paradox of American Unipolarity: Why the United States May Be Better Off in a Post-Unipolar World, Orbis 55;1)
The United States should start planning now for the inevitable decline of its preeminent position AND view good relations with the United States as indispensable for their own security.
cp AT: Asia War No chance of China/Japan conflict---economic interdependence Richard Katz 13, Editor of the semiweekly The Oriental Economist Alert and the monthly The Oriental Economist Report, “Mutual Assured Production”, Foreign Affairs, July/August 2013, EBSCO Why Trade Will Limit Conflict Between China and Japan¶ During the Cold War, AND China and Japan stand to gain far more from trading than from fighting. Multiple factors make Asia war unlikely Vannarith 10—Executive Director of the Cambodian Institute for Cooperation and Peace. PhD in Asia Pacific Studies, Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific U (Chheang, Asia Pacific Security Issues: Challenges and Adaptive Mechanism, http://www.cicp.org.kh/download/CICP20Policy20brief/CICP20Policy20brief20No203.pdf) Some people look to China for economic and strategic interests while others still stick to AND the region and those elements are present and being improved in this region. Politics Overview Causes fast multipolar power shifts Harris and Burrows 9 Mathew, PhD European History @ Cambridge, counselor of the U.S. 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 In light of collective action problems, it may be the market, more so AND reserves is among the decisive factors determining global outcomes to the current crisis. UQ Wall Congress will successfully avert shutdown now, but Boehner will take it down to the wire Tal Kopan, 9-20-2013, “Chuck Schumer on shutdown: ‘They’ll blink’,” Politico, http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/government-shutdown-update-chuck-schumer-97118.html Sen. Chuck Schumer thinks Republicans won’t go through with shutting down the government, AND let those 60 tea party people dictate, it’s a disaster.’” Senate will pass a clean CR and kick it back to the house – will go down to the wire Sean Sullivan, 9-20-2013, “A step-by-step guide to what’s next in the government shutdown showdown,” Washington Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/09/19/a-step-by-step-guide-to-whats-next-in-the-government-shutdown-showdown/ Continuing resolutions and Obamacare and a shutdown. Oh my! The House on Friday AND easy call. In other words, he’d be in quite a jam. AT: No Shutdown Impact Shutdown would crush econ – past shutdowns didn’t happen during a fragile economy Daily Kos, 1-14-2013, "Government Shutdown: What It Is, and What It Isn't (Update x1)," http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/01/14/1178981/-Government-Shutdown-What-It-Is-and-What-It-Isn-t That said, there is an important element that is very different this time. AND is the world's largest economy trying to stay afloat without making bad decisions. This time is really seriously different Ben White and MJ Lee, 8-12-2013, “Next fiscal fight: Why Wall Street should worry,” Politico, http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/wall-street-debt-ceiling-95426.html?hp=t1 The prevailing view: When Congress returns in September, sabers will be rattled and AND but I don’t think it’s pricing in this impending battle.” Or battles. AT: Thumpers Obama’s shifting to the economy CBS News 9/16/13, Lindsey Boerma, “After weeks of focus on Syria, Obama pivots to the economy,” http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57603030/after-weeks-of-focus-on-syria-obama-pivots-to-the-economy/ Facing an overwhelmingly united front against his request for U.S. intervention in AND to OK his request for military intervention in civil war-torn Syria. No more Syria thumper – Budget comes first Frank James, 9-11-2013, “Congress Looks Beyond Syria To Its Next Fight,” NPR, http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/09/11/221460742/congress-looks-beyond-syria-to-its-next-fight Now that Congress' extraordinary Syria debate is on hold, at least for now, the next upcoming drama is really a return to much more familiar territory: how will congressional leaders get enough votes to pass legislation to keep the government from going off yet another metaphorical cliff. AT: Debt Ceiling Thumper Averting a shutdown builds momentum on other deficit issues – allows the economy to keep growing, which makes other negotiations possible Baltimore Sun, 9-12-2013, "Budget battle rejoined ," http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/editorial/bs-ed-house-budget-20130912,0,6666385.story That's what most economists favor. That's what the bipartisan Simpson-Bowles commission advocated AND be happy when the entitlement program checks are no longer in the mail? GOP will cave on the debt ceiling now Greg Giroux, 9-20-2013, “Senate Budget Chief Sees Republican Yield on Debt Lifting,” Bloomberg, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-19/senate-budget-chief-sees-republican-yield-on-debt-lifting.html Republicans seeking to curb President Barack Obama’s health-care law probably will capitulate to AND a spending bill needed to keep the government running after Sept. 30.
In absolute dollar terms, Pakistan’s economy is 27th largest in the world. The AND Pakistan’s informal economy continues to document and assess more improvements will be seen. Disease Impact Government shutdown wrecks CDC disease monitoring – key to check outbreaks Emily Walker, 4-8-2011, "Both Sides Claim Win as Shutdown Averted," Med Page Today, http://www.medpagetoday.com/Washington-Watch/Washington-Watch/25826 The vast majority of employees at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC AND won't have the manpower we have right now," the HHS spokesman said. Extinction Quammen 12 David, award-winning science writer, long-time columnist for Outside magazine for fifteen years, with work in National Geographic, Harper's, Rolling Stone, the New York Times Book Review and other periodicals, 9/29, “Could the next big animal-to-human disease wipe us out?,” The Guardian, pg. 29, Lexis Infectious disease is all around us. It's one of the basic processes that ecologists AND collapses? One possible factor is infectious disease, and viruses in particular.
Tournament: GSU | Round: Semis | Opponent: Georgetown AM | Judge: Doesn't include security K or politics --- check any other GSU round for those
DA
1nc
Net-beneficial---restricting targeted killing as a first resort outside active hostilities collapses counter-terrorism by signaling availability of safe havens and immunity from strikes---the “unable-unwilling” framework’s a distinct and better alternative Geoffrey Corn 13, Professor of Law and Presidential Research Professor, South Texas College of Law, 5/16/13, Statement before the Senate Armed Services Committee, CQ Congressional Testimony, lexis 3. What is the geographic scope of the AUMF and under what circumstances may the United States attack belligerent targets in the territory of another country? In my opinion, there is no need to amend the AUMF to define the AND with the strategic objective of preventing future terrorist attacks against the United States. I believe much of the momentum for asserting some arbitrary geographic limitation on the scope AND military objectives pursuant to the law of armed conflict are subjected to attack. I do not, however, intend to suggest that it is proper to view AND him to dictate when and where he will be subject to lawful attack. I believe this balance between legal authority and policy and diplomatic considerations is reflected in AND sovereignty concerns through diplomacy, focused on the strategic interests of the nation. Retaining the legal option of first resort killing is key to military training---breaking that paradigm collapses operational effectiveness Geoffrey Corn 10, Professor of Law and Presidential Research Professor, South Texas College of Law, 2010, “Mixing Apples and Hand Grenades: The Logical Limit of Applying Human Rights Norms to Armed Con?ict,” International Humanitarian Legal Studies 1 (2010) 52–94 Furthermore, while it might be tempting to assume that shifting from one use of AND of lawful targeting of military objectives that is the focus or proportionality analysis.
Specifically, special forces conduct first-resort targeted killings outside of armed conflict zones 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 readiness is 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.
Warfighting DA---2NC First-resort targeting outside conflict zones is key to deny terrorist safe havens---it’s reverse-causal---codifying the restriction in the plan signals a massive victory for terrorists across the globe---and it’s unique because Obama’s able to re-expand first-resort targeted killings as long as he has the legal authority Geoffrey Corn 13, Professor of Law and Presidential Research Professor, South Texas College of Law, 2013, “Geography of Armed Conflict: Why it is a Mistake to Fish for the Red Herring,” International Legal Studies, 89 INT’L L. STUD. 77 (2013) TAC=Transnational Armed Conflict Prior to September 11 and the advent of TAC, there was virtually no discourse AND to extend beyond the “hot zone” of Afghan-istan.36 Of course, it also fueled criticism of the armed conflict characterization. Critics, AND and nullifies LOAC applicability—an issue lacking clear and consistent standards.40 Where the United States presses this advantage has been and remains the other major source AND and strategic realities drove the law applicability assessment, and not vice versa. The U.S. response to the September 11 terrorist attacks indicated the intent AND the nature of the threat drove a major shift in the response modality. While the TAC typology seemed to defy accepted international law cat-egorizations of armed AND —is essentially opportunity driven: the conflict follows the belligerent target.45
Our link destroys all their spin about the plan merely codifying current policy---the current approach makes limits on first-resort killings part of the rules of engagement, not a legal restriction on authority---legally codifying them would destroy flexibility Geoffrey Corn 13, Professor of Law and Presidential Research Professor, South Texas College of Law, 2013, “Geography of Armed Conflict: Why it is a Mistake to Fish for the Red Herring,” International Legal Studies, 89 INT’L L. STUD. 77 (2013) Ironically, when Professor Gabrielle Blum proposed such a limitation in her article The Dispensable AND that authority, we were much more closely aligned in our views.78 This latter aspect of the “capture or kill” debate is critical, and AND of the shock effect it will produce on the corporate enemy capability.80
The disad turns the entire case---legally codifying geographic limits causes the U.S. to circumvent the ban by relying on even worse legal justifications---that’s clearly net worse for both norms and allied perception Geoffrey Corn 13, Professor of Law and Presidential Research Professor, South Texas College of Law, 2013, “Geography of Armed Conflict: Why it is a Mistake to Fish for the Red Herring,” International Legal Studies, 89 INT’L L. STUD. 77 (2013) NOTE: “Sub rosa” denotes secrecy or confidentiality – Wikipedia The law of conflict regulation is arguably at a critical crossroads. If threat drives AND way to protect the State to legal liabilities based on inapposite legal norms.
The plan causes massive resistance and backlash by the executive: a) The U.S. views itself as in an armed conflict with al-Qaeda, regardless of the geographical zone of combat Laurie R. Blank 10, Director, International Humanitarian Law Clinic, Emory Law School, 9/16/10, “DEFINING THE BATTLEFIELD IN CONTEMPORARY CONFLICT AND COUNTERTERRORISM: UNDERSTANDING THE PARAMETERS OF THE ZONE OF COMBAT,” Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law, Vol. 39, No. 1, 2010, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1677965 This Article will focus on a related question, but one that has not yet AND on the applicable law within (and without) the zone of combat.
b) The plan applies the human rights law framework to areas that the U.S. currently understands as governed by the law of armed conflict---that causes military backlash against both the plan and any broader effort to make battlefield conduct comply with human rights law---that’s net offense against both advantages Geoffrey Corn 10, Professor of Law and Presidential Research Professor, South Texas College of Law, 2010, “Mixing Apples and Hand Grenades: The Logical Limit of Applying Human Rights Norms to Armed Con?ict,” International Humanitarian Legal Studies 1 (2010) 52–94 Perhaps the most critical premise of this article is that failing to recognize the existence AND produce results that are consistent with the very nature of armed con?ict. 11 Each of these outcomes is problematic. In the ? rst instance, noncompliance inevitably AND of overbroad application creates the potent to disable the e?cacy of military operations.
Plan Limits TKs Uniqueness---there’s currently no legal consensus over how to define the battlefield in the war on terror---but clearly conflict takes place outside traditional battlefields Laurie R. Blank 10, Director, International Humanitarian Law Clinic, Emory Law School, 9/16/10, “DEFINING THE BATTLEFIELD IN CONTEMPORARY CONFLICT AND COUNTERTERRORISM: UNDERSTANDING THE PARAMETERS OF THE ZONE OF COMBAT,” Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law, Vol. 39, No. 1, 2010, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1677965 The English language and traditional military discourse contain numerous terms to describe wartime areas. AND often to the day—when each of these conflicts began and ended. We cannot say the same for the current struggle against terrorism, often called the AND legal conundrums regarding the application of the law to military and counterterrorism operations.
The plan’s standard would prohibit targeted killings as first resort anywhere that lacks large-scale military presence or consistent aerial attacks---their author concedes that would cover most future conflicts Jennifer C. Daskal 13, Fellow and Adjunct Professor, Georgetown Center on National Security and the Law, Georgetown University Law Center, April 2013, “ARTICLE: THE GEOGRAPHY OF THE BATTLEFIELD: A FRAMEWORK FOR DETENTION AND TARGETING OUTSIDE THE "HOT" CONFLICT ZONE,” University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 161 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1165 This Article has assumed the existence of one or more zones of active hostilities, AND situation in Afghanistan once the United States and NATO remove their troops. n206
Capture Link The only alternative to first-resort killing is a capture mandate Geoffrey Corn 13, Professor of Law and Presidential Research Professor, South Texas College of Law, 2013, “Geography of Armed Conflict: Why it is a Mistake to Fish for the Red Herring,” International Legal Studies, 89 INT’L L. STUD. 77 (2013) One of the issues Daskal addresses in her article beyond that of target identification is AND be obligatory when it is a feasible alternative to employing deadly force.67 No single aspect of the DPH Interpretive Guidance generated more controversy than Section IX of AND permits the application of deadly force as a measure of first resort.70
The plan bans targeted killings as long as there’s the potential that capture might become viable in the future David Cole 13, professor at Georgetown University Law Center, 2/6/13, “Lethal Force Must Be Last Resort,” http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/02/05/what-standards-must-be-met-for-the-us-to-kill-an-american-citizen/lethal-force-must-be-last-resort Killing is also sometimes justified in self defense, or when necessary for law enforcement purposes, as when a woman kills her husband who is threatening her with a gun, or when the police recently shot the kidnapper in Alabama to save his hostage’s life. But killing in self defense requires a truly imminent threat of attack, and a finding that capture is not feasible, so that lethal force is a last resort. Carried away by the technology of drones, which permit remote-control killing anywhere AND and continually posing an imminent threat, permitting their killing at any time. But even if capture is not feasible at the moment, if the suspect is not about to attack us, it is possible that capture will become feasible later. Self defense requires that lethal force be used only as a last resort; the Obama administration’s redefinition of “imminence” permits it to be used as a first resort. Is it any wonder that the administration has killed hundreds of suspected terrorists outside Afghanistan, but captured almost none?
New detentions are politically impossible---requiring capture before killing means we won’t do either Lisa Hajjar 12, chair of the Law and Society Program at the University of California, Santa Barbara, Fall 2012, “Anatomy of the US Targeted Killing Policy,” Middle East Report, No. 264, http://www.merip.org/mer/mer264/anatomy-us-targeted-killing-policy?ip_login_no_cache=fe0d21bdc1a90052f29270e6930e1752 These uncertain answers in the spring of 2011 highlighted the lack of a clear detention AND members of the enemy going forward creates a heightened incentive to kill people.”
Surrender link
Restricting targeted killing as a first resort establishes a requirement that the U.S. offer opportunities for surrender before targeting Laurie R. Blank 12, Director, International Humanitarian Law Clinic, Emory Law School, 2012, “NATIONAL SECURITY: PART II: ARTICLE: TARGETED STRIKES: THE CONSEQUENCES OF BLURRING THE ARMED CONFLICT AND SELF-DEFENSE JUSTIFICATIONS,” William Mitchell Law Review, 38 Wm. Mitchell L. Rev. 1655 In the immediate aftermath of the May 1, 2011 raid that killed Osama bin AND and self-defense regimes and the dangers of conflating them most directly. Under the LOAC, an individual who is a legitimate target can be targeted with AND obligation to offer opportunities for surrender. n97 As one scholar has explained, Once an armed conflict exists, it is not incumbent on the army of the one party to inquire whether members of a military unit of the other party wish to surrender before attacking it. The onus is on the party that wishes to surrender and thereby prevent attack to make this clear. n98 At the heart of the matter, therefore, the legal issue centers on a clear expression of the intent to surrender. n99 Surrender must be *1685 accepted but need not be solicited. By all accounts, for example, this appeared to be the rules of engagement for the bin Laden raid. According to then-CIA director Leon Panetta's explanation, The authority here was to kill bin Laden. And obviously, under the rules of engagement, if he had in fact thrown up his hands, surrendered and didn't appear to be representing any kind of threat, then they were to capture him. But they had full authority to kill him. n100 In contrast, human rights law's requirement that force only be used as a last AND therefore every attempt must be made to capture before resorting to lethal force.
Targeted killings using drones are literally incapable of offering surrender---means the plan results in banning drones everywhere outside Afghanistan Michael W. Lewis 12, Associate Professor of Law at Ohio Northern University Pettit College of Law, Spring 2012, “ARTICLE: SYMPOSIUM: THE 2009 AIR AND MISSILE WARFARE MANUAL: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS: Drones and the Boundaries of the Battlefield,” Texas International Law Journal, p. lexis The legal determination of what constitutes "the battlefield" has particular significance for the use of drones, particularly armed drones. This is because "the battlefield" is used to effectively define the scope of IHL's application. n31 In situations outside the scope of IHL, international human rights law (IHRL) n32 applies. For the *300 purposes of this Article, the salient difference between these AND that an opportunity to surrender be offered before lethal force is employed. n38 Because drones are incapable of offering surrender before utilizing lethal force, armed drones may AND adapt their operating procedures to comply with IHRL's requirements. Armed drones cannot. *301 As a result, the debate about what constitutes the legal AND is accepted, then drone use would be considered illegal everywhere outside Afghanistan.
Yes Prolif Impact
Prolif causes rational crisis escalation---causes accidents Kroenig 12 – Matthew Kroenig is an Assistant Professor of Government at Georgetown University and a Stanton Nuclear Security Fellow on the Council on Foreign Relations, May 26th, 2012, “The History of Proliferation Optimism: Does It Have A Future?” http://www.npolicy.org/article.php?aid=1182andtid=30 What’s Wrong with Proliferation Optimism? The proliferation optimist position, while having a distinguished pedigree, has several major flaws AND war in an attempt to force less-resolved opponents to back down.
CP
1nc
The United States Federal Government should condition the use of the President’s authority for targeted killings as a first resort to instances of self-defense or response to attack by a non-state actor located within a state has consented to the United States’ carrying out targeted killing missions within its borders, or that is unwilling or unable to prosecute or neutralize such actors. The standard of “unable or unwilling” should require offering notice, when feasible, to the targeted state and allowance of time for a good-faith effort to neutralize the threat to the United States. “Ability” should be defined by analysis of the level of sovereign control the state exercises over the territory in which the relevant non-state groups are located.
Competes---it’s functionally distinct from the plan because it makes no reference to active hostilities or geographical limits on targeted killing authority.
Solves the case---the U.S. and every other state already justify targeted killings with an “unable or unwilling” framework---no other legal model will ever achieve status as a norm---the plan forfeits the ability to shape that norm by clarifying its criteria Ashley S. Deeks 12, Academic Fellow, Columbia Law School, Spring 2012, “ARTICLE: "Unwilling or Unable": Toward a Normative Framework for Extraterritorial Self-Defense,” Virginia Journal of International Law, 52 Va. J. Int'l L. 483 In an August 2007 speech, then-Presidential candidate Barack Obama asserted that his AND Pakistan is unwilling or unable to strike against them, we should." n2 On May 2, 2011, the United States put those words into operation. AND response. The lack of guidance therefore has the potential to be costly. President Obama's speech invoked an important but little understood legal standard governing the use of AND threat in a way that the United States believes may not be adequate? Many states agree that the "unwilling or unable" test is the correct standard AND suppress the threat before using force without consent in that state's territory. n10 Given that academic discussion of the test has been limited thus far, we may AND (and proportional) to suppress the threat that the nonstate group poses. A test constructed at this level of generality offers insufficient guidance to states. Although AND solutions to -- the imprecision surrounding the "unwilling or unable" test. The test's lack of content undermines the legitimacy of the test as it currently is AND be "unwilling or unable" to suppress attacks by a nonstate actor. Identifying the test's pedigree demonstrates the legitimacy of the core test and helps to frame AND development and applications of the test in ascertaining what its meaning should be. It is worth noting that this test is not the only standard around which states AND the preferred test, a hurdle no other option is poised to meet. In considering the appropriate content of the test, I argue that the "unwilling AND reduce the frequency of) those that stand in tension with the test.
2nc solves terror
Headshot---European allies specifically support the CP Anthony Dworkin 13, senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, “Drones And Targeted Killing: Defining A European Position”, July, http://ecfr.eu/page/-/ECFR84_DRONES_BRIEF.pdf Outside an armed conflict, the default European assumption would be that the threat of AND that state is unable or unwilling to act effectively to restrain the attack. This consensus provides a basis on which the EU can step up engagement with the AND will be watching to see how far he matches his words with action. Kris – their ONLY INTERNAL LINK CARD --- is exclusively writing about detention--- means they can’t solve ANY of the internal link and there’s only a risk we do --- the key line in this card is that “Our friends accept only a law enforcement response outside theatres of active armed conflict”---that line has a footnote right after it, which says: 76. As discussed in Part I, supra, the Obama administration has made clear that it will use military commissions and law of war detention. See infra Part IV. Last paragraph of their card makes clear it’s only talking about detention: This is not simply abstract philosophy. It is an important reality in our military’s AND hostilities, while we abandon those tools here in the United States.84
2nc solves norms
Only the CP solves norms because it’s based on reforming a long-standing precedent of action by states---the plan isn’t Ashley S. Deeks 12, Academic Fellow, Columbia Law School, Spring 2012, “ARTICLE: "Unwilling or Unable": Toward a Normative Framework for Extraterritorial Self-Defense,” Virginia Journal of International Law, 52 Va. J. Int'l L. 483 Deriving factors largely from the statements and explanations of victim states means that those factors AND likely to respect standards rationally related to concerns they recognize as appropriate." n116
No Precedent
1nc
No causal link between U.S. drone doctrine and other’ countries choices---means can’t set a precedent Kenneth Anderson 11, Professor of International Law at American University, 10/9/11, “What Kind of Drones Arms Race Is Coming?,” http://www.volokh.com/2011/10/09/what-kind-of-drones-arms-race-is-coming/#more-51516 New York Times national security correspondent Scott Shane has an opinion piece in today’s Sunday AND long one, starting with China. The predicament is put this way: Eventually, the United States will face a military adversary or terrorist group armed with AND perceived enemies, even American citizens, who are viewed as a threat. “Is this the world we want to live in?” asks Micah Zenko, a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. “Because we’re creating it.” By asserting that “we’re” creating it, this is a claim that there AND that Anwar al-Awlaki was, in objective terms, our enemy?) It sounds like it must be true. But is it? There are a AND what I think the real “arms race” surrounding drones will be. Unmanned aerial vehicles have clearly got a big push from the US military in the AND substantial state that feels like developing them will be able to do so. But the point is that this was happening anyway, and the technology was already AND do their own amateur version, putting some kind of bomb on it. Moving on from the avionics, weaponizing the craft is also not difficult. The AND states competing to come up with weapons technologies that are … more discriminating.
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.
Zero chance that U.S. self-restraint causes any other country to give up their plans for drones Max Boot 11, the Jeane J. Kirkpatrick Senior Fellow in National Security Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, 10/9/11, “We Cannot Afford to Stop Drone Strikes,” Commentary Magazine, http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/10/09/drone-arms-race/ The New York Times engages in some scare-mongering today about a drone ams race. Scott Shane notes correctly other nations such as China are building their own drones and in the future U.S. forces could be attacked by them–our forces will not have a monopoly on their use forever. Fair enough, but he goes further, suggesting our current use of drones to target terrorists will backfire: If China, for instance, sends killer drones into Kazakhstan to hunt minority Uighur Muslims it accuses of plotting terrorism, what will the United States say? What if India uses remotely controlled craft to hit terrorism suspects in Kashmir, or Russia sends drones after militants in the Caucasus? American officials who protest will likely find their own example thrown back at them. “The problem is that we’re creating an international norm” — asserting the right to strike preemptively against those we suspect of planning attacks, argues Dennis M. Gormley, a senior research fellow at the University of Pittsburgh and author of Missile Contagion, who has called for tougher export controls on American drone technology. “The copycatting is what I worry about most.” This is a familiar trope of liberal critics who are always claiming we should forego AND and cut down our own arsenal–to encourage similar restraint from Iran. The argument falls apart rather quickly because it is founded on a false premise: AND is unilateral disarmament–which is what the New York Times implicitly suggests. Imagine if we did refrain from drone strikes against al-Qaeda–what would AND . What’s the difference between sending a hit team and sending a drone? While a decision on our part to stop drone strikes would be unlikely to alter AND the vain hope it will encourage disarmament on the part of dictatorial states.
2nc no precedent/AT Anderson votes aff The ‘drone precedent’ arg is incoherent---their claim is that other states will use drones in far different ways than the U.S. does---proves our drone policies are irrelevant, and pretexts at best for what states will inevitably do Kenneth Anderson 13, Professor of International Law at American University, June 2013, “The Case for Drones,” Commentary, Vol. 135, No. 6 This critique often leads, however, to the further objection that the American use of drones is essentially laying the groundwork for others to do the same. Steve Coll wrote in the New Yorker: "America's drone campaign is also creating an ominous global precedent. Ten years or less from now, China will likely be able to field armed drones. How might its Politburo apply Obama's doctrines to Tibetan activists holding meetings in Nepal?" The United States, it is claimed, is arrogantly exerting its momentary technological advantage AND behaves malignantly, drones will not be responsible. Its leaders will be.
AT: SCS SCS tension inevitable but won’t escalate, even if they win a huge internal link Michal Meidan 12, China Analyst at the Eurasia Group, 8/7/12, “Guest post: Why tensions will persist, but not escalate, in the South China Sea,” http://blogs.ft.com/beyond-brics/2012/08/07/guest-post-why-tensions-will-persist-but-not-escalate-in-the-south-china-sea/#axzz2Cbw54ORc These tensions are likely to persist. And Beijing is not alone in perpetuating them AND in other deepwater plays elsewhere, as its attempted takeover of Nexen demonstrates. Economics prevent conflict escalation Creehan 12 – Senior Editor of the SAIS Review of International Affairs (Sean, “Assessing the Risks of Conflict in the South China Sea,” Winter/Spring, SAIS Review, Vol. 32, No. 1) Regarding Secretary Clinton’s first requirement, the risk of actual closure of the South China AND conflict are so great that significant changes to the status quo are unlikely. And, US will always deter China---even if they acted it would only cause a diplomatic fuss Vu Duc ‘13 "Khanh Vu Duc is a Vietnamese-Canadian lawyer who researches on Vietnamese politics, international relations and international law. He is a frequent contributor to Asia Sentinel and BBC Vietnamese Service, "Who's Bluffing Whom in the South China Sea?" www.asiasentinel.com/index.php?option=com_contentandtask=viewandid=5237andItemid=171 Conversely, China would find an increased American presence unacceptable and a nuisance. Of course, neither country is likely to find itself staring down the barrel of the other's gun. China's plans for the region would undoubtedly be under greater American scrutiny if Washington decides to allocate more assets to Asia-Pacific. For the US, returning in force to Asia-Pacific would prove to be a costly endeavour, resources the country may or may not be able to muster. Yet, even if this is true, Washington's calculations may determine that the security risk posed by China in the region outweighs whatever investment required by the US. China's dispute with Japan over the Senkaku/Diaoyu Island, however heated, will AND The consequences stemming from such action are too great for Beijing to ignore. Although it is unlikely that China's neighbors would be able to mount more than a diplomatic protest, the fuss deriving from such an incident could prove more burdensome for China than it is willing to risk. The real consequence for China of any and all conflict in the region is and has always been an American intervention. As is, it would benefit Beijing to seek a peaceful, mutually agreed upon resolution, rather than brute force. China’s just posturing---they’ll back down after the leadership change VOA 12 – Voice of America News, 9/4/12, “Will South China Sea Disputes Lead to War?,” http://www.voanews.com/content/south-china-sea-war-unlikely/1501780.html “If the PRC continues on its current path, it would seem that it is willing to militarize the whole South China Sea issue,” said Dean Cheng, a China military and foreign policy expert at the Heritage Foundation. Cheng offers another possibility – Beijing’s current hardline policies might be DUE to the power shift. “Once Xi Jinping, Li Keqiang, et. al., have secured their position in 2013-2014,” said Cheng, “they could focus on domestic issues and assume a LESS hardline position.” In that case, Cheng said it is possible the Chinese will become more conciliatory.
Rising tensions cause peaceful resolution VOA 12 – Voice of America News, 9/4/12, “Will South China Sea Disputes Lead to War?,” http://www.voanews.com/content/south-china-sea-war-unlikely/1501780.html Defusing Asia’s biggest flashpoint would be in everyone’s interest. “All countries have a strongly vested interest in the maintenance of freedom of navigation in Southeast Asian waters,” said Ian Storey. “Ensuring the free flow of maritime trade through the sea is especially important at a time of global economic downturn.” Secretary Clinton’s discussions in Beijing could fall flat, or they could go a long way easing tensions. “As long as both sides take appropriate precautionary measures, we should be okay,” said David Arase. “The rising tension could be productive if it prompts an effort to find compromise.” China needs stability in the South China Sea—no aggression Andrew H. Ring 12, Lieutenant Commander in the U.S. Navy and former Federal Executive Fellow at the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs at Harvard University, "A U.S. South China Sea Perspective: Just Over the Horizon," July 4, Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, projects.iq.harvard.edu/sites/projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/fellows/files/ring.pdf China has maintained peaceful relations with the fourteen countries it shares land borders with for AND Asian neighbors will likely draw world powers into the South China Sea dispute.
AT: Senkakus No war is the Senkakus Reuters 12 “Japan, China Military Conflict Seen Unlikely Despite Row,” 9/24, http://www.cnbc.com/id/49142182 Hawkish Chinese commentators have urged Beijing to prepare for military conflict with Japan as tensions AND stepping in to ensure that the situation does not get out of control." Econ interdependence prevents it Richard Katz 13, Editor of the semiweekly The Oriental Economist Alert and the monthly The Oriental Economist Report, “Mutual Assured Production”, Foreign Affairs, July/August 2013, EBSCO Why Trade Will Limit Conflict Between China and Japan¶ During the Cold War, AND China and Japan stand to gain far more from trading than from fighting. No Sino-Japanese/Senkaku conflict Reuters 12, “Japan, China military conflict seen unlikely despite strain,” 9/23/12, http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/23/us-china-japan-confrontation-idUSBRE88M0F220120923 Hawkish Chinese commentators have urged Beijing to prepare for military conflict with Japan as tensions AND military confrontation what is already the worst crisis in bilateral ties in decades. The U.S. can effectively restrain both sides now Reuters 12, “Japan, China military conflict seen unlikely despite strain,” 9/23/12, http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/23/us-china-japan-confrontation-idUSBRE88M0F220120923 "The chances of a military conflict are very, very slim because neither side AND they don't seek it and they do not intend to let it happen." China will not use military power in disputes Qingguo and Rosecrance 10 (Jia and Richard, Global Asia Journal, East Asia Foundation, “Delicately Poised: Are China and the US Heading for Conflict?” January 2010, http://globalasia.org/V4N4_Winter_2010/Jia_Qingguo_Richard_Rosecrance.html) Will China and the US Go to War? If one accepts the previous analysis AND that these are good values that it should strive to realize in practice. Zero chance of conflict Wang Shuo 12, managing editor of Caixin Media, "Closer Look: Why War Is Not an Option," September 12, Caixin Online, english.caixin.com/2012-09-12/100436770.html There won't be a war in East Asia.¶ The United States has five military AND is no possibility of a war in East Asia, not even remotely.
Terror Intel Sustainable Intel sharing is sustainable NYT 13, 1/30, “Drone Strike Prompts Suit, Raising Fears for U.S. Allies” The issue is more complex than drone-strike foes suggest, the current and AND , however controversial, of many of the most hardened Islamic extremist leaders. Extremely broad support for intel sharing Maciej Osowski 11, 3/8, EU-US intelligence sharing post 9/11: predictions for the future, www.e-ir.info/2011/03/08/eu-us-intelligence-sharing-post-911-predictions-for-the-future/ Intelligence cooperation between the US and other EU member states. The 9/11 AND will be a common strong threat to the security to all participating states.
Off Security is a psychological construct—the aff’s scenarios for conflict are products of paranoia that project our violent impulses onto the other Mack 91 – Doctor of Psychiatry and a professor at Harvard University (John, “The Enemy System” http://www.johnemackinstitute.org/eJournal/article.asp?id=23 *Gender modified)
The threat of nuclear annihilation has stimulated us to try to understand what it is AND , taking their cues from the leadership, contribute powerfully to the process.
Our response is to interrogate the epistemological failures of the 1ac---this is the only way to solve inevitable extinction Ahmed 12 Dr. Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed is Executive Director of the Institute for Policy Research and Development (IPRD), an independent think tank focused on the study of violent conflict, he has taught at the Department of International Relations, University of Sussex "The international relations of crisis and the crisis of international relations: from the securitisation of scarcity to the militarisation of society" Global Change, Peace and Security Volume 23, Issue 3, 2011 Taylor Francis
While recommendations to shift our frame of orientation away from conventional state-centrism toward AND of state security planning in the context of counter-terrorism operations abroad. The intensifying problematisation and externalisation of Muslim-majority regions and populations by Western security AND the efficacy of the prevailing geopolitical and economic order is ideologically beyond question. As much as this analysis highlights a direct link between global systemic crises, social polarisation and state militarisation, it fundamentally undermines the idea of a symbiotic link between natural resources and conflict per se. Neither 'resource shortages' nor 'resource abundance' (in ecological, energy, food and monetary terms) necessitate conflict by themselves. There are two key operative factors that determine whether either condition could lead to conflict AND to externalisation of those groups, and the legitimisation of violence towards them. Ultimately, this systems approach to global crises strongly suggests that conventional policy 'reform' is AND of the post-carbon era through social, political and economic transformation. Yet conventional theoretical and policy approaches fail to (1) fully engage with the AND , effective, and joined-up policy-making on these issues. Off Congress will ultimately compromise to avert shutdown Tom Cohen, 9-20-2013, “Congress: will it be a government shutdown or budget compromise?” CNN, http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/19/politics/congress-shutdown-scenarios/index.html?utm_source=feedburnerandutm_medium=feedandutm_campaign=Feed3A+rss2Fcnn_allpolitics+(RSS3A+Politics) There hasn't been a government shutdown in more than 17 years, since the 28 AND changes to provide Boehner and House Republicans with political cover to back it. The plan would trade off with Congress’s ability to avert the shutdown---GOP has momentum and will, but they need literally every hour to get it done Frank James, 9-13-2013, “Congress Searches For A Shutdown-Free Future,” NPR, http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/09/13/221809062/congress-searches-for-a-shutdown-free-future The only thing found Thursday seemed to be more time for negotiations and vote- AND people. When we have something to report, we'll let you know." Shutdown wrecks the economy Yi Wu, 8-27-2013, “Government Shutdown 2013: Still a Terrible Idea,” PolicyMic, http://www.policymic.com/articles/60837/government-shutdown-2013-still-a-terrible-idea Around a third of House Republicans, many Tea Party-backed, sent a AND to demand cancellation of the entire health care reform enacted a year before. Global nuclear war Harris and Burrows 9 Mathew, PhD European History @ Cambridge, counselor of the U.S. 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 Of course, the report encompasses more than economics and indeed believes the future is AND within and between states in a more dog-eat-dog world.
Off
Congress is too slow to respond to 21st century threats --- executive deference is critical Andrew Rudalevige 6, the Thomas Brackett Reed Professor of Government @ Bowdoin College, “The New Imperial Presidency,” UMich-Ann Arbor Press, Book, p. 264-67 That fragmentation is most obvious at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue. Despite common AND , yet indiicts damage that, if anything, is more devastating.14 Executive flexibility and ability to launch force quickly is vital to solve multiple nuclear threats Li 9 Zheyao, J.D. candidate, Georgetown University Law Center, 2009; B.A., political science and history, Yale University, 2006. This paper is the culmination of work begun in the "Constitutional Interpretation in the Legislative and Executive Branches" seminar, led by Judge Brett Kavanaugh, “War Powers for the Fourth Generation: Constitutional Interpretation in the Age of Asymmetric Warfare,” 7 Geo. J.L. and 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. Great power war John Yoo 9, Emanuel S. Heller Professor of Law @ UC-Berkeley Law, visiting scholar @ the American Enterprise Institute, former Fulbright Distinguished Chair in Law @ the University of Trento, served as a deputy assistant attorney general in the Office of Legal Council at the U.S. Department of Justice between 2001 and 2003, received his J.D. from Yale and his undergraduate degree from Harvard, “Crisis and Command,” Book, p. 360-63 *We do not endorse ableist language What did not happen in the Cold War is even more important than what did AND than the costs of executive action, even taking into account these setbacks. Off The United States Federal Government should require Congressional authorization prior to initiating offensive use of conventional force. The President of the United States should execute a disarming nuclear strike on the Chinese nuclear arsenal.
Taiwan crisis is likely this year---draws in the U.S. Michael Mazza 13, research fellow in foreign and defense policy at the American Enterprise Institute, 1/3/13, “Four Surprises That Could Rock Asia in 2013,” http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/01/03/four_surprises_that_could_rock_asia_in_2012?page=full Since President Ma Ying-jeou came to power in 2008, Taipei and Beijing AND , from 20 percent in 1992 to 9.8 percent in 2012. Economic integration is apparently failing to halt what Beijing sees as a troubling trend. AND ally -- could throw U.S.-China relations into a tailspin. Extinction - Taiwan’s an existential issue---they’ll strike U.S. cities Straits Times 2K June, 25, No one gains in war over Taiwan The US estimates that China possesses about 20 nuclear warheads that can destroy major American AND was to assess Chinese actions according to the American way of thinking. " China alerting missiles in a crisis causes rapid US preemptive strike Lieber and Press 7 - Keir A. Lieber, Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Notre Dame, and Daryl G. Press, Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Pennsylvania, Winter 2007, “U.S. Nuclear Primacy and the Future of the Chinese Deterrent,” China Security, Issue No. 5, online: http://www.wsichina.org/cs5_5.pdf Ironically, one of the clearest explanations for how the United States may use nuclear AND and react inside of the lengthy launch cycle time of Chinese forces.”24 U.S. first-strike is key to prevent or limit the damage of U.S.-China nuclear war Lieber and Press 7 – Keir Lieber, Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Notre Dame, and Daryl Press, Associate Professor of Government at Dartmouth College, July/August 2007, “Superiority Complex,” The Atlantic, http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200707/china-nukes From a military perspective, this modernization has paid off: A U.S. nuclear first strike could quickly destroy China’s strategic nuclear arsenal. Whether launched in peacetime or during a crisis, a preemptive strike would likely leave China with no means of nuclear retaliation against American territory. And given the trends in both arsenals, China may live under the shadow of U.S. nuclear primacy for years to come. This assessment is based on unclassified information, standard targeting principles, and formulas that AND silos. Chinese leaders would have little or no warning of the attack. During the Cold War, U.S. submarines posed little danger to China’s AND is virtually assured (the likelihood is calculated as greater than 99 percent). In reality, American planners could not assume such near-perfect results. Some AND in American counterforce capabilities since the end of the Cold War is staggering.) Beyond bolstering the ability to conduct a first strike, the improvements to U. AND , can be more discriminating, if planners want to minimize civilian casualties. A second key decision for war planners is whether to set the weapon to detonate AND falls to earth in the hours after the blast, spreading lethal radiation. Airbursts create smaller zones of extremely high overpressure, but they also generate very little AND and over a very wide area, greatly reducing the harm to civilians. In the past, a nuclear attack on China’s arsenal would have had horrific humanitarian AND have contemplated such a strike, but only in the most dire circumstances. But things are changing radically. Improved accuracy now allows war planners to target hardened AND generation of GPS satellites—with higher-powered signals to complicate jamming. The payoff for equipping cruise missiles (or nuclear bombs) with GPS is clear AND , allies, or territory might be more inclined to choose preemptive action. Strategic Implications of the Nuclear Imbalance The most plausible flash point for a serious U.S.-China conflict is AND solution (for example, a return to Taiwan’s pre-declaration status). By putting its nuclear forces on alert, however, China’s leaders would compel a U.S. president to make a very difficult decision: to accede to blackmail (by agreeing to a cease-fire and pressuring the Taiwanese to renounce independence), to assume that the threat is a bluff (a dangerous proposition, given that each Chinese ICBM carries a city-busting 4,000-kiloton warhead), or to strike the Chinese missiles before they could be launched. How do America’s growing counterforce capabilities affect this scenario? First, American nuclear primacy may prevent such a war in the first place. China’s leaders understand that their military now has little hope of defeating U.S. air and naval forces. If they also recognize that their nuclear arsenal is vulnerable—and that placing it on alert might trigger a preemptive strike—the leaders may conclude that war is a no-win proposition. Second, if a war over Taiwan started anyway, U.S. nuclear primacy might help contain the fighting at the conventional level. Early in the crisis, Washington could quietly convey to Beijing that the United States would act decisively if China put its vulnerable nuclear arsenal on alert. Finally, if China threatened to launch nuclear attacks against America’s allies, its territory AND he or she would reap the benefits of the past decade’s counterforce upgrades. Plan and perm make first strike impossible – Congress would never approve a first strike, and waiting until a crisis makes it less likely to be successful James J. Wirtz 7, et al, Professor of National Security Affairs at the Naval Postgraduate School, Winter 2006-2007, “The Short Shadow of U.S. Primacy?”, International Security Lieber and Press's bolt-out-of-the-blue scenario is within AND --that nuclear retaliation might occur following a nearly splendid first strike. n7
Case Intervention AT: Groupthink Groupthink theory is wrong Anthony Hempell 4, User Experience Consulting Senior Information Architect, “Groupthink: An introduction to Janis' theory of concurrence-seeking tendencies in group work., http://www.anthonyhempell.com/papers/groupthink/, March 3 In the thirty years since Janis first proposed the groupthink model, there is still AND 1986, p. 399; cited by Choi and Kim, 1999). No groupthink—executives are fragmented and pluralistic—Congress links harder Posner and Vermeule, 7 – *Kirkland and Ellis Professor of Law at the University of Chicago Law School AND professor at Harvard Law School (Eric and Adrian, Terror in the Balance: Security, Liberty, and the Courts p. 46-47) The idea that Congress will, on net, weed out bad policies rests on AND to block harmful policies, whereas executive decisionmaking is relatively centralized and unitary. The contrast is drawn too sharply, because in practice the executive is a they AND of Arab Americans in Michigan, often a swing state in presidential elections. It is not obvious, then, that statutory authorization makes any difference at all AND resists the stampede toward bad policies and safeguards the interests of oppressed minorities. Even if that condition obtains, however, the argument for authorization goes wrong by AND policies that need to be adopted quickly if they are to be effective.
Informal checks on groupthink are sufficient Kennedy, 12 Copyright (c) 2012 Gould School of Law Southern California AND Arts and Sciences; B.A. Government 2009, Harvard University. Neither the president nor the decision-making group members implement "hybrid" checks AND - the executive branch - and thereby become part of the bureaucratic machine.
Inter-Agency Process The "inter-agency process" check involves getting approval for, or opinions about, a proposed decision from other agencies. n252 The inter-agency process is particularly common for national security and foreign policy decisions. n253 "Occasionally, it will operate at a higher level in principals' committees involving Cabinet-level or sub-Cabinet people and their deputies," thus directly checking the decision-making group members. n254 2. Intra-Agency Process Another similar check is the "intra-agency process," in which the circulation of proposed decisions within the agency empowers dissidents and harnesses a diversity of thinking. n255 If nothing else, the process catches errors, or at least increases the odds of avoiding them, given the number of people who must review or approve a document or decision within the agency. n256 3. Agency or Lawyer Culture The culture of a particular agency - the institutional self-awareness of its professionalism - provides another check. n257 "Lawyer culture" - which places high value on competency and adherence to rules and laws - resides at the core of agency culture; n258 its "nay-saying" objectivity "is especially important in the small inner circle of presidential decision making to counter the tendency towards groupthink and a vulnerability to sycophancy." n259 *677 4. Public Humiliation A final check in this category is the "public humiliation" check. n260 This check only comes into play when the previous three have failed, and involves the threat to ""go public' by leaking embarrassing information or publicly resigning." AT: Accidents Multiple checks prevent Executive overreach --- their impact is a myth John Yoo 9, Emanuel S. Heller Professor of Law @ UC-Berkeley Law, visiting scholar @ the American Enterprise Institute, former Fulbright Distinguished Chair in Law @ the University of Trento, served as a deputy assistant attorney general in the Office of Legal Council at the U.S. Department of Justice between 2001 and 2003, received his J.D. from Yale and his undergraduate degree from Harvard, “Crisis and Command,” E-Book A second lesson of this book is that the notion of an unchecked executive, AND Mexican-American War and to end the Vietnam conflict, for example. AT: Adventurism They don’t solve “better wars” or adventurism Jide Nzelibe 6, Asst. Profesor of Law @ Northwestern, and John Yoo, Emanuel S. Heller Professor of Law @ UC-Berkeley Law, “Rational War and Constitutional Design,” Yale Law Journal, Vol. 115, SSRN But before accepting this attractive vision, we should ask whether the Congress first system AND have produced sharp division in American domestic politics and proven to be mistakes. The other side of the coin here usually goes little noticed, but is just AND might be American policy in the Balkans during the middle and late 1990s. Warfighting AT: Power Projection Reject their vague assertions for conflict scenarios absent heg – their authors overestimate the importance of the US Fettweis 11 Christopher J. Fettweis - Department of Political Science Tulane University and Professor of National Security Affairs at the US Naval War College, “Free Riding or Restraint Examining European Grand Strategy”, Comparative Strategy; Sep/Oct2011, Vol. 30 Issue 4, p316-332, 17p, Chetan Assertions that without the combination of U.S. capabilities, presence and commitments AND of fighting one another to begin with, and our commitments are redundant. AT: Soft Power Soft power’s inevitable and not key Brooks and Wohlforth, 9 (Stephen Brooks and William Wohlforth, both are professors of Government at Dartmouth, “Reshaping the world order: how Washington should reform international institutions,” Foreign Affairs, March-April) FOR ANALYSTS such as Zbigniew Brzezinski and Henry Kissinger, the key reason for skepticism AND UnitedStates today has the necessary legitimacy to shepherd reform of the international system. AT: Alliances Alliances will fail regardless of their internal link Barma et al., 13 (Naazneen, assistant professor of national-security affairs at the Naval Postgraduate School; Ely Ratner, a fellow at the Center for a New American Security; and Steven Weber, professor of political science and at the School of Information at the University of California, Berkeley, March/April 2013, “The Mythical Liberal Order,” The National Interest, http://nationalinterest.org/print/article/the-mythical-liberal-order-8146) Assessed against its ability to solve global problems, the current system is falling progressively AND era, and they approach the global system in a meaningfully different way.
AT: Ikenberry No “liberal order” impact---U.S. model fails Barma et al., 13 (Naazneen, assistant professor of national-security affairs at the Naval Postgraduate School; Ely Ratner, a fellow at the Center for a New American Security; and Steven Weber, professor of political science and at the School of Information at the University of California, Berkeley, March/April 2013, “The Mythical Liberal Order,” The National Interest, http://nationalinterest.org/print/article/the-mythical-liberal-order-8146) AFTER A year and a half of violence and tens of thousands of deaths in AND prevailing order as it is exposing the inherent frailty of the existing framework. AT: Benevolence States won’t bandwagon---capabilities outweigh intentions---it’s impossible to make heg seem benevolent Layne and Schwarz 2 – Christopher Layne, professor and Robert M. Gates Chair in National Security at Texas A and M University’s George H. W. Bush School of Government and Public Service; and Benjamin Schwarz, National Editor of The Atlantic, January 2002, “A New Grand Strategy,” The Atlantic, Vol. 289, No. 1, p. 36-42 Like some optimistic Britons in the late eighteenth century, many American strategists today assert AND good of the international system rather than to advance its own selfish aims. But states must always be more concerned with a predominant power's capabilities than with its AND the European Union should make itself "a counterweight to the United States." SOP No Preemption Modeling---General The Bush doctrine doesn’t set a precedent for other nations Lieber and Lieber 2 Keir A. Lieber, Assistant Professor of Political Science, University of Notre Dame and Robert J. Lieber, Professor of Government and Foreign Service, Georgetown University, December 2002, http://164.109.48.86/journals/itps/1202/ijpe/pj7-4lieber.htm Some analysts believe that it is counterproductive to make explicit the conditions under which America AND will not be emboldened by rhetorical shifts in U.S. policy. AT: HR Norms Authoritarian states don’t follow norms — their “US justifies others” arg is naive John O. McGinnis 7, Professor of Law, Northwestern University School of Law. Ilya Somin Assistant Professor of Law, George Mason University School of Law. GLOBAL CONSTITUTIONALISM: GLOBAL INFLUENCE ON U.S. JURISPRUDENCE: Should International Law Be Part of Our Law? 59 Stan. L. Rev. 1175 The second benefit to foreigners of distinctive U.S. legal norms is information AND nations can decide to adopt our good norms and avoid our bad ones. The only noteworthy counterargument is the claim that U.S. norms will have AND political processes to screen out American norms that might cause harm if copied. Of course, many nations remain authoritarian. n270 But our norms are not likely AND compared to the harm of allowing raw international law to trump domestic law. Human rights cred is irrelevant---public opinion, global norms, and NGO networks outweigh US policy Andrew Moravcsik 5, PhD and a Professor of Politics and International Affairs at Princeton, 2005, "The Paradox of U.S. Human Rights Policy," American Exceptionalism and Human Rights, http://www.princeton.edu/~amoravcs/library/paradox.pdf It is natural to ask: What are the consequences of U.S. AND seem to have little to do with U.S. multilateral policy. AT: SOP – Useless SoP useless – pres powers too big 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. 17-18) We begin with the constitutional framework, and with the official constitutional theory of liberal AND power suppress the evils of factionalism, and conduce to better policymaking overall. This theory has collapsed. Its fit with reality is no longer merely imperfect, AND the institutions they occupy and second in assuming that some invisible-hand mechanism
would cause the mutual contest among institutions to produce a socially beneficial system of mutual checks. Nothing in the actual separation-of-powers system, however, guarantees or even generally tends to produce socially beneficial results. In particular, we show that the system will predictably lead to suboptimal checking-to a political regime in which some institutions (such as legislature and judiciary) do too little to check the swelling power of others (such as the executive). Second, we examine the monitoring function of the separation of powers, focusing particularly AND the courts, exerts implicit but effective control over executive and administrative behavior.
Block
CP
AT: We Don’t Ban Nukes Nuclear weapons are a subset of “military force” Joshua J. McElwee, 9-18-2013, “Disarm nukes, question all military force,” National Catholic Reporter, http://ncronline.org/blogs/francis-chronicles/vatican-disarm-nukes-question-all-military-force A Vatican official on Monday renewed the Catholic church's decades-long call for global AND the use of any sort of military force, not just nuclear weapons. Gov docs prove Michio Kaku 6, Professor of Nuclear Physics at City University of New York, To Win a Nuclear War, 122, The thrust of these Top Secret documents is quite explicit. US. military force AND that naval superiority supported British colonialism In the world of the previous century. General Maxwell Taylor, former Chairman of the JCS, was unusually frank when he talked about the need to dominate escalation in the Third World: “AS the leading ‘have power, we may expect to have to Ìg1it for our national valuables against envious ‘have nos’... We need I mobile, ready forces to deter or suppress such conflicts before they expand into something greater.”
Armed forces include nuclear forces. US Code 10 subsection 111 'Military Force Structure Review Act of 1996'. * Current through PL 113-31, approved 8/9/13 * TITLE 10. ARMED FORCES SUBTITLE A. GENERAL MILITARY LAW PART I. ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS CHAPTER 2. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Go to the United States Code Service Archive Directory 10 USCS § 111 Lexis "(1) The term ' above the line' force structure of the Armed Forces' means the force structure (including numbers, strengths, and composition and major items of equipment) for the Armed Forces at the following unit levels: "(A) In the case of the Army, the division. "(B) In the case of the Navy, the battle group. "(C) In the case of the Air Force, the wing. "(D) In the case of the Marine Corps, the expeditionary force. "(E) In the case of special operations forces of the Army, Navy, or Air Force, the major operating unit. "(F) In the case of the strategic forces, the ballistic missile submarine fleet, the heavy bomber force, and the intercontinental ballistic missile force. "(2) The term 'Commission on Roles and Missions of the Armed Forces' means the Commission on Roles and Missions of the Armed Forces established by subtitle E of title IX of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (Public Law 103-160; 107 Stat. 1738; 10 U.S.C. 111 note).
To contextualize - SS (1) The Panel shall submit to the AND national security of the United States through the time covered by the assessment.
Use of nuclear weapons inherently “declares war” – the plan would force the president to get authorization from congress Hemesath 2000 PAUL A. HEMESATH* J.D./M.S.F.S. Georgetown University Law Center, School of Foreign Service, 2001; B.A. University of California at Los Angeles, 1996 88 Geo. L.J. 2473 1999-2000 Who's Got the Button? Nuclear War Powers Uncertainty in the Post-Cold War Era As intimated above, the end of the Cold War has brought fundamental change to AND Congress may plausibly reassert its prerogatives in light of a return to normalcy.
AT: Congress Says Yes Not fast enough - China can launch in 27 minutes, we have their fastest timeframe for approval beat by 6 minutes Li Bin 7, Inst. Of Int’l Studies @ Tsinghua, 2007, “Tracking Chinese Strategic Mobile Missiles,” Science and Global Security 15:1-30, http://www.princeton.edu/sgs/publications/sgs/archive/151Li-Bin.pdf#search=22li20bin20df-3120gmti22 Another article on Xinhua News Agency’s website describes details of an exercise of patrol and AND exercise. Based on this, preparation takes about a half an hour.
Speed Key Rapid response key Bob Aldridge, former Trident missile engineer, “11-16-2002, “U.S. Trident Submarine and Missile System,” PLRC Pacific Life Research Center Submarine-launched Trident missiles have important advantages over ICBMs. They can reach their AND Global Positioning System (GPS) satellite navigation corrections, make ICBMs obsolete.
Taboo DA – Use Strengthens Taboo Violating the taboo just makes it stronger George Quester, Government Prof @ Maryland, Spring 2005, “If The Nuclear Taboo Gets Broken,” Naval War College Review, v. 58, no. 2 Thus, when taboos are violated, the question immediately arises whether the taboos AND ,” an actual instance would challenge that attitude but not necessarily demolish it.
AT: Taboo DA – Low Casualty Solves Low casualty first strikes don’t mess up the taboo – people would get over it George H. Quester, prof @ Maryland, 2006, Nuclear First Strike, p. gb The second group of escalation possibilities comprised cases in which nuclear weapons would be used AND too much on excessive fears of the difference that nuclear weapons would make.
Yes US-China War Prefer Mazza---IR scholars agree---this is the year for a Taiwan crisis William Lowther 13, staff, Taipei Times, 1/7/13, “Taiwan may hurt China-US ties this year: expert,” http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2013/01/07/2003551954 He added that with the easy economic cross-strait steps already taken, Beijing now expects Ma to discuss political issues. “But Ma doesn’t have the domestic political support to pursue political talks,” Mazza said. This could set the scene for a crisis in the Strait, he added. Several other US academics polled on this question agreed with Mazza. “Maybe Mazza is right that this is the year that Beijing wants some measurable political success and becomes even more assertive,” one expert said. “The problem has always been that Beijing gets to define the ‘status quo’ and therefore gets to decide when Taiwan has gone too far,” he said.
Taiwan crisis inevitable---current détente will inevitably break down and China’s committed to both reunification and the military option J. Michael Cole 12, Taipei-based journalist who focuses on military issues in Northeast Asia and in the Taiwan Strait, previously served as an intelligence officer at the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, 9/3/12, “Taiwan Hedges its Bets on China,” The Diplomat, http://thediplomat.com/flashpoints-blog/2012/09/03/taiwan-hedges-its-bets-against-china/ By a number of yardsticks, relations in the Taiwan Strait today are the best they’ve been in years, if not ever. But if a report released by Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense (MND) on Friday is any indication, Taiwanese government officials don’t appear to be convinced that such détente will last for very long. Without doubt, the pace of normalization in relations between Taiwan and China, especially AND currency into U.S. dollars before a transaction can be made. Beyond trade, visits to Taiwan by Chinese officials have become almost routine, a limited number of Chinese can now study at Taiwan’s universities, Chinese tourism to the island has boomed, and joint exercises by the countries’ respective coast guards are now held every other year since 2010, mostly for the purpose of sea-rescue operations in the waters off Taiwan’s Kinmen and China’s Xiamen. While those developments have for the most part contributed to a less tense, if AND missile build-up targeting Taiwan — would undermine his efforts at rapprochement. For one reason or another, that restraint seems to have disappeared. Officials are AND has acquired enough amphibious transport vehicles or when the situation calls for it. Additionally, the report said the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) had been hard at work improving its electronic warfare (EW) capabilities so that it can operate in a complex EW environment, while pointing to signs that China could turn to all-put psychological warfare to sow confusion in Taiwan ahead of a military campaign. The report also states that the MND was expanding its Communication Electronics and Information Bureau AND than 1 million cyber-attacks, the great majority coming from China. Such signaling, which was immediately picked up by the local media, could not have been made without the consent of senior government officials. Several factors can help explain why Taiwan is hardening its position. These include the need for increased military preparedness ahead of the expected pressure from Beijing for the two sides to enter sensitive political negotiations. Already there are signs that China has begun turning the screws on this issue. Another possibility is that Taipei may have realized that despite the recent “goodwill,” AND territorial claims in those two areas (claims that Taipei has systematically denied). Other possible factors include institutional turf battles and efforts by the MND to obtain a AND an opportunity to secure future military assistance deals with the U.S. Whatever the reason, Taipei is fully aware that Taiwanese prefer the “status quo AND pliant, administration in Taipei, Taiwan’s response has to be in kind. The signaling may be a subtle shift, but it’s a step in the right AND A strong defense is the best insurance Taiwan can buy at this point.
Peaceful relations will inevitably break down---Chinese impatience, Taiwanese moves toward independence Szu-yin Ho 11, Professor of Political Science, National Chengchi University, 11/10/11, “Under the Shadow of a Rising Great Power,” http://www.aei.org/files/2012/09/26/-under-the-shadow-of-a-rising-great-power_151048132170.pdf Given Taiwanese and Chinese efforts as well as US encouragement of these efforts, the AND opposition to Taiwan’s independence that those leaders have fostered may prove their undoing. Taiwan therefore remains a vital national security concern for China. 7 On the other AND -oriented interpretation of its modern history, and a strong besieged mentality. The two sides of the Taiwan Strait differ greatly in their approach to solving the AND sovereignty; rather, both sides should learn how to manage their differences. Ma’s operational formula is “mutual non-denial of the other side’s governing authority AND that it can be easily reversed should Taiwan resume its quest for independence. The current rapport between Taiwan and China might be disrupted in the future. Taiwan AND , has commented on China’s progress since the beginning of the Ma administration: Though we have released a lot of goodwill, the proportion of people in Taiwan AND we will never forget war. The PLA has to take initiative.11 As China grows stronger—as it did after the 2008 global financial crisis—it may become overconfident. Therefore, a coercive threat to Taiwan is not totally unfathomable.
Yes Chinese Nuclear Use – China-India China-India nuclear war coming – border dispute, Tibetan independence, and Chinese expansionism Jeremy Kahn, 10-10-2009, “Why India Fears China,” http://www.newsweek.com/id/217088/page/1 China claims some 90,000 square kilometers of Indian territory. And most of AND to reassure the public that "there will be no repeat of 1962."
Yes Chinese Nuclear Use – South China Seas Chinese aggression in the South China Sea sparks war with the US Peter Brown, political analyst, 12-9-2009, “Calculated ambiguity in the South China Sea,” Asia Times, http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/KL08Ae01.html Evidence of China's growing reach in the South China Sea can be found at obscure AND meaning that China will only settle for dictating future regimes for the SCS."
Beefing up China's offshore presence means that its State Oceanic Administration (SOA) AND and military pressures to force regional conformity with its desires," said Fisher.
case Modeling Adv
No modeling---nuclear doctrines are driven by regional security interests---references to U.S. doctrine are just for legitimation of things they’d do anyway Tertrais 9 – Bruno Tertrais, Senior Research Fellow at the Paris-based Foundation for Strategic Research and Contributing Editor to Survival, October-November 2009, “The Trouble with No First Use,” Survival, Vol. 51, No. 5, p. 23-24 Sagan argues that first-use options encourage other countries to follow suit, citing AND course of a conflict against India despite their ratification of the relevant conventions.
Modeling isn’t reverse-causal – US posture is an excuse after the fact, not the cause Stanley Foundation 8 – “A New Look at No First Use,” April 4, 2008, online: http://www.stanleyfoundation.org/publications/pdb/NoFirstUsePDB708.pdf That said, conference participants were divided as to how, and how much, AND at the very least deprive other states of one argument for their arsenals.
Russia doesn’t model U.S. doctrine---they retain first-use options to deter U.S. conventional advantages and they repealed their NFU policy years ago with zero impact Stanley Foundation 8 – “A New Look at No First Use,” April 4, 2008, online: http://www.stanleyfoundation.org/publications/pdb/NoFirstUsePDB708.pdf Some participants were not sure that NFU would measurably reduce the salience of nuclear weapons AND while remaining more realistic and honest about possible nuclear use in extenuating circumstances. Many participants emphasized the realist’s perspective that, despite our attempts to reduce the salience AND change in US nuclear doctrine is unlikely to affect their own nuclear decisions.
No modeling – Russia, China, Pakistan, and Israel won’t consider giving up their nuclear advantage. Esin 09 (General Viktor Esin (Ret.), 6/21/09, Crossing Obstacles and Implementation of De-alert Approach, East West Institute Forum, http://www.ewi.info/system/files/Esin.pdf)
Second type of the obstacles pertains to provision of military security of nuclear states. AND East is concluded and the Arab states provide Israel with credible security guarantees.
No modeling Zenko ‘13 Micah, Council on Foreign Relations Center for Preventive Action Douglas Dillon fellow, "The Signal and the Noise," Foreign Policy, 2-2-13, www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/02/20/the_signal_and_the_noise, accessed 6-12-13, mss
Later, Gen. Austin observed of cutting forces from the Middle East: " AND pronouncements seriously, and instead assume they are made to appease domestic audiences.
Flex
AT: Plan Solves Warfighting Congress doesn’t enhance cred --- narrow majorities make us look unsure --- empirics prove John Yoo 4, Emanuel S. Heller Professor of Law @ UC-Berkeley Law, visiting scholar @ the American Enterprise Institute, former Fulbright Distinguished Chair in Law @ the University of Trento, served as a deputy assistant attorney general in the Office of Legal Council at the U.S. Department of Justice between 2001 and 2003, received his J.D. from Yale and his undergraduate degree from Harvard, “War, Responsibility, and the Age of Terrorism,” UC-Berkeley Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series, http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1015andcontext=johnyoo It is also not obvious that congressional deliberation ensures consensus. Legislative authorization might reflect AND with some political resistance, it does not appear to have been significant. Adversaries won’t perceive Congressional participation as a sign of resolve Matthew Waxman 8/25/13, Professor of Law @ Columbia and Adjunct Senior Fellow for Law and Foreign Policy @ CFR, “The Constitutional Power to Threaten War,” Forthcoming in Yale Law Journal, vol. 123, August 25, 2013, SSRN The credibility-enhancing effects of legislative constraints on threats are subject to dispute. AND as to how foreign leaders interpret political maneuvers within Congress regarding threatened force. New statutory restrictions collapse executive crisis response --- triggers terrorism, rogue state attacks, and wildfire prolif John Yoo 8/30/13, Emanuel S. Heller Professor of Law @ UC-Berkeley Law, visiting scholar @ the American Enterprise Institute, former Fulbright Distinguished Chair in Law @ the University of Trento, served as a deputy assistant attorney general in the Office of Legal Council at the U.S. Department of Justice between 2001 and 2003, received his J.D. from Yale and his undergraduate degree from Harvard, “Like it or not, Constitution allows Obama to strike Syria without Congressional approval,” Fox News, http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/08/30/constitution-allows-obama-to-strike-syria-without-congressional-approval/ The most important of the president’s powers are commander-in-chief and chief AND time to introduce sweeping, untested changes in the way we make war. Congressional involvement cripples warfighting – extinction *This is their 1ac separation-of-powers author Weinberger 9 Seth Weinberger, Assistant Professor in the Department of Politics and Government at the University of Puget Sound, M.A. and Ph.D. in Political Science from Duke University, "Balancing War Powers in an Age of Terror", The Good Society, 18(2), http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/good_society/v018/18.2.weinberger.html In wartime, however, it may be neither expedient nor strategically sound for the AND Congress time and time again to enact laws to advance the war effort. Key to victory in every domain Johson ‘6 Karlton, Army War College, “Temporal and Scalar Mechanics of Conflict Strategic Implications of Speed and Time on the American Way of War,” http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a449394.pdf
Military services appear to be increasingly dependent on speed, and these organizations continue to AND clearly underlies the tenets and principles of airpower as an enabling factor.28 AT: Waxman Congressional restrictions cause adversaries to doubt the credibility of our threats --- causes crisis escalation Matthew Waxman 8/25/13, Professor of Law @ Columbia and Adjunct Senior Fellow for Law and Foreign Policy @ CFR, “The Constitutional Power to Threaten War,” Forthcoming in Yale Law Journal, vol. 123, August 25, 2013, SSRN A claim previously advanced from a presidentialist perspective is that stronger legislative checks on war AND to use force in order to prevent a confrontation which might escalate.179 Plan allows Congress to vocally oppose crisis intervention --- that destroys international perception of U.S. resolve Waxman 8/25/13 Matthew Waxman, Professor of Law @ Columbia and Adjunct Senior Fellow for Law and Foreign Policy @ CFR, citing William Howell, Sydney Stein Professor in American Politics @ U-Chicago, and Jon Pevehouse, Professor of Political Science @ U-Wisconsin-Madison, “The Constitutional Power to Threaten War,” Forthcoming in Yale Law Journal, vol. 123, August 25, 2013, SSRN When members of Congress vocally oppose a use of force, they undermine the president’s AND abandon, those military operations that do not involve vital strategic interests.145
AT: Tradeoff Zero-Sum/Solves They completely shift the balance of war powers Heder 10 (Adam, J.D., magna cum laude , J. Reuben Clark Law School, Brigham Young University, “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) Congressional attempts to repeal an authorization for war, in fact, would conflict with AND some unilateral right to effectively control all major aspects of a war. 89
The aff is not topical —- introducing armed forces only refers to human troops, not weapons systems such as nuclear weapons —- prefer our interpretation because it’s based on textual analysis, legislative history, and intent of the WPR
Lorber 13 – Eric Lorber, J.D. Candidate, University of Pennsylvania Law School, Ph.D Candidate, Duke University Department of Political Science. January 2013, "Executive Warmaking Authority and Offensive Cyber Operations: Can Existing Legislation Successfully Constrain Presidential Power?" University of Pennsylvania Journal of Contsitutional Law, 15 U. Pa. J. Const. L. 961, lexis nexis As is evident from a textual analysis, n177 an examination of the legislative history AND is highly unlikely - such operations will not trigger the War Powers Resolution.
Vote negative for predictable limits —- nuclear weapons is a whole topic on its own —- requires research into a whole separate literature base —- undermines preparedness for all debates.
1NC
Congress will successfully avert a government shutdown now, but time is super tight
Harris 26 Burrows 9 Mathew, PhD European History @ Cambridge, counselor of the U.S. 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 Of course, the report encompasses more than economics and indeed believes the future is AND within and between states in a more dog-eat-dog world.
1NC
Security is a psychological construct—the aff’s scenarios for conflict are products of paranoia that project our violent impulses onto the other
The threat of nuclear annihilation has stimulated us to try to understand what it is AND , taking their cues from the leadership, contribute powerfully to the process.
Don’t call it an alternative—-our response is to interrogate the epistemological failures of the 1ac—-this is the only way to solve inevitable extinction
Ahmed 12 Dr. Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed is Executive Director of the Institute for Policy Research and Development (IPRD), an independent think tank focused on the study of violent conflict, he has taught at the Department of International Relations, University of Sussex "The international relations of crisis and the crisis of international relations: from the securitisation of scarcity to the militarisation of society" Global Change, Peace 26 Security Volume 23, Issue 3, 2011 Taylor Francis
While recommendations to shift our frame of orientation away from conventional state-centrism toward AND of state security planning in the context of counter-terrorism operations abroad. The intensifying problematisation and externalisation of Muslim-majority regions and populations by Western security AND the efficacy of the prevailing geopolitical and economic order is ideologically beyond question. As much as this analysis highlights a direct link between global systemic crises, social polarisation and state militarisation, it fundamentally undermines the idea of a symbiotic link between natural resources and conflict per se. Neither ’resource shortages’ nor ’resource abundance’ (in ecological, energy, food and monetary terms) necessitate conflict by themselves. There are two key operative factors that determine whether either condition could lead to conflict AND to externalisation of those groups, and the legitimisation of violence towards them. Ultimately, this systems approach to global crises strongly suggests that conventional policy ’reform’ is AND of the post-carbon era through social, political and economic transformation. Yet conventional theoretical and policy approaches fail to (1) fully engage with the AND , effective, and joined-up policy-making on these issues.
1NC
Conventional wars against nuclear-armed adversaries require primacy to control escalation—-otherwise adversaries will use nuclear weapons first
Lieber and Press 10 – Keir A. Lieber, Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Notre Dame, and Daryl G. Press, Associate Professor of Political Science at Dartmouth College, March/April 2010, "Second Strike: Is the U.S. Nuclear Arsenal Outmoded?," Foreign Affairs Nuclear weapons are a boon for vulnerable states. During the Cold War, the AND a grim lesson: use every weapon at your disposal to prevent defeat. When Jan Lodal and James Acton call for the elimination or devaluation of nuclear weapons AND range of counterforce capabilities, including conventional and low-casualty nuclear weapons. Hans Kristensen, Matthew McKinzie, and Ivan Oelrich raise several technical objections concerning the AND Chinese silos even if they were built to withstand 5,000 PSI. Kristensen, McKinzie, and Oelrich also contend that airbursts alone cannot destroy missile silos AND China’s—are highly vulnerable to a U.S. airburst attack. Our critics further suggest that the existence of mobile missiles obviates our analysis. If AND half a mile would suffice if a five-kiloton warhead were used. Kristensen, McKinzie, and Oelrich also note that the U.S. military’s AND generation of nuclear delivery systems should further combine prompt delivery with high accuracy. Lodal tries to link our discussion of counterforce options with the views held by senior AND would be a disproportionate response to many possible enemy uses of nuclear weapons. Critics of our policy prescriptions must confront two core issues. First, nuclear weapons have fundamentally changed since the Cold War. They once produced stalemate, and nuclear war once meant mass slaughter. For good or ill, that has changed. The revolution in accuracy means that enemy arsenals can be destroyed, and in ways that produce few civilian casualties. Theories of deterrence and beliefs about strategic stability and nuclear force requirements must be reevaluated accordingly.
U.S. nuclear primacy prevents nuclear war over Taiwan—-the war likely wouldn’t break out and wouldn’t escalate if it did
Lieber and Press 7 - Keir A. Lieber, Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Notre Dame, and Daryl G. Press, Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Pennsylvania, Winter 2007, "U.S. Nuclear Primacy and the Future of the Chinese Deterrent," China Security, Issue No. 5, online: http://www.wsichina.org/cs5_5.pdf Ironically, one of the clearest explanations for how the United States may use nuclear AND and react inside of the lengthy launch cycle time of Chinese forces."24 Blair’s words mirror our argument and suggest the two ways that nuclear primacy may benefit AND its nuclear force – or even attacking Taiwan – in the first place.
War over Taiwan is structurally inevitable—-U.S. conventional superiority ensures China will rollback their NFU and escalate to nuclear war
Zhang 8 - Baohui Zhang, Associate Professor of Political Science, Lingnan University, Hong Kong, March 2008, "The Taiwan Strait and the Future of China’s No-First-Use Nuclear Policy," Comparative Strategy, Vol. 27, No. 2, p. 164-182 For the above reasons the no-first-use principle remained unchallenged until the AND RMA) that has given the United States vast conventional advantage over China. According to John Wilson Lewis and Xue Litai, during the 1990s Taiwan’s tendency to AND prevent Taiwan’s independence has become an obsession of the Chinese leadership and military. The problem for China is that it also increasingly believes that American military intervention can AND the American military conducted its operations in this new kind of war.16 In fact, the Chinese military was awed by the American dominance in conventional warfare AND countries. In fact, they are almost in a defenseless situation."17 Major General Xu Hezhen, who is the Commandant of PLA Army Command Academy in AND a position of perpetual disadvantage until it loses the will of resistance."18 The RMA thus presents a serious problem for China’s military planners: how to defeat AND United States could be won or even brought to a reasonable draw."19 This bleak assessment by Chinese officers of the U.S. conventional dominance in AND , taken alone, potentially condemns the PLA to evolving relative obsolescence."21 How to prevent a disastrous defeat in the Taiwan Strait led some in China to AND develop a nuclear doctrine "suitable for economically and technologically weak states."22
China would perceive any decline in primacy as a green-light to attack Taiwan
CAGS, Center on American and Global Security, 2009, Weapons of Mass Destruction and the Future of U.S. National Security: From Present Problems to Future Challenges, http://www.indiana.edu/~~cags/docs/WMDReportFINAL.pdf Third, the impact of China’s achievement of MAD with the United States would affect AND the escalation risks of two established nuclear powers fighting a conventional war.4
Nuclear primacy’s key to hegemony
Craig 9 – Campbell Craig, Professor of International Relations at the University of Southampton, 2009, "American power preponderance and the nuclear revolution," Review of International Studies, Vol. 35, p. 35-36 As Keir Lieber and Daryl Press have suggested, the US may be on the AND so against a small nation with a second-strike minimum deterrent arsenal. The nuclear revolution delivers a clear message to any large state considering major war with AND nuclear state can feel confident that it will be safe from conquest.34 The general relevance of these messages to American unipolar preponderance is clear. At the AND American predation today than comparable states facing dominant powers in previous eras.36 The main effects of the nuclear revolution, then, bolster the general claim of AND factor, and show how the nuclear revolution specifically reinforces each of them.
1NC
Text —— The United States Executive Branch should establish a declaratory policy that the United States will not use nuclear weapons against a governmental entity, proxy, or group that has not used nuclear weapons against another governmental entity or group.
The plan is action policy and the CP is declaratory policy. Under declaratory NFU, it’s possible that in the face of incontrovertible evidence that an adversary is about to launch a nuclear strike, the U.S. could use nuclear weapons first.
Tertrais 9 – Bruno Tertrais, Senior Research Fellow at the Paris-based Foundation for Strategic Research and Contributing Editor to Survival, October-November 2009, "The Trouble with No First Use," Survival, Vol. 51, No. 5, p. 26-27 The nuance is important. Declaratory policies (what states claim they would do) AND there is no evidence that the 2001 Nuclear Posture Review included this option.
This solves the case:
It’s virtually identical in function—-the U.S. would only override a declaratory NFU in an extreme crisis—-and global public opinion would rally behind the U.S.
Feiveson and Hogendoorn 3 – Harold Feiveson, senior research scientist and co-director of the Program in Science 26 Global Security at the Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton, and Ernst Hogendoorn, Ph.D. Candidate at the Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton, Summer 2003, "No First Use of Nuclear Weapons," The Nonproliferation Review, online: http://cns.miis.edu/npr/pdfs/102feiv.pdf In extremis, of course, a U.S. administration might find compelling reason to override a no-first-use commitment, and actually use or explicitly threaten to use nuclear weapons. Such an act would be taken only in the most dire of circumstances, and in such a situation it is hard to believe that U.S. flaunting of a prior declaratory commitment would weigh much in how the world viewed the U.S. actions.
The net-benefit—-making NFU an action policy and completely prohibiting all scenarios for first-use costs hundreds of thousands of lives in an inevitable crisis—-the CP’s declaratory NFU enables the U.S. to override its declared posture and launch damage-limitation strikes against an imminent nuclear attacker
Tertrais 9 – Bruno Tertrais, Senior Research Fellow at the Paris-based Foundation for Strategic Research and Contributing Editor to Survival, October-November 2009, "The Trouble with No First Use," Survival, Vol. 51, No. 5, p. 25 A no-first-use policy might also have security costs beyond deterrence. AND is giving up the possibility of saving hundreds of thousands of his citizens.
Only a declaratory NFU creates successful existential deterrence—-the knowledge that a declaratory NFU could be revoked in crisis de-escalates tension and prevents conflict
Feiveson and Hogendoorn 3 – Harold Feiveson, senior research scientist and co-director of the Program in Science 26 Global Security at the Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton, and Ernst Hogendoorn, Ph.D. Candidate at the Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton, Summer 2003, "No First Use of Nuclear Weapons," The Nonproliferation Review, online: http://cns.miis.edu/npr/pdfs/102feiv.pdf Opponents of a strong no-first-use declaration by the United States generally AND go into battle thinking they can rely on the use of nuclear weapons.
The CP’s the best middle ground—-it refuses to tie the hands of future presidents while adopting the substance of NFU—-the consequences of nuclear war mean declaratory NFU would only be overridden in catastrophic circumstances
Boese 6 – Wade Boese, Research Director of the Arms Control Association, March 25, 2006, "Preventing Nuclear Disaster," online: http://www.armscontrol.org/print/128 Nuclear weapons possessors should be pushed to adopt no-first-use policies. At this time, China and India are the only two states that have renounced the first use of their nuclear arms. In the absence of ending its nuclear deployments, the 26-member NATO alliance AND so should NATO’s readiness to introduce or employ nuclear weapons in a conflict. Universal adoption of a no-first-use option should particularly appeal to the AND much affinity among the uniformed U.S. military for nuclear weapons. U.S. political leaders also find it difficult to fathom scenarios in which AND and immeasurable consequences. This holds true for other world leaders as well. As long as nuclear weapons exist, their role should be confined to deterring a nuclear-weapons attack by another state. Anything more is unjustified. As former Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara wrote last year in Foreign Policy, "I would characterize current U.S. nuclear weapons policy as immoral, illegal, militarily unnecessary, and dreadfully dangerous."
Case
Heg Advantage
Conventional Inevitable
Unparalleled conventional superiority now
Stimson Center 2009, nonprofit, nonpartisan institution devoted to enhancing international peace and security through a unique combination of rigorous analysis and outreach, http://www.stimson.org/space/?SN=WS20040504680 The United States enjoys unparalleled and unprecedented military superiority. The US will spend close AND assign responsibility to than asymmetric warfare waged against soft targets here on earth.
AND —- will maintain superiority into the future
Zhang 8 - Baohui Zhang, Associate Professor of Political Science, Lingnan University, Hong Kong, March 2008, "The Taiwan Strait and the Future of China’s No-First-Use Nuclear Policy," Comparative Strategy, Vol. 27, No. 2, p. 164-182 The RMA thus presents a serious problem for China’s military planners: how to defeat AND , taken alone, potentially condemns the PLA to evolving relative obsolescence."21
AT: Heg Impact
Heg impact’s empirically denied
Preble 10 – Former prof, history, Temple U. PhD, history, Temple (Christopher, U.S. Military Power: Preeminence for What Purpose?, 3 August, http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/u-s-military-power-preeminence-for-what-purpose/) Goure and the Hadley-Perry commissioners who produced the alternate QDR argue that the AND States while the schlubs in fly-over country pick up the tab.
No escalation
Haas 8 Richard, President of the Council on Foreign Relations, former director of policy planning for the Department of State, former vice president and director of foreign policy studies at the Brookings Institution, the Sol M. Linowitz visiting professor of international studies at Hamilton College, a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a lecturer in public policy at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, and a research associate at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, April, "Ask the Expert: What Comes After Unipolarity?" http://www.cfr.org/publication/16063/ask_the_expert.html Does a non polar world increase or reduce the chances of another world war? AND highly costly conflicts involving terrorist groups, militias, rogue states, etc.
AT: Taiwan
No war and escalation
GS 6 (Global Security, China’s Options in the Taiwan Confrontation, http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/taiwan-prc.htm) With a belief that the US will come to Taiwan’s aid should China initiate action AND to control escalation beyond "demonstrative" detonations would cause utterly disproportionate destruction.
AT: Iran War
Multiple factors constrain Iranian aggression or adventurism
Kaye 10—Senior political scientist, RAND. CFR member and former prof at George Wash. PhD in pol sci from UC Berkeley—AND—Nora Bensahel—adjunct prof of IR at Georgetown. PhD in pol sci from Stanford—AND—Jerrold D. Green—research professor, USC. PhD in pol sci from U Chicago—AND—Frederic Wehrey—Senior analyst at RAND. Former Georgetown prof. D.Phil. candidate in IR, Oxford. Master’s in near Eastern studies, Princeton (Dalia Dassa, Dangerous But Not Omnipotent, Report by RAND for the Airforce and DOD, http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monographs/2009/RAND_MG781.pdf) To accurately gauge the strategic challenges from Iran over a ten- to fifteen- AND , ties to Islamist groups, and ability to influence Arab public opinion.
AT: Korean War
No Korean war—-laundry list—-(rational regime, empirics, military inferiority, and it’s all just domestic propaganda)
Fisher 13 Max, Foreign Policy Writer @ Washington Post 26 Former Editor at the Atlantic, "Why North Korea loves to threaten World War III (but probably won’t follow through)" http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/03/12/why-north-korea-loves-to-threaten-world-war-iii-but-probably-wont-follow-through/ North Korea is indeed a dangerous rogue state that has, in the recent past AND 100 artillery shells at Yeonpyeong Island, killing two civilians and wounding 19. But is North Korea really an irrational nation on the brink of launching "all-out war," a mad dog of East Asia? Is Pyongyang ready to sacrifice it all? Probably not. The North Korean regime, for all its cruelty, has also shown itself to be shrewd, calculating, and single-mindedly obsessed with its own self-preservation. The regime’s past behavior suggests pretty strongly that these threats are empty. But they still matter. For years, North Korea has threatened the worst and, despite all of its AND to bear the costs of preventing its outbursts from sparking an unwanted war. Starting World War III or a second Korean War would not serve any of Pyongyang’s AND United States, it would almost certainly end with the regime’s total destruction. Still, provocations and threats do serve Pyongyang’s interests, even if no one takes AND death that Kim had made up for North Korea’s weakness with canny belligerence: The shtick of apparent madness flowed from his country’s fundamental weakness as he, like AND nuclear reactor construction, hard cash-earning tourist enclaves and investment zones. At the risk of insulting Kim Jong Eun, it helps to think of North AND because he deserves it, but because you want the tantrum to stop.
AT: US Economic Model
Aff’s not key to the US economic model – no reason why improving conventional military forces sustains the US economic system
US economic model resilient
APSA 9 (American Political Science Association, Task Force Report, U.S. Standing in the World: Causes, Consequences, and the Future, October 2009, http://www.apsanet.org/media/PDFs/APSAUSStandingShortFinal.pdf) There is, as of yet, no clear finding that U.S AND models and actively establishing programs in places like Qatar, Singapore, and China
Prolif Advantage
AT: East Asian Prolif
Asian prolif doesn’t cause war
Alagappa 9—Distinguished Senior Fellow, East-West Center. PhD, IR, Tufts (Muthiah, The long shadow: nuclear weapons and security in 21st century Asia, ed. Alagappa, 512) International political interaction among Asian states is for the most part rule governed, predictable AND to view the roles and effects of nuclear weapons in this larger context.
AT: Terrorism
No terrorism impact
Zenko 26 Cohen 12 – Micah Zenko, Fellow in the Center for Preventive Action at the Council on Foreign Relations; and Michael A. Cohen, Fellow at the Century Foundation, March/April 2012, "Clear and Present Safety," Foreign Affairs, Vol. 91, No. 2, p. 79-93 Take terrorism. Since 9/11, no security threat has been hyped more AND the intelligence and law enforcement agencies of the United States and its allies.
AT: Russia War
No impact
David E. Hoffman 10/22/12, contributing editor to Foreign Policy and the author of The Dead Hand: The Untold Story of the Cold War Arms Race and Its Dangerous Legacy, which won the 2010 Pulitzer Prize for general non-fiction, "Hey, Big Spender," Foreign Policy, www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/10/22/hey_big_spender?page=full Despite tensions that flare up, the United States and Russia are no longer enemies; the chance of nuclear war or surprise attack is nearly zero. We trade in each other’s equity markets. Russia has the largest audience of Facebook users in Europe, and is open to the world in a way the Soviet Union never was.
Block
Primacy
Impact
Nuclear primacy controls escalation—-prevents adversaries from escalating conventional wars to nuclear—-benefits for escalation and crisis control conclusively outweigh any risk—-crises are worse without U.S. nuclear threats Lieber 26 Press, November-December 9 - Keir A. Lieber, Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Notre Dame, and Daryl G. Press, Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Pennsylvania, November-December 2009, "The Nukes We Need: Preserving the American Deterrent," Foreign Affairs, p. 50-51 A second criticism of the argument for retaining and improving certain counterforce capabilities is that AND know that the United States possesses a well-honed nuclear counterforce capability. This second criticism has merit. Nevertheless, the benefits of maintaining effective counterforce capabilities AND S. leaders would have a much more acceptable option if deterrence fails. The nuclear forces the United States builds today must be able to act as a AND —that the United States’ strategic position abroad rests largely on a bluff.
THIS IS THEIR IRAN/NK IMPACT 212121
Conventional wars with nuclear adversaries are inevitable—-counterforce is the only way to keep them from escalating to nuclear war Lieber 26 Press 9 - Keir A. Lieber, Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Notre Dame, and Daryl G. Press, Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Pennsylvania, November-December 2009, "The Nukes We Need: Preserving the American Deterrent," Foreign Affairs, p. 39-41 Unfortunately, deterrence in the twenty-first century may be far more difficult for AND or later find itself embroiled in conventional wars with nuclear-armed adversaries. Preventing escalation in those circumstances will be far more difficult than peacetime deterrence during the AND conflict, when U.S. enemies are fighting for their lives. Debating the future of the U.S. nuclear arsenal is critical now because AND the ability to destroy an adversary’s nuclear weapons before they can be used. Simply counting U.S. warheads or measuring Washington’s counterforce capabilities will not, however, reveal what type of arsenal is needed for deterrence in the twenty-first century. The only way to determine that is to work through the grim logic of deterrence: to consider what actions will need to be deterred, what threats will need to be issued, and what capabilities will be needed to back up those threats. The Obama administration is right that the United States can safely cut its nuclear arsenal AND . A deterrent posture based on such a dubious threat would lack credibility. Instead, a credible deterrent should give U.S. leaders a range of AND -yield weapons—as it cuts the size of its nuclear force.
These wars only stay conventional in a world of U.S. nuclear primacy—-we won’t escalate conflicts, but adversaries will Lieber 26 Press 7 - Keir A. Lieber, Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Notre Dame, and Daryl G. Press, Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Pennsylvania, Winter 2007, "U.S. Nuclear Primacy and the Future of the Chinese Deterrent," China Security, Issue No. 5, online: http://www.wsichina.org/cs5_5.pdf Third, the growth of U.S. nuclear counterforce capabilities may give U AND sideline and keep their conflicts with the United States at the conventional level.
Ov
Perception of declining U.S. deterrence causes fast, global. great power nuclear war Caves, Senior Fellow at the National Defense University 10 – John P. Caves Jr., Senior Research Fellow in the Center for the Study of Weapons of Mass Destruction at the National Defense University, January 2010, "Avoiding a Crisis of Confidence in the U.S. Nuclear Deterrent," Strategic Forum, No. 252 Perceptions of a compromised U.S. nuclear deterrent as described above would have profound policy implications, particularly if they emerge at a time when a nuclear-armed great power is pursuing a more aggressive strategy toward U.S. allies and partners in its region in a bid to enhance its regional and global clout. A dangerous period of vulnerability would open for the United States and those nations that depend on U.S. protection while the United States attempted to rectify the problems with its nuclear forces. As it would take more than a decade for the United States to produce new nuclear weapons, ensuing events could preclude a return to anything like the status quo ante. The assertive, nuclear-armed great power, and other major adversaries, could be willing to challenge U.S. interests more directly in the expectation that the United States would be less prepared to threaten or deliver a military response that could lead to direct conflict. They will want to keep the United States from reclaiming its earlier power position. Allies and partners who have relied upon explicit or implicit assurances of U.S. nuclear protection as a foundation of their security could lose faith in those assurances. They could compensate by accommodating U.S. rivals, especially in the short term, or acquiring their own nuclear deterrents, which in most cases could be accomplished only over the mid- to long term. A more nuclear world would likely ensue over a period of years. Important U.S. interests could be compromised or abandoned, or a major war could occur as adversaries and/or the United States miscalculate new boundaries of deterrence and provocation. At worst, war could lead to state-on-state employment of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) on a scale far more catastrophic than what nuclear-armed terrorists alone could inflict.
China
Credible nuclear primacy deters China from intervening in the first place Keir A. Lieber, Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Notre Dame, and Daryl G. Press is Associate Professor of Government at Dartmouth, 2007, Superiority Complex, http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/print/200707/china-nukes The most plausible flash point for a serious U.S.-China conflict is AND solution (for example, a return to Taiwan’s pre-declaration status). By putting its nuclear forces on alert, however, China’s leaders would compel a U.S. president to make a very difficult decision: to accede to blackmail (by agreeing to a cease-fire and pressuring the Taiwanese to renounce independence), to assume that the threat is a bluff (a dangerous proposition, given that each Chinese ICBM carries a city-busting 4,000-kiloton warhead), or to strike the Chinese missiles before they could be launched. How do America’s growing counterforce capabilities affect this scenario? First, American nuclear primacy may prevent such a war in the first place. China’s leaders understand that their military now has little hope of defeating U.S. air and naval forces. If they also recognize that their nuclear arsenal is vulnerable—and that placing it on alert might trigger a preemptive strike—the leaders may conclude that war is a no-win proposition. Second, if a war over Taiwan started anyway, U.S. nuclear primacy might help contain the fighting at the conventional level. Early in the crisis, Washington could quietly convey to Beijing that the United States would act decisively if China put its vulnerable nuclear arsenal on alert.
Accepting nuclear vulnerability with China accelerates their attempts to exploit it—-causes a fast ramp-up of asymmetric capabilities and war—-turns every aff arg Pfaltzgraff 9 – Robert L. Pfaltzgraff, Jr., Shelby Cullom Davis Professor of International Security Studies at Tufts University, April 7, 2009, "China–U.S. Strategic Stability," online: http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/2009npc_prepared_pfaltzgraff.pdf This, then, leads me to the conclusion that to the extent that the AND at a time of crisis and lead to undesired escalation based on miscalculation.
Primacy DA—-Link—-NFU
NFU makes nuclear primacy inoperative – first-strike threats define primacy Lieber and Press 6 - Keir A. Lieber, Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Notre Dame, and Daryl G. Press, Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Pennsylvania, March-April 2006, "The Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy," Foreign Affairs During the Cold War, Washington relied on its nuclear arsenal not only to deter AND military doctrine and that nuclear primacy remains a goal of the United States.
Nuclear first-use threats prevent conflict from escalating, even if they’re not credible enough to deter initial conflict Chilton 9 – Gen. Kevin Chilton, Commander, U.S. Strategic Command, Spring 2009, "Waging Deterrence in the Twenty-First Century," Strategic Studies Quarterly, Vol. 3, No. 1, p. 40-41 Many argue that the only legitimate role of nuclear weapons is to deter the use of nuclear weapons in a catastrophic attack against us or our allies. This is indeed their most important role. However, the deterrence roles of the US nuclear arsenal go well beyond deterrence of nuclear attack alone. US nuclear forces cast a long shadow over the decision calculations of anyone who would AND to chance."5 These are deterrence dynamics that only nuclear forces provide. As a result, US nuclear forces make an important contribution to deterring both symmetric and asymmetric forms of warfare in the twenty-first century. Our nuclear forces provide a hedge against attacks that could cripple our ability to wage conventional war because they would enable the United States to restore the military status quo ante, trump the adversary’s escalation in a manner that improves the US position in the conflict, or promptly terminate the conflict.
Conventional deterrence is a handicap in crises against nuclear-armed adversaries if we’re perceived as not willing to escalate to nuclear war Kroenig 9 – Matthew Kroenig, Assistant Professor of Government at Georgetown University, August 27, 2009, "Nuclear Superiority or the Balance of Resolve? Explaining Nuclear Crisis Outcomes," online: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1452250 I also include a number of control variables. We may expect states that enjoy AND and Stuckey 1972) and extracted using EUGene (Bennett and Stam 2000).
Nuclear Threats Credible—-Crises/Conflicts with Nuclear Adversaries
Nuclear threats are highly credible during crises and conflicts with nuclear-armed adversaries—-that’s the only time credibility matters Lieber 26 Press 9 - Keir A. Lieber, Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Notre Dame, and Daryl G. Press, Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Pennsylvania, November-December 2009, "The Nukes We Need: Preserving the American Deterrent," Foreign Affairs, p. 39-41 The primary purpose of U.S. nuclear forces is to deter nuclear attacks AND plausible circumstances: during a conventional war against a nuclear-armed adversary. In the coming decades, the United States may find itself facing nuclear-armed AND two members of the nuclear club, and one intent on joining it. The central problem for U.S. deterrence in the future is that even AND pressuring the United States to settle the conflict short of a decisive victory. Such escalatory strategies are rational. Losing a conventional war to the United States would AND if they use every weapon at their disposal to stave off total defeat. Coercive nuclear escalation may sound like a far-fetched strategy, but it was AND expect that North Korean leaders would keep their nuclear weapons on the sidelines. Layered on top of these challenges are two additional ones. First, U. AND not reflected in the military operations, which nearly achieved a regime change. In future confrontations with nuclear-armed adversaries, the United States will undoubtedly want to prevent nuclear escalation. But the leaders of U.S. adversaries will face life-and-death incentives to use their nuclear arsenals to force a cease-fire and remain in power.
Nuclear weapons only seem to lack credibility from our perspective—-adversaries are forced to moderate their aims in the face of U.S. nuclear threats—-that’s not true of conventional deterrence Payne 9 – Keith B. Payne, President of The National Institute for Public Policy, Spring 2009, "On Nuclear Deterrence and Assurance," Strategic Studies Quarterly, p. 50-51 Of course, the explanations of apparent Iraqi restraint offered by Tariq Aziz, Wafic AND nuclear threats are incredible and thus useless for contemporary regional deterrence purposes.29 Prominent American commentators can assert that nuclear weapons are incredible and thus useless in such AND no need to employ nuclear weapons and had no intention of doing so. There is little doubt that US nuclear threats have contributed to the deterrence of additional AND past, the working of deterrence on such occasions may be extremely important.
Case
No transition wars
Parent 11—assistant for of pol sci, U Miami. PhD in pol sci, Columbia—and—Paul MacDonald—assistant prof of pol sci, Williams (Joseph, Graceful Decline?;The Surprising Success of Great Power Retrenchment, Intl. Security, Spring 1, p. 7)
Some observers might dispute our conclusions, arguing that hegemonic transitions are more conflict prone AND readily identify and eliminate extraneous burdens without exposing vulnerabilities or exciting domestic populations. We believe the empirical record supports these conclusions. In particular, periods of hegemonic AND ability to sustain its economic performance or engage in foreign policy adventurism. 94
Zero impact—-prefer conclusiveness
Maher 11—-adjunct prof of pol sci, Brown. PhD expected in 2011 in pol sci, Brown (Richard, The Paradox of American Unipolarity: Why the United States May Be Better Off in a Post-Unipolar World, Orbis 55;1)
At the same time, preeminence creates burdens and facilitates imprudent behavior. Indeed, AND have with Washington and to reinforce their security relationships with the United States.
No Middle East impact
Cook 7—CFR senior fellow for Mid East Studies. BA in international studies from Vassar College, an MA in international relations from the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, and both an MA and PhD in political science from the University of Pennsylvania(Steven, Ray Takeyh, CFR fellow, and Suzanne Maloney, Brookings fellow, 6 /28, Why the Iraq war won’t engulf the Mideast, http://www.iht.com/bin/print.php?id=6383265, AG) Underlying this anxiety was a scenario in which Iraq’s sectarian and ethnic violence spills over AND its civil strife and prevent local conflicts from enveloping the entire Middle East.
Professors agree—-NK has no capability no matter how crazy they are
Neuman ’13 SCOTT NEUMAN, NPR "How Credible Are North Korea’s Threats?," March 9 www.npr.org/2013/03/09/173839660/how-credible-are-north-koreas-threats Simply possessing a static nuclear device, however, is not the same as having one that can be launched atop a missile, Lind says. North Korea’s claims aside, the physical size of the device used in the most recent test seem likely to be "way too big" to launch on a missile or even deliver, in any practical sense, by airplane, she says. George Lopez, a political science professor at the University of Notre Dame, is more emphatic. Even if the North had a small, deliverable weapon, he says, "I think most of the bets are that they do not have the capability to reliably reach a target." "They don’t seem to have the booster they need to get a workable weapon to land where they want it to," Lopez says. "Could they build something, load it on an airplane and drop it over South Korea? Maybe, but it would ~be~ pretty difficult, probably impossible." *First 2 paragraphs cite Jennifer Linn, associate professor of government @ Dartmouth
No threat to the US model
Posen 9 - deputy director and senior fellow of the Peterson Institute for International Economics (Adam, "Economic leadership beyond the crisis," http://clients.squareeye.com/uploads/foresight/documents/PN20USA_FINAL_LR_1.pdf) Is there an alternative economic model? The preceding description would seem to confirm the AND is all that is required, rather than desperately defending economic globalisation itself.
No chance of rapid proliferation – leaders don’t believe nuclear weapons are in their interest
Jacques Hymans 6, Assistant Professor of International Relations at USC and former fellow at the Harvard Institution for Strategic Studies, "The Psychology of Nuclear Proliferation: Identity, Emotions, and Foreign Policy," amazon For this is not the first time we have faced widespread projections of a coming AND specialists to persist in foretelling "life in a nuclear-armed crowd"
a quarter- century after Albert Wohlstetter coined the phrase.° Indeed, William AND a dramatic success because few state leaders have desired the things it prohibits.
9/14/13
Politics - Shutdown DA 1NC
Tournament: UMKC | Round: 2 | Opponent: ASU HR | Judge: Congress will successfully avert a government shutdown now, but time is super tight Fox News, 9-11-2013, “House pulls spending bill amid backlash as government shutdown looms,” http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/11/house-leaders-pull-temporary-spending-bill-after-conservative-backlash/ House Republican leaders pulled their plan Wednesday to temporarily fund the federal government after rank AND Security Agency can collect data on Americans in its efforts to thwart terrorism. The plan would trade off with Congress’s ability to avert the shutdown - GOP has momentum and will, but they need literally every hour to get it done Frank James, 9-13-2013, “Congress Searches For A Shutdown-Free Future,” NPR, http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/09/13/221809062/congress-searches-for-a-shutdown-free-future The only thing found … weand#39;ll let you know.and#34; Shutdown wrecks the economy Yi Wu, 8-27-2013, “Government Shutdown 2013: Still a Terrible Idea,” PolicyMic, http://www.policymic.com/articles/60837/government-shutdown-2013-still-a-terrible-idea Around a third of House Republicans, many Tea Party-backed, sent a AND to demand cancellation of the entire health care reform enacted a year before. Global nuclear war Harris and Burrows 9 Mathew, PhD European History @ Cambridge, counselor of the U.S. 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 Of course, the report encompasses more than economics and indeed believes the future is AND within and between states in a more dog-eat-dog world.
9/14/13
Waiver CP 1NC
Tournament: UMKC | Round: 2 | Opponent: ASU HR | Judge: The Executive branch should take all necessary measures to expedite the Guantanamo Bay Periodic Review Boardand#39;s formation and review of indefinitely detained prisonersand#39; cases. The Executive Branch should issue national security waivers for the transfer or repatriation of the eighty-six Guantanamo prisoners currently cleared for release and any prisoners who successfully challenge their status as indefinite detainees. The Executive should direct the Attorney General to inform the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals that the Department of Justice no longer considers the cleared detainees to be detainable. Any necessary funds that the Executive cannot obtain from the Defense Department should be taken from the Departments of Justice or Homeland Security.
off Off Congress will ultimately compromise to avert shutdown – GOP divisions make it more likely, not less Tom Cohen, 9-20-2013, “Congress: will it be a government shutdown or budget compromise?” CNN, http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/19/politics/congress-shutdown-scenarios/index.html?utm_source=feedburnerandutm_medium=feedandutm_campaign=Feed3A+rss2Fcnn_allpolitics+(RSS3A+Politics) There hasn't been a government shutdown in more than 17 years, since the 28 AND changes to provide Boehner and House Republicans with political cover to back it. The plan would trade off with Congress’s ability to avert the shutdown - GOP has momentum and will, but they need literally every hour to get it done Frank James, 9-13-2013, “Congress Searches For A Shutdown-Free Future,” NPR, http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/09/13/221809062/congress-searches-for-a-shutdown-free-future The only thing found Thursday seemed to be more time for negotiations and vote- AND people. When we have something to report, we'll let you know." Shutdown wrecks the economy Yi Wu, 8-27-2013, “Government Shutdown 2013: Still a Terrible Idea,” PolicyMic, http://www.policymic.com/articles/60837/government-shutdown-2013-still-a-terrible-idea Around a third of House Republicans, many Tea Party-backed, sent a AND to demand cancellation of the entire health care reform enacted a year before. Global nuclear war Harris and Burrows 9 Mathew, PhD European History @ Cambridge, counselor of the U.S. 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 Of course, the report encompasses more than economics and indeed believes the future is AND within and between states in a more dog-eat-dog world. Off Security is a psychological construct—the aff’s scenarios for conflict are products of paranoia that project our violent impulses onto the other Mack 91 – Doctor of Psychiatry and a professor at Harvard University (John, “The Enemy System” http://www.johnemackinstitute.org/eJournal/article.asp?id=23 *Gender modified)
The threat of nuclear annihilation has stimulated us to try to understand what it is AND , taking their cues from the leadership, contribute powerfully to the process.
Our response is to interrogate the epistemological failures of the 1ac---this is a prereq to successful policy Ahmed 12 Dr. Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed is Executive Director of the Institute for Policy Research and Development (IPRD), an independent think tank focused on the study of violent conflict, he has taught at the Department of International Relations, University of Sussex "The international relations of crisis and the crisis of international relations: from the securitisation of scarcity to the militarisation of society" Global Change, Peace and Security Volume 23, Issue 3, 2011 Taylor Francis
While recommendations to shift our frame of orientation away from conventional state-centrism toward AND of state security planning in the context of counter-terrorism operations abroad. The intensifying problematisation and externalisation of Muslim-majority regions and populations by Western security AND the efficacy of the prevailing geopolitical and economic order is ideologically beyond question. As much as this analysis highlights a direct link between global systemic crises, social polarisation and state militarisation, it fundamentally undermines the idea of a symbiotic link between natural resources and conflict per se. Neither 'resource shortages' nor 'resource abundance' (in ecological, energy, food and monetary terms) necessitate conflict by themselves. There are two key operative factors that determine whether either condition could lead to conflict AND to externalisation of those groups, and the legitimisation of violence towards them. Ultimately, this systems approach to global crises strongly suggests that conventional policy 'reform' is AND of the post-carbon era through social, political and economic transformation. Yet conventional theoretical and policy approaches fail to (1) fully engage with the AND , effective, and joined-up policy-making on these issues. Off Interpretation---the plan should specify the newly-restricted legal threshold and accountability mechanism it establishes for targeted killings Legal specificity’s a pre-requisite to productive debates over targeted killing Gregory McNeal 13, Associate Professor of Law, Pepperdine University, 3/5/13, “Targeted Killing and Accountability,” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1819583 Discussing and analyzing the notion of accountability and the practice of targeted killings raises problems AND “unaccountable” while failing to specify what they mean by accountability.12 The literature is far from clear. Commentators might be focusing on instrumental concerns, AND in an analysis of targeted killings without specifying what one means by accountability. Overcoming the problem of theory specification is a necessary precondition for any analysis that claims AND ease of replicability, and grounding in the social science and governance literature.
Off Targeted killings are strikes carried about against pre-meditated, individually designated targets---signature strikes are distinct Kenneth Anderson 11, Professor at Washington College of Law, American University, Hoover Institution visiting fellow, Non-Resident Visiting Fellow at Brookings, “Distinguishing High Value Targeted Killing and ‘Signature’ Attacks on Taliban Fighters,” August 29 2011, http://www.volokh.com/2011/08/29/distinguishing-high-value-targeted-killing-and-signature-attacks-on-taliban-fighters/ From the US standpoint, it is partly that it does not depend as much 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 Kenneth Anderson 11, Professor at Washington College of Law, American University, Hoover Institution visiting fellow, Non-Resident Visiting Fellow at Brookings, “Efficiency in Bello and ad Bellum: Targeted Killing Through Drone Warfare,” Sept 23 2011, 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. Off TEXT: The United States Executive branch should restrict the use of signature strikes by the President of the United States in Yemen. Counterplan solves cred and the case Adrian Vermeule 7, Harvard law prof - AND - Eric Posner - U Chicago law, The Credible Executive, 74 U. Chi. L. Rev. 865 *We do not endorse gendered language The Madisonian system of oversight has not totally failed. Some- times legislators overcome AND , we may speak of formal and informal means of self-binding:
Executive self-restraint is the only way to solve the case Gillian Metzger 9, prof, Columbia Law, THE INTERDEPENDENT RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL SEPARATION OF POWERS 59 Emory L.J. 423 The case in favor of internal mechanisms is in part comparative. Real limitations exist AND perceived as contributing to more fully informed and expertise-based decisionmaking. n79
Off Signature strikes are key to thin the ranks of Al-Qaeda---they make it impossible for militants to keep pace with their rates of losses Philip Mudd 13, was a senior official at the CIA and the FBI, now director of global risk at SouthernSun Asset Management, 5/24/13, “Fear Factor,” http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/05/24/fear_factor_signature_strikes The impact of armed drones during the decade-plus of this intense global counterterrorism AND of Pakistan. The threat was fading steadily. But not fast enough. So-called signature strikes -- in which target selection is based not on identification AND the revolutionary leader, but it was the troops who executed his vision. Signature strikes have pulled out these lower-level threads of al Qaeda's apparatus -- AND terror organizations, destroying their operational capability faster than the groups can recover.
Targeting low-level militants is key to all aspects of counter-terror---in-depth network analysis means the people we target don’t seem important to observers, but they’re actually vital to the effectiveness of terror groups Gregory McNeal 13, Associate Professor of Law, Pepperdine University, 3/5/13, “Targeted Killing and Accountability,” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1819583 This becomes obvious when one considers that national security bureaucrats will look beyond criticality and vulnerability, and also engage in network-based analysis. Network-based analysis looks at terrorist groups as nodes connected by links, and assesses how components of that terrorist network operate together and independently of one another.143 Contrary to popular critiques of the targeting process that liken it to a “haphazardly prosecuted assassination program,” in reality modern targeting involves applying pressure to their functionality.144 To effectively pursue a network-based approach, bureaucrats rely in part on what AND vulnerable, thus negating the enemy’s asymmetric advantage of denying a target.”151 Viewing targeting in this way demonstrates how seemingly low-level individuals such as couriers AND function, disrupting those lines of communication can significantly impact those networks.157 Nuclear terrorism is feasible---high risk of theft and attacks escalate 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 a common understanding of these threats and develop a strategy to combat them.
Nuke terror causes extinction---equivalent to full-scale nuclear war Owen B. Toon 7, chair of the Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences at CU-Boulder, et al., April 19, 2007, “Atmospheric effects and societal consequences of regional scale nuclear conflicts and acts of individual nuclear terrorism,” online: http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/pdf/acp-7-1973-2007.pdf To an increasing extent, people are congregating in the world’s great urban centers, AND should be carried out as well for the present scenarios and physical outcomes. Case Yemen Civilian Casualties---1NC Casualties are way down and drones are far more precise than alternatives---our ev uses the best data Michael Cohen 13, Fellow at the Century Foundation, 5/23/13, “Give President Obama a chance: there is a role for drones,” The Guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/may/23/obama-drone-speech-use-justified Drone critics have a much different take. They are passionate in their conviction that AND , drone strikes are a far more humane method of war-fighting. AT: Yemen Blowback No public backlash in Yemen---just as many people love them as hate them Max Boot 13, the Jeane J. Kirkpatrick Senior Fellow in National Security Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, 2/6/13, “Obama Drone Memo is a Careful, Responsible Document,” http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2013/02/06/obama-drone-memo-is-a-careful-responsible-document/ Drone strikes are by no means risk free, the biggest risk being that by AND been conducted with less collateral damage and more precision than in the past. It is hard to assess what impact they have had on public opinion in countries AND died in January of wounds received in a drone strike late last year.” No tangible impact to local blowback---and even if drones are unpopular, local populations are more afraid of alternatives like Pakistani military strikes Kenneth Anderson 13, Professor of International Law at American University, June 2013, “The Case for Drones,” Commentary, Vol. 135, No. 6 THE MOST PROMINENT CRITIQUE TODAY, HOWEVER, is that drone warfare is counterproductive because it produces "blowback." What is blowback? Blowback comprises the supposed bad consequences of drones that swamp the benefits, if any AND perception outweighs whatever tactical value, if any, drone strikes might have. Blowback can never be dismissed, because it might be true in some cases. AND distinct settings: "narrow" counterinsurgency and "broad" global counterterrorism. The narrow blowback hypothesis concerns those in communities directly affected by global counterterrorism drone strikes AND a hearts-and-minds campaign to win over the local population? Direct and immediate concerns about villagers' perceptions during the counterinsurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan led AND its counterterrorism policy rest upon the chimera of a stable, democratic Afghanistan). It is sharply contested, to say the least, whether and to what extent AND concerns about whether villages might be sufficiently provoked against American infantry are subsiding. Drones Good for Yemen Aggressive targeted killing policy’s key to stability in Yemen Alan W. Dowd 13, writes on national defense, foreign policy, and international security in multiple publications including Parameters, Policy Review, The Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations, World Politics Review, American Outlook, The Baltimore Sun, The Washington Times, The National Post, The Wall Street Journal Europe, The Jerusalem Post, and The Financial Times Deutschland, Winter-Spring 2013, “Drone Wars: Risks and Warnings,” Parameters, Vol. 42.4/43.1 At the beginning of President Hadi’s May offensive he, therefore, had a fractured AND , but they could also melt away in the face of military setbacks. Adding to his problems, President Hadi had only recently taken office after a long AND Yemeni officers indicated that they respected the fighting ability of their enemies.16 Shortly before the ground offensive, drones were widely reported in the US and international AND government, although it no longer ruled any urban centers in the south. SSs---Alternatives Worse Alternatives to signature strikes are worse for all their advantages Dan Trombly 13, National Security/International Affairs Analyst, Caerus Analytics, LLC, 5/29/13, “I Might Need You To Kill: Signatures, Patterns, and Alternatives,” http://www.cnas.org/blogs/abumuqawama/2013/05/i-might-need-you-kill-signatures-patterns-and-alternatives.html Of course, it is important to note these violent dynamics are hardly unique to signature strikes or aerial assassinations. Though improper targeting and munitions selection can rapidly magnify the danger of collateral damage in those operations, it is important to remember the enormous potential costs of seeking to kill or capture militants with any instruments that are unable to ensure security for civilians. Night raids, such as the infamous botched Gardez raid, can easily falter on AND on the Pakistani border, killing as many as two dozen Pakistani soldiers. Even then, a regime of raiding into territories where we are not willing to AND to generate as much actionable intelligence as possible through the raiding process itself. The face of a robust capture program is not the FBI effort which retrieved the AND suspects and highly compliant host government security and intelligence seems less than forthcoming. The face of a capture program in Pakistan’s border regions with Afghanistan, Yemen, AND had even their own President thinking they were running a massive assassination machine. Of course, programs like the CIA-Vietnamese Provincial Reconnaissance Units, for all AND wealthy liberal 3rd-party interventions might try to steer their clients towards.
AT: Indo-Pak No Indo-Pak war Mutti 9— Master’s degree in International Studies with a focus on South Asia, U Washington. BA in History, Knox College. over a decade of expertise covering on South Asia geopolitics, Contributing Editor to Demockracy journal (James, 1/5, Mumbai Misperceptions: War is Not Imminent, http://demockracy.com/four-reasons-why-the-mumbai-attacks-wont-result-in-a-nuclear-war/) Fearful of imminent war, the media has indulged in frantic hand wringing about Indian AND and is using its regional influence to bring more diplomatic pressure on Pakistan. AT: Africa War No Africa war or they can’t solve Straus 12—professor of politics at the University of Wisconsin (Scott, WARS DO END! CHANGING PATTERNS OF POLITICAL VIOLENCE IN SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA, afraf.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2012/03/01/afraf.ads015.full) The principal finding is that in the twenty-first century both the volume and AND face or in a position to seize and hold large swaths of territory. Allied Backlash EU Relations They don’t solve allied backlash---we still do drone strikes elsewhere No EU relations impact Mark Leonard 12, co-founder and director of the European Council on Foreign Relations, the first pan-European think tank, 7/24/12, “The End of the Affair,” http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/07/24/the_end_of_the_affair?page=full But Obama's stellar personal ratings in Europe hide the fact that the Western alliance has AND for both sides to wake up and realize just what is at stake. AT: Environment Impact No impact to the environment and no solvency Holly Doremus 2k Professor of Law at UC Davis, "The Rhetoric and Reality of Nature Protection: Toward a New Discourse," Winter 2000 Washington and Lee Law Review 57 Wash and Lee L. Rev. 11, lexis Reluctant to concede such losses, tellers of the ecological horror story highlight how close AND material benefits of destructive decisions frequently will exceed their identifiable material costs. n221 AT: Heg Solves War Impact’s empirically denied Preble 10 – Former prof, history, Temple U. PhD, history, Temple (Christopher, U.S. Military Power: Preeminence for What Purpose?, 3 August, http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/u-s-military-power-preeminence-for-what-purpose/) Goure and the Hadley-Perry commissioners who produced the alternate QDR argue that the AND States while the schlubs in fly-over country pick up the tab. Block
T
2NC Overview
They’re totally different procedures and the distinction is important David Hastings Dunn 13, 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 and 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.
The aff kills nuanced debates Kenneth Anderson 11, Professor at Washington College of Law, American University, Hoover Institution visiting fellow, Non-Resident Visiting Fellow at Brookings, “Efficiency in Bello and ad Bellum: Targeted Killing Through Drone Warfare,” Sept 23 2011, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1812124 Speaking to the broad future of the technology, however, and given the direction AND that one-size-fits-all legal analysis is not sufficient.
The government also draws a distinction between the two Micah Zenko 12, the Douglas Dillon Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, 7/16/12, “Targeted Killings and Signature Strikes,” http://blogs.cfr.org/zenko/2012/07/16/targeted-killings-and-signature-strikes/ Although signature strikes have been known as a U.S. counterterrorism tactic for over four years, no administration official has acknowledged or defended them on-the-record. Instead, officials emphasize that targeted killings with drones (the official term is “targeted strikes”) are only carried out against specific individuals, which are usually lumped with terms like “senior” and “al-Qaeda.” Harold Koh: “The United States has the authority under international law, and the responsibility to its citizens, to use force, including lethal force, to defend itself, including by targeting persons such as high-level al-Qaeda leaders who are planning attacks.” John Brennan: “This Administration’s counterterrorism efforts outside of Afghanistan and Iraq are focused on those individuals who are a threat to the United States.” Jeh Johnson: “In an armed conflict, lethal force against known, individual members of the enemy is a long-standing and long-legal practice.” Eric Holder: “Target specific senior operational leaders of al Qaeda and associated forces.” In April, Brennan was asked, “If you could address the issue of AND get into the specifics of the process by which these decisions are made.”
Historical analysis proves Afsheen John Radsan 12, Professor, William Mitchell College of Law, Assistant General Counsel at the Central Intelligence Agency from 2002 to 2004; and Richard Murphy, the ATandT Professor of Law, Texas Tech University School of Law, 2012, “The Evolution of Law and Policy for CIA Targeted Killing,” Journal of National Security Law and Policy, Vol. 5, p. 439-463 Some of the concerns about a CIA drone campaign relate to the personalized nature of AND , videos, voice samples, and biographical information in an intelligence file.
Best consensus definition of targeted killings excludes signature strikes---identification of individual targets is the key defining factor throughout the lit Philip Alston 11, the John Norton Pomeroy Professor of Law, New York University School of Law, was UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions from 2004 until 2010, 2011, “ARTICLE: The CIA and Targeted Killings Beyond Borders,” Harvard National Security Journal, 2 Harv. Nat'l Sec. J. 283 As with many terms that have entered the popular consciousness as though they had a AND sought to be covered by the use of the term-targeted killing. The term was brought into common usage after 2000 to describe Israel's self-declared AND , but instead uses the customary law applicable to international armed conflicts. n41 At the other end of the definitional spectrum is a five-part definition proposed AND definition, Solis proposes one which is unsuitable outside of international humanitarian law. A more flexible approach is needed in order to reflect the fact that "targeted AND , firing from UAVs, the use of car bombs, and poison. There are thus three central requirements for a workable definition. The first is that AND broad range of situations in relation to which it has regularly been applied. The common element in each of the very different contexts noted earlier is that lethal AND of the operation, from its inception, should not be to kill. Although in most circumstances targeted killings violate the right to life, in the exceptional AND specific individual who is not in the physical custody of the perpetrator. n46
Most precise interpretations prove that TKs are premeditated against a specific individual---their interps are normative which kills predictability William Abresch 9, Director, Project on Extrajudicial Executions, Center for Human Rights and Global Justice, New York University School of Law, “Targeted Killing in International Law,” European Journal of International Law, 20 (2): 449-453 Studies of targeted killing are often situated within the politically fraught debate over Hellfire missile AND the implications of the lex lata for the practices covered by his definition. “de lege ferenda” means “what the law should be,” while “lex lata” means “what the law really is”
TKs=/=Drones
They conflate overall drone strategy and tareted killings Kenneth Anderson 13, Professor of International Law at American University, June 2013, “The Case for Drones,” Commentary, Vol. 135, No. 6 This feature of Predators and Reapers -- the two forms of drones really at issue AND as seen most dramatically in the Bin Laden raid by the Navy SEALs. Similarly, drones are useful for more than targeted killing. They have broad, AND by the work to keep a high-speed jet in the air.
AT: Contextual Definitions Contextual definitions bad – intent to define outweighs Eric Kupferbreg 87, University of Kentucky, Senior Assistant Dean, Academic and Faculty Affairs at Northeastern University, College of Professional Studies Associate Director, Trust Initiative at Harvard School of Public Health 1987 “Limits - The Essence of Topicality” http://groups.wfu.edu/debate/MiscSites/DRGArticles/Kupferberg1987LatAmer.htm Often, field contextual definitions are too broad or too narrow for debate purposes. AND is a unique context, then additional considerations enter into our definitional analysis. AT: Reasonability It’s arbitrary and undermines research Evan Resnick 1, assistant professor of political science – Yeshiva University, “Defining Engagement,” Journal of International Affairs, Vol. 54, Iss. 2 In matters of national security, establishing a clear definition of terms is a precondition AND "engagement," they undermine the ability to build an effective foreign policy.
DA
Drone Use/Doctrine Expanding Obama will expand the use of drones and relax targeting rules in the future---particularly the imminence standard Alexei Offill-Klein 13, J.D. University of California, Davis, School of Law, Spring 2013, “Note: Targeted Killings: Al-Aulaqi v. Obama and the Misuse of the Political Question Doctrine,” U.C. Davis Journal of International Law and Policy, 19 U.C. Davis J. Int'l L. and Pol'y 207 There are signs the Obama administration intends to expand the drone program even further, AND drone war to those alleged terrorists who would not previously have been targeted.
Link UQ Status quo target vetting is carefully calibrated to avoid every aff impact in balance with CT--- there’s only a risk that restrictions destroy it Gregory McNeal 13, Associate Professor of Law, Pepperdine University, 3/5/13, “Targeted Killing and Accountability,” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1819583 Target vetting is the process by which the government integrates the opinions of subject matter AND , as targets are progressively refined within particular agencies and at interagency meetings. A validation step follows the vetting step. It is intended to ensure that all AND are not considered in current operations). Some of the questions asked are: • Is attacking the target lawful? What are the law of war and rules of engagement considerations? • Does the target contribute to the adversary's capability and will to wage war? • Is the target (still) operational? Is it (still) a viable element of a target system? Where is the target located? • Will striking the target arouse political or cultural “sensitivities”? • How will striking the target affect public opinion? (Enemy, friendly, and neutral)? • What is the relative potential for collateral damage or collateral effects, to include casualties? • What psychological impact will operations against the target have on the adversary, friendly forces, or multinational partners? • What would be the impact of not conducting operations against the target?187 As the preceding criteria highlight, many of the concerns that critics say should be AND .g. creating more terrorists as a result of the killing).191
Low-Level Militants Key Prefer McNeil – to a casual observer, sig strikes don’t seem important, but he’s a total bad ass and knows that they are --- their ev is all speculation Gregory McNeal 13, Associate Professor of Law, Pepperdine University, 3/5/13, “Targeted Killing and Accountability,” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1819583 To overcome the lack of empirical evidence which plagues theoretical discourse regarding targeted killings, AND accurately critique on accountability grounds a process for which no empirical account exists.
Targeting low-level operatives is key to the entire war on terror---just because their authors don’t understand why, that doesn’t mean they’re right Gregory McNeal 13, Associate Professor of Law, Pepperdine University, 3/5/13, “Targeted Killing and Accountability,” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1819583 While al Qaeda has relied heavily on social hierarchy and key individuals to inspire action AND the example of the U.S. experience in Iraq is instructive: Al-Qaeda in Iraq task organized itself across a range of operational and support AND and imposed additional recruitment and training costs that further diminished operational capacity.162 As these examples demonstrate, sometimes targeting even low-level operatives can make a AND have not been lost on the Obama administration, as Daniel Klaidman noted: President Obama understood that in the shadow wars, far from conventional battlefields AND the difference between who would be killed and who would be spared.165 Accountability for these “finely grained” legal distinctions is bound up in bureaucratic analysis AND be a key factor in any assessment of whether targeted killings are accountable.
AT: Recruiting Targeted killings destroy operational effectiveness of terror groups---they can’t recruit new operatives fast enough to keep pace with losses Alex Young 13, Associate Staff, Harvard International Review, 2/25/13, “A Defense of Drones,” Harvard International Review, http://hir.harvard.edu/a-defense-of-drones Moreover, drone strikes have disrupted al Qaeda’s system for training new recruits. The AND of death from the skies has forced extremist organizations to become more scattered. More importantly, though, drone strikes do not only kill top leaders; they AND
the idea that these strikes only kill senior officials is a myth.
AT: Intel Losses from Not Capturing Shifting to capture missions is impossible---every alternative to drones is worse for CT Daniel Byman 13, Professor in the Security Studies Program at the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University and a Senior Fellow at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution, July/August 2013, “Why Drones Work,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 92, No. 4 Critics of drone strikes often fail to take into account the fact that the alternatives AND . casualties, and possibly the deaths of the suspects and innocent civilians.
No Alternatives---2NC Expansive targeted killing policy’s vital to counterterror---no viable replacement Kenneth Anderson 10, Professor of International Law at American University, 3/8/10, “Predators Over Pakistan,” The Weekly Standard, http://www.weeklystandard.com/print/articles/predators-over-pakistan Targeting terrorists and militants with Predator drone strikes is one campaign promise President Obama has AND ungoverned places in the world, we have few good options besides UAVs.
Drones permit the United States to go directly after terrorists, rather than having to AND engage in counterterrorism, drones will be a critical part of our offense.
Generic escalation Future terror attacks cause XTC- increasing tech and lack of effective US response Nathan Myhrvold '13, Phd in theoretical and mathematical physics from Princeton, and founded Intellectual Ventures after retiring as chief strategist and chief technology officer of Microsoft Corporation , July 2013, "Stratgic Terrorism: A Call to Action," The Lawfare Research Paper Series No.2, http://www.lawfareblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Strategic-Terrorism-Myhrvold-7-3-2013.pdf Technology contains no inherent moral directive—it empowers people, whatever their intent, AND on a scale that will make 9/11 look trivial by comparison.
case Civilian Casualties---1NR Tech advances and tighter rules of engagement are substantially reducing civilian casualties---alternatives to drones are worse Rosa Brooks 13, Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center and Bernard L. Schwartz Senior Fellow, New America Foundation, 4/23/13, “The Constitutional and Counterterrorism Implications of Targeted Killing,” http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/pdf/04-23-13BrooksTestimony.pdf *We do not endorse gendered language First, critics often assert that US drone strikes are morally wrong because the kill AND and combatants than close air support or other tactics that receive less attention.
CCs---Drones Better than Alternatives Drones are vastly better for civilians than alternatives Romesh Ratnesar 13, Deputy Editor of Bloomberg-Businessweek, 5/23/13, “Five Reasons Why Drones Are Here to Stay,” http://www.businessweek.com/printer/articles/119384-five-reasons-why-drones-are-here-to-stay 2. They Work. As Obama said at NDU, “dozens of highly AND Pakistan last year, fewer than 2 percent of those killed were civilians. AT: Yemen Blowback No data supports the blowback or radicalization thesis Michael Aaronson 13, Professorial Research Fellow and Executive Director of cii – the Centre for International Intervention – at the University of Surrey, and Adrian Johnson, Director of Publications at RUSI, the book reviews editor for the RUSI Journal, and chair of the RUSI Editorial Board, “Conclusion,” in Hitting the Target?: How New Capabilities are Shaping International Intervention, ed. Aaronson and Johnson, http://www.rusi.org/downloads/assets/Hitting_the_Target.pdf Unintended detrimental consequences of intervention – ‘blowback’– are by no means a new AND words, the covert drone programme is radical Islamism’s latest recruiting sergeant.17 This is contested, as is inevitable when relying on anecdotal evidence. Some data AND be contradictory given what is known from WikiLeaks documents about private approval.20 A lack of data may mean that talk of blowback is misguided, or it AND assessment, outlined in this report, to the strategic conduct of intervention.
OR blowback’s inevitable---local governments will always deflect blame Amitai Etzioni 12, senior advisor to the Carter White House; taught at Columbia University, Harvard and The University of California at Berkeley; and is a university professor and professor of international relations at The George Washington University, 4/2/12, “In Defense of Drones,” http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/defense-drones-6715 What about collateral damage? Rohde notes that “across Pakistan, there's a belief AND hence could be used, albeit on a less “extraordinary” scale. If wishes were horses, beggars would ride. The notion that if we ask these governments to explain to their people what’s up—including that while they are providing us with targeting information they denounce the drones—they would do so (or that we could make them speak truth to their people) is a lovely sociological fantasy. AT: Indo-Pak No Indo-Pak war Mutti evidence is fantastic – new coop and economic ties prevent miscalc War won’t go nuclear Enders 2 (Jan 30, David, Michigan Daily, “Experts say nuclear war still unlikely,” http://www.michigandaily.com/content/experts-say-nuclear-war-still-unlikely)
Ashutosh Varshney – Professor of Political Science and South Asia expert at the University of Michigan
Paul Huth – Professor of International Conflict and Security Affairs at the University of Maryland
Kenneth Lieberthal – Professor of Political Science at the University of Michigan. Former special assistant to President Clinton at the National Security Council University political science Prof. Ashutosh Varshney becomes animated when asked about the likelihood of AND command control system has strengthened. The trigger is in very safe hands." 1NC Heg---War Defense Preble
No impact to heg Maher 11---adjunct prof of pol sci, Brown. PhD expected in 2011 in pol sci, Brown (Richard, The Paradox of American Unipolarity: Why the United States May Be Better Off in a Post-Unipolar World, Orbis 55;1)
At the same time, preeminence creates burdens and facilitates imprudent behavior. Indeed, AND have with Washington and to reinforce their security relationships with the United States. Empirically proven Geller 99---Geller and Singer, 99 – *Chair of the Department of Political Science @ Wayne State University (Daniel S and Joel David, Nations at war: a scientific study of international conflict, p. 116-117) Note – Hopf = Visiting Professor of Peace Research, The Mershon Center, Ohio State University PhD in pol sci from Columbia. Levy = Board of Governors’ Professor of Political Science at Rutgers University and an Affiliate AND Award from the Foreign Policy Analysis Section of the International Studies Association. PhD
Hopf (1991) and Levy (1984) examine the frequency, magnitude and AND international system is unrelated to the number of major powers in the system. Prefer our ev Layne 6---pol sci prof, AandM (Christopher, The Peace of Illusions: American Grand Strategy from 1940 to the Present, Cornell University Press, p. 185-186) The fundamental problem with all these scenarios, both historical and hypothetical, is that AND the fact that the threat posed by potential Eurasian hegemons has often been exaggerated
deliberately and used as a pretext for intervening in conflicts where America's security clearly has AND S. officials have cried wolf way too many times in the past.
off Off Interpretation---the plan should specify the newly-restricted legal threshold and accountability mechanism it establishes for targeted killings Legal specificity’s a pre-requisite to productive debates over targeted killing Gregory McNeal 13, Associate Professor of Law, Pepperdine University, 3/5/13, “Targeted Killing and Accountability,” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1819583 Discussing and analyzing the notion of accountability and the practice of targeted killings raises problems AND “unaccountable” while failing to specify what they mean by accountability.12 The literature is far from clear. Commentators might be focusing on instrumental concerns, AND in an analysis of targeted killings without specifying what one means by accountability. Overcoming the problem of theory specification is a necessary precondition for any analysis that claims AND ease of replicability, and grounding in the social science and governance literature. Vote neg: Ground---precise legal standards for killings determine the scope of the plan---we can’t read disad links or generate competition without textual commitment in the 1AC to defend a particular legal standard. Precision---legal education’s the point of forced topic rotation---they undermine it.
Off Security is a psychological construct—the aff’s scenarios for conflict are products of paranoia that project our violent impulses onto the other Mack 91 – Doctor of Psychiatry and a professor at Harvard University (John, “The Enemy System” http://www.johnemackinstitute.org/eJournal/article.asp?id=23 *Gender modified)
The threat of nuclear annihilation has stimulated us to try to understand what it is AND , taking their cues from the leadership, contribute powerfully to the process.
Our response is to interrogate the epistemological failures of the 1ac---this is the only way to solve inevitable extinction Ahmed 12 Dr. Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed is Executive Director of the Institute for Policy Research and Development (IPRD), an independent think tank focused on the study of violent conflict, he has taught at the Department of International Relations, University of Sussex "The international relations of crisis and the crisis of international relations: from the securitisation of scarcity to the militarisation of society" Global Change, Peace and Security Volume 23, Issue 3, 2011 Taylor Francis
While recommendations to shift our frame of orientation away from conventional state-centrism toward AND of state security planning in the context of counter-terrorism operations abroad. The intensifying problematisation and externalisation of Muslim-majority regions and populations by Western security AND the efficacy of the prevailing geopolitical and economic order is ideologically beyond question. As much as this analysis highlights a direct link between global systemic crises, social polarisation and state militarisation, it fundamentally undermines the idea of a symbiotic link between natural resources and conflict per se. Neither 'resource shortages' nor 'resource abundance' (in ecological, energy, food and monetary terms) necessitate conflict by themselves. There are two key operative factors that determine whether either condition could lead to conflict AND to externalisation of those groups, and the legitimisation of violence towards them. Ultimately, this systems approach to global crises strongly suggests that conventional policy 'reform' is AND of the post-carbon era through social, political and economic transformation. Yet conventional theoretical and policy approaches fail to (1) fully engage with the AND , effective, and joined-up policy-making on these issues. Off Congress will ultimately compromise to avert shutdown Tom Cohen, 9-20-2013, “Congress: will it be a government shutdown or budget compromise?” CNN, http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/19/politics/congress-shutdown-scenarios/index.html?utm_source=feedburnerandutm_medium=feedandutm_campaign=Feed3A+rss2Fcnn_allpolitics+(RSS3A+Politics) There hasn't been a government shutdown in more than 17 years, since the 28 AND changes to provide Boehner and House Republicans with political cover to back it. The plan would trade off with Congress’s ability to avert the shutdown---GOP has momentum and will, but they need literally every hour to get it done Frank James, 9-13-2013, “Congress Searches For A Shutdown-Free Future,” NPR, http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/09/13/221809062/congress-searches-for-a-shutdown-free-future The only thing found Thursday seemed to be more time for negotiations and vote- AND people. When we have something to report, we'll let you know." Shutdown wrecks the economy Yi Wu, 8-27-2013, “Government Shutdown 2013: Still a Terrible Idea,” PolicyMic, http://www.policymic.com/articles/60837/government-shutdown-2013-still-a-terrible-idea Around a third of House Republicans, many Tea Party-backed, sent a AND to demand cancellation of the entire health care reform enacted a year before. Global nuclear war Harris and Burrows 9 Mathew, PhD European History @ Cambridge, counselor of the U.S. 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 Of course, the report encompasses more than economics and indeed believes the future is AND within and between states in a more dog-eat-dog world.
Off Targeted killing’s vital to counterterrorism---disrupts leadership and makes carrying out attacks impossible Kenneth Anderson 13, Professor of International Law at American University, June 2013, “The Case for Drones,” Commentary, Vol. 135, No. 6 Targeted killing of high-value terrorist targets, by contrast, is the end result of a long, independent intelligence process. What the drone adds to that intelligence might be considerable, through its surveillance capabilities -- but much of the drone's contribution will be tactical, providing intelligence that assists in the planning and execution of the strike itself, in order to pick the moment when there might be the fewest civilian casualties. Nonetheless, in conjunction with high-quality intelligence, drone warfare offers an unparalleled means to strike directly at terrorist organizations without needing a conventional or counterinsurgency approach to reach terrorist groups in their safe havens. It offers an offensive capability, rather than simply defensive measures, such as homeland security alone. Drone warfare offers a raiding strategy directly against the terrorists and their leadership. If one believes, as many of the critics of drone warfare do, that AND common enemies are examples of the methods that are just of military nature. Drone warfare today is integrated with a much larger strategic counterterrorism target -- one in AND acknowledged in communications, have a significant impact on planning and organizational effectiveness.
Constraining targeted killing’s role in the war on terror causes extinction Louis Rene Beres 11, Professor of Political Science and International Law at Purdue, 2011, “After Osama bin Laden: Assassination, Terrorism, War, and International Law,” Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law, 44 Case W. Res. J. Int'l L. 93 Even after the U.S. assassination of Osama bin Laden, we are AND that it could represent distinctly, even especially, law-enforcing behavior. For this to be the case, a number of particular conditions would need to AND populations than would all of the alternative forms of anticipatory self-defense. Such an argument may appear manipulative and dangerous; permitting states to engage in what AND international law may sometimes still require extraordinary methods of law-enforcement. n71 Let us suppose, for example, that a particular state determines that another state AND assassination could prove reasonable, life-saving, and cost-effective. What of another, more common form of anticipatory self-defense? Might a conventional military strike against the prospective attacker's nuclear, biological or chemical weapons launchers and/or storage sites prove even more reasonable and cost-effective? A persuasive answer inevitably depends upon the particular tactical and strategic circumstances of the moment, and on the precise way in which these particular circumstances are configured. But it is entirely conceivable that conventional military forms of preemption would generate tangibly greater harms than assassination, and possibly with no greater defensive benefit. This suggests that assassination should not be dismissed out of hand in all circumstances as a permissible form of anticipatory self-defense under international law. *115 What of those circumstances in which the threat to particular states would not involve higher AND , it could be followed, in certain circumstances, by unconventional attacks.
Nuclear terrorism is feasible---high risk of theft and attacks escalate 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 a common understanding of these threats and develop a strategy to combat them.
Extinction---equivalent to full-scale nuclear war Owen B. Toon 7, chair of the Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences at CU-Boulder, et al., April 19, 2007, “Atmospheric effects and societal consequences of regional scale nuclear conflicts and acts of individual nuclear terrorism,” online: http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/pdf/acp-7-1973-2007.pdf To an increasing extent, people are congregating in the world’s great urban centers, AND should be carried out as well for the present scenarios and physical outcomes.
Off
The Executive branch should publicly articulate its legal rationale for its targeted killing policy, including the process and safeguards in place for target selection. The CP’s the best middle ground---preserves the vital counter-terror role of targeted killings while resolving all their downsides Daniel Byman 13, Professor in the Security Studies Program at the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University and a Senior Fellow at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution, July/August 2013, “Why Drones Work,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 92, No. 4 Despite President Barack Obama's recent call to reduce the United States' reliance on drones, AND , and with fewer civilian casualties than many alternative methods would have caused. Critics, however, remain skeptical. They claim that drones kill thousands of innocent AND comparatively low-risk way of targeting these areas while minimizing collateral damage. So drone warfare is here to stay, and it is likely to expand in AND drone warfare risks dragging the United States into conflicts it could otherwise avoid. Drone Wars 1NC No Drone Wars No risk of drone wars Joseph Singh 12, researcher at the Center for a New American Security, 8/13/12, “Betting Against a Drone Arms Race,” http://nation.time.com/2012/08/13/betting-against-a-drone-arms-race/#ixzz2eSvaZnfQ In short, the doomsday drone scenario Ignatieff and Sharkey predict results from an excessive focus on rapidly-evolving military technology. Instead, we must return to what we know about state behavior in an anarchistic international order. Nations will confront the same principles of deterrence, for example, when deciding to launch a targeted killing operation regardless of whether they conduct it through a drone or a covert amphibious assault team. Drones may make waging war more domestically palatable, but they don’t change the very serious risks of retaliation for an attacking state. Any state otherwise deterred from using force abroad will not significantly increase its power projection on account of acquiring drones. What’s more, the very states whose use of drones could threaten U.S. security – countries like China – are not democratic, which means that the possible political ramifications of the low risk of casualties resulting from drone use are irrelevant. For all their military benefits, putting drones into play requires an ability to meet the political and security risks associated with their use. Despite these realities, there remain a host of defensible arguments one could employ to discredit the Obama drone strategy. The legal justification for targeted killings in areas not internationally recognized as war zones is uncertain at best. Further, the short-term gains yielded by targeted killing operations in Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen, while debilitating to Al Qaeda leadership in the short-term, may serve to destroy already tenacious bilateral relations in the region and radicalize local populations. Yet, the past decade’s experience with drones bears no evidence of impending instability in the global strategic landscape. Conflict may not be any less likely in the era of drones, but the nature of 21st Century warfare remains fundamentally unaltered despite their arrival in large numbers. AT: Indo-Pak War No Indo-Pak war Mutti 9— Master’s degree in International Studies with a focus on South Asia, U Washington. BA in History, Knox College. over a decade of expertise covering on South Asia geopolitics, Contributing Editor to Demockracy journal (James, 1/5, Mumbai Misperceptions: War is Not Imminent, http://demockracy.com/four-reasons-why-the-mumbai-attacks-wont-result-in-a-nuclear-war/) Fearful of imminent war, the media has indulged in frantic hand wringing about Indian AND and is using its regional influence to bring more diplomatic pressure on Pakistan. War won’t go nuclear Enders 2 (Jan 30, David, Michigan Daily, “Experts say nuclear war still unlikely,” http://www.michigandaily.com/content/experts-say-nuclear-war-still-unlikely)
Ashutosh Varshney – Professor of Political Science and South Asia expert at the University of Michigan
Paul Huth – Professor of International Conflict and Security Affairs at the University of Maryland
Kenneth Lieberthal – Professor of Political Science at the University of Michigan. Former special assistant to President Clinton at the National Security Council University political science Prof. Ashutosh Varshney becomes animated when asked about the likelihood of AND command control system has strengthened. The trigger is in very safe hands." Not even close to extinction Khan 9 Shamsur Rabb, Newstrack India, Price of an Indo-Pak War, Newstrack India, 1/20, http://www.newstrackindia.com/newsdetails/62680 Let us turn to unprecedented casualty in case of a nuclear conflict: Natural Resources AND of entire population of the Indian sub-continent would have been possible.
1NC Precedent Answers No US precedent---not causal Kenneth Anderson 11, Professor of International Law at American University, 10/9/11, “What Kind of Drones Arms Race Is Coming?,” http://www.volokh.com/2011/10/09/what-kind-of-drones-arms-race-is-coming/#more-51516 New York Times national security correspondent Scott Shane has an opinion piece in today’s Sunday AND long one, starting with China. The predicament is put this way: Eventually, the United States will face a military adversary or terrorist group armed with AND perceived enemies, even American citizens, who are viewed as a threat. “Is this the world we want to live in?” asks Micah Zenko, a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. “Because we’re creating it.” By asserting that “we’re” creating it, this is a claim that there AND that Anwar al-Awlaki was, in objective terms, our enemy?) It sounds like it must be true. But is it? There are a AND what I think the real “arms race” surrounding drones will be. Unmanned aerial vehicles have clearly got a big push from the US military in the AND substantial state that feels like developing them will be able to do so. But the point is that this was happening anyway, and the technology was already AND do their own amateur version, putting some kind of bomb on it. Moving on from the avionics, weaponizing the craft is also not difficult. The AND states competing to come up with weapons technologies that are … more discriminating. Zero chance that U.S. self-restraint causes any other country to give up their plans for drones Max Boot 11, the Jeane J. Kirkpatrick Senior Fellow in National Security Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, 10/9/11, “We Cannot Afford to Stop Drone Strikes,” Commentary Magazine, http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/10/09/drone-arms-race/ The New York Times engages in some scare-mongering today about a drone ams race. Scott Shane notes correctly other nations such as China are building their own drones and in the future U.S. forces could be attacked by them–our forces will not have a monopoly on their use forever. Fair enough, but he goes further, suggesting our current use of drones to target terrorists will backfire: If China, for instance, sends killer drones into Kazakhstan to hunt minority Uighur Muslims it accuses of plotting terrorism, what will the United States say? What if India uses remotely controlled craft to hit terrorism suspects in Kashmir, or Russia sends drones after militants in the Caucasus? American officials who protest will likely find their own example thrown back at them. “The problem is that we’re creating an international norm” — asserting the right to strike preemptively against those we suspect of planning attacks, argues Dennis M. Gormley, a senior research fellow at the University of Pittsburgh and author of Missile Contagion, who has called for tougher export controls on American drone technology. “The copycatting is what I worry about most.” This is a familiar trope of liberal critics who are always claiming we should forego AND and cut down our own arsenal–to encourage similar restraint from Iran. The argument falls apart rather quickly because it is founded on a false premise: AND is unilateral disarmament–which is what the New York Times implicitly suggests. Imagine if we did refrain from drone strikes against al-Qaeda–what would AND . What’s the difference between sending a hit team and sending a drone? While a decision on our part to stop drone strikes would be unlikely to alter AND the vain hope it will encourage disarmament on the part of dictatorial states. Legitimacy Drone Court Doesn’t Solve A drone court wouldn’t solve U.S. credibility Jeh Johnson 13, former Pentagon General Counsel, 3/18/13, “Keynote address at the Center on National Security at Fordham Law School: A “Drone Court”: Some Pros and Cons,” http://www.lawfareblog.com/2013/03/jeh-johnson-speech-on-a-drone-court-some-pros-and-cons/ The problem is that the American public is suspicious of executive power shrouded in secrecy. In the absence of an official picture of what our government is doing, and AND shall die, pursuant to a process and by standards no one understands. Our government, in speeches given by the Attorney General,2 John Brennan,3 Harold Koh,4 and myself,5 makes official disclosures of large amounts of information about its efforts, and the legal basis for those efforts, but it is never enough, because the public doesn’t know what it doesn’t know, but knows there are things their government is still withholding from them. The revelation 11 days ago that the executive branch does not claim the authority to kill an American non-combatant – something that was not, is not, and should never be an issue – is big news, and trumpeted as a major victory for congressional oversight. A senator who filibusters the government’s secrecy is compared in iconic terms to Jimmy Stewart. At the same time, through continual unauthorized leaks of sensitive information, our government looks to the American public as undisciplined and hypocritical. One federal court has characterized the government’s position in FOIA litigation as “Alice in Wonderland,”6 while another, this past Friday, referred to it as “neither logical nor plausible.”7 An anonymous, unclassified white paper leaked to NBC News prompts more questions than it answers. Our government finds itself in a lose-lose proposition: it fails to officially confirm many of its counterterrorism successes, and fails to officially confirm, deny or clarify unsubstantiated reports of civilian casualties. Our government’s good efforts for the safety of the people risks an erosion of support by the people. It is in this atmosphere that the idea of a national security court as a solution to the problem — an idea that for a long time existed only on the margins of the debate about U.S. counterterrorism policy but is now entertained by more mainstream thinkers such as Senator Diane Feinstein and a man I respect greatly, my former client Robert Gates – has gained momentum. To be sure, a national security court composed of a bipartisan group of federal judges with life tenure, to approve targeted lethal force, would bring some added levels of credibility, independence and rigor to the process, and those are worthy goals. In the eyes of the American public, judges are for the most part respected for their independence. In the eyes of the international community, a practice that is becoming increasingly controversial would be placed on a more credible footing. A national security court would also help answer the question many are asking: what do we say to other nations who acquire this capability? A group of judges to approve targeted lethal force would set a standard and an example. Further, as so-called “targeted killings” become more controversial with time, I believe there are some decision-makers within the Executive Branch who actually wouldn’t mind the added comfort of judicial imprimatur on their decisions. But, we must be realistic about the degree of added credibility such a court AND “drone court” operating in secret is criticized in the same way? Credibility---1NC Alternatives to drones are worse for cred---and plan’s not enough to solve Amitai Etzioni 12, senior advisor to the Carter White House; taught at Columbia University, Harvard and The University of California at Berkeley; and is a university professor and professor of international relations at The George Washington University, 4/2/12, “In Defense of Drones,” http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/defense-drones-6715 Rohde acknowledges that we are dealing with people who make and plant bombs and train AND a reason we should not order more drones rather than stand them down. Why are drones so bad? Mr. Rohde, who was kidnapped by the AND adversaries, making them nervous and preventing them from training in large groups? In addition, Rohde argues that drones are bad for public relations. He says AND and above all, American attempts to much change their ways of life. Moreover, few things agitate Muslims around the world, polls show, more than AND do if we are going to fight terrorists and those who harbor them. There’s no impact to anti-drones backlash Stephen Holmes 13, the Walter E. Meyer Professor of Law, New York University School of Law, July 2013, “What’s in it for Obama?,” The London Review of Books, http://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n14/stephen-holmes/whats-in-it-for-obama This is the crux of the problem. We stand at the beginning of the AND against which antiwar forces are apparently unable to rally even modest public support. 1NC — Middle East American hypocrisy in the Middle East destroys credibility Neil Macdonald 9/5/13, Senior Washington Correspondent for CBC News, “Obama's indecision on Syria strains U.S. credibility: Neil Macdonald,” http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2013/09/04/f-vp-obama-congress-syria-missile-strike-neil-macdonald.html In fact, “red lines” are old hat in the Middle East. AND to call it a coup.¶ The list goes on. And on.
1NC — PRISM PRISM destroys legitimacy Migranyan 7/5 (Andranik is the director of the Institute for Democracy and Cooperation in New York. He is also a professor at the Institute of International Relations in Moscow, a former member of the Public Chamber and a former member of the Russian Presidential Council. “Scandals Harm U.S. Soft Power,” 2013, http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/scandals-harm-us-soft-power-8695) For the past few months, the United States has been rocked by a series AND America—and its model for governance—with a more critical eye. 1NC — Credibility Theory Wrong Zero data supports the credibility thesis Jonathan Mercer 13, associate professor of political science at the University of Washington in Seattle and a Fellow at the Center for International Studies at the London School of Economics, 5/13/13, “Bad Reputation,” http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/136577/jonathan-mercer/bad-reputation Since then, the debate about what to do in Syria has been sidetracked by discussions of how central reputation is to deterrence, and whether protecting it is worth going to war. There are two ways to answer those questions: through evidence and through logic. AND did indeed worry about their reputations. But their worries were often mistaken. For example, when North Korea attacked South Korea in 1950, U.S AND that the Americans intended to destroy his revolution, perhaps with nuclear weapons. Similarly, Ted Hopf, a professor of political science at the National University of AND these threats seriously. As the record shows, reputations do not matter.
AT: Heg Solves War No heg impact Preble 10 – Former prof, history, Temple U. PhD, history, Temple (Christopher, U.S. Military Power: Preeminence for What Purpose?, 3 August, http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/u-s-military-power-preeminence-for-what-purpose/) Goure and the Hadley-Perry commissioners who produced the alternate QDR argue that the AND States while the schlubs in fly-over country pick up the tab. AT: Multilat Multilat fails —gridlock David Held 13, Professor of Politics and International Relations, at the University of Durham AND Thomas Hale, Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Blavatnik School of Government, Oxford University AND Kevin Young, Assistant Professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, 5/24/13, “Gridlock: the growing breakdown of global cooperation,” http://www.opendemocracy.net/thomas-hale-david-held-kevin-young/gridlock-growing-breakdown-of-global-cooperation The Doha round of trade negotiations is deadlocked, despite eight successful multilateral trade rounds AND and reform, and the domestic political landscapes of the most powerful countries. 1NC — Soft Power Frontline Soft power resilient Brooks and Wohlforth 9 (Stephen Brooks and William Wohlforth, both are professors of Government at Dartmouth, “Reshaping the world order: how Washington should reform international institutions,” Foreign Affairs, March-April) FOR ANALYSTS such as Zbigniew Brzezinski and Henry Kissinger, the key reason for skepticism AND UnitedStates today has the necessary legitimacy to shepherd reform of the international system.
Soft power fails Singh 8 (Robert, professor in the School of Politics in Birkbeck College at University of London, “The exceptional empire,” Vol. 45, Iss. 5, ProQuest) Like many theoretical constructs in social science, 'soft power' has its appeal and adherents AND As one Newsweek poll recorded the sorry figuresunderpinning America's 'tarnished global image.' AT: Warming No warming impact Robert O. Mendelsohn 9, the Edwin Weyerhaeuser Davis Professor, Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Yale University, June 2009, “Climate Change and Economic Growth,” online: http://www.growthcommission.org/storage/cgdev/documents/gcwp060web.pdf The heart of the debate about climate change comes from a number of warnings from AND economic growth and well?being may be at risk (Stern 2006). These statements are largely alarmist and misleading. Although climate change is a serious problem AND range climate risks. What is needed are long?run balanced responses. AT: Disease No disease extinction Posner 5—Senior Lecturer, U Chicago Law. Judge on the US Court of Appeals 7th Circuit. AB from Yale and LLB from Harvard. (Richard, Catastrophe, http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-4150331/Catastrophe-the-dozen-most-significant.html) Yet the fact that Homo sapiens has managed to survive every disease to assail it AND wider human contacts that make it more difficult to localize an infectious disease.
Block
DA
Turns Case
Limiting targeted killings in Pakistan causes a shift to ground assaults---turns the case and collapses the Pakistani government Richard Weitz 11, Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Political-Military Analysis at the Hudson Institute, 1/2/11, “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/ Perhaps the most important argument in favor of using UAV strikes in northwest Pakistan and other terrorist havens is that alternative options are typically worse. The Pakistani military has made clear that it is neither willing nor capable of repressing the terrorists in the tribal regions. Although the controversial ceasefire accords Islamabad earlier negotiated with tribal leaders have formally collapsed, the Pakistani Army has repeatedly postponed announced plans to occupy North Waziristan, which is where the Afghan insurgents and the foreign fighters supporting them and al-Qaeda are concentrated. Such a move that would meet fierce resistance from the region’s population, which has traditionally enjoyed extensive autonomy. The recent massive floods have also forced the military to divert its assets to humanitarian purposes, especially helping the more than ten million displaced people driven from their homes. But the main reason for their not attacking the Afghan Taliban or its foreign allies based in Pakistan’s tribal areas is that doing so would result in their joining the Pakistani Taliban in its vicious fight with the Islamabad government. Yet, sending in U.S. combat troops on recurring raids or a protracted occupation of Pakistani territory would provoke widespread outrage in Pakistan and perhaps in other countries as well since the UN Security Council mandate for the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan only authorizes military operations in Pakistan. On the one known occasion when U.S. Special Forces actually conducted a AND U.S. forces attempting to cross the Afghan-Pakistan border. On several occasions since then, Pakistani troops and militia have fired at what they believed to be American helicopters flying from Afghanistan to deploy Special Forces on their territory, though there is no conclusive evidence that the U.S. military has ever attempted another large-scale commando raid in Pakistan after the September 2008 incident. Further large-scale U.S. military operations into Pakistan could easily rally popular support behind the Taliban and al-Qaeda. It might even precipitate the collapse of the Islambad government and its replacement by a regime in nuclear-armed Pakistan that is less friendly to Washington. Given these alternatives, continuing the drone strikes appears to be the best of the limited options available to deal with a core problem, giving sanctuary to terrorists striking US and coalition forces in Afghanistan and beyond.
Aggressive targeted killing policy’s key to stability in Yemen Alan W. Dowd 13, writes on national defense, foreign policy, and international security in multiple publications including Parameters, Policy Review, The Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations, World Politics Review, American Outlook, The Baltimore Sun, The Washington Times, The National Post, The Wall Street Journal Europe, The Jerusalem Post, and The Financial Times Deutschland, Winter-Spring 2013, “Drone Wars: Risks and Warnings,” Parameters, Vol. 42.4/43.1 At the beginning of President Hadi’s May offensive he, therefore, had a fractured AND , but they could also melt away in the face of military setbacks. Adding to his problems, President Hadi had only recently taken office after a long AND Yemeni officers indicated that they respected the fighting ability of their enemies.16 Shortly before the ground offensive, drones were widely reported in the US and international AND government, although it no longer ruled any urban centers in the south.
Link UQ Status quo target vetting is carefully calibrated to avoid every aff impact in balance with CT--- there’s only a risk that restrictions destroy it Gregory McNeal 13, Associate Professor of Law, Pepperdine University, 3/5/13, “Targeted Killing and Accountability,” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1819583 Target vetting is the process by which the government integrates the opinions of subject matter AND , as targets are progressively refined within particular agencies and at interagency meetings. A validation step follows the vetting step. It is intended to ensure that all AND are not considered in current operations). Some of the questions asked are: • Is attacking the target lawful? What are the law of war and rules of engagement considerations? • Does the target contribute to the adversary's capability and will to wage war? • Is the target (still) operational? Is it (still) a viable element of a target system? Where is the target located? • Will striking the target arouse political or cultural “sensitivities”? • How will striking the target affect public opinion? (Enemy, friendly, and neutral)? • What is the relative potential for collateral damage or collateral effects, to include casualties? • What psychological impact will operations against the target have on the adversary, friendly forces, or multinational partners? • What would be the impact of not conducting operations against the target?187 As the preceding criteria highlight, many of the concerns that critics say should be AND .g. creating more terrorists as a result of the killing).191
AT: Recruiting Targeted killings destroy operational effectiveness of terror groups---they can’t recruit new operatives fast enough to keep pace with losses Alex Young 13, Associate Staff, Harvard International Review, 2/25/13, “A Defense of Drones,” Harvard International Review, http://hir.harvard.edu/a-defense-of-drones Moreover, drone strikes have disrupted al Qaeda’s system for training new recruits. The AND of death from the skies has forced extremist organizations to become more scattered. More importantly, though, drone strikes do not only kill top leaders; they AND
the idea that these strikes only kill senior officials is a myth.
Drones destroy terror groups’ ability to train new recruits Daniel Byman 13, Professor in the Security Studies Program at the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University and a Senior Fellow at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution, July/August 2013, “Why Drones Work,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 92, No. 4 Drones have also undercut terrorists' ability to communicate and to train new recruits. In AND forcing the group to choose between having no leaders and risking dead leaders.
Drones Key---General---2NC Prefer our evidence---critics are wrong---drones are highly effective at CT, and don’t cause high civilian casualties or blowback Alex Young 13, Associate Staff, Harvard International Review, 2/25/13, “A Defense of Drones,” Harvard International Review, http://hir.harvard.edu/a-defense-of-drones The War on Terror is no longer a traditional conflict. The diffuse, decentralized AND , and other countries has changed the nature of the war on terror. This strategy is not without controversy. The Obama administration’s heavy use of unmanned drones AND use of drones exacerbates, rather than solves, the problem of terrorism. The reality is not so bleak: drones are very good at what they do. Unmanned attacks are highly effective when it comes to eliminating specific members of terrorist organizations, disrupting terrorist networks without creating too much collateral damage. Their effectiveness makes drone strikes a vital part of US counterterrorism strategy. Predator and Reaper drones are not the indiscriminate civilian-killers that some make them AND also help to mitigate anti-American sentiment that stems from civilian casualties.
Targeted killings play several irreplaceable functions in CT: 1) Leadership decapitation a) Drones are key---militants can’t replace senior leaders Patrick B. Johnston 13, Associate Political Scientist, RAND Corporation, and Anoop Sarbahi, postdoctoral scholar in the Department of Political Science at the University of California, Los Angeles, July 2013, “The Impact of U.S. Drone Strikes on Terrorism in Pakistan and Afghanistan,” http://patrickjohnston.info/materials/drones.pdf We expect drone strikes that kill terrorist leaders will be associated with reductions in terrorist AND the most commonly listed experience type, just ahead of “weapons.”22 In the context of northwest Pakistan, where militant freedom of movement is limited by AND degradation of terrorists’ ability to produce violence. This logic implies Hypothesis 3: H3: All else equal, drone strikes that kill one or mor e terrorist leader(s) will lead to a decrease in terrorist violence.
General
Judicial review would result in limiting AUMF drone strikes to declared zones of armed conflict---that functionally bans drones Milena Sterio 12, Associate Professor of Law, Cleveland-Marshall College of Law, Fall 2012, “Presidential Powers and Foreign Affairs: Rendition and Targeted Killings of Americans: The United States' Use of Drones in the War on Terror: The (Il)legality of Targeted Killings Under International Law,” Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law, 45 Case W. Res. J. Int'l L. 197 After the terrorist attacks of 9/11, President George W. Bush, AND well as the CIA. As Jane Mayer famously noted in her article: The U.S. government runs two drone programs. The military's version, which is publicly acknowledged, operates in the recognized war zones of Afghanistan and Iraq, and targets enemies of U.S. troops stationed there. As such, it is an extension of conventional warfare. The C.I.A.'s program is aimed at terror suspects around the world, including in countries where U.S. troops are not based. n3 *199 Moreover, although the President had designated Afghanistan and its airspace as a combat zone AND have offered detailed legal justifications for the legality of the American drone program. Harold Koh, State Department Legal Advisor, justified the use of drones at the AND proportionality to ensure that the targets are legitimate and collateral damage minimized. n12 Koh offered four reasons supporting the legality of targeted drone killings. First, enemy AND high level belligerent leaders" does not violate domestic law banning assassinations. n16 The Obama Administration has continued to use drones in Pakistan, as well as in AND abroad without any judicial involvement or proceedings to determine guilt of any crime. In a subsequent speech, Attorney General Eric Holder confirmed the Obama Administration's view on AND be conducted in a manner consistent with applicable law of war principles. n21 Despite Koh's and Holder's justifications, many have questioned the legality of the American use AND IV); and the location and status of drone operators (Part V). II. What and Where is the Battlefield? Which Laws Apply? Under the Bush Administration approach, the United States post 9/11 was engaged AND of drones, could be used if consistent with the laws of war. Under the Obama Administration, the rhetoric has slightly changed: the United States is AND where central governments cannot claim to possess effective control. n28 *203 The above described terminology ("global war on terror" and "war against al AND the use of force is necessary and the use of force is proportionate. First, a state resorting to force must prove its decision to resort to force AND groups project military-scale power," n33 this view remains controversial. n34 Second, a state resorting to the use of force must prove its use of AND the lawfulness of this type of force through the jus ad bellum prism. If, however, one rejects the conclusion that the United States is engaged in AND Under this paradigm, one must conclude that the drone program is illegal.
Turns yemen/Pakistan --- Judicial review would eliminate targeted killing authority outside of declared war zones and drastically narrow the standard of combatants’ participation in hostilities---it’s unique because the executive hasn’t been forced to litigate the policy in any court Lisa Hajjar 12, professor of sociology at the University of California -- Santa Barbara, 8/9/12, “Litigating the New Frontier in the War on Terror,” http://www.jadaliyya.com/pages/index/6801/litigating-the-new-frontier-in-the-war-on-terror Now CCR and the ACLU are pioneering into the new frontier, the US targeted AND Anwar al-Awlaki, Samir Khan, and Abdulrahman al-Awlaki. This lawsuit is pioneering because it is the first challenge in a US court to AND -Awlaki lacked standing because the government had no plans to kill him. Now that Anwar al-Awlaki, his 16-year-old son Abdulrahman AND lawsuit aims to demonstrate by pursuing consequences for those responsible for its violation. Of the three dead citizens, only Anwar al-Awlaki was targeted on purpose. Khan had the misfortune of being with him on 30 September 2011 when the jointly operated CIA-JSOC drone struck. Why Abdulrahman was killed in an attack two weeks later remains shrouded in secrecy, like the policy in general. Anwar al-Awlaki was accused by the government of being a leader of al AND FOIA to release that document and other information about the targeting of citizens.) The ACLU and CCR are making a case with broad implications for executive discretion and AND to the president under the AUMF into judicial play in a new way. The complaint also challenges the government’s interpretation of “direct participation in hostilities.” The blurry and contested meaning of direct participation has gotten a lot of judicial play via habeas challenges to the detention of people in Guantánamo and in the context of charges prosecuted through the military commissions. But this case, in which the allegation of direct participation is coupled with the use of lethal force, elevates the issue to a new level. The killing of Khan and Abdulrahman, who were not alleged to be participating in AND And if so, is the whole clandestine kill process mistake-prone? So far, the government has not had to answer such questions, at least not in a court of law. To the extent that any answers have been provided about targeted killing in general and the killing of citizens in particular, they have come mostly in the form of leaks from unnamed sources and carefully scripted public remarks by top officials. The targeted killing policy is the latest incarnation of unfettered executive superpower discretion. The AND , and the killing of three citizens provided the opportunity to do so. If this case is not dismissed on state secrets grounds, as the government is AND ” to press for governmental transparency, accountability and adherence to the law.
Judicial review would result in all targeted killings being ruled unconstitutional---courts would conclude they don’t satisfy the requirement of imminence for use of force in self-defense Benjamin McKelvey 11, J.D., Vanderbilt University Law School, November 2011, “NOTE: Due Process Rights and the Targeted Killing of Suspected Terrorists: The Unconstitutional Scope of Executive Killing Power,” Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, 44 Vand. J. Transnat'l L. 1353 In the alternative, and far more broadly, the DOJ argued that executive authority AND President's constitutional powers and is not subject to judicial interference or review. n104 The DOJ is correct in arguing that the President is constitutionally empowered to use military AND , specific, and imminent threat of harm to the United States. n108 Therefore, the President was justified in using lethal force to protect the nation against AND , not political questions, and they are subject to judicial review. n114 Under judicial review, a court would likely determine that targeted killing does not satisfy AND not satisfy the imminence standard for the constitutional use of defensive force. n118
Ex Ante Review Ex ante judicial review makes effective drone ops impossible---even limiting the court to vetting names in advance compromises the timelines of operations James Oliphant 13, Deputy Editor, the National Journal, J.D. from the Ohio State University Morrill College of Law, 5/30/13, “Vetting the Kill List,” National Journal, http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/vetting-the-kill-list-20130404 Civil libertarians and even hawks such as former Rep. Jane Harman of California, AND Robert Gates, the former Defense secretary, also favors such an approach. But even among supporters, no consensus exists on what questions a drone court would AND a judge should be involved when it comes to “pulling the trigger.” Still, Chesney says such a court could still vet the names on the list AND ” threat and whether a judge would be qualified to make that determination.) But even that small degree of oversight, warns Gregory McNeal, a counterterrorism expert at Pepperdine University, risks throwing sand in the gears by extending the timeline of an op. And to McNeal, this point leads directly to the larger issue of accountability—or, to use the Washington synonym, blame. Judges, he says, simply aren’t ever going to be equipped to identify and navigate the variables involved in a drone strike. Jeh Johnson, formerly the Obama administration’s top lawyer at the Pentagon, expressed his discomfort with court-based oversight in a speech last month at Fordham University. Questions of feasibility and imminence, he said, “are up-to-the-minute, real-time assessments.” More important, Johnson emphasized, “we want military and national security officials to continually assess and reassess these two questions up until the last minute of the operation.” Given that reality, shifting the responsibility of a sign-off to a set AND “this is great. Because you aren’t on the hook for anything.” By and large, federal judges don’t want to be in this position. They AND , because approving surveillance is related to Fourth Amendment protections on search warrants.
AT: Intel Losses from Not Capturing Shifting to capture missions is impossible---every alternative to drones is worse for CT Daniel Byman 13, Professor in the Security Studies Program at the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University and a Senior Fellow at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution, July/August 2013, “Why Drones Work,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 92, No. 4 Critics of drone strikes often fail to take into account the fact that the alternatives AND . casualties, and possibly the deaths of the suspects and innocent civilians.
AT: Yemen/Pakistan Blowback No public backlash in Pakistan or Yemen---just as many people love them as hate them Max Boot 13, the Jeane J. Kirkpatrick Senior Fellow in National Security Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, 2/6/13, “Obama Drone Memo is a Careful, Responsible Document,” http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2013/02/06/obama-drone-memo-is-a-careful-responsible-document/ Drone strikes are by no means risk free, the biggest risk being that by AND been conducted with less collateral damage and more precision than in the past. It is hard to assess what impact they have had on public opinion in countries AND died in January of wounds received in a drone strike late last year.”
Casualties are way down and drones are far more precise than alternatives---our ev uses the best data Michael Cohen 13, Fellow at the Century Foundation, 5/23/13, “Give President Obama a chance: there is a role for drones,” The Guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/may/23/obama-drone-speech-use-justified Drone critics have a much different take. They are passionate in their conviction that AND , drone strikes are a far more humane method of war-fighting.
AT: States won’t support States will support terror- a means to undermine superpowers without fear of repercussions Nathan Myhrvold '13, Phd in theoretical and mathematical physics from Princeton, and founded Intellectual Ventures after retiring as chief strategist and chief technology officer of Microsoft Corporation , July 2013, "Stratgic Terrorism: A Call to Action," The Lawfare Research Paper Series No.2, http://www.lawfareblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Strategic-Terrorism-Myhrvold-7-3-2013.pdf Proxy fighting has taken a new form in the 21st century. Instead of proxy AND the same way that the guerrilla movements did ¶ during the Cold War.
Note: in the AT Lieber and Press block States don’t have to support for successful nuke terror Sam Kane 8/3/13, intern for the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation and Georgetown senior, 8/3/13, "New Study Downplays Threat of 'Nuclear Handoff,' But Nuclear Terrorism Threat Remains," http://nukesofhazardblog.com/story/2013/8/2/161042/0978 Over the past few weeks, several blogs have spotlighted a recent article by scholars AND “nuclear handoff” – but the broader threat of nuclear terrorism remains.
Afghanistan---1NC Targeted killings are key to Afghan stability post-withdrawal Daniel Byman 13, Professor in the Security Studies Program at the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University and a Senior Fellow at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution, July/August 2013, “Why Drones Work,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 92, No. 4 In places where terrorists are actively plotting against the United States, however, drones give Washington the ability to limit its military commitments abroad while keeping Americans safe. Afghanistan, for example, could again become a Taliban-run haven for terrorists after U.S. forces depart next year. Drones can greatly reduce the risk of this happening. Hovering in the skies above, they can keep Taliban leaders on the run and hinder al Qaeda's ability to plot another 9/11. Extinction James Jay Carafano 10 is a senior research fellow for national security at The Heritage Foundation and directs its Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies, “Con: Obama must win fast in Afghanistan or risk new wars across the globe,” Jan 2 http://gazettextra.com/news/2010/jan/02/con-obama-must-win-fast-afghanistan-or-risk-new-wa/ We can expect similar results if Obama’s Afghan strategy fails and he opts to cut AND a puny EU military force incapable of defending the interests of its nations.
Case
Alt Causes---1ac ev
Unrestrained drone use collapses global stability – harms US legitimacy Kennedy, 13 “Drones: Legitimacy and Anti-Americanism”, Greg Kennedy is a Professor of Strategic Foreign Policy at the Defence Studies Department, King's College London, based at the Joint Services Command and Staff College, Defence Academy of the United Kingdom, in Shrivenham, Parameters 42(4)/43(1) Winter-Spring 2013
The exponential rise in the use of drone technology in a variety of military and AND to ensure its strategic aims are not derailed by operational and tactical expediency.
That bolsters legitimacy Epstein, 11 Michael, Michigan State University College of Law “Targeted Killing Court: Why The United States Needs To Adopt International Legal Standards For Targeted Killings And How To Do So In A Domestic Court”, SSRN
Overall, I believe that the TKR Court provides for a rigid system of Article AND sort of judicial review could help salvage our reputation abroad and at home.
External court based oversight maintains legitimacy – key internal link to global stability Knowles, 09 Robert, Assistant Professor, NYU Law, “Article: American Hegemony and the Foreign Affairs Constitution”, 41 Ariz. St. L.J. 87, p. lexis
The hegemonic model also reduces the need for executive branch flexibility, and the institutional AND courts to reduce the "deference gap" between foreign and domestic cases.
Read This fool
Their internal link can’t affect the structural reasons why heg solves war Maher 11---adjunct prof of pol sci, Brown. PhD expected in 2011 in pol sci, Brown (Richard, The Paradox of American Unipolarity: Why the United States May Be Better Off in a Post-Unipolar World, Orbis 55;1)
The United States should start planning now for the inevitable decline of its preeminent position AND view good relations with the United States as indispensable for their own security.
CP AT: Perm Do Both Links to the NB or severs The counterplan alone is key to effective drone operations---the permutation sends the signal that the rest of the government sides with critics of drones over the executive---that delegitimizes drones and collapses the program Kenneth Anderson 10, Professor of International Law at American University, 3/8/10, “Predators Over Pakistan,” The Weekly Standard, http://www.weeklystandard.com/print/articles/predators-over-pakistan Obama deserves support and praise for this program from across the political spectrum. More than that, though, the drone strikes need an aggressive defense against increasingly vocal critics who are moving to create around drone warfare a narrative of American wickedness and cowardice and of CIA perfidy. Here the administration has dropped the ball. It has so far failed to provide a robust affirmation of the propositions that underwrite Predator drone warfare. Namely: n Targeted killings of terrorists, including by Predators and even when the targets are American citizens, are a lawful practice; n Use of force is justified against terrorists anywhere they set up safe havens, including in states that cannot or will not prevent them; n These operations may be covert—and they are as justifiable when the CIA is tasked to carry them out secretly as when the military does so in open armed conflict. n All of the above fall within the traditional American legal view of “self-defense” in international law, and “vital national security interests” in U.S. domestic law. There are good reasons for Republicans and centrist Democrats to make common cause in defending AND view of domestic and international law for future administrations, Democratic and Republican. At the same time, congressional Republicans and centrist Democrats need to put Obama’s senior AND with hedged and narrow legal rationales from which they can later walk away. Consider, for instance, the diffidence of Harold Koh, the legal adviser of AND , and other agencies directly conducting these activities as somewhat less than reassuring. In fact, the administration’s top lawyers should offer a public legal defense of its AND S. government and will be publicly defended as such by their superiors. Even as the Obama administration increasingly relies on Predator strikes for its counterterrorism strategy, AND at stigmatizing the use of Predators as both illegal and a coward’s weapon. Stigmatizing the technology and the practice of targeted killing is only half of it, AND —either as law enforcement or as armed conflict conducted by uniformed military. The Obama administration is complacent about this emerging “international soft law” campaign. AND spun by the interlocking international “soft law” community and global media. It’s a mistake to remain oblivious to either the sense or the sensibility. Outside AND United States, or abroad in Europe, or at the United Nations? The Obama administration assumes that it uniquely sets the terms of legal legitimacy and has AND Here’s the thumbnail version of drone warfare, as portrayed in the media. CP Solves – Top Shelf Disclosing target criteria builds credibility, enacts domestic accountability, and doesn’t link to the terror disad Gregory McNeal 13, Associate Professor of Law, Pepperdine University, 3/5/13, “Targeted Killing and Accountability,” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1819583 Related to defending the process, and using performance data is the possibility that the AND better diplomatic footing, and would certainly engender mechanisms of domestic political accountability. Strongly err neg---their authors don’t understand how thorough and effective inter-executive mechanisms are---adding transparency’s clearly sufficient Gregory McNeal 13, Associate Professor of Law, Pepperdine University, 3/5/13, “Targeted Killing and Accountability,” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1819583 To date scholars have lacked a thorough understanding of the U.S. government’s AND legal theory, and constrained scholarly discourse on a matter of public import. This article is a necessary corrective to the public and scholarly debate. It has AND independent review can enhance the already robust accountability mechanisms embedded in current practice.
CP Solves---Norms/Precedent/Drone Prolif Executive-branch transparency and bringing U.S. practice in line with policy builds the international diplomatic capital to press for drone norms Kristin Roberts 13, News Editor, National Journal, 3/22/13, “When the Whole World Has Drones,” http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/when-the-whole-world-has-drones-20130321 But even without raising standards, tightening up drone-specific restrictions in the standing AND , or 15 years—might find helpful in arguing against another’s actions. A not-insignificant faction of U.S. defense and intelligence experts, AND some weapons, including land mines, blinding lasers, and nuclear bombs. Arguably more significant than spotty legal regimes, however, is the behavior of the AND policy that it did most recently on “enhanced interrogation” of terrorists. The case against open, transparent rule-making is that it might only hamstring AND operations manual for other nations but a legal and moral one as well.
Legal transparency solves global drone prolif---allows the U.S. to successfully shape international norms Daniel Byman 13, Professor in the Security Studies Program at the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University and a Senior Fellow at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution, July/August 2013, “Why Drones Work,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 92, No. 4 The fact remains that by using drones so much, Washington risks setting a troublesome AND conceded that the administration is "establishing precedents that other nations may follow." Controlling the spread of drone technology will prove impossible; that horse left the barn AND (also called Burma) to kill a wanted drug trafficker hiding there. The spread of drones cannot be stopped, but the United States can still influence AND carefully considers the law and the risks to civilians before ordering a strike. Washington needs to be especially open about its use of signature strikes. According to AND has not made clear what its rules and procedures for such strikes are. Washington should exercise particular care with regard to signature strikes because mistakes risk tarnishing the entire drone program. In the absence of other information, the argument that drones are wantonly killing innocents is gaining traction in the United States and abroad. More transparency could help calm these fears that Washington is acting recklessly.
AT: Doesn’t Solve Groupthink No groupthink---there are several different checkpoints on the way to a targeting decision and objection at any point stops the entire op Gregory McNeal 13, Associate Professor of Law, Pepperdine University, 3/5/13, “Targeted Killing and Accountability,” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1819583 Based on this information, we can sketch a general picture of the kill- AND facts, or intelligence and analytic judgments regarding facts and expected outcomes.219
Solves---Legitimacy The CP alone is the best way to boost U.S. legitimacy---bargaining theory proves that making concessions to critics of our drone policy encourages them to move the goalposts and never be satisfied---informing them of the rationale behind targeted killings with a “take it or leave it” stance encourages bandwagoning. Reject their ev by activists and academics---they always call for the most restrictive measures but their perspective’s irrelevant to actual inter-state relations Kenneth Anderson 11, Professor of International Law at American University, 10/3/11, “Public Legitimacy for Targeted Killing Using Drones,” http://www.volokh.com/2011/10/03/public-legitimacy-for-targeted-killing-using-drones/ Jack Goldsmith, writing at Lawfare, urges the Obama administration to release a redacted AND an agreement to continue discussion around alternatives that are considered plausible is sufficient. Solves---vs. Drone Court Disclosing targeting standards leads to public scrutiny and reform---solves better than a drone court Gabor Rona 13, International Legal Director, Human Rights First, 2/27/13, “The pro-rule of law argument against a 'drone court',” http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/judicial/285041-the-pro-rule-of-law-argument-against-a-drone-court#ixzz2dlSUsFz1 So if a drone court isn’t the answer, what is? Congress should require the executive to disclose the targeting standards it’s adopted so as to AND White House has refused to release most information about the targeted killing program. Congress should also ensure that victims of unlawful targeting — or their survivors — have the right to claim compensation, creating a deterrent to government abuse. That right already exists in theory but time and again courts have prohibited such cases from moving forward, buying without question the government’s claim that allowing them would threaten national security. Congress should limit the executive’s ability to hide unlawful killings behind this claim. These are just a few of the steps Congress could take to rein in the unbridled power of this administration any future ones to clandestinely kill individuals suspected of participating in terrorism. Creating a new secret court to secretly review secretly planned killings is not the way to go.
Case Squo Solves---Internal/External Oversight Internal and external accountability mechanisms are effective now---and they’ll stay that way as drone missions increase Jack Goldsmith 12, Harvard Law professor and a member of the Hoover Task Force on National Security and Law, 3/19/12, “Fire When Ready,” http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/03/19/fire_when_ready In this new age of drone warfare, probing the constitutional legitimacy of targeted killings AND accountability that includes courts but also includes other institutions and actors as well. When the Obama administration made the decision to kill Awlaki, it did not rely AND with al Qaeda who are "engaged in hostilities against the United States." International law is also relevant to targeting decisions. Targeted killings are lawful under the AND the United States relied on in the Osama bin Laden raid inside Pakistan. These legal principles are backed by a system of internal and external checks and balances AND and approved by lawyers and policymakers at the highest levels of the government.
2nr
Throw out ev from the “Living Under Drones” report---sample size wasn’t representative and was selection-biased by partisan researchers Joshua Foust 12, Fellow at the American Security Project, 9/26/12, “Targeted Killing, Pro and Con: What to Make of U.S. Drone Strikes in Pakistan,” The Atlantic, http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/09/targeted-killing-pro-and-con-what-to-make-of-us-drone-strikes-in-pakistan/262862/ A new report, "Living Under Drones," jointly authored by Stanford University and AND is essential to gaining a better understanding of the campaign and its consequences. On that last point, the authors are absolutely right -- more transparency about targeting AND should be paused or radically altered. Those arguments are not well supported. For starters, the sample size of the study is 130 people. In a AND and humanitarian workers, members of civil society, academics, and journalists." The authors did not conduct interviews in the FATA, but Islamabad, Rawalpindi, AND BIJ data as the most "reliable," these data are highly suspect.
Their study relies on interviews with subjects selected by an NGO engaged in anti-drone lawsuits---clearly colors its findings Kenneth Anderson 13, Professor of International Law at American University, June 2013, “The Case for Drones,” Commentary, Vol. 135, No. 6
An often cited report, "Living Under Drones," issued in 2012 by AND report in an article for the Atlantic online on September 26,2012.
