Tournament: UMKC | Round: 1 | Opponent: Oklahoma LS | Judge: Justin Stanley
Inherency
Contention 1 is Inherency—

1. Targeted killings will increase now – low American casualty numbers, decreased expenses, WOT, and Brennan appointment all prove
   Jonathan Masters, Deputy Editor for the Council on Foreign Relations and writes for The Atlantic and Huffington Post and CNN, 5/23/13, “Targeted Killings,” http://www.cfr.org/counterterrorism/targeted-killings/p9627#p2

Analysts point to several factors that indicate U.S. targeted killings are likely
AND
overseeing the process by which suspected militants and terrorists are selected for strikes. 

2. Lack of transparency is biggest reason war powers are expanding now – Increase in Congressional oversight key
Pearlstein 3/26/13 (Deborah, Professor of Public and International Affairs at Princeton, http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/03/congress_shouldn_t_give_president_obama_new_power _to_fight_terrorists.html)

Despite this, Leiter and others seem convinced that Congress should pass a new law
AND
the case for new use-of-force legislation is impossibly thin.

Drone Prolif
Contention 2 is Prolif—

1. Drones are beginning to proliferate because of US precedent
   Stanford 12 (Stanford and NYU Law, International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic of Stanford Law School and the Global Justice Clinic of the NYU Law School, September 2012, “Living Under Drones: Death, Injury and Trauma to Civilians from US Drone Practices in Pakistan” http://www.livingunderdrones.org/report/)

US Targeted Killing and Drone Strike Practices May Establish Dangerous Precedents and Undermine the Rule of Law and US Democracy
AND
partners combat Al Qaeda and al Shabaab ‘militants’ in Somalia. 

2. Continuing un-transparent US drone policy risks that other countries will follow suit
Stanford 12 (Stanford International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic, 2012, “Executive Summary and Recommendations” http://www.livingunderdrones.org/)

Fourth, current US targeted killings and drone strike practices undermine respect for the rule
AND
, and as more countries develop lethal drone technologies, these risks increase.

3. US led drone prolif presents the greatest threat to civilization- o/w traditional nuclear war because of lack of protocol
Jenkins 13, Simon, “Drones are fooland#39;s gold: they prolong wars we canand#39;t win,” The Guardian, 10 January 2013, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jan/10/drones-fools-gold-prolong-wars

The drone wars seem pointless yet unstoppable. Their appeal to western leaders lies partly
AND
front. It is hard to imagine a greater danger to world peace.
Scenario 1 is Meltdowns- even nations without nukes can use UAVs to strike nuclear reactions ensuring widespread nuclear catastrophe
Mckillop 13, Andrew, “The Coming Global Drone War,” Before It’s News, March 2, 2013, http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2013/03/the-coming-global-drone-war-2580996.html

To date no public data or test results on simulated installations are available for
AND
The problem is that everybody else will also be forced to do so.
Nuclear meltdown causes extinction – 100 times the radiation of a nuclear bomb-
Lendman, 2011
(Stephen, Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization, 03/ 13, “Nuclear Meltdown in Japan,”, The People’s Voice http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/Voices.php/2011/03/13/nuclear-meltdown-in-japan, accessed 10/12/12,WYO/JF
Reuters said the 1995 Kobe quake caused $100 billion in damage, up to
AND
potentially millions under a worse case scenario, including far outside East Asia.
Scenario 2 is Armenia Azerbaijan war- Recent drone prolif threatens Ammenia Azerbaijan war that causes international drawn in
Global Post 12, “Drone violence along Armenian-Azerbaijani border could lead to war,” Global Post, Oct 23rd, 2012, http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/europe/121022/drone-violence-along-armenian-azerbaijani-border-could-lead-war?page=0,1
According to SIPRI, Azerbaijan had acquired about 30
AND
That’s the one thing I’m sure of.”
Middle East conflict triggers nuclear warfare—end of the Cold War increased the risk of escalation
Primakov 9 (September, Yevgeny, President of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of the Russian Federation; Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences; member of the Editorial Board of Russia in Global Affairs. This article is based on the scientific report for which the author was awarded the Lomonosov Gold Medal of the Russian Academy of Sciences in 2008, “The Middle East Problem in the Context of International Relations”) 

The Middle East conflict is unparalleled in terms of its potential for spreading globally.
AND
seems that President Obama’s position does not completely rule out such a possibility.

Middle East war causes extinction—escalation of WMDs
Nassar  2 (Bahig, Arab Co-ordinating Centre of Non-Governmental Organizations, and Afro-Asian People’s Solidary Organization, 11/25/02, keynote paper for Cordoba Dialogue on Peace and Human Rights in Europe and the Middle East, http://www.inesglobal.org/BahigNassar.htm)

Wars in the Middle East are of a new type
AND
 instead of solving them

Hegemony
Contenton 3 is Hegemony—
Drones undermine American influence - Hard power alone cant solve
Younger 13, Caleb , “Drones: Is the Loss of Soft Power Worth It?,” The Georgetown Progressive, 2/15/13 http://guprogressive.com/?p=5803

At the Progressive, we have
AND
will make up for it.
 Multiple Internal Links
1) Alliances- Drones risk US foreign military alliances because of legitimacy issues
Kennedy 13 (Greg, a Professor of Strategic Foreign Policy at the Defence Studies Department, Kingand#39;s College London, based at the Joint Services Command and Staff College, “Drones: Legitimacy and Anti-Americanism,” Parameters 42(4)/43(1) Winter-Spring 2013, Strategic Studies Institute at the United States Army War College
http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/parameters/Issues/WinterSpring_2013/3_Article_Kennedy.pdf
p. 26)
The current debate over the legitimacy
AND
This article will address only the first three critical questions. 

These alliances are key to cooperative engagement
Kreisher 12 (Otto Kreisher, Former Naval Officer/veteran Washington correspondent and defense journalist, “Chuck Hagel, Touted As Next SecDef, Argues For Soft Power, Allies”,  December 10 2012, Breaking Defense, http://breakingdefense.com/2012/12/10/chuck-hagel-touted-as-next-secdef-argues-for-soft-power-allie/   )

Perhaps with an eye toward America losing its preeminent military position, Hagel argued that
AND
must be addressed through alliances, through “joint thinking,” he said.

2) Drone strikes as is hurt U.S. credibility – lack of congressional oversight means we get blamed for all bombings
Zenko 13, (Micah, fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, with expertise in Conflict Prevention; US national security policy, military planning and operations and nuclear weapons policy. “Reforming U.S. Drone Strike Policies”, Council on Foerign Relations Special Report no. 65, January 2013 http://www.cfr.org/wars-and-warfare/reforming-us-drone-strike-policies/p29736, pg15)

The problem with maintaining that drone strikes are covert is that both the American and
AND
, no congressional committee has conducted a hearing on any aspect of them.

Credibility is key to hard power
APSA 9 (American Political Science Association, The American Political Science Association is the leading professional organization for the study of political science and serves more than 15,000 members in over 80 countries. With a range of programs and services for individuals, departments and institutions, APSA brings together political scientists from all fields of inquiry, regions, and occupational endeavors within and outside academe in order to expand awareness and understanding of politics, “ U.S. Standing in the World: Causes, Consequences, and the Future,” Task Force Report, October 2009,
http://www.apsanet.org/media/PDFs/APSAUSStandingShortFinal.pdf
p. 3-4)

Unlike something a nation possesses and can easily measure, like wealth or military might
AND
understanding of Americans, even when it has no readily observable behavioral implications.

Soft power is key to solve multiple extinction scenarios
Nye 8 (Joseph, professor of International Relations at Harvard University, “American Power After the Financial Crises,” Foresight Project, 2008, http://www.foresightproject.net/publications/articles/article.asp?p=3533)
Power always depends on context, and in todayand#39;s world, it is distributed in
AND
that even the largest country cannot achieve its aims without the help of others

Soft power is key to exercise hard power
Nye 2004 (Joseph S. Nye, political scientist and former Harvard school of government dean, “Soft Power and American Foreign Policy” Vol. 119, No. 2, Summer 2004 , http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/20202345.pdf,p. 260-261)

In the global information age,
AND
. We cannot afford that.
Soft power is key to sustain hegemony – solves a laundry list of impacts
Thayer 6 (Bradley A. is an associate professor in the Department of Defense and Strategic Studies, Missouri State University, “In Defense of Primacy,” November/December 2006, Issue 86, National Interest, p.32, EBSCOHost, Accessed Date: 5-7-13 y2k) 

A grand strategy based on American primacy means ensuring the United States stays the worldand#39;s
AND
--and the worldand#39;s--to have it last as long as possible.¶ 

Terrorism
Contention 4 is Terror—

1. Ambiguous strikes with little justification means drone strikes causes terrorism by increasing anti-American sentiment
   Stanford 12 (Stanford and NYU Law, International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic of Stanford Law School and the Global Justice Clinic of the NYU Law School, September 2012, “Living Under Drones: Death, Injury and Trauma to Civilians from US Drone Practices in Pakistan” http://www.livingunderdrones.org/report/)

The central justification for
AND
the concerns of various stakeholders, and short and long-term costs and benefits, is long overdue.

2. Drones are the top recruiting tool for Al Qaeda, increase terrorism. Signals US weakness.
Volo 13 (Lorraine Bayard de Volo. Associate Prof. at University of Colorado Boulder. Focuses on Political Science and Women’s Studies. “Unmanned?: Drones and the Revolution in Gender-Military Affairs”. 2013. European Conference on Politics and Gender. http://www.ecpg-barcelona.com/ PG 7)  

Finally, drone strikes and the attendant
AND
Drones, then, are an indication of weakness in the superpower. 

3. Transparency solves terrorism by releasing justifications and real civilian casualties to Pakistani people
Robbins 13, Carla, “Drones: Transparency on Rules for Their Use Is a Must,” Business Week, 2/14/13, http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-02-14/drones-transparency-on-rules-for-their-use-is-a-must#p2

The New America Foundation has compiled a
AND
The only way we can influence their use is by being as public and transparent as possible.” Better late than never.

4. Secret nature of targeted killings stops cooperation—studies prove other nations overwhelmingly disapprove of US policies.
Dowd 12, (Alan W. Dowd, Alan W. Dowd writes on defense and security issues. His work has appeared in Policy Review, Parameters, Military Officer, The American Legion, World Politics Review and other leading publications, The Brewing Backlash against the Drone War, June 19, 2012, http://www.the-american-interest.com/article.cfm?piece=1278) NOTE: 20 countries surveyed include US, Britain, Germany, Poland, France, India, Italy, Czech Rep., China, Lebanon, Mexico, Spain, Japan, Brazil, Russia, Tunisia, Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, Greece; see http://www.pewglobal.org/2012/06/13/global-opinion-of-obama-slips-international-policies-faulted/

But what looks like a successful counterterrorism
AND
and often decides “personally whether to go ahead” with a drone strike.

6. Globalization means only cooperation can solve terrorism—the world is too interconnected for local efforts to solve.
Cordesman 10, (Anthony H. Cordesman, Center for Strategic and International Studies Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy, International Cooperation in Counterterrorism: Redefining the Threat and the Requirement, March 11, 2010, http://csis.org/files/publication/100315_IntCoopinfightterror.pdf)

The first lesson in improving such cooperation
AND
more than create hollow, pointless tragedies. 

7. Terrorism causes miscalculation that draws in Russia and China and culminates in extinction- also causes rising alert levels
Ayson 2010 (Robert Ayson, Professor of Strategic Studies and Director of the Centre for Strategic Studies: New Zealand at the Victoria University of Wellington, “After a Terrorist Nuclear Attack: Envisaging Catalytic Effects,” Studies in Conflict and Terrorism, Volume 33, Issue 7, July, Available Online to Subscribing Institutions via InformaWorld)

A terrorist nuclear attack, and even the use of nuclear weapons in response by
AND
for the terrorists. This might not help the chances of nuclear restraint.

Plan Text
Plan: The United States Congress should require the President to release the United States Department of Justice memoranda outlining the legal basis and justification for drone attacks.

Solvency
Contention 5 is Solvency—
Releasing the DOJ memoranda solves transparency with other nations, targeting criteria, and civilian data
Stanford 12 (Stanford International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic, 2012, “Executive Summary and Recommendations” http://www.livingunderdrones.org/)

In light of these concerns,
AND
This includes not double-striking targets as first responders arrive.

Increasing congressional visibility is the only way to stop drone proliferation that prevents instability.
Roberts 13 (Kristin, When the Whole World Has Drones, National Journal, 21 March 2013, http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/when-the-whole-world-has-drones-20130321, da 8-1-13) PC

The proliferation of drone technology
AND
of the most awesome military robotics capabilities of this generation.

US will set the precedent for the next 50 Nations to get drones
Rall 13, Ted, “9/11 via Drone? Drone wars set a dangerous precedent,” Urban Tulsa Weekly, FEBRUARY 13, 2013, http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid3A56847

The trouble isnand#39;t just the drones themselves.
AND
why wouldnand#39;t the government of Yemen be legally justified to deploy Yemeni drones over American airspace and use them to blow up any Americans or anyone else they felt like?
Transparent drone procedures key to perception of legitimacy
Machon 2006 (Maj. Matthew J., US Army Major and investigor for the School of Advanced Military Studies, “Targeted Killing as an Element of U.S. Foreign Policy in the War on Terror”, 5/25/06, http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/machon.pdf, p. 57)

To maintain international legitimacy and retain the moral high ground within the war on ¶
AND
appears to be the case thus far in the war on ¶ terror.

Transparency standards are key – executive restraint does not allow the US to restore credibility
Alston 2011 (Philip, professor of law at NYU School of Law and former UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial executions, “The CIA and Targeted Killings Beyond Borders”, Harvard National Security Journal, Vol. 2) PY
This Article has not sought to spell out the options open to the United States
AND
United States before long when invoked by other states with highly problematic agendas.

Tournament: tournament | Round: 1 | Opponent: Weber State Chadwick-Sanchez | Judge: Anderson
1AC

PLAN: The United States Congress should establish statutory requirements for drone strikes in the area of targeted killing based on relevant executive documents outlining the legal basis and justifications for drone strikes. 

1
CONTENTION 1: DRONE PROLIFERATION
Current US drone policy causes unchecked drone proliferation around the world
Stanford and NYU Law, International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic of Stanford Law School and the Global Justice Clinic of the NYU Law School, September 2012, “Living Under Drones: Death, Injury and Trauma to Civilians from US Drone Practices in Pakistan” http://www.livingunderdrones.org/report/

US Targeted Killing and Drone Strike Practices May Establish Dangerous Precedents and Undermine the Rule
AND
the US is “establishing precedent that other nations may follow.”790

This has two impacts
A. This drone proliferation escalates to extinction absent US government action – Obama action alone won’t be enough, treaties don’t solve, and DOD shift isn’t sufficient – only Congress can set the necessary precedent
Kristen Roberts 13, news editor for the National Journal, master in security studies from Georgetown, “When the Whole World Has Drones”, March 22, http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/when-the-whole-world-has-drones-20130321

The proliferation of drone technology has moved well beyond the control of the United States government and its closest allies. The aircraft are too easy to obtain, with barriers to entry on the production side crumbling too quickly to place limits on the spread of a technology that promises to transform warfare on a global scale. Already, more than 75 countries have remote piloted aircraft. More than 50 nations are building a total of nearly a thousand types. At its last display at a trade show in Beijing, China showed off 25 different unmanned aerial vehicles. Not toys or models, but real flying machines. It’s a classic and common phase in the life cycle of a military innovation: An a\
dvanced country and its weapons developers create a tool, and then others learn how
AND
operations manual for other nations but a legal and moral one as well.

*This outweighs nuclear war because MAD doesn’t apply
Jenkins 13, Simon, “Drones are fool's gold: they prolong wars we can't win,” The Guardian, 10 January 2013, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jan/10/drones-fools-gold-prolong-wars
The greatest threat to world
AND
a greater danger to world peace.
B. Armenia-Azerbaijan War
Unrestricted drone use causes nuclear war in the Caucuses
Clayton 12 (Nick Clayton, Worked in several publications, including the Washington Times the Asia Times and Washington Diplomat. He is currently the senior editor of Kanal PIK TV's English Service (a Russian-language channel), lived in the Caucuses for several years,10/23/2012, "Drone violence along Armenian-Azerbaijani border could lead to war", www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/europe/121022/drone-violence-along-armenian-azerbaijani-border-could-lead-war)

Armenia and Azerbaijan could soon
AND
“an Armenian-Azerbaijani war will not be small. That’s the one thing I’m sure of.”
That causes extinction
Blank 2k
(Stephen, Prof. Research at Strategic Studies Inst. @ US Army War College, “U.S. Military Engagement with Transcaucasia and Central Asia”, www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/pub113.pdf)  

Washington’s burgeoning military-political-economic involvement seeks, inter alia, to demonstrate
AND
is not much we could do absent a strong and lasting regional commitment.

2
CONTENTION 2: HEGEMONY
Drone strikes hurts US soft power and hegemony
Stanford and NYU Law, International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic of Stanford Law School and the Global Justice Clinic of the NYU Law School, September 2012, “Living Under Drones: Death, Injury and Trauma to Civilians from US Drone Practices in Pakistan” http://www.livingunderdrones.org/report/

The significant global opposition
AND
tackle pressing global challenges.

Two ways the plan solves
A. Legitimacy
Drones risk US alliances because of legitimacy issues that exist due to a lack of transparency and codified law
Kennedy 13 (Greg, a Professor of Strategic Foreign Policy at the Defence Studies Department, King's College London, based at the Joint Services Command and Staff College, “Drones: Legitimacy and Anti-Americanism,” Parameters 42(4)/43(1) Winter-Spring 2013, Strategic Studies Institute at the United States Army War College
http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/parameters/Issues/WinterSpring_2013/3_Article_Kennedy.pdf
p. 26)
The current debate over the legitimacy
AND
.”6This article will address only the first three critical questions. 

Plan solves – clarified drone procedures solve perception of legitimacy
Machon 2006 (Maj. Matthew J., US Army Major and investigor for the School of Advanced Military Studies, “Targeted Killing as an Element of U.S. Foreign Policy in the War on Terror”, 5/25/06, http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/machon.pdf, p. 57)

To maintain international legitimacy and retain the moral high ground within the war on ¶
AND
appears to be the case thus far in the war on ¶ terror.

Lack of transparency and Congressional support now kills allied credibility
Jack Goldsmith, the Henry L. Shattuck Professor of Law at Harvard Law School and a member of the Hoover Institution’s Jean Perkins Task Force on National Security and Law and served in the Bush administration as assistant attorney general at the Office of Legal Counsel and as special counsel to the general counsel, 5/1/13, “How Obama Undermined the War on Terror”
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/112964/obamas-secrecy-destroying-american-support-counterterrorism

As a result, much of what the administration says about its secret war—
AND
and unfamiliar war for which he would need sustained domestic and international support." 

Legitimacy is key to exercise hard power
Nye 2004 (Joseph S. Nye, political scientist and former Harvard school of government dean, “Soft Power and American Foreign Policy” Vol. 119, No. 2, Summer 2004 , http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/20202345.pdf,p. 260-261)

In the global information age, the attractiveness of the United States will be crucial
AND
as the new realities of the information age. We cannot afford that. 

B. Democratic hypocrisy
Lack of transparency and codification makes the US seem like it is not following its own ideals – this hurts our standing in the world
John Podesta, former White House Chief of Staff under Clinton and Chair for the Center for American Progress and previously served on the National Security Council and is a graduate of Georgetown Law, 3/13/13, “Obama should lift secrecy on drones” http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/john-podesta-obama-should-lift-secrecy-on-drones/2013/03/13/7e98d7ca-8a9b-11e2-8d72-dc76641cb8d4_story.html
From Attorney General Eric Holder’s testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee last week,
AND
prologue to a farce or tragedy; or, perhaps, both.”

That kills hegemony
APSA 9 (American Political Science Association, The American Political Science Association is the
AND
, Consequences, and the Future,” Task Force Report, October 2009,
http://www.apsanet.org/media/PDFs/APSAUSStandingShortFinal.pdf
p. 3-4)

Unlike something a nation possesses and can easily measure, like wealth or military might
AND
understanding of Americans, even when it has no readily observable behavioral implications.

Decline in hegemony causes escalation of multiple global flashpoints for violence—there is no sustainable alternative to American leadership
Kagan 11 (Robert, Senior Associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and and a senior fellow in foreign policy at the Brookings Institution, “The Price of Power,” 1/24, http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/price-power_533696.html?page=3)

Today the international situation is also one of high risk. • The terrorists who
AND
impractical but that it is immoral and contrary to the nation’s true ideals.

3

US counter-terrorism efforts are failing. Overreliance on drones results in civilian deaths that cause blowback- terrorist groups use civilian deaths for recruitment and fundraising, their key strategies for resurgence.
Cronin, prof-GMU, 13 (Audrey Kurth, Professor of Public Policy at George Mason University and the author of How Terrorism Ends: Understanding the Decline and Demise of Terrorist Campaigns, “Why Drones Fail,” Foreign Affairs, Jul/Aug2013, Vol. 92, Issue 4)
Like any other weapon, armed drones
AND
, the United States risks multiplying its enemies and heightening their incentives to attack the country.
And, lack of transparency to the drone program collapses allied cooperation on terrorism, which is critical to intelligence sharing.
Human Rights First 13 (How to Ensure that the U.S. Drone Program does not Undermine Human Rights BLUEPRINT FOR THE NEXT ADMINISTRATION,  Updated April 13, http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/pdf/blueprints2012/HRF_Targeted_Killing_blueprint.pdf)
The Obama Administration has dramatically escalated targeted killing by drones as a central feature of
AND
allies and thereby impeded the flow of critical intelligence about terrorist operations.12
Allied cooperation on intelligence is critical to effective counterterrorism  
McGill and Gray 12 (Anna-Katherine Staser McGill, David H. Gray, “Challenges to International Counterterrorism Intelligence Sharing,”  Global Security Studies, Summer 2012, Volume 3, Issue 3, http://globalsecuritystudies.com/McGill20Intel20Share.pdf)
In his article “Old Allies and New Friends: Intelligence-Sharing in the War on Terror”, Derek Reveron states “the war on terror requires high
AND
 also be addressed in order to sustain current operations.

Globalization means only cooperation can solve terrorism—the world is too interconnected for local efforts to solve.
Cordesman 10, (Anthony H. Cordesman, Center for Strategic and International Studies Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy, International Cooperation in Counterterrorism: Redefining the Threat and the Requirement, March 11, 2010, http://csis.org/files/publication/100315_IntCoopinfightterror.pdf)

The first lesson in improving such cooperation
AND
more than create hollow, pointless tragedies. 

Terrorism causes miscalculation that draws in Russia and China and culminates in extinction- also causes rising alert levels
Ayson 2010 (Robert Ayson, Professor of Strategic Studies and Director of the Centre for Strategic Studies: New Zealand at the Victoria University of Wellington, “After a Terrorist Nuclear Attack: Envisaging Catalytic Effects,” Studies in Conflict and Terrorism, Volume 33, Issue 7, July, Available Online to Subscribing Institutions via InformaWorld)

A terrorist nuclear attack, and even the use of nuclear weapons in response by
AND
for the terrorists. This might not help the chances of nuclear restraint.

4
CONTENTION 4: SOLVENCY
Leaks about the program make a certain level of transparency inevitable – controlling them and codifying requirements into law is key to maintaining legitimacy of the program
Robert Chesney, a professor at the University of Texas School of Law and a nonresident senior fellow of the Brookings Institution and a distinguished scholar at the Robert S. Strauss Center for International Security and Law and is cofounder and contributor to the Lawfare Blog and writes frequently on topics relating to US counterterrorism policy and law, 6/18/13, “Trust, but Codify: Metadata, Drones, and Legal Transparency” http://www.lawfareblog.com/2013/06/trust-but-codify-metadata-drones/
There is a subtle connection between
AND
were brought into the light and entrenched in statute.

And, there is existing Congressional oversight now, but legally codifying it is key
Washington Post, 5/8/13, “Lawmaker wants military to promptly alert Congress about drone strikes” http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-05-08/world/39114073_1_drone-strikes-operations-oversight
Rep. Mac Thornberry (Tex.), the chairman of a
AND
so everybody knows,’ ” he said.

Drone strikes are legal now but only Congressional codification puts them on stronger political and diplomatic standing
Washington Post, 2/6/13, “A time to explain the drone campaign” http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-02-06/opinions/36948039_1_drone-strikes-legal-memos-obama-administration
THURSDAY’S CONFIRMATION hearing for John O. Brennan as director of the CIA
AND
 press and hotly debated by the country’s politicians; what’s missing is official U.S. information.
As for the legal memos, we have argued before that, while the administration’s
AND
, which would be a first step in the right direction.

Tournament: Shirley | Round: 1 | Opponent: Wayne State Leap-Messina | Judge: Kelsie
Contention 1 is Toys for Boys

Western voices have co-opted Malala’s story ignoring the militarism that we have inflicted upon the Pakistani population
Baig 13 (Assed, “Malala Yousafzai and the White Saviour Complex,” October 16th, http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/assed-baig/malala-yousafzai-white-saviour_b_3592165.html//ht)
When Malala Yusufzai was shot in the head by Taliban gunmen simply because she wanted
AND
that tells us that the West drops bombs to save girls like Malala.

(Insert analytic along these lines)
They only listen when it works for them, when it becomes critical of their program they’re told they’re not allowed to speak anymore— how can we use a story to identify how the judge should relate to info or how they’re doing it negatively

Criticism of targeted killing policy is disregarded in favor of the thrill of the kill—the unMANNED aerial vehicle has enhanced the increasingly masculinized frame of international war—this enframing obfuscates the forms of masculinity that produces militarism and ignores the feminine subjectivities
Salter 13 (Michael, professor of Sociology and Criminology –University of Western Sydney, “Toys for the Boys? Drones, Pleasure and Popular Culture in the Militarization of Policing” September 6th, 2013, http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/199/art253A10.1007252Fs10612-01392134.pdf?auth66=1384386811_74fa3effa7a9938388afb3a3868be1a8andext= .pdfht)
Singer (2012) has asked ‘Do drones undermine democracy?’ by reducing
AND
militarism as a symbolic code of gendered displacement and defence against social change.

The issue of national security surrounding debate over targeted killing reifies paternalistic responses to external threats, positing the US as the masculine protector
Bayard de Volo 12 (Lorraine, Professor of Women’s and Gender Studies at CU Boulder, “Unmanned?: Drones and the Revolution in Gender-Military Affairs,” http://www.ecpg-barcelona.com/sites/default/files/Ppr-Unmanned-ECPG.pdf/ht)
Protector or Predator?: Masculinity and the State¶ At the 2010 White House Correspondents’
AND
U.S. toughness to other nations and non-state militaries. 

The introduction of targeted killing as a tool of warfare has only further masculinized the international sphere, blurring the lines between warfare and masculine pleasure
Wall and Monahan 11, (Tyler Wall Eastern Kentucky University, Torin Monahan Vanderbilt University) “Surveillance and violence from afar: The politics of drones and liminal security-scapes” Theoretical Criminology 15 (3), 2011, http://torinmonahan.com/papers/UAVs_Wall-Monahan.pdf
*Modified for Language
But the discourse of discriminatory precision bombing is primarily a fantasy because civilians are still
AND
little bloodthirsty. But it’s f cool’. (Shachtman, 2005)

This has lead to the development of graphic displays of the killing of believed combatants in war zones labeled ‘drone porn’ intended for sexual arousal-this is the military’s attempt to ensconce the larger public in the supposed allure of drone warfare
Simoni 10 (MA in International Peace Studies from the Kroc Institute at the University of Notre Dame, “Drone Porn – The Arousing Nature of War” January 16th 2010, http://www.genderacrossborders.com/2010/01/16/drone-porn-the-arousing-nature-of-war/ht)
Drone porn. Have you heard of it? I hadn’t. And I certainly
AND
speculate about the intent, I’ve chosen to focus on the undeniable results. 

This militarized engagement of the population is responsible for endless wars and masculinized forms of military control and colonialism
Chandra Talpade Mohanty, Gender Studies at Syracuse University, 2011
3/26 “Imperial Democracies, Militarised Zones,  Feminist Engagements” Economic and Political Weekly vol xlvi no 13
The post-11 September 2001 consolidation of imperial  democracies and securitised regimes in the
AND
violence. Susan Comfort (2011) argues that the  current imperialist warfare economy
necessitates militarised  conditions of labour control, racist profiling and sexual violence.  Militarised forces
AND
-Mexico border share  designers, builders, and profiteers  (Platt 2011).
Since its “founding” in 1776, the US has engaged in military  conflict
AND
culture, language,  educational systems, and na-  tional values and identities

We advocate an end to the war powers authority of the president in the area of targeted killing.
Contention 2 is Technicism

Techno-strategic discourse functions de-politicise the feminine by forced assimilation into the political—those without expertise are excluded in favor of those that know the “jargon”
Elshtain 90 (Jean Bethke, former Laura Spelman Rockefeller Professor of Social and Political Ethics in the University of Chicago Divinity School with a joint appointment in the department of political science, 1990, “Women, Militarism, and War: Essays in History, Politics, and Social Theory”, pp. 29-30 | aps)
During that year she collected insightful anecdotes, many of which are detailed in this
AND
did not distance us from nor disguise that which it purports to describe.

The voice of masculinity is prevalent throughout foreign policy discourse—only deconstructing technicism’s claim to monopoly over rationality can re-vitalize policy analysis
Elshtain 90 (Jean Bethke, former Laura Spelman Rockefeller Professor of Social and Political Ethics in the University of Chicago Divinity School with a joint appointment in the department of political science, 1990, “Women, Militarism, and War: Essays in History, Politics, and Social Theory”, pp.50-51 | aps)
The question for those of us who do choose to learn is what use are
AND
voices—diverse voices whose conversations with each other will invent those futures. 

Technicism blurs the feminine voice in order to assimilate the feminine into the masculine—our analysis is crucial to remedy techno-managerialism
McSwain 7 (Cynthia J., Department of Public Administration School of Business and Public Administration , George Washington University,  Orion F. White Jr., Center for Public Administration, Virginia Polytechnic and State University, 6/26/07, “Transfiguring the golem: technicism, human relations technology, and the human project”, pp. 951-2 | aps)
We see little hope that human relations technology will serve as a remedy for the
AND
is appropriate that the sort of changes we hope for would begin here. 

Technicism relegates decisionmaking to those deemed experts—this magnifies conflict on a global scale and puts us in a permanent state of war
Fasching 1993 (Darrell J., Professor of Religious Studies at University of South Florida, The Ethical Challenge of Auschwitz and Hiroshima, Pp. 232-233) 

These technological barbarians, says Neuhaus, "are composed of the most sophisticated and
AND
demonic and inhuman over human self-transcendence and compassion for the stranger.

Our impact outweighs on probability and magnitude – risk assessment is epistemologically biased towards white male elites who discount the severity of everyday localized violence in destroying marginalized communities.
Verchick 96 Robert, Assistant Professor, University of Missouri -- Kansas City School of Law. J.D., Harvard Law School, 1989, “IN A GREENER VOICE: FEMINIST THEORY AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE” 19 Harv. Women's L.J. 23
Because risk assessment is based on statistical measures of risk, policymakers view it as
AND
effectively, must include the voices of those typically excluded from its practice. 

Contention 3 is Debate

The militarization of public space normalizes violence that is fed to us by the empire as a product of fear-based politics—the embrace of drone warfare and militaristic foreign policy tools crowds out the feminine subjects
Giroux 9/25 (Henry A., continues putting out fine literature, admirable, 9/25/13, “Beyond Savage Politics and Dystopian Nightmares”, http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/19025-beyond-savage-politics-and-dystopian-nightmares | aps)
Unfortunately, the dark and dire images of America’s dysimagination machine made visible endlessly in
AND
television dramas, they have become the most visible humans occupying public schools.

The production of the militarized student demands dissent in public spaces like debate—the aff forms a public pedagogy that cultivates new sites of democracy
Giroux 4 (Henry A., cool dude, 2004, “War on Terror: The Militarising of Public Space and Culture in the United States”, The Third Text, Vol. 18, Issue 4, pp. 220-221 | aps)
As the forces of militarisation are ratcheted up within multiple spaces in the body politic
AND
which a democratic future both at home and abroad stands in the balance.

The view of life as a state of permanent warfare subordinates society to militaristic tendencies—this destroys deliberation
Giroux 4 (Henry A., a gentleman and scholar, 2004, “War on Terror: The Militarising of Public Space and Culture in the United States”, The Third Text, Vol. 18, Issue 4, pp. 218-220 | aps)
Militarism in both its old and new forms views life as a form of permanent
AND
as a particular ideology and cultural politics that militarisation has to be opposed.