IRAN AFF/NEG

ITRA PMC Observation 2. Inherency

A. The US has issued sanctions on Iran in the past- new arms organizations require additional legislation.
Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2010 (CISADA), which was signed into law by President Barack Obama in July 2010. The act now lacks enforcement given that many of the previously identified threats have altered their organization to avoid US sanction. Committee chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) "Given the grave nature of the Iranian threat, it is my hope that my colleagues will support further strengthening the bill as it moves through the legislative process and not fall into the trap of enabling the Executive Branch to ignore U.S. law"

Plan: The United States Federal Government should, via an act of congress, significantly reduce the arms trade from Iran by implementing the Iran Threat Reduction Act. Funding and Enforcement are Normal Means.

Observation 3. Solvency

A. Plan solves Iranian arms deals.

The bill is meant to close loopholes that Ros-Lehtinen and others believe the administration is using to avoid enforcement of the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2010 (CISADA), which was signed into law by President Barack Obama in July 2010. To date, only two companies have been sanctioned under provisions in CISADA that were designed to clamp down on Iran's energy sector -- one Iranian state-owned corporation, and one corporation from Belarus. The new bill eliminates some of the waivers available to the president, raises the bar for other waivers, and expands the list of targeted Iranian officials and entities. The new legislation for the first time targets Iran's crude oil exports and the dominant role played by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) in the development, production, and distribution of Iran's oil," said Mark Dubowitz, the executive director of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, who helped develop the House bill. "With the introduction of this new legislation, companies now are on notice that buyer beware': If you're buying crude from Iran, you're buying it from the IRGC, and that's bad for business, bad for your reputation and could make you the target of U.S. sanctions." Other original co-sponsors are committee ranking Democrat Howard Berman (D-CA), Dan Burton (RIN), Edward R. Royce (R-CA), Brad Sherman (D-CA), Steve Chabot (R-OH), Gary Ackerman (D-NY), and Ted Deutch (D-FL). "We must use every economic tool available to force Iran to end its pursuit of nuclear weapons," Berman said in his own statement. "As we await vigorous enforcement by the Obama Administration under CISADA, we must continually look ahead and examine additional means to pressure Iran, and that is exactly what this new legislation is intended to do."

B. US will be modeled.
Empirically allies fall in behind the United States applying our sanctions to Iran, which maximizes their effectiveness. The United States has cooperated with Russia and Europe on controlling sanctions aimed at defusing nuclear capability in Iran. Additionally a US developed travel ban for Iranian leaders was modeled by Britian and Canada.

Advantage One.) Democracy

A. Arms trade increasing now to counterbalance United States influence.

Sen. Lindsey Graham was talking about the Islamic Republic of Iran, specifically the death trade plied by the mullahs, their Revolutionary Guard Corps, their Hezbollah operatives, and the assorted jihadists under their control. And while the plying is being done in Iraq, it is being done against America. Irans fortification of the Afghan Taliban also continues at a steady clip. It may even be spiking now as the planned drawdown of American forces gets under way. Again, the mullahs are determined to pose as Allahs avengers, casting the infidels out of Dar alIslam.

B. This is destabilizing Iraq pushing them towards a civil war.

Iran has been funneling large amounts of money and arms into Southern Iraq, in order to help support the Shiite population of Iraq. This makes civil war inevitable, because the insurgents have a continuous supply of aid, which allows for constant violence.

C. Iraq civil war causes massive war in the Middle East which breeds terrorism.
The US will be forced to use stronger technology to deter other nations from invading Iraq, which causes Middle East war. Iraq will be torn apart by warring nations trying to fight to secure the country as their own, which causes small scales wars to breakout. Big powers like China and Russia are drawn-in to protect their oil interests, which means the three great powers become entrenched in wars that spread like wildfire around the Middle East. This inevitably leads to the launch of nuclear weapons, which causes extinction through nuclear winter.

D. Left unchecked, terrorism will quickly escalate and result in nuclear deployment.

1. Continued instability causes terrorist groups to coalesce, increasing their political potency and ability to use nuclear weapons.
Chronic political instability in Yemen will cause terrorist components to coalesce, forming a cohesive threat to the U.S. and Middle Eastern stability as a whole. Observers fear that terrorists could obtain nuclear assets from Pakistan if such organizations appeared credible to the Pakistani government. The creation of an enduring militant safe-haven in Yemen, dominated by al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, would raise significant issues over the security of the Middle East as a whole. Nuclear material in the hands of militants would create a new dynamic in the region and throughout the world, which transcends any existing conventional threat.

2. Even a minor nuclear detonation would kill hundreds of thousands immediately.

A nuclear weapon detonation in a major city will instantly kill 500,00 people, with many hundreds of thousands dying shortly thereafter. On a normal working day, more than 500,000 people crowd the area within a half-mile radius of Times Square. The explosion of a 10-kiloton device in midtown Manhattan would kill them all instantly. Hundreds of thousands of others would die from radiation poisoning in the days ahead.

3. Terrorist use of nuclear weapons causes nuclear retaliation by the U.S., ending the lives of hundreds of millions of people.
The United States policy of nuclear accountability calls for massive retaliation, even in the instance of a terrorist attack. Directive 17 requires that we strike back against the state that provided the uranium to the terrorist organization once the material is identified and its original location is determined. This guarantees nuclear war and the deaths of hundreds of millions of people are the U.S. rains nuclear bombs down on every conceivable target in the proliferating state.

Advantage Two.) Leadership

A. The United States stands to secure a great deal of influence from stopping Iranian arms proliferation.
"U.S. policy towards Iran has offered a lot of bark, but not enough bite. This new bipartisan legislation would bring to bear the full weight of the U.S. by seeking to close the loopholes in existing energy and financial sanctions laws, while increasing the type and number of sanctions to be imposed," The main point is to say that the Obama administration should be less concerned about zoning issues in Jerusalem and more concerned with the threat from Iran. To maintain comparative advantage into the 21st century the United States must seek to eliminate the avenues for Iran to continue to counterbalance US efforts in the middle east.

B. Sanctions are essential- military engagement risks loss of leadership and middle eastern war.
A hard line stance with Iran could be detrimental to the United States leadership capabilities Should the United States undertake military action against Iran, the ramifications in Iraq would be immediate and extreme. If the US attacks Iran, it is probable that American forces - already taxed by attacks from Sunni factions - will also face reprisal attacks in Iraq from Shi'ite factions loyal to Iran. The result will be a dramatic escalation in US and civilian casualties, US forces will be required to bunker themselves further into their bases, and US forces will find themselves required to fight the very government they just finished helping into power. Iraq, already a seething cauldron, will sink further into chaos.

C. A collapse of United States hegemony would yield extinction.

The wealthiest ports of the global economy would become the targets of plunderers and pirates. Without a blue water United States navy, terrorists could disrupt the freedom of seas, targeting oil tankers, aircraft carriers, and cruise liners. American primacy helps keep a number of complicated relationships aligned--between Greece and Turkey, Israel and Egypt, South Korea and Japan, India and Pakistan, Indonesia and Australia. The communications capabilities and global logistical reach of the U.S. military alleviates natural disaster, earthquake, flood, drought, volcanic eruption, typhoon or tsunami, the United States assists the countries in need. Limited nuclear wars could devastate numerous regions. Beginning in the Korean Peninsula, the lack of United States troops will give North Korea the go ahead to invade South Korea. In 2002, it was our diplomats that prevented a nuclear showdown between India and Pakistan over Kashmir. The United States would not have enough money to continue to fund disease prevention, so the great plagues of aids and malaria would continue their deadly work. There is no nation or group of nations that can fill in for a United States power vacuum. We will not enter in a new multipolar harmony- we will return to an apolar world with regional hegemons wreaking havoc throughout the world.

Observation 2. Inherency

A. The US has issued sanctions on Iran in the past- new arms organizations require additional legislation.
Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2010 (CISADA), which was signed into law by President Barack Obama in July 2010. The act now lacks enforcement given that many of the previously identified threats have altered their organization to avoid US sanction.

 Committee chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) "Given the grave nature of the Iranian threat, it is my hope that my colleagues will support further strengthening the bill as it moves through the legislative process and not fall into the trap of enabling the Executive Branch to ignore U.S. law"

Plan: The United States Federal Government should, via an act of congress, significantly reduce the arms trade from Iran by implementing the Iran Threat Reduction Act. Funding and Enforcement are Normal Means.

Observation 3. Solvency

A. Plan solves Iranian arms deals.

The bill is meant to close loopholes that Ros-Lehtinen and others believe the administration is using to avoid enforcement of the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2010 (CISADA), which was signed into law by President Barack Obama in July 2010. To date, only two companies have been sanctioned under provisions in CISADA that were designed to clamp down on Iran's energy sector -- one Iranian state-owned corporation, and one corporation from Belarus. The new bill eliminates some of the waivers available to the president, raises the bar for other waivers, and expands the list of targeted Iranian officials and entities. The new legislation for the first time targets Iran's crude oil exports and the dominant role played by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) in the development, production, and distribution of Iran's oil," said Mark Dubowitz, the executive director of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, who helped develop the House bill. "With the introduction of this new legislation, companies now are on notice that buyer beware': If you're buying crude from Iran, you're buying it from the IRGC, and that's bad for business, bad for your reputation and could make you the target of U.S. sanctions." Other original co-sponsors are committee ranking Democrat Howard Berman (D-CA), Dan Burton (RIN), Edward R. Royce (R-CA), Brad Sherman (D-CA), Steve Chabot (R-OH), Gary Ackerman (D-NY), and Ted Deutch (D-FL). "We must use every economic tool available to force Iran to end its pursuit of nuclear weapons," Berman said in his own statement. "As we await vigorous enforcement by the Obama Administration under CISADA, we must continually look ahead and examine additional means to pressure Iran, and that is exactly what this new legislation is intended to do."

B. US will be modeled.
Empirically allies fall in behind the United States applying our sanctions to Iran, which maximizes their effectiveness. The United States has cooperated with Russia and Europe on controlling sanctions aimed at defusing nuclear capability in Iran. Additionally a US developed travel ban for Iranian leaders was modeled by Britian and Canada.

Advantage One.) Democracy

A. Arms trade increasing now to counterbalance United States influence.

Sen. Lindsey Graham was talking about the Islamic Republic of Iran, specifically the death trade plied by the mullahs, their Revolutionary Guard Corps, their Hezbollah operatives, and the assorted jihadists under their control. And while the plying is being done in Iraq, it is being done against America. Irans fortification of the Afghan Taliban also continues at a steady clip. It may even be spiking now as the planned drawdown of American forces gets under way. Again, the mullahs are determined to pose as Allahs avengers, casting the infidels out of Dar alIslam.

B. This is destabilizing Iraq pushing them towards a civil war.

Iran has been funneling large amounts of money and arms into Southern Iraq, in order to help support the Shiite population of Iraq. This makes civil war inevitable, because the insurgents have a continuous supply of aid, which allows for constant violence.

C. Iraq civil war causes massive war in the Middle East which breeds terrorism.
The US will be forced to use stronger technology to deter other nations from invading Iraq, which causes Middle East war. Iraq will be torn apart by warring nations trying to fight to secure the country as their own, which causes small scales wars to breakout. Big powers like China and Russia are drawn-in to protect their oil interests, which means the three great powers become entrenched in wars that spread like wildfire around the Middle East. This inevitably leads to the launch of nuclear weapons, which causes extinction through nuclear winter.

D. Left unchecked, terrorism will quickly escalate and result in nuclear deployment.

1. Continued instability causes terrorist groups to coalesce, increasing their political potency and ability to use nuclear weapons.
Chronic political instability in Yemen will cause terrorist components to coalesce, forming a cohesive threat to the U.S. and Middle Eastern stability as a whole. Observers fear that terrorists could obtain nuclear assets from Pakistan if such organizations appeared credible to the Pakistani government. The creation of an enduring militant safe-haven in Yemen, dominated by al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, would raise significant issues over the security of the Middle East as a whole. Nuclear material in the hands of militants would create a new dynamic in the region and throughout the world, which transcends any existing conventional threat.

2. Even a minor nuclear detonation would kill hundreds of thousands immediately.

A nuclear weapon detonation in a major city will instantly kill 500,00 people, with many hundreds of thousands dying shortly thereafter. On a normal working day, more than 500,000 people crowd the area within a half-mile radius of Times Square. The explosion of a 10-kiloton device in midtown Manhattan would kill them all instantly. Hundreds of thousands of others would die from radiation poisoning in the days ahead.

3. Terrorist use of nuclear weapons causes nuclear retaliation by the U.S., ending the lives of hundreds of millions of people.
The United States policy of nuclear accountability calls for massive retaliation, even in the instance of a terrorist attack. Directive 17 requires that we strike back against the state that provided the uranium to the terrorist organization once the material is identified and its original location is determined. This guarantees nuclear war and the deaths of hundreds of millions of people are the U.S. rains nuclear bombs down on every conceivable target in the proliferating state.

Advantage Two.) Leadership

A. The United States stands to secure a great deal of influence from stopping Iranian arms proliferation.
"U.S. policy towards Iran has offered a lot of bark, but not enough bite. This new bipartisan legislation would bring to bear the full weight of the U.S. by seeking to close the loopholes in existing energy and financial sanctions laws, while increasing the type and number of sanctions to be imposed," The main point is to say that the Obama administration should be less concerned about zoning issues in Jerusalem and more concerned with the threat from Iran. To maintain comparative advantage into the 21st century the United States must seek to eliminate the avenues for Iran to continue to counterbalance US efforts in the middle east.

B. Sanctions are essential- military engagement risks loss of leadership and middle eastern war.
A hard line stance with Iran could be detrimental to the United States leadership capabilities Should the United States undertake military action against Iran, the ramifications in Iraq would be immediate and extreme. If the US attacks Iran, it is probable that American forces - already taxed by attacks from Sunni factions - will also face reprisal attacks in Iraq from Shi'ite factions loyal to Iran. The result will be a dramatic escalation in US and civilian casualties, US forces will be required to bunker themselves further into their bases, and US forces will find themselves required to fight the very government they just finished helping into power. Iraq, already a seething cauldron, will sink further into chaos.

C. A collapse of United States hegemony would yield extinction.

The wealthiest ports of the global economy would become the targets of plunderers and pirates. Without a blue water United States navy, terrorists could disrupt the freedom of seas, targeting oil tankers, aircraft carriers, and cruise liners. American primacy helps keep a number of complicated relationships aligned--between Greece and Turkey, Israel and Egypt, South Korea and Japan, India and Pakistan, Indonesia and Australia. The communications capabilities and global logistical reach of the U.S. military alleviates natural disaster, earthquake, flood, drought, volcanic eruption, typhoon or tsunami, the United States assists the countries in need. Limited nuclear wars could devastate numerous regions. Beginning in the Korean Peninsula, the lack of United States troops will give North Korea the go ahead to invade South Korea. In 2002, it was our diplomats that prevented a nuclear showdown between India and Pakistan over Kashmir. The United States would not have enough money to continue to fund disease prevention, so the great plagues of aids and malaria would continue their deadly work. There is no nation or group of nations that can fill in for a United States power vacuum. We will not enter in a new multipolar harmony- we will return to an apolar world with regional hegemons wreaking havoc throughout the world.

***NEG***
Solvency Answers: Sanctions Fail A. The United States has proposed several rounds of sanctions to contain arms trades in Iran, lack of oversight dooms them to failure.
The U.S. Department of the Treasury yesterday took action to designate two major Iranian commercial entities -Tidewater Middle East Co. and Iran Air - under Iran sanctions regulations. Tidewater Middle East Co. is a port operating company owned by Irans Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) that has been used by the IRGC for illicit shipments. Sanctions are a paper tiger to Iran as they have already made moves to counter the United States economically, international pressure has peaked with no results from Iran. Additionally Irans constant denial of their illicit weapons programs casts doubt on US action, splintering its international fortitude.

B. Sanctions are ineffective

Iran's largest shipping company used a vast network of shell companies to move $60 million through New York bank accounts over the past three years in violation of U.S. trade sanctions, prosecutors said on Monday. In a 317-count indictment, Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. alleged that Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines, or Irisl, and its affiliates used aliases in Singapore, the United Arab Emirates and the U.K. to trick banks into processing wire transfers that normally would have been blocked or seized. "They would create new companiescorporate alter egosto take the place of the sanctioned companies in international transactions," Mr. Vance said. The international shipping industry conducts business primarily in U.S. currency and therefore firms involved in international shipping must have access to the U.S. financial system, he said. A New York times article that came out right after the admission to a secret nuclear facility near Qom indicates that this is the secret piece in the puzzle for Iranian nuclear development. History proves- Sanctions have been instituted on four different occasions. Hostage Crisis Iran-Iraq War Rafsanjani and Khatami governments Ahmadinejad government- UN security council rez 1737 Iran will RESTART proliferation in a world of new sanctions because it will be their ONLY viable option- The new round of sanctions threatens WORLDWIDE pressure. The IAEA predicted that the 3,000 plus centrifuges that would be operational in this facility could provide enough HEU to facilitate a large scale nuclear weapon.

LIBYA PULL OUT AFF

Plan: The USFG should alter its current level of military presence in Libya by removing all of its military presence in Libya.

Advantage One: Peace

A. The situation in Libya is at a stalemate. With Qaddafi maintaining control over the East and the rebels having successfully made progress in the West things are better for the rebels than when they started, but have produced a stalemate in the Libyan Civil War. The stalemate is noticeable in the fact that France, the country that spearheaded the effort to intervene in Libya and remove Qaddafi, has turned to negotiating with Qaddafi.

B. The negotiations with France will fail if the US does not step down. NATO needs to be unified on what their next course of action is. With France turning to negotiations, and the US and the rest of NATO still involved in military operations to remove Qaddafi progress will be nearly impossible. Since the US contributes 75% of NATOs defence budget, and other countries will be pulling their forces within the next 90 days (Norway has announced it will withdraw its six F-16 fighters on August 1, and Italy is pulling out its Garibaldi aircraft carrier), if the US removed itself from the operation the rest of NATO would have to follow suit with too little resources to continue to engage Qaddafi. This would allow real negotiations to take place between France and Qaddafi.

C. Succesful negotiations are necessary for peace talks to succeed The rebels have vowed that they will not stop until Qaddafi steps down, and Qaddafi to do whatever necessary to maintain his position in Libya, which he argues is merely a figurehead position with the country being ruled by the people. Negotiations with France can produce a solution by taking the route of not forcing Qaddafi into exile, but mandating the relinquishment of all military and administrative control over the country. This would allow for peace talks with the rebel Transitional National Council to finally put an end to the negotiation.

D. A peaceful resolution to the conflict now through talks would save countless lives and create a stable government. Deaths due to the conflict thus far have led to between 3000 and 6000 deaths according to estimates from the World Health Organization and the Libyan League for Human Rights. This is over a span of only about 6 months, and all indications are that the conflict will last much longer if the goal remains to forcibly remove Qaddafi. These deaths are actually much more largely due to NATO efforts in the war, including carpet bombings, and patrol drones which have killed not only Qaddafis forces, but also many civilians. Peace talks would also ensure a more lasting solution, setting up a mutually agreed upon government structure that divides power evenly. This is critical for lasting peace in the region and better governance.

Advantage Two: US Interventionism

A. The US has been losing favor in the Muslim world and around the world for its interventionist policies in the Middle East. Since Obama took office, our Soft Power has massively increased overnight around the world in all areas except for with the Muslim world. This has largely been due to the United States interventionist policies in the Middle East that has turned them into the oppressive occupant and an enemy of the people.

B. The US was reluctant to enter Libya. While Britain and France were calling for military intervention, it was the U.S. and the Obama administration that wanted to take things slow, insisting that organic revolutions are preferable. Obama is worried about intervening in Libya being perceived as just another instance of intervening in the Middle East to topple one leader in favor of one more friendly to the United States. The U.S. has yet to recognize the Libyan rebels, or provide them with direct military (measures France has gone through with).

C. The plans decision to pull out of Libya sets a new precedent in U.S. foreign policy that demonstrates that we are willing to allow the people of the Middle East to work out their problems. This is critical to Soft Power. The US has largely sat back during the recent revolutions and allowed the people to work together in order to manifest organic change. The US must do the same in Libya at a time when it is being pressured by NATO to intervene in order to demonstrate that it is serious about democratic movements, particularly those in the Middle East. This will be important to gain allies at a time when many governments in the region are being replaced.

D. Raising our Soft Power in the region will be critical, especially at this time to fight back against transnational threats, such as international terrorism and a laundry list of other problems. As the U.S. has been able to successfully demonstrate its hard power lately, even taking down Osama Bin Laden (symbol of war on terror), it must now back this up with Soft Power, especially as governments transition into new democracies throughout the Middle East region in order to guard against other transnational issues including disease spread, climate change, and the continued threat of malicious nonstate actors.

INCREASE ASSISTANCE TO LIBYA AFF

Background: The US has sent non-lethal aid to the Libyan rebels. Recently the president proposed action that would provided urgently needed non-lethal assistance to support efforts in Libya with $25 million. After the head of the rebels expressed concern saying that they still need lethal help to continue being competitive, the president refused to do so. Leaving the rebels without proper equipment needed to take over a regime.

Lybia's rebel forces has reached a stalemate and will lose without weaponry and training. As the Libyan rebels are preparing to push forward in their drive on Tripoli in a bid to isolate Muammar Gaddafi in the ever-closing capital, they are starting to slow down as Gaddafi's men are noticeably better trained and have better guns. The recruits who hope to overthrow Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, though they might have the resolve necessary to make good fighters, their fly-by-night training is too brief, and it does not stress the combat fundamentals required to produce properly trained soldiers. With both out-dated weapons and weak training, it looks like the rebels are coming to a halt.

Libya's rebel forces needs the US to supply them with weapons if they are to make a breakthrough in their fight against Gaddafi. Commander of the rebel forces said, his forces would make more progress if they were better armed, adding that earlier shipments of weapons had helped them to advance in the western city of Misrata, but they are again faced with a shortage. Colonel Gaddafi has heavy weaponry such as tanks along with lots of artillery. To be able to withstand this type of weaponry and win, the rebels will need some light weapons to create a balance.

Plan: The US will alter its current level of military presence in Lybia, by aiding the Libyan rebels with small arms and training.

Solvency: The rebels will take international help with weapons. Fernana, commander of the rebel forces since he was elected leader of the region's various military councils on March 15 has stated that he "welcomed any international help," regarding weapons.

Past weaponry aid has proven to work for the rebels. The revolutionary forces in Misrata have achieved successive victories as a result of shipments of weapons that they were able to obtain. Though now its time for more shipments as the rebels advance to Gaddafis stronghold, but no one is willing to lend a hand. With more advanced weaponry the Libyan rebels will be able to prove themselves once more.

Advantage One: Gaddafi is fucked up. Gaddafi has complete control and the rebels chance of victory is looking slim. Right now the main concern is that the Libyan rebels will over-reach and underestimate in their haste move west. Though they have been successful, they may fail to realize that Gaddafis forces are stronger closer to Tripoli and the rebels are weakened and in need of supplies and better training. Right now they are not a match for the regime forces, if they move hastily and get destroyed theres nothing to stop regime from moving right back down the coast road. Gaddafi has had complete control of Libya for forty years and does not seem to be ready to give up his power yet. As uprising has swept across the Arab world Gaddafi lashed out with a level of violence unseen in any of the other uprisings. Making it known that his regime can continue for years to come, and with family members to follow it seems very likely it will unless the US steps up. Gaddafi has been responsible for hundreds of civilian deaths while trying to fight the rebels. In April 23 civlians were killed by Gaddafi rocket attack on residential district of Misurata, proving Gaddafis reckless behavior and non-caring attitude.

Plan ensures rebels victory. Giving the rebels small arms and training techniques will ensure a victory. The rebels have fought back against Gaddafis high level of violence and has won tribal leaders and an increasing share of the military to their side, seizing the eastern half of the country. Lately there has been a slow down with the rebels as they have run short on arms and their new recruits have not been up to par, by giving the rebels this they will be able to come up with a victory and topple the regime.

Gaddafi is responsible for death and dehumanization. It has been over 40 years since Col. Muammar Gaddafi came to power in libya and for nearly as long the West has watched his every move. The financier of an eclectic array of guerrilla groups around the globe, he is responsible for many of the deadliest terrorist attacks in the mid-80s, including the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Scotland that killed 270 people. Gaddafi has also been seen as criminally responsible for killing, wounding and imprisoning hundreds of civilians, and the International Criminal Court has issued an arrest warrant because of it. The status quo will mean that millions of people will continue to be dehumanized and murdered because of Gaddafis regime.

Advantage Two: Oil Security. Gaddafi threatens oil security for the US. Gaddafi has already threatened to torch his countrys oil fields saying its either me or chaos, but will not do it as the rebels are closing in on him, advancing from the south and west. If the Libyan rebels fall back and the Gaddafi regime takes control of more oil fields, which would be from lack of guns and training, then Gaddafi would probably torch them as this would be a direct blow to the rebellious tribes. Gaddafi would and

has risked his own people to be able to stay in power, by torching the oil fields it would weaken the rebels enough to gain a victory, and he knows this. A similar situation has happened before with Saddam Hussein in Desert Storm, where he ordered his troops to set fire to some 700 oil wells. Nine months passed before the last fire was put out. It is safe to say that Gaddafi is an irrational actor and could do the same.

Plan solves. Plan ensures that the rebels win so that Gaddafi is kicked out of power and can no longer control Libyas oil supply. Also it makes sure that the rebels do not fall back and give Gaddafi an opportunity to actually torch the oil fields.

Food price inflation. Oil prices would go up substantially even from these levels. Libya supplies 2% of the worlds oil where Europe and the US buys a lot of it. With higher oil prices commuting is expected to be to expensive for most, and electricity will be to high for most to use. With all these conditions along with a hurting economy, people will be forced to choice between getting gas to go to work or feeding their children or making their house payments. The result of increased gasoline prices is starvation, homelessness, and lack of other necessities because of the lack of money when the cost of production rises along with inflation but wages merely decrease instead of increase.

Starvation. Peripheral members of society, already locked in poverty, will lack the resources to purchase food in a world of severe price spikes. This will result in massive starvation as an entire years worth of food production comes in below expected levels without any course for adjustment. High food prices could potentially kill millions of people. Additionally starvation is the most dehumanizing way to die, as it takes weeks to kill you as individual organs shut down, causing excruciating pain, all while psychosis, paranoia, and hallucinations set in among the victims.

SUDAN AFF/NEG
Observation 1 Inherency Sudan became the worlds newest nation saturday July 2011
The largely Christian people of southern Sudan voted last January almost unanimously to split from the Arab-Muslim-dominated north. Southern sudan's split from northern Sudan came after the people vote on a referendum last year

Southern Sudan is currently focusing on forming a new functioning government North Sudanese are Arabs and Muslims, the South are black and Christian or animist.

Observation 2 harms Southern Sudan needs monetary and structural guidance

Currently there has been plenty of verbal support for the new nation but no real world tangible support

Violence is still high because of ethnic tensions

the ethnic and religious rivalries are threatening the stability of a country missing everything but not oil

Not enough clinics to service the people

there is an overall lack of health services available to the victims and clinics cannot adequately respond to rape, unwanted pregnancies, STI and HIV infection.

The south is blaming the north for the violence that has continued
Juba is still accusing Khartoum of supporting militia and rebel groups in the South in order to destabilize the new country.

Plan text : the united states federal government through normal legislative and executive means will increase it's diplomatic ties with the government of southern Sudan by officially proposing that southern Sudan join the united nations. AOA- USFG AOE - USFG Timeframe - now funding - Normal means

Advantage 1 Fem Harms Women treated as second class citizens

The IRC report says that safety and security problems identified by women in the Lakes region include economic violence, early or forced marriage, domestic rape, sexual violence, cattle raiding and tribal clashes.

Violence against women is high now

Violence against women is rampant, devastating and tolerated in South Sudan and the new country needs to address these gross human rights violations and train people, especially soldiers, to respect womens rights

Historically worst forms of abuses

In a civil war that lasted over 21 years, women and young girls have been the victims of the worst human rights abuses. And as South Sudan and the world
celebrate the birth of a new nation, it is incumbent on the new government to speedily address the gross human violations to cultivate hope among the survivors .

This type of violence is tolerated

"Violence against women and girls is pervasive, devastating, and a tolerated problem in Sudan, a legacy of Sudan's brutal civil war, during which it was commonplace.

Services for victims is scarce

As violence increases in the region, so will rape and sexual abuse, yet assistance for survivors and prevention services are critically scarce," says
Susan Purdin, who oversees International Rescue Committee (IRC) programmes in South Sudan.

Links The USFG Will nominate Southern Sudan to the un Un has special committees and groups that deal with women's and gender rights Bring problems to light Solvency The UN can solve for human rights violations
Chapter VI calls for the solution of international disputes by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means. Under this chapter any United
Nations Member may bring any dispute, or any situation which might lead to international friction or give rise to a dispute, to the attention of the Security Council or of the General Assembly

UN can send in reinforcements

By accepting the Convention, States commit themselves to undertake a series of measures to end discrimination against women in all forms, including to incorporate the principle of equality of men and women in their legal system, abolish all discriminatory laws and adopt appropriate ones prohibiting discrimination against women;

The UN provides infrastructure for trying criminals

establish tribunals and other public institutions to ensure the effective protection of women against discrimination; and to ensure elimination of all acts of discrimination against women by persons, organizations or enterprises

Impacts

Significantly decrease the cyclical dehumanization of women in the status quo Taking a stance now means future generations will be more likely to not follow in the old path Increase quality of life Decreased in atrocities means women will have the ability to focus on school, vocational training, etc. Increase in Education means better quality of life for children/dependents of women Increase equality Promotes prosperity Internal growth Decrease the spread of HIV and STD

Advantage Bizcon Uniqueness

80 per cent of Sudans oil reserves and deposits of gold, iron and copper still to be explored and exploited, might soon become the best place to do business in Africa. The huge quantity of foreign investment being poured into the country reflects the jostling of the main global players (the U.S. and China above all) to become its privileged trading partners. South Sudan will not be an easy bet for investors. Many sticky issues remain on the table, the main one being the normalization of strained relations with the North. South Sudan is currently facing six internal rebellions, the main ones led by disgruntled former officers of the SPLA who decided to change sides and whose wars have caused hundreds of deaths since the beginning of the year.

Link Proposal to join the un will solidify an increase in new investors Additionally it will bring reassurance to older investors that the country is a good place to invest

Internal links the government in Juba does not take this position seriously. Its just a tactic to improve his negotiating position, Marial says of Bashir. Khartoum gets 70 per cent of its budget from the oil. If Bashir shuts down the pipeline, he will shoot himself in the foot. The Northern government has acknowledged that the secession of the South will result in the North losing some 35 per cent of its budget South depends even more on its oil exports, which account for 98 per cent of current revenues, The country doesnt produce anything. Twenty years of war have made everyone depend on relief,. Agriculture has been abandoned, and more and more people are concentrating in cities that cant meet the rising demand of services and goods. Impacts Increase in investor confidence will bring more jobs to southern Sudan Increase qol Revitalize forgotten industries Agriculture Increases self dependance Increases availability of food Helps fight starvation Saves lives

sources http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=56426 http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/english/texttrans/2011/07/201107101 30834su0.9286397.html?CP.rss=true http://www.un.org/geninfo/faq/briefingpapers/briefing2a.htm http://www.african-bulletin.com/watch/881-south-sudan-the-newcountry-has-a-flag-but-not-yet-an-economy.html

Neg sources http://www.voanews.com/english/news/africa/decapua-sudan-armstrade-8jul11-125225269.html

Neg
Disadvantage arms trade Uniqueness Arms trade high in the status quo
Amnesty International says the arms trade is fueling conflicts between northern and southern Sudan. Its calling on the worlds major powers to control arms
shipments to regions such as Southern Kordofan State.

Fighting has been escalating

Fighting in the state has been going on for weeks displacing thousands of people. Various groups have accused Khartoums Sudan Armed Forces of targeting civilians.

China and Russia provide weapons

What we have is Chinese and Russian arms supplies that have been ongoing to Sudan for the last few years and they are the biggest arms suppliers. And different types of weaponry being used in violation of international humanitarian law and international human rights law, said Helen Hughes, a
researcher for Amnesty International.

Weapons getting more gnarly

Amnesty said these include the Russian-made Antonov aircraft and SU-25 fighter jets being used in indiscriminate attacks in Southern Kordofan.In terms of South Sudan, Hughes said, the USA has invested heavily in military assistance and training to the Sudanese Peoples Liberation Army. But the little information that is publically available about that training there doesnt seem to be any indication that the SPLA is being trained on international human rights law and international law, which is absolutely vital for a professional army. Arms Trade Treaty

Talks scheduled to continue

Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) talks are scheduled to continue next week at the United Nations in New York. Negotiations have been underway for the past few years.Theres a negotiation of the final text in June 2012, Hughes said. And the focus of this weeks talks will be on the implementation of the treaty. Its absolutely vital that the U.S., for
example, if it wants to prevent the kinds of human rights violations and indiscriminate attacks that have been ongoing recently in Southern Kordofan and elsewhere, needs to throw its political

weightt behind [it], ensuring that the ATT is going to be effective,.

US must establish precedent

the U.S., as the worlds largest arms supplier, could really send a positive signal to the likes of Russia and China and many other member states. Hughes added, This treaty isnt going to be a panacea for all of the problems. Its going to be a preventative tool. Its about trying to prevent the transfer of arms wheres theres going to be this substantial risk. And in places like Sudan it could make a
She said difference. But the United States, Russia and China often have not signed major international weapons treaties.Certainly when you look to the landmine treaty and the cluster munitions treaty, there you have the evidence of what youre describing. At the moment, no state is actively opposing the Arms Trade Treaty, she said. Treaty talks are scheduled for July 11-15.

Links Plan uses the US, to propose southern Sudan to join the UN Internal links Allows US to increase its political in the international community Arms still entering the country Impacts Child soldiers continue Increases death Increases violence

SPACE STUFF
OBSERVATION 1.) BACKGROUND A.) BUSH ADMINISTRATION SET UP THE ARES PROGRAM TO SEND SUPPLIES TO THE INT'L SPACE STATION AND THE MOON. ARES 1 COULD RESUPPLY THE INT'L SPACE STATION IN THE SHORT TERM WHILE NASA WAITS FOR A DIFFERENT/PRIVATE MODEL OF SPACE TRAVEL. ARES V WOULD BE ABLE TO ACHIEVE A RETURN TO THE MOON, MEANS THAT COLONIZATION OF THE MOON WOULD BE POSSIBLE IN THE FUTURE ONLY WITH THE ARES V ROCKET. NASA'S GOAL IS TO HAVE ARES 1 OPERATING AND RUNNING MISSIONS BY 2015, WITH FULL FUNDING THAT WOULD BE ACHIEVABLE. MEANS WE'RE INDEPENDANT OF RUSSIA BY 2015. WORST CASE SCENARIO NASA HAS THE ABILITY TO USE MILITARY GRADE ROCKETS TO FERRY PEOPLE TO THE MOON, THE PROGRAM HAS TO EXIST IN ORDER FOR THAT TO HAPPEN THOUGH. B.) OBAMA AXES THE CONSTELLATION PROGRAM.

MINIMALLY DOESN'T INCLUDE ANY KIND OF FUNDING FOR THE HARDWARE. NASA SPENT $8BILLION ALREADY ON THE HARDWARE. DUE TO COST OVERRUNS AND REDESIGN PROBLEMS THE PROGRAM (ARES 1 AND V) WOULDN'T HAVE MET THEIR ORIGINAL BUDGET, MEANING THAT ANY KIND OF PARTIAL FUNDING WON'T SOLVE. ESTIMATED COSTS UP TO 2015 WOULD BE $44 BILLION BUT THAT NUMBER WOULD LIKELY RISE. PRIVITIZATION DOESN'T GUARENTEE A RELIABLE PRIVATE LAUNCH VEHICLE. PRIVATE SPACE WOULD MEAN THAT THE GOALS WOULD BE DIFFERENT AND COLONIZATION OF THE MOON IS NOT A PRIORITY BUT RATHER COMMUNICATINOS SATELLITES AS WELL AS INFRASTRUCTURE AROUND EARTH. http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/space/nasa/4343791 http://www.universetoday.com/30384/obama-to-re-examine-constellation-program/ PLAN THE USFG SHOULD FULLY FUND AN IMPLIMENT NASA'S CONSTELLATION PROGRAM. OBSERVATION 2.) SOLVENCY A.) ROCKETS AIN'T NO PROBLEM, THERE'S BACKUPS TO ARES 1 AND V. 1. WORST CASE SCENARIO NASA HAS THE ABILITY TO USE MILITARY GRADE ROCKETS TO FERRY PEOPLE TO THE MOON, THE PROGRAM HAS TO EXIST IN ORDER FOR THAT TO HAPPEN THOUGH. 2. EVEN IF THAT DOESN'T WORK NASA IS LOOKING AT THE DIRECT 2.0 SYSTEM WHICH IS TWO JUPITER 120 ROCKETS WHICH ARE FUNCTIONALLY THE SAME AS THOSE USED ON THE SHUTTLE WITH A CAPSULE ON TOP.

B.) MOST CRITICAL POINT IS THAT WE HAVE A FUNCTIONAL LANDER. 1. ORION CREW CAPSULE WHICH WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO DOCK WITH THE INT'L SPACE STATION. 2. ALTAIR LUNAR LANDER WHICH HAS THE ABILITY TO SEND HUMANS BACK TO THE MOON. BECAUSE OF THE ADVANCEMENT IN ROCKET TECHNOLOGY AND THE INT'L SPACE STATION MEANS THAT COLONIZATION BECOMES A REALITY.

ADVANTAGE 1.) SPACE MILITARIZATION A.) SPACE MILITARIZATION IS HAPPENING NOW AND IS INEVITABLE. 1. THE US IN IRAQ USES SPACE WEAPONS IN THE FORM OF GPS AND JOINT DIRECT ATTACK MUNITIONS MEANS THAT WE CAN TRACK OUR TROOP MOVEMENTS BETTER. 2. PRECISION GUIDED WEAPONS AND IMAGERY FROM SPACE BASED SURVEILLANCE IS ALREADY HAPPENING. 3. US HAS TO CONTINUE TO DEVELOP MORE ASSETS IN SPACE AND DEEPER TO PROTECT FROM ANY KIND OF ENCROACHMENT. IF AN ENEMY FORCE WOULD WANT TO TAKE DOWN THE US THEY WOULD HAVE TO NUETRALIZE COMMUNICATIONS MEANS NUETRALIZING SATELLITES. CHINAS 2007 ANTISATELLITE WEAPONS TEST PROVES. 4. ALSO PROVES THAT THEY'RE DEVELOPING WEAPONS IN A COMPETING FASION. 5. MILITARY CAN'T PICK UP ALL THE SLACK NASA IS KEY TO DEVELOPING SPACE TRAVEL THAT WILL HELP TO MILITARIZE SPACE. THEY NEED NASA ROCKETS/EXPERTISE IN ORDER TO ADVANCE SPACE MILITARIZATION AT A MORE RAPID PACE. 6. PRIVIATE FIRMS HAVE NO INTEREST IN HELPING THE US MILITARIZE SPACE. AND THEY'RE PROBABLY TO EXPENSIVE.

STRATFOR 8 [STRATFOR is a global intelligence company and has been cited by media
such as CNN, Bloomberg, the Associated Press, Reuters, The New York Times and the BBC as an authority on strategic and tactical intelligence issues.[6] Barron's once referred to it as "The Shadow CIA".[7] United States: The Weaponization of Space April 10, 2008, http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/united_states_ weaponization_space] B.) SPACE WEAPONS ARE THE BIGGEST INTERNAL LINK TO HEGE-PREVENTS CHALLENGERS FROM DEVELOPING OFFENSIVE CAPABILITIES AND DETERS ROUGE STATES. 1. SPACE BASED MISSILE DEFENSE WOULD DETER ANY ROUGE STATE FROM LAUNCHING NUCLEAR WEAPONS. MEANS THAT THE RISK FROM NORTH KOREA AND IRAN FALLS TO NEAR ZERO. 2. ALSO MEANS THAT A COUNTRY LIKE CHINA/RUSSIA WOULDN'T LAUNCH IN A WORLD WHERE THEY COULDN'T WIN THAT WAR. MISSILE DEFENSE IN SPACE IS CRITICAL TO PREVENT A WAR IN THE FUTURE. 3. FUTURE WAR BETWEEN US/CHINA IS INEVITABLE DUE TO RESOURCE CONSUMPTION. EVENTUALLY WE WILL OVERLAP WITH CHINA AND UNLESS WE HAVE THE STRATIGIC SPACE UPPERHAND CHINA WOULD BE FORCED INTO CONFLICT. IF THEY DON'T SEE A CHANCE TO WIN THEY'LL NOT FIGHT.

Dolman 5 [Everett C. Associate Professor of Comparative Military Studies US Air Force

School of Advanced Air and Space Studies. US Military Transformation and Weapons in Space. http://www.eparl.net/pages/space_hearing_images/ConfPaper%20Dolman%20US%20Military%20Transfor m%20%26%20Space.pdf. 4-5]

C.SPACE WEAPONS BOLSTER THE US TECH ADVANTAGE OTHER COUNTRIES WON'T HAVE THE RESOURCES TO COMPETE. 1. ANY COUNTRY LOOKING TO COMPETE WOULD LITERALLY HAVE TO SPEND HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON A MINIMAL COUNTER FORCE THAT WOULD NOT BE COMPETATIVE WITH THE UNITED STATES. 2. THIS WON'T HAPPEN SOONMEANS THE TIME TO ACT IS NOW SO THAT THE US CAN ENTRENCH THEMSELVES IN SPACE AND MAKE IT UNAPPEALING FOR ANYONE WHO WOULD MAKE A MOVE. 3. MOST STATES IF NOT ALL WOULDN'T COUNTER US IN SPACE DIRECTLY, THERE'S A CHANCE FOR ASYMETRIC BALANCING DEPENDING ON HOW WE USE THE WEAPONS BUT THE LIKELIHOOD OF AN ARMS RACE IN SPACE DOESN'T EXIST. JUST TOO EXPENSIVE FOR COMPETATORS. 4. Dolman 5 [Everett C. Associate Professor of Comparative Military Studies US Air Force

School of Advanced Air and Space Studies. US Military Transformation and Weapons in Space. http://www.eparl.net/pages/space_hearing_images/ConfPaper%20Dolman%20US%20Military%20Transfor m%20%26%20Space.pdf. 4-5] D.CHINA IS DEVELOPING OFFENSIVE SPACE WEAPONS TO CHALLENGE THE US. 1. PLA OBSERVES WESTERN CONFLICT IN A STATISTICAL SENSE. PLA ANALYSIS OF CONFLICTS IN AFGHANISTAN AND THE BALKANS INDICATE THAT SPACE IS THE NEXT ADVANCEMENT OF THEIR FORCES. 2. ADDITIONALLY, THEY ADMIT THAT SPACE IS CRITICAL TO WAGE NON-CONTACT, NON-LINEAR, NON-SYMMETRIC WARFARE. 3. THEIR 2007 SATELLITE TESTS PROVE THAT THEY'RE DEVELOPING A COUNTER MEASURE TO THE US SPACE SYSTEM. THE US CAN'T FUNCTION WITHOUT THE MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF COMMUNICATION SATELLITES AND INFRASTRUCTURE THAT EXISTS IN SPACE. THEY WOULD HIT US THERE FIRST.

Cheng 11 [Dean, Research Fellow at the Heritage Foundations Asian Studies Center and
has a BA in politics from Princeton and studied for a masters at MIT, Chinas Active Defense Strategy and its Regional Impact Heritage Foundation, February 1, 2011] E.) IMPACT =NUCLEAR LOLOCAUST 1. IN A WORLD WHERE THERE ISN'T A DETERRENCE TO NUCLEAR WAR IT WOULD EVENTUALLY HAPPEN IN A LONG ENOUGH TIMELINE. NUCLEAR DETERRENCE IS CRITICAL TO PREVENT WAR. 2. ONE LAUNCH WOULD TRIGGER ALL LAUNCHES. THE TRESHHOLD FOR NOT LAUNCHING NUCLEAR WEAPONS GOES TO ZERO AFTER THE FIRST TIME IT HAPPENS. ESPECIALLY IN A WORLD WHERE THE US AND CHINA HAVE BEEN AT WAR. 3. THAT WAR WOULD DESTABILIZE OTHER REGIONS MEANING THAT INDIA-PAKISTAN ARE AT RISK AS WELL AS RUSSIA/FRANCE/BRITIAN. 4. NUCLEAR WAR WOULD KILL BILLIONS WITH A WORLD WIDE ESPLOTIONS. ADVANTAGE 2.) SPACE COLONIZATION A.) CONSTELLATION PROGRAM IS KEY TO SPACE TRAVEL 1. THEY COULD DO IT QUICKEST, THE MODELS ARE THERE ARE FUNCTIONAL, WE JUST NEED TO HAVE THEM BUILT AND FUNDED. THIS WILL GET US INTO SPACE THE QUICKEST. 2. MOON BASE IS CRITIAL TO REDUCE THE COSTS OF LAUNCHING FURTHER INTO SPACE. THE MOON BASE MAKES THE COLONIZATION OF OTHER PLACES AROUND OUR SOLAR SYSTEM AND BEYOND A TRUE REALITY. 3. LAUNCHING FROM EARTH WOULD BE TOO COSTLY TO MAKE A REALISTIC MISSION TO MARS WITH HUMANS, WE NEED THE MOON AND WE NEED IT NOW. http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:dNxEOYkNp2EJ:www.thespac ereview.com/article/791/1+Moon+base+is+key+to+further+space+exploration&cd=10&hl= en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com B.) EVERY SECOND WE DELAY SPACE COLONIZATION ONE HUNDRED TRILLION PEOPLE DIE. 1. THE

VIRGO SUPERCLUSTER CONTAINS 10^13 STARS. SUPPOSE THAT EACH STAR COULD SUSTAIN 10^10. THE VIRGO SUPERCLUSTER COULD CONTAIN 10^23 BIOLOGICAL HUMANS. THIS CORRESPONDS TO A LOSS OF 10^14 HUMAN LIVES PER SECOND OF DELAYED COLONIZATION. 2. WHEN WE DON'T COLONIZE WE RISK AN EXESTENTIAL THREAT. THIS MEANS THAT THOSE LIVES WON'T EXIST IN A WORLD WHERE COLONIZATION WON'T HAPPEN. WE'RE ENDING FUTURE LIVES BY NOT COLONIZING.
Nick Bostron, professor of philosophy at Yale University, 04, Astronomical Waste: The Opportunity Cost of Delayed Technological Development, http://www.nickbostrom.com/astronomical/waste.html

C.SPACE COLONIZATION SOLVES FOR WAR, HUNGER AND POLLUTION 1. THE PROBLEM OF WAR CAN'T BE SOLVED WITHOUT EXPANSION, MAKING RESOURCES MORE INFINITE WILL DECREASE THE PROBABILITY OF A WAR OVER RESOURCES, WHICH ARE THE BASIS FOR ALMOST EVERY CONFLICT IN HISTORY. 2. SAME WITH HUNGER. IF WE MAKE RESOUCRES LIKE FOOD MORE INFINITE, OR OPEN UP MORE SPACE FOR THE PRODUCTION OF FOOD WE CAN DRIVE DOWN THE COSTS. 3. THE PROBLEM WITH POLLUTION IS THAT WE TRY AND CONTAIN INDUSTRY WITHIN OUR BIOSPHERE, IF WE MOVE IT OUTSIDE OF THAT AND TO SAY, THE MOON, WE DON'T HAVE THOSE SAME LIMITATIONS AND THE DESTRUCTION OF OUR NATURAL ENVIRONMENT CAN DECREASE TO NEAR NOTHING. ADVANTAGE 3.) JOBS. A.) NASA HAS TO CUT BACK JOBS DUE TO THE PROGRAM LOSS 1. SPECIFICALLY MEANS THAT 4,000 JOBS ARE GONE, AND THOSE INDIVIDUALS ARE LAYED OFF. 2. ALSO MEANS THAT THERE IS NO INDUSTRY FOR THOSE INDIVIDUALS, OR PEOPLE WHO ARE ATTEMPTING TO MAKE THEIR WAY INTO THE SPACE FIELD. http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2010/02/01/obamas-nasa-budget-so-long-moonmissions-hello-private-spaceflight/ B.) GETTING INTO SPACE AND GETTING THIS FIELD GOING IS CRITICAL TO INCREASING THE JOB MARKET. 1. INCREASES THE PROPENSITY IN THE SPACE FIELD SPECIFICALLY, MEANING MORE JOBS THERE. 2. ALSO INCREASES THE PROPENSITY FOR SPACE INDUSTRIES TO DEVELOP (MOON MINING, ASTEROID MINING, POTENTIALLY MARS MINING.) 3. HELPS THE AERO-SPACE INDUSTRY IN DEVELOPING NEW TECHNNOLOGIES FOR SPACE TRAVEL. MEANS R&D JOBS AS WELL AS MANUFACTURING. 4. INCREASES THE MEDICAL-SCIENCE INDUSTRY AND THE PROPENSITY FOR DISCOVERY AND PROCUTION OF NEW THINGS GIVEN THAT OUR ABILITY TO DO SCIENCE IN SPACE IS GREATLY IMPROVED BY BEING IN SPACE. C.THIS WOULD HELP US TO GET INTO A NEW AND GROUND BREAKING INDUSTRY, IMPROVING THE US ECONOMIC POSITION IN THE WORLD. 1.) IN A WORLD WHERE THE US IS THE ONE THAT HAS A MOON BASE, OR THE ABILITY TO GO TO SPACE MORE AND CHEAPER, WE HAVE A HOLD ON AN INDUSTRY THAT HAS NOTHING BUT AN UPSIDE.

NEGATIVE GLOBAL WARMING 1NC A.) GLOBAL WARMING IS HAPPENING NOW, WE'RE AT THE POINT OF NO RETURN 1. 2009 WAS THE WARMEST YEAR IN 130 YEARS. 2. THE MEAN TEMP GLOBALLY HAS INCREASE 1.03 DEGREES SINCE THE 1951-1980 BASE PERIOD. 3. 2000-2010 WAS THE WARMEST DECADE ON RECORD 4. ARCTIC SEA ICE IS DECLINING AT 11.5% PER DECADE. 5. THERMAL EXPANSION OF SEA WATER HAS INCREASED AND IS AN INDICATOR THAT GLOBAL WARMING IS HAPPENING NOW. INCREASED 3.27 MM PER YEAR SINCE 1993.

B.) NASA IS BEING FUNDED TO DO RESEARCH, SWITCHING TO SPACE TRAVEL WOULD KILL THE FOCUS OF GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE.

1. AS

OF JUNE 2011 THEY HAD RECIEVED INCREASED FUNDING FOR THE GDDE. 2. THEIR INFRASTRUCTURE IS ONLY ABLE TO DO ONE WELL, THIS MEANS THAT GLOBAL WARMING SHOULD BE THE FOCUS.
C.) NASA IS THE USFG'S PUSH FOR GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE INNITIATIVES IS CRITIAL TO CURB GLOBAL WARMING 1. GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE EDUCATION PROJECT INCREASES EDUCATION AT THE ELEMETARY-UNDERGRADUATE LEVELS. IT'S GOALS ARE TO: IMPROVE SCIENCE AND MATH THUS INCREASING OUR TALENT POOL IS DEALING WITH WARMING AND DEVELOPING NEW TECHNOLOGIES, IMPROVE OUR COMMITMENT TO LONG TERM RESEARCH, MAKE THE US A MORE ATTRACTIVE PLACE TO RESEARCH, AND ENSURE THAT WE'RE A PREMIERE PLACE TO INNOVATE. 2. NASA SATELLITES CAN MONITOR GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE TRENDS IN ORDER TO GET BETTER ACCESS TO INFORMATION AND MOVE FORWARD ON INNOVATIONS IN TECHNOLOGY AND BETTER EDUCATE. 3. THEIR SATELLITE CAPABILITIES ARE IN A UNIQUE POSITION TO BE THE MOST EFFECTIVE IN DETERMINING STRATEGIES FOR DEALING WITH GLOBAL WARMING. 4. THEIR FACILITIES CAN BEST HANDLE THE SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH NECESSARY TO DETERMINE THE BEST POSSIBLE SOLUTION TO THE CLIMATE CHANGE PROBLEM. 5. EDUCATION AND INNOVATION IS KEY TO NEW TECHNOLOGY THAT CAN SOLVE BACK FOR GLOBAL WARMING. THE MORE YOU KNOW. 5. D.) EXTINCTION 1. THERE ARE FUNDMANETAL EQUILIBRIUM CONDITIONS PROVE THAT THE INNER CORE OF THE EARTH COULD NOT GROW BY ITSELF, BUT RATHER EXPANDS BECAUSE OF EXTERNAL HEAT. 2. VIRTUALLY ALL OF OUR ENERGY THAT EXISTS IN THE CORE IS BASED ON RADIONIC ORIGINS. HENCE, EARTH IS A NUCLEAR REACTOR WITH AN INNER CORE. 3. IF GLOBAL WARMING WOULD CONTINUE VIA THE GREENHOUSE EFFECT THE CORE WOULD CONTINUE TO GROW AND EVENTUALLY CREATE A FUNCTIONAL NUCLEAR MELTDOWN AND AN EARTH INTERNAL ATOMIC EXPLOSION. 4. THE REAL DANGER IS THE EXPLOSION OF EARTH. LEADERSHIP 1NC A.) AMERICAN SPACE DOMINANCE NOWNO DECLINE 1. ACCORDING TO FUTRON, A TECHNOLOGY CONSULTANCY FIRM, AMERICA'S DOMINANCE IN SPACE TRAVEL IS LIGHT YEAR AHEAD OF THE CLOSEST RIVAL. 2. MEANS NO RISK OF AN IMPACT IN THE NEAR FUTURE. B.) PRIVITIZATION, NOT GOVERNMENT FUNDING IS KEY TO LEADERSHIP 1. NASA IS LOSING IT'S POSSITION OF WORLD LEADERSHIP IN THE SPACE WORLD EVEN THOUGHT IT'S THE MOST ADVANCED, IT'S STAGNANT. 2. FUNDING HAS BEEN LOW AND NOT WORTH WHILE FOR NASA IS TO DO ANYTHING WORTH WHILE IN THE RESEARCH DEPARTMENT. 3. THERE ISN'T AN INCENTIVE FOR INNOVATION, IT'S NOT A PROFIT DRIVEN INDUSTRY. 4. NEW AEROSPACE INDUSTRY MEANS THAT THERE IS A CHANCE FOR NASA AND SPACE TRAVEL COMMERCIALIZATION TO BE A MASSIVE, BOOMING INDUSTRY. THE PRIVATE SECTOR IS BEING CREATED AROUND THIS IDEA AND THE PRIVITIZATION OF NASA WOULD PROVIDE A MASSIVE BOOST. C.THERE'S NO WAY TO PERCIEVE GOVERNMENT FUNDING OF NASA AS GOOD, THIS IS TERMINAL DEFENSE ON CASE 1. NASA IS RECENT YEARS HAS HAD INTEREST LOST IN THEM BECAUSE THEY HAVE LACKED REAL INNOVATION AND MOVEMENT. 2. NEW INNOVATION IS CRITIAL IN ORDER TO GARNER ACCESS TO NEW RELATIONSHIPS AND NEW WAYS FOR US TO GET A DEEPER ACCESS TO

SPACE. 3. NO ONE CARES AS LONG AS NASA CONTINUES ON ITS CURRENT PATH, IMPIRICALLY PROVEN, THERE'S TOO MANY PROBLEMS WITH WHAT NASA DOES. DELAYS AND BUDGET OVERRUNS CREATE THE APPEARANCE OF FAILURE. 4. D.) NEW BUDGET FACILITIES SPACE LEADERSHIP ARE BETTER THAN CONSTELLATION. 1. NASAS REJECTION OF THE CONSTELLATION PROGRAM MEANS THAT THEY'RE ABLE TO HAVE NO GOALS. THESE GOALS BENEFIT SPACE TRAVEL MORE BECAUSE OF A BETTER CHANCE OF LONG TERM SUCCESS. 2. INT'L COMPANIES IMPROVE RELATIONS BETTER VIA ECONOMIC TIES. THEY'RE ABLE TO BRING MULTICULTURAL ENTITIES TOGETHER IN ORDER TO CREATE CLOSER BONDS AS OPPOSED TO A UNILATERAL SPACE ORGANIZATION. 3. MEANS THAT THE LEADERSHIP IS BETTER IN THE END.

ECONOMY 1NC A.) SPACE EXPLORATION NOT KEY TO INNOVATION, ADDS COSTS, NOT VALUE 1. NASAS ONLY GOAL IS PATENTS AND ISN'T COST EFFECTIVE. WE ONLY SPENT $7 BILLION ON HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT PROGRAMS. 2. NOT NEARLY ENOUGH TO ACHIEVE ANY KIND OF TRAVEL, THIS MEANS THAT SPACE TRAVEL WITH HUMANS WILL ALWAYS BE HALF ASSED. 3. THE PROBLEM IS THE REASONS FOR GOING INTO SPACE ARE WRONG, WE'RE GOING FOR INNOVATIONS SUCH AS CANCER RESEARCH AND INNOVATIONS LIKE MICROELECTRONICS, WE SHOULD BE GOING FOR SIMPLY SPACE TRAVEL. B.) DEFUNDING NASA AND ALLOWING PRIVITIZATION SAVES THE ECONOMY. 1. TOP HEAVY CENTRAL PLANNING KILLS THE INNOVATION THAT OCCUR, POOR PLANNING MAKES IT HAPPEN. NASA WASTES MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF MONEY FOR DISCOVER VERY LITTLE. THE MARS ROVERS WOULD HAVE BEEN WORTHLESS HAD THEY NOT ACCIDENTLY LASTED FOR THIS LONG. THEY GOT LUCKY 2. MOST OF THE INNOVATIONS OF NASA HAVE BEEN THE RESULT OF COMMERCIAL MARKETS THAT ARE INVOLVED IN NASA. 3. CONSUMERS SHOULD BE THE ONES THAT DECIDE THE DIRECTION OF RESEARCH FOR NASA. ONLY VIA PRIVITIZATION CAN THIS REALLY HAPPEN. ADDITIONALLY, THE PRIVATE SECTOR WOULD HAVE MORE THAN THE $17 BILLION IN RESOURCES THAT NASA GETS, MEANS THAT BETTER CHECK AND BETTER GOALS ARE THERE. 4. PROFIT BASED INDUSTRY IS KEY IN ORDER TO TRULY ADVANCE SPACE TRAVEL. 5. PRIVATE SECTOR COULD MAKE THINGS THAT ARE MORE BENEFICIAL FOR THE ECONOMY, FOR INSTANCE COMMERCIAL DEMAND FOR MORE ACCURATE WEATHER CONDITIONS AND GEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT. THERE'S A HIGH COMMERCIAL DEMAND FOR THAT. C.ECONOMY ON THE BRINK NOW 1. LAST QUARTER UNEMPLOYMENT ROSE TO 9.6% 2. THE DEBT CEILING DEBATE IS STAGNATING THE ECONOMY BY DECREASING CONSUMER CONFIDENCE, IF WE CAN'T SPEND MORE MONEY WE CAN'T CREATE MORE JOBS AND IMPROVE OVERALL. 3. D.ECONOMIC COLLAPSE = DEATH 1. DURING TIMES OF ECONOMIC COLLAPSE THE GOVERNMENT TRIES TO KEEP UP WITH PERCIEVED GROWTH, THE ONLY WAY TO DO THAT IS EXPAND FOR MORE RESOURCES. 2. THIS MEANS THAT CONFLICT WITH CHINA IS INEVITABLE, SPECIFICALLY IN AFRICA OVER OIL/LAND RIGHTS. 3. EVENTUALLY THAT WAR GOES NUCLEAR BECAUSE CHINA WILL LOSE, OUR CONVENTIONAL MILITARY/BLUE WATER NAVY MEANS THAT WE HAVE A

MASSIVE ADVANTAGE. 4. CHINA WILL LAUNCH WEAPONS WHILE US TROOPS MARCH ON BEIJING, MEANS THAT WE WILL LAUNCH A RETALIATORY STRIKE 5. INCREASES THE RISK OF AN ACCIDENTAL LAUNCH BY RUSSIA/FRANCE/BRITIAN/INDIA/PAKISTAN. 6. BILLIONS DIE IN THE INITIAL BLAST, MILLIONS MORE WITH THE FALLOUT FROM RADIATION POSIONING AND LACK OF FOOD. PRIVITIZATION GOOD A.) PRIVATE SECTOR DEVELOPMENT SERVES PROFIT MOTIVATION AND AVOIDS MISCREDIT OR POINTLESS INNOVATION 1. PRIVATE SECTOR MEANS THAT WE'RE NOT DEVELOPING TECHNOLOGY AFTER MISSIONS OR TO IMPROVE THEM, WHICH IS POOR PLANNING, WE HAVE EVERYTHING READY AND THE PLANNING IS THERE. WE HAVE BETTER TECH EARLIER WITH THE PRIVATE SECTOR. 2. SUCCESS AND FAILURE IN THE MARKETPLACE DRIVE INDUSTRY, MEANS THAT THEY CAN TURN A POSSITIVE PROFIT AT THE END OF THE DAY. MEANS THAT IT'S PREFERABLE. B.) SELF INNOVATION SOLVES 1. PRIVIATE SECTOR WORKING ON CREATING MORE ROBOTIC PROBES AND CREATING 2,500 NEW JOBS ALONG THE SCIENCE COAST. 2. COMPETITION ONLY MAKES THE SCIENCE MORE EFFECTIVE, MEANS THAT THE BEST TECHNOLOGY GETS PUT IN THE HANDS OF SCIENTISTS, AND THEY'RE ABLE TO UTILIZE IT BETTER. C.COMMERCAL SHUTTLES ARE BETTER 1. EXTERNAL TANKS CORPORATION SUGGESTED MORE THRUST FOR THE SHUTTLE IN THE 80'S THAT WOULD HAVE GOT US INTO LOW EARTH ORBIT. 2. THEY CAN SEND METHANE GENERATORS TO MARS TO PRODUCE FUEL FOR AN ASTRONAUTS TRIP HOME, MEANS THAT THE PRIVATE SECTOR HAS WORKED OUT MARS TRAVEL. 3. SPACESHIP ONE SPACE PLANE WAS AN EXAMPLE OF COMMERCIAL TRAVEL THAT WOULD BE FANTASTIC IN SIMPLY THE TRANSPORT OF PEOPLE. D.PRIVITIZATION SOLVES JOBS BETTER 1. GOVERNMENT PROPED UP INDUSTRY TYPICALLY FAIL, ETHANOL 2. THE STAGNATION OF NASA IS A REALLY GOOD EXAMPLE OF THAT HAPPENING. 3. PRIVATE SECTOR INNOVATION MEANS INFINITE GROWTH AND EXPANSION, AND THE INNOVATION