18 replies to this topic

[John Quinto]

So as of right now, I'm running space lasers missile defense, but I as told that Brilliant Pebbles is a better option because of some impact calculus card that says a 0.0000001% chance of it working will outweigh anything, and that its solvency is easier to win. Problem is, I already know a good bit about the lasers aff, and I think that finding the Impact calc and solvency cards may take a while, and it's already late in the year. Should I make the switch or is there a better aff out there?

[Razorscale2]

I would suggest making the switch, its not that much though of an aff change, i used to run the SBL (space based lasers), then colonization, now im running SPS. however Lasers to Brilliant Pebbles isnt that much of a shift as SBL to colonization.

And plus you have the winter break to look for cards...

[thefrozenone]

Brilliant Pebbles are obviously the same thing as "space BMD"- but only two real differences
1. Brilliant Pebbles might work. Lasers? Almost definitely not
2. Brilliant Pebbles leave behind more debris. Lasers could vaporize that shit out of the sky.

Why don't you just run an aff that combines both systems? Few neg teams have specific offense that will allow them to PIC out of one of the systems. It's really a no-risk option, plus you can read those sweet Asteroids/Debris add-ons if you have lasers.

[maccook]

I run Brilliant Pebbles, the biggest issue is debris, although I've only ran into that argument once so far. The lit saying it's the best system (in terms of both operation and cost) is pretty solid. As long as you have a decent block written for debris, you shouldn't have too much of a problem as that's really the only hyperspecific link they're going to get.

[John Quinto]

I'll also have you guys know that I was running SPS with the advantages of colonization and BMD. Then I cut off SPS and turned it into Space lasers with the advantages of solving for ICBMs/Space War and colonization. I'm planning on cutting off colonization since it takes up time because of all the on-case run on it, and since I'm cutting off colonization that's why I was considering Brilliant Pebbles.

[Chaos]

Depth is better than breadth for the affirmative in policy debate.

[thefrozenone]

maccook, on 19 December 2011 - 01:19 PM, said:

I run Brilliant Pebbles, the biggest issue is debris, although I've only ran into that argument once so far. The lit saying it's the best system (in terms of both operation and cost) is pretty solid. As long as you have a decent block written for debris, you shouldn't have too much of a problem as that's really the only hyperspecific link they're going to get.

This. Also, just make your plan "space based missile defense system beyond the meso"- that makes any PIC out of a specific system a non-starter- just perm do the CP because n/m is just the "best system," whatever the lit says that is. Besides these PICs are mostly non-starters anyways

Also, how have teams who have read BMD as an advantage to SBSP deal with negs who just go ahead and read turns to BMD/have a CP that has the Dep. of Commerce/Dept. of Energy/NASA doing (the net benefit is that NASA/DoC/DoE doesn't weaponize it and solves the other advs)?

[truepestcontrol]

Brilliant pebelss is proven to work and test have been shown that if brilliant pebels were in operation during operation desert sheild and storm, that none of Saddams SCUD missiles would have reached their targets. I argued that brilliant pebbles destroyed the warhead inopperable in the atmoshpere and burned up. I have cards for all this

[ironcross123]

Brilliant Pebbles doesn't cause debris: http://www.sendspace.com/file/haqfah First card problem solved. I also have a solar flares will solve debris by 2013 card if you want

[truepestcontrol]

ironcross123, on 08 February 2012 - 04:58 PM, said:

Brilliant Pebbles doesn't cause debris: http://www.sendspace.com/file/haqfah First card problem solved. I also have a solar flares will solve debris by 2013 card if you want

my argument for that would be that the trade off would be better than letting the icbm hit its target

[thefrozenone]

truepestcontrol, on 02 February 2012 - 08:43 PM, said:

Brilliant pebelss is proven to work and test have been shown that if brilliant pebels were in operation during operation desert sheild and storm, that none of Saddams SCUD missiles would have reached their targets. I argued that brilliant pebbles destroyed the warhead inopperable in the atmoshpere and burned up. I have cards for all this

There's a pretty qualified guy named Theodore Postol who extensively makes fun of the Frederick card which says this, pointing out that these tests were meaningless and probably falsified
http://www.pbs.org/w...etc/postol.html

AND this one
http://www.estarwars.net/tedpostal.htm

This is probably not the best argument you want to make for the BMD aff 1) because it's factually iffy and 2) because it really has no impact in relation to "we solve all nuclear war" unless the neg reads a countermeasures turn

You'll be much better off with the article by Greg Canavan titled "the feasibility of missile defense"- it makes the traditional timeframe arguments, the argument that dolman makes about how tech concerns are irrelevant AND gives a strong DoD/MDA acquisition key warrant

[ironcross123]

truepestcontrol, on 08 February 2012 - 07:48 PM, said:

my argument for that would be that the trade off would be better than letting the icbm hit its target

Yeah there's a card in there that says that...

[truepestcontrol]

and id run some EDDE cards on that to.

[Mister T Debater]

Cant use this card (I dont run this aff) but its good, so huzzah shitty card:



Kantack 2-16
“KANTACK: NASA programs prove inefficient, require rethinking” Published: Thursday, February 16, 2012 By Benjamin Kantack political science and spanish major.
http://www.dailynebr...04#.T0BM2Fymi8A


But one extremely valuable project NASA could undertake is "BrilliantPebbles." We're constantly reminded of the ever-present threat of Iran gaining nuclear weapons and of other potentially hostile nuclear powers. Brilliant Pebbles could provide a preventative network of small satellites capable of stopping ballistic missiles (including nuclear warheads) from threatening the United States or its allies. For about twice the cost of the James Webb Space Telescope – which would only allow us to look at pretty things far away — America could have Brilliant Pebbles — which would pay huge national security, foreign policy and diplomatic dividends, virtually squelching the threat of nuclear terrorism. NASA can be great again, if it avoids ineffective and wasteful programs and focuses on protecting America from its foes.

[JustAlex]

Mister T Debater, on 19 February 2012 - 08:28 PM, said:

Cant use this card (I dont run this aff) but its good, so huzzah



Kantack 2-16
“KANTACK: NASA programs prove inefficient, require rethinking” Published: Thursday, February 16, 2012 By Benjamin Kantack political science and spanish major.
http://www.dailynebr...04#.T0BM2Fymi8A


But one extremely valuable project NASA could undertake is "BrilliantPebbles." We're constantly reminded of the ever-present threat of Iran gaining nuclear weapons and of other potentially hostile nuclear powers. Brilliant Pebbles could provide a preventative network of small satellites capable of stopping ballistic missiles (including nuclear warheads) from threatening the United States or its allies. For about twice the cost of the James Webb Space Telescope – which would only allow us to look at pretty things far away — America could have Brilliant Pebbles — which would pay huge national security, foreign policy and diplomatic dividends, virtually squelching the threat of nuclear terrorism. NASA can be great again, if it avoids ineffective and wasteful programs and focuses on protecting America from its foes.

>Political Science and Spanish major
>Daily Nebraskan Opinion
>Sources for good cards on a space topic

One of these is not like the other.

[SDDebater]

^He's also the brother of someone running Brilliant Pebbles.

[Chaos]

lolkantack

[truepestcontrol]

JustAlex, on 19 February 2012 - 09:21 PM, said:

>Political Science and Spanish major
>Daily Nebraskan Opinion
>Sources for good cards on a space topic

One of these is not like the other.

good eye

[Mister T Debater]

JustAlex, on 19 February 2012 - 09:21 PM, said:

>Political Science and Spanish major
>Daily Nebraskan Opinion
>Sources for good cards on a space topic

One of these is not like the other.

SDDebater, on 20 February 2012 - 05:21 AM, said:

^He's also the brother of someone running Brilliant Pebbles.

lol ohshi