Jump to content
Santana Hill

Choking, Dying

Should women be allowed combat positions in the Armed forces?  

72 members have voted

  1. 1. Should women be allowed combat positions in the Armed forces?

    • NO way!
      10
    • Sure
      45
    • Only If men and women can share bunks
      15
    • don't know
      2


Recommended Posts

How that heck are you supposed to argue women in combat when you are negative??

Its sexist, women should be allowed in combat.

I want to join the Army,I'm female, and I wanna Kill some insurgents!!!!!!!!!

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

to answer your question...i think you are absolutely right. it's a terrible thing that negatives have to actually debate against allowing women in combat. how dare i actually try to win a debate round. in fact, if i ever hit somebody from now on that runs WIC, i won't go to the round and i'll tell the judge they're right. same goes for DADT and citizenship and every other case that i can't possibly debate against if i had a heart!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We hit a team that actually said that, and they conceded.

 

It was sad.

 

was it the girl that started this thread?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is the negatives burden to prove what the affirmative is doing is bad. The moralistic approach is that we're in debate fantasy land and to preserve debate as an educational game, one must negate the affirmative, even if you believe in what they are saying. This isn't the first time something like this has happened - look at any case that has ever had a racism advantage and the other team argues that racism is good.

 

Furthermore, the war in Iraq has completely changed the role of women in the military. While there still may be a combat ban, women in the military in Iraq have proven themselves in ground combat when situations arose that they needed to return fire.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070306/ts_alt_afp/womenusiraqmilitary;_ylt=Ah6hICqw6dy57Wju2RDjF.Cs0NUE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How that heck are you supposed to argue women in combat when you are negative??

Its sexist, women should be allowed in combat.

I want to join the Army,I'm female, and I wanna Kill some insurgents!!!!!!!!!

 

yeah....

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a lot of empirical data that women fighting in combat roles is not good, I mean look at Iran and Israel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is silly. Consult NATO, it solves for hege too.

 

(No, seriously, I would go thirteen in the block on F/X T on Increasing.)

 

Also, to clarify, I don't think teams tend to argue racism good all that often (because, let's face it, there are certain issues you don't want to risk judge intervention on); it would probably be something more like a utilitarian 'racism justified' if it solves for something greater (i.e., the racial profiling shpeal from last year_).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How that heck are you supposed to argue women in combat when you are negative??

Its sexist, women should be allowed in combat.

I want to join the Army,I'm female, and I wanna Kill some insurgents!!!!!!!!!

 

I also find myself arguing against things I may very well agree with when I'm negative... but that's the beauty and importance of debate. As the Opposing Viewpoints series of books says, if you can't understand your opponent's arguments you don't really understand your side on an issue either. By learning to argue both for and against issues you care about, you'll gain a broader understanding and see why people might say a certain plan is bad even if it sounds pretty good.

 

I think the Peace Corps is a cool program, for example, but in round, I'd still argue against it. That's how the game works.

There are certain areas where I might draw the line, but in general debate is about an exchange of ideas, and so sometimes we propose things we wouldn't in real life.

 

(Also, if you point out specific flaws in their plan, or run a CP like other people suggested you're not saying women in combat are always bad, you're saying their plan isn't the best way to solve for it.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately for this case the aff usually makes the neg seem completely sexist and they create the patriarchy advantage based off of that, and stuff like that. What I like to do is just run militarism that these women will become killing machines increasing rape and violence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but ultimately, the arguments that women already serve in combat is unresponsive, isn't it?

1) it just proves why the ban should be lifted

2) their sexism advantages would probably stem off the fact that the removing of the ban would be a symbolic victory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sry Synergy - too busy here SAVING THE BABIES you baby-eating nazi.

Q: How do you fit 1,000 dead babies in a plastic baggie?

A: Blender.

 

Q: How do you get them out?

A: Tostito's

 

HAR HAR HAR!!!

 

EDIT: Level Up!

You have acquired a new Ability!

Ninja Skill: Consecutive Posts.

3d8, +3 Saving Throw. Cooldown 24 hours. Lasts indefinitely, or until dispelled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...