Jump to content

Recommended Posts

What do you guys think will be this topics generic disads?

 

Some ideas

 

1. Stability/ terrorism- military presence key to deterring terrorist

2. Hege trade-off- if we move out of certain countries others will step in for resources/ land

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think there could be potential for a da about troop reallocation. ie you pull troops out of japan, the pentagon will move the idle troops to south korea, that's bad because a large south korean military presence accelerates north korean nuclearization.

 

obviously that's probably not the actual scenario, but i think that kind of disadvantage could be interesting. X country relations disads are also likely. i feel like the potential for generic das is less for this topic than last year, most will probably be for specific countries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

japanese proliferation/re-arm

 

heg DA

 

international politics. It's actually legit for Japan because the main platform of the Social Democrats is reducing US troop presence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i can see things like spark and wipeout being huge on this topic

 

just like on EVERY other topic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
usually true, not so much this year with every other aff being kritikal

 

because there will be no K affs next year...

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
because there will be no K affs next year...

 

way less, this topic sucks so much ppl run k affs, next years topic is great, so tons will be legit policy affs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
way less, this topic sucks so much ppl run k affs, next years topic is great, so tons will be legit policy affs.

 

Security

Super Power Syndrome

Security

Kritikal Heg Bad

Security

Militarism

Security

 

not that having these affs are bad things

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Security

Super Power Syndrome

Security

Kritikal Heg Bad

Security

Militarism

Security

 

not that having these affs are bad things

 

Oh, don't forget about security affs. just sayin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Security

Super Power Syndrome

Security

Kritikal Heg Bad

Security

Militarism

Security

 

not that having these affs are bad things

 

i'm not saying k affs are bad, i'm saying that they increase when the number of good policy affs decreases, and i'm saying that when there are many of them, spark and wipeout apply less that year

 

spark and wipeout will be considerably more prominent next year than they were last year because not only is it a foreign topic, but a military topic. Just because you can list of 4 k affs doesn't disprove this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i'm not saying k affs are bad, i'm saying that they increase when the number of good policy affs decreases, and i'm saying that when there are many of them, spark and wipeout apply less that year

 

spark and wipeout will be considerably more prominent next year than they were last year because not only is it a foreign topic, but a military topic. Just because you can list of 4 k affs doesn't disprove this

 

you can count well

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i'm not saying k affs are bad, i'm saying that they increase when the number of good policy affs decreases, and i'm saying that when there are many of them, spark and wipeout apply less that year

 

spark and wipeout will be considerably more prominent next year than they were last year because not only is it a foreign topic, but a military topic. Just because you can list of 4 k affs doesn't disprove this

you forgot security

no seriously, there will be a ridiculous numbers of unique and different Security affs, either having to do with the specific country or military installment

 

BTW: Spark and wipeout = dumb

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
way less, this topic sucks so much ppl run k affs, next years topic is great, so tons will be legit policy affs.

 

not true at all, it just matters what the lit base is

 

there aren't many good terminal impacts to the social services debate, but plenty of progressives and radicals think social services are great. because K ground this year is better, more people run K affs. next year's topic has plenty of solid policy ground, but also plenty of solid K ground, so it'll be a toss up. it's not an issue of whether a topic is "good".

 

also, I have debated plenty of topics with strong policy ground that had no less spark/wipeout presence than I see this year. your prediction that they will be "huge" is laughable.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see something like a natural disasters trade off: if we take all these troops out of that area then we will not be able to give aid fast enough if there is a big natural disaster

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are great built in disads on this topic.

 

Allied Prolif: US forces overseas, in particular in SK and Japan, provide a credible link to the US extended deterrent. If we withdraw those forces, they may proliferate to protect themselves.

 

Relations Disads: We have treaty obligations to Japan, SK and Turkey - that doesn't necessarily mean that we are obligated to keep troops there (the opposite is debatable) but there are a lot of good arguments that withdrawal of deployments would undermine relations and Treaties. The impacts to these can range from cooperation on specific issues to deterring regional security threats.

 

Deterrence Disads: Deployments in other nations may deter regional rivals, hegemons or aggressors. North Korea is a Built In disad to any South Korea case. In the old days, this was called Red Spread, because it was the Soviet Union that was usually being deterred. Now, there is more variety.

 

Iraq / Afghanistan Collapse Disads: If we fail in either of these nations (arguably) it could collapse the nation, its neighbors or the region. We have troops there for a reason (rightly or wrongly) and that reason is a Built In disad to withdrawal.

 

War on Terror: People have been stretching the imagination of internal links for years to get to links to the War on Terror. This year, it is Front And Center Core negative ground for Iraq and Afghanistan cases. Withdrawal (arguably) hurts our ability to fight terrorist training camps and supporters, and would be key victories for Anti Americanism.

 

Foreign Politics Disads: A withdrawal of US forces from any of these countries would have enormous political implications for the host country.

 

Obviously some people will still run common perma-generics like politics or wipeout. But there is so much Good negative disad ground that is unique to this resolution - some of these disads overlap with previous year's topics, but not in a bad way - all of these are things that we had to stretch to get internal links to on previous topics, but now we have Intelligent links to them, decent global uniqueness for them, and they are Core ground. There has not been a topic with better built in negative ground in years.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How about something like an invasive species da, like if we mass pull all these troops out, invasive species will come into American soil?

 

 

I like the idea of invasive species, or disease spread DAs based off of troops returning home. I think the only issue involved (specifically with invasive species) is the size of the link story you need to get to a significant impact.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...