Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Annex Iraq, followed closely by Nuke Afghanistan.

 

But seriously, this is so subjective that its nearly impossible to say. TNWs seems like the most plausible case (like it could actually happen in the next couple years, and it makes sense to do). South Korea and Japan have realism issues that make disadvantage links pretty strong (would we really just yank our troops out of South Korea - in reality this would have to occur over a long period of time). The sand is shifting a lot on Afghanistan and Iraq, so I'm not sure I'd want to commit to them. Kuwait affs will generally suck.

 

Some of the smaller cases are subject to strong topicality attacks: drones (which I like in principal), satellites, miscellaneous weapons systems, militarized anthropologists, etc.

 

I could see versions of the PMC case being pretty popular - I'm not sure there's a lot of support for hiring out mercenaries of death. Afghanistan Counter Narcotics might be ok.

 

So if you put a gun to my head, I'd probably pick TNWs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TNWs followed closely by a Deleuzean problematization of the situation in Iraq

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Deleuzoguattarian, Maury. Respect the multitude.

 

This insinuates that Guattari's contribution to Capitalism and Schizophrenia was relevant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This insinuates that Guattari's contribution to Capitalism and Schizophrenia was relevant

 

Are you serious? - and don't forget Kafka & What is Philosophy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

South Korea - the evidence is pretty good and can easily beat the deterrence DA if you're good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think TNW's are definitely the best, although it's a bit disappointing that all the policy versions released by camps are generally terrible, but the UT k aff is pretty good.

 

Afghanistan and Iraq maybe... it's mostly gonna be regional stability internal links to terrorism and ME war, and then some k advantages, which kinda redeems these topic countries. But a good specific aff for Iraq would definitely be PMC's, it'll be the easiest way for all those cap debaters to critique cap on aff. Only downside to PMC's will be the constant T debates.

 

South Korea will probably be good for a k aff, like rape or something, anything with ontological impacts so it can outweigh the inevitable North Korea deterrence debate with impact framing.

 

Japan will be an easy aff to run. The japanese kinda don't want us there, relations may be a good advantage, although I've seen no real brink evidence on relations crashing from staying. And okinawa specifically would be good for some k advantages.

 

I myself am leaning towards TNW's. Pretty sick advantages. You can do all kinds of shit with NATO, probably has the most credible internal link to nuke terrorism ever heard of, the russians probably don't like them, you can spin a biopower advantage into it, Iran preemption, maybe a regional stability advantage.

 

Feel free to correct me or add on to what I'm saying

Edited by The Debater Formerly Known As Rawrcat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TNW will be a good aff, but not necessarily the most strategic one. Every person who reads a TNW aff increases the incentive to research really really good 1NCs against them. It's sort of a self denying prophecy. TNWs will probably be popular, which means that the neg arguments you go against will probably either be very good or unpredictable. Either way, that's not a good thing to go against.

 

But I think TNWs will be good, because there's not enough literature on the negative side. There are very few good arguments against TNWs, so the arguments which are good can be blocked out before the round. But you should still consider the above if you're planning to read a TNW affirmative.

Edited by Chaos
rhetoric was pretty strong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TNWs are pretty good, but, as Chaos said, they will be predictable and most people will have 1NCs to run against it - however, I disagree that it's a reason to not run TNWs.

 

PMCs is also pretty good, as are the South Korea and Japan affs, however, I also agree that this is really subjective and depends on a lot of things

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After debating TNWs for an entire year, let me tell you: no one will come up with a smarter 2NR strategy than "politics and case"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TNWs as said, but I'm personally going to run Japan Militarization myself. I'm working my way through the DAs for it to build it, and in general I'm guessing good JAffs will be a lot rarer than TNWs.

 

TNWs can provoke a lot of Middle East War DAs too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...