Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
superman222e

Need TNW Withdrawl from Turkey is inevitable

Recommended Posts

title says it all

Try researching

 

or, find specific non-uniques.

 

or, throw out your "god in baby form" with the bathwater and switch your aff

 

Just stop nagging everyone IRL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Budget constraints will cause B61 withdrawal at the 2010 NATO Strategic Concept review

Meier, Ph.D., International Representative for the Arms Control Association and researcher with the Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy at the University of Hamburg, ‘6 (Oliver Meier, Ph.D., International Representative for the Arms Control Association and researcher with the Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy at the University of Hamburg, “News Analysis: An End to U.S. Tactical Nuclear Weapons in Europe?” July/August, http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2006_07-08/NewsAnalysis)

 

Best I can do, you can read through it yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Budget constraints will cause B61 withdrawal at the 2010 NATO Strategic Concept review

Meier, Ph.D., International Representative for the Arms Control Association and researcher with the Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy at the University of Hamburg, ‘6 (Oliver Meier, Ph.D., International Representative for the Arms Control Association and researcher with the Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy at the University of Hamburg, “News Analysis: An End to U.S. Tactical Nuclear Weapons in Europe?” July/August, http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2006_07-08/NewsAnalysis)

 

Best I can do, you can read through it yourself.

 

I don't mean to burst your bubble, but this was 4 years ago. Nukes should have already been gone...so either the aff has nothing to remove, or the card doesn't apply to the situation.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't mean to burst your bubble, but this was 4 years ago. Nukes should have already been gone...so either the aff has nothing to remove, or the card doesn't apply to the situation.

 

All I did was go to Trinity HM and copy/pasted it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

US-Turkey Relations ensure inevitable removal of nuclear weapons in Turkey.

Alexandra Bell and Benjamin Loehrke 09 (Bell: Master's degree in International Affairs from the New School and a Bachelor's degree in Peace, War and Defense and U.S. History from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Loehrke: BA in political science at Indiana University Bloomington and MPP , International Security and Economic Policy at University of Maryland College Park. "The status of U.S. nuclear weapons in Turkey" The Bulletin 11/23) http://www.thebulletin.org/web-edition/features/the-status-of-us-nuclear-weapons-turkey

 

A prescription for withdrawal. Preventing Turkey (and any other country in the region) from acquiring nuclear weapons is critical to international security. Doing so requires a key factor that also is essential to paving the way toward withdrawal of U.S. nuclear weapons: improved alliance relations. The political and strategic compasses are pointing to the eventual withdrawal of nuclear weapons from Europe--it's a strategy that certainly fits the disarmament agenda President Barack Obama has outlined. But to get there, careful diplomacy will be required to improve U.S.-Turkish ties and to assuage Turkish security concerns.

 

The U.S.-Turkish relationship cooled when Turkey refused to participate in Operation Iraqi Freedom, after which Turkish support for U.S. policy declined through the end of the George W. Bush administration. Obama's election has helped to mend fences, and his visit to Turkey in April was warmly received. In fact, all of the administration's positive interactions with Turkey have been beneficial: Washington has supported Turkey's role as a regional energy supplier and encouraged Ankara as it undertakes difficult political reforms and works to resolve regional diplomatic conflicts. For its part, Turkey recently doubled its troop contribution to NATO's Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan--a boon to U.S. efforts there.

 

By incorporating Ankara into its new European missile defense plans--intended to protect Turkey and other countries vulnerable to Iran's short- and intermediate-range ballistic missiles--Washington could further shore up its military relationship with Turkey. Ship-based Aegis missile systems will be the backbone of the strategy, with considerations left open for later deployments of mobile ground-based interceptors in Eastern Europe or Turkey. This cooperation could provide the bond with Washington and perception of security that Turkey seeks in the face of a potential Iranian bomb.

 

Because Russia weighs significantly in Turkish security calculations, reductions to Russian strategic and nonstrategic nuclear arsenals also would help improve Ankara's peace of mind. The United States and Russia soon will seek ratification of a follow-on agreement to START. And treaty negotiations in pursuit of further reductions to the U.S. and Russian arsenals should involve forward-deployed nuclear weapons, including the U.S. weapons in Turkey. During any such negotiations, Turkey must be fully confident in NATO and U.S. security guarantees. Critically, any removal of the weapons in Turkey would need to happen in concert with efforts to prevent Iran from turning its civil nuclear energy program into a military one. Otherwise, Washington would risk compromising Turkey as a NATO ally and key regional partner.

 

If used properly, Turkey actually can play an important role in this complex process, and the United States and its allies should seriously consider Turkish offers to serve as an interlocutor between Iran and the West. First, Ankara's potential influence with Tehran should not be underestimated. As Princeton scholar Joshua Walker has noted, given its long-established pragmatic relations and growing economic ties with Iran, Ankara is in a position to positively influence Tehran's behavior.

 

More largely, if the United States and European Union task Turkey with a bigger role in the diplomatic back-and-forth with Iran, it would help convince Ankara (and others) of Turkey's value to NATO and have the additional benefit of pulling Ankara into a closer relationship with Washington and Brussels. As a result, Turkey would obtain a stronger footing in alliance politics, contain its chief security concerns, and foster the necessary conditions for the removal of tactical U.S. nuclear weapons from Turkish soil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't mean to burst your bubble, but this was 4 years ago. Nukes should have already been gone...so either the aff has nothing to remove, or the card doesn't apply to the situation.

 

No, NATO strat con finalizes in november of 2010, that's when the card (tag?) says they get removed.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
US-Turkey Relations ensure inevitable removal of nuclear weapons in Turkey.

Alexandra Bell and Benjamin Loehrke 09 (Bell: Master's degree in International Affairs from the New School and a Bachelor's degree in Peace, War and Defense and U.S. History from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Loehrke: BA in political science at Indiana University Bloomington and MPP , International Security and Economic Policy at University of Maryland College Park. "The status of U.S. nuclear weapons in Turkey" The Bulletin 11/23) http://www.thebulletin.org/web-edition/features/the-status-of-us-nuclear-weapons-turkey

 

A prescription for withdrawal. Preventing Turkey (and any other country in the region) from acquiring nuclear weapons is critical to international security. Doing so requires a key factor that also is essential to paving the way toward withdrawal of U.S. nuclear weapons: improved alliance relations. The political and strategic compasses are pointing to the eventual withdrawal of nuclear weapons from Europe--it's a strategy that certainly fits the disarmament agenda President Barack Obama has outlined. But to get there, careful diplomacy will be required to improve U.S.-Turkish ties and to assuage Turkish security concerns.

 

The U.S.-Turkish relationship cooled when Turkey refused to participate in Operation Iraqi Freedom, after which Turkish support for U.S. policy declined through the end of the George W. Bush administration. Obama's election has helped to mend fences, and his visit to Turkey in April was warmly received. In fact, all of the administration's positive interactions with Turkey have been beneficial: Washington has supported Turkey's role as a regional energy supplier and encouraged Ankara as it undertakes difficult political reforms and works to resolve regional diplomatic conflicts. For its part, Turkey recently doubled its troop contribution to NATO's Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan--a boon to U.S. efforts there.

 

By incorporating Ankara into its new European missile defense plans--intended to protect Turkey and other countries vulnerable to Iran's short- and intermediate-range ballistic missiles--Washington could further shore up its military relationship with Turkey. Ship-based Aegis missile systems will be the backbone of the strategy, with considerations left open for later deployments of mobile ground-based interceptors in Eastern Europe or Turkey. This cooperation could provide the bond with Washington and perception of security that Turkey seeks in the face of a potential Iranian bomb.

 

Because Russia weighs significantly in Turkish security calculations, reductions to Russian strategic and nonstrategic nuclear arsenals also would help improve Ankara's peace of mind. The United States and Russia soon will seek ratification of a follow-on agreement to START. And treaty negotiations in pursuit of further reductions to the U.S. and Russian arsenals should involve forward-deployed nuclear weapons, including the U.S. weapons in Turkey. During any such negotiations, Turkey must be fully confident in NATO and U.S. security guarantees. Critically, any removal of the weapons in Turkey would need to happen in concert with efforts to prevent Iran from turning its civil nuclear energy program into a military one. Otherwise, Washington would risk compromising Turkey as a NATO ally and key regional partner.

 

If used properly, Turkey actually can play an important role in this complex process, and the United States and its allies should seriously consider Turkish offers to serve as an interlocutor between Iran and the West. First, Ankara's potential influence with Tehran should not be underestimated. As Princeton scholar Joshua Walker has noted, given its long-established pragmatic relations and growing economic ties with Iran, Ankara is in a position to positively influence Tehran's behavior.

 

More largely, if the United States and European Union task Turkey with a bigger role in the diplomatic back-and-forth with Iran, it would help convince Ankara (and others) of Turkey's value to NATO and have the additional benefit of pulling Ankara into a closer relationship with Washington and Brussels. As a result, Turkey would obtain a stronger footing in alliance politics, contain its chief security concerns, and foster the necessary conditions for the removal of tactical U.S. nuclear weapons from Turkish soil.

 

The removal of the nukes in Turkey is hinged on START being ratified according to this card. And it also depends on whether or not the US and Russia decide to negotiate removal of TNW's in Turkey, which there is no warrant that there will be, the author just asserts that they should be and that Turkey would be cool with it because they'd fell more comfortable with a reduced Russian arsenal and knowing that we have their backs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The removal of the nukes in Turkey is hinged on START being ratified according to this card. And it also depends on whether or not the US and Russia decide to negotiate removal of TNW's in Turkey, which there is no warrant that there will be, the author just asserts that they should be and that Turkey would be cool with it because they'd fell more comfortable with a reduced Russian arsenal and knowing that we have their backs.

 

Stop arguing against evidence as a reason not to use it. If you're going to ask for help, just accept it. Let the other team argue against it, that card could be super helpful for a sick disad against TNWs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think this thread is a classic example of debaters finding evidence for something that doesn't actually exist... don't you love the internet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No joke... Haha been looking for something that says something along the lines of "NATO is being troubled by the continued presence of turkey's tnw's". It probably doesn't help that I've got slow internet and some pickiness. Any help?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No joke... Haha been looking for something that says something along the lines of "NATO is being troubled by the continued presence of turkey's tnw's". It probably doesn't help that I've got slow internet and some pickiness. Any help?

 

look in camp files or use google. that's easy to find.

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...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...