Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

Round 492: [Space] - Crusso (Aff) Vs Embracethesuffering(Neg)

Recommended Posts

Your SSI 10 cars cites ground based sattelite systems, how exactly does the plan solve for targets on the ground?


What is uplink jamming?


Your Bonner 10 card cites both uplink and downlink jamming, how do you solve for both?


Your Tucker 8 card goes "The positioning and navigation capabilities of GPS are not the only critical infrastructure enablers provided by this well known space system, “…its value as a global time standard rather than as a navigation aid is more important. It is virtually the only global source for accurate timing.â€24 Please provide me with the whole card without the ellipse.


Your cards are two and three years old, timeframe for satt attacks? also, by who?


What exactly is Network Centric warfare?



What is seabasing?


What does DTN exactly do to solve?


What does a space based network node do to solve the problem?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, on heg, your Kagan evidence cites wars in a multipolar world back in the 18th century, why is that a reason to reject multipolarity's peaceful capabilities now?


Still on Kagan, explain the warrant as to why US hegemony will lead to peace?


The US has maintained hegemony for most of the 21st century, why were there still multiple wars?(E.g. Iraq, Afghanistan)

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry I didnt put this all in one post, Ill do that for the 2AC but


The Barno 11 evidence talks about the rise of regional actors and how traditional deterrence fails, what does this mean in terms of Heg?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry about the delay, I haven't been home all weekend.

1. DTN allows satellites to send information directly to other satellites with space=based network nodes, eliminating the need for ground based stations which are one of the most vulnerable areas.

2. The intentional interference by states to block transmissions in order to prevent messages getting out, usually targeting the antenna.

3. Our NSTAC evidence does a pretty good job explaining it. The addition of an on board route processing engine, increased redundancy, and their ability to regenerate after an attack.

4. That is a quote from another excerpt. The rest of the quote wasn't included. I'm not omitting anything from the Tucker evidence.

5. We are seeing these attacks every day. Anonymous hacking major government networks, Iran hijacking a satellite are all reasons we need cybersecurity. It's only a matter of time before they hack into a major network and cause serious damage to the economy.

Anyone. China has developed a cyber war program, so has Iran, and especially non-state terrorist organizations.

6. Warfare that focuses on using computers and GPS for targetting abilities, UAV, etc.

7. Seabasing is a military strategy that uses naval warships to be positioned off coasts of hotspot areas which deploy rapid response units who go in mainland to deescalate conflict.

8. DTN has more effective information gathering capabilities that is necessary to provide data on conflict zones and allows completely stable communication to our soldiers even in hostile environmental areas. The squo does nothing to solve for either of those. Also see my answers to number 3.

9. Space based network nodes are the hardware we deploy DTN with on our satellites. See my answers on why DTN is good.

10. The warrants as to why it's bad, such as even deeper alliance systems that heg and use of war to solve conflict, plus 300 years of empirics prove it's bad.

11. Our Barno 11 evidence is indicative of how seabasing specifically solves war, by maintaining quick access to conflict zones, we can send in small units that are capable of dealing with asymmetric problems and deescalating them. Also, this ability lets other countries model off our military through training and aid, increasing the amount of allies which would lead to war. On the Kagan card, spreading democracy allows us to have more allies and also model US norms, and even though there will still be conflict in a unipolar world, that conflict is limited as opposed to a multipolar world, where we'd have autocratic nations rising up against democracy and there would be a much more protectionist world system that would inevitabley lead to more conflict.

12. Those are asymmetric wars that our aff claims to solve for. See above that even if SOME conflict is inevitable, heg is the only way to keep it from escalating to power wars.

13. It means our current military doctrine is ineffective which weakens heg.

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.

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.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Create New...