Jump to content
CaptainWilderson

Which Impact Do You Hate The Most?

Recommended Posts

Any nuke war scenario that is in response to not using the USFG in round

 

Seriously though, there is no world in which us not taking FIATed action in a debate round would lead to nuke war

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bird deaths = extinction

 

On a related note, bumblebees. Best read with a cell phone towers link.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On a related note, bumblebees. Best read with a cell phone towers link.

Too bad I have impact defense!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Impact turn: squo key to bumblebee robots key to nanotech.

I can see this being a rather legitimate argument. Bumblebee robots probably means robots with a specifically powerful kind of organization or swarming pattern. 8/10 would run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

awwwwwwwwwwwww *kicks dirt*

I love ridiculous impacts, sometimes. Other times I hate them. I'm glad that one was ridiculous in a way that sounded plausible, that's what I intended.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

tommy949, on 20 Mar 2013 - 02:06 undefined, said:snapback.png

racism/oppression

It's just so annoying how urban debate teams rant about 8 minutes of racism when they go home and don't do anything about it

 

 

You have reached your quota of negative votes for the day

 

I went back and downvoted it. 

Feel much better now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quebec secession causes nuclear war with Canada. 

 

Chunkry has reached Chunkry's quota for negative votes for the day

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Econ is underestimated, mainly because no one researches it and just uses the same shitty impact cards every year (mead, broward, etc)

 

Economic decline results in war

I agree.  There's too little empirical support for it to be run as often as it is.

 

Actually there is a ton of empirical evidence to support it. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the overall impact story of many of those impacts you posted. It's not that nations suddenly decide to turn on their trading partners, but that radicals become more likely to gain power which then leads to conflict. That's a much more persuasive story (also, it's compatible with arguments about deterrence if you contend that moderates are rational while radicals are not). For a US specific empiric, you could probably argue that Romney almost won because of the economy and then talk about how he would have antagonized China and other countries. That argument is new to me and very good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the overall impact story of many of those impacts you posted. It's not that nations suddenly decide to turn on their trading partners, but that radicals become more likely to gain power which then leads to conflict. That's a much more persuasive story (also, it's compatible with arguments about deterrence if you contend that moderates are rational while radicals are not). For a US specific empiric, you could probably argue that Romney almost won because of the economy and then talk about how he would have antagonized China and other countries. That argument is new to me and very good.

Additionally, if you count all the different examples cited in those cards you get ~47 empirics to support the position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the Food Prices DA, the chain of events might be the stupidest I've ever seen. It starts with saying that high food prices are currently crushing Afghan opium trade, then that TI lowers food prices. The next card's tag is, "That will crush NATO." And that leads to nuke war.

 

I have no idea who thought of this, but they must have been getting in on that opium trade.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Prison Industrial Complex

Retribution leads to a depletion of wildlife.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Federalism. I always ask teams that run it on us "Why does the DOT exist?" and they always screw up the response. 

 

I really don't think that building a new (aff goes here) is going to cause a civil war. Pretty sure that if this was the 1950's you'd have read the same type of arguments on building the Highway System.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^You can say that about any disad. I don't think investing in a road system will lead to nuclear war with China, or excess Methane releases, or any extinction scenario for that matter.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^You can say that about any disad. I don't think investing in a road system will lead to nuclear war with China, or excess Methane releases, or any extinction scenario for that matter.

I've always wanted to run some kind of K against BS impacts like this. Something like Apocalyptic rhetoric but that is about any form of extinction scenario. There's just a huge lack of real world impacts in CX. I do the same extinction cards that everyone else does but in my heart I know they're full of shit. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

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...