Jump to content
lolwut5

lolwut5 (aff) vs SnarkosaurusRex (neg)

Recommended Posts

CX

So how did access US technology prevent an oil spill with Deepwater Horizon a few years ago?

 

What’s the brink for biodiversity?

 

How much of a threat would you say China is to its neighbors and the world?

 

Why would it be Muslims that deploy nuclear weapons against the capital as claimed by your Easterbrook evidence?

 

So is one of the goals of the plan to secure the Caribbean and Latin American regions from the threat of terrorism?

 

Does Hezbollah currently have a way to attack the US with nuclear weapons? Do they even have nuclear weapons?

 

What’s Hezbollah’s motivation for using nuclear weapons?

 

Why is your Pascual and Huddleston 9 evidence tagged as the president when it says the secretary of the treasury?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol. I would be down with that xD

 

 

CX

So how did access US technology prevent an oil spill with Deepwater Horizon a few years ago?

 

Good question, going to give a bit of a longer answer here b/c it is important.  

First of all, as you know, BP is a British company despite its global operations. Don't conflate US tech with British tech.

Second, a key distinction we need to make here is between proactive and reactive tech. I read a wonderful book called "Private Empire" by Steve Coll which was about ExxonMobil and American power, and in it, he provides some context to the spill, that BP had a record of really awful proactive environmental protection standards and flagrantly violated common industry safety practices.

Third, Cuba lacks necessary proactive tech including: industry standard blowout preventors, well casings, drilling fluids and reactive tech like: submersibles, dispersants, oil eating bacteria, floating booms, and more. 

^All of this BP had during the spill b/c there was no 'embargo' on BP, you could say.

Fourth, that oil spill was not exactly mild by any definition, and even with US containment tech, it really hurt the ecosystem. Again, let's not conflate this example with our plan, but using BP to say "oh well we didn't go extinct from BP" ignores the crucial distinction between a spill with US proactive and reactive tech and a spill with none of that tech... which could very well go down a path far worse, ending in catastrophe. Hell, I think BP was a catastrophe, but at least we're still here. 

Fifth, our evidence talks about a spill in the context of Cuban waters... BP was in US waters. Context is key.

 

What’s the brink for biodiversity?

You mean what would trigger the impact? An oil spill of the magnitude all our highly qualified scientific evidence talks about. 

 

How much of a threat would you say China is to its neighbors and the world?

Well, again a good question. China is a rising power with a growing GDP, military force, etc. It's not that the idea *china* specifically poses a threat because we hate those evil Chinese, the opposite is true, I mean if any other country were China we would view them the same way, you could say our evidence is in the realist IR framework that quite legitimately sees a burgeoning hegemon in China and due to the way China, Taiwan and the US feel about Taiwan's sovereignty, a fight over Taiwan and the one nation policy has a unique chance of escalation due to the history of conflict and struggle over Taiwan. I mean just look at the history of relations between the Kuomintang and the CCP, sure things have changed but have people really forgotten? crazier things have happened in the past.

In other words, I don't think China poses a unique threat out of all the nations, however, it's not exactly far-fetched to claim that China will act in its national interest and if that interest means using its leverage over the US to attempt to resolve the Taiwan dispute unilaterally then I guess that's the logical conclusion of those premises.

 

Why would it be Muslims that deploy nuclear weapons against the capital as claimed by your Easterbrook evidence?

Well, make the distinction between radical fundamentalist adherents of Islam and your typical Muslim. Once you have that distinction, Islamist terrorists (and *HEZBOLLAH* in particular) have consistently attacked innocent US civilians and soldiers (let's not get into justifying violence, this is just fact), and when Hezbollah is given the opportunity to strike (as it has utilized these opportunities in the past) the US will retaliate with its own nuclear arsenal b/c their hand will be forced to enact revenge on nonviolent Muslims around the world no matter how they would have chosen to approach the situation in 'peacetime'. This is coming from a very well respected US defense analyst who's spent a lot of time researching these things and at the forefront of policy.

 

So is one of the goals of the plan to secure the Caribbean and Latin American regions from the threat of terrorism?

That's misconstrued. The plan would reverse the trend of increasingly negative and hostile relations between the US and Cuba and spillover to Latin America as a second order effect, and that would allow the US to pursue dialogue with Cuba on preventing terrorist prolif. We will defend that the plan increases relations which will prevent Hezbollah from being given an opportunity to strike, not a nebulous claim to 'secure' Latin America from "OMGZ terroristz"

 

Does Hezbollah currently have a way to attack the US with nuclear weapons? Do they even have nuclear weapons?

Yeah, and remember the whole Cuban Missile Crisis? Imagine that with radical fundamentalist terrorists. Unless we reverse the collapse of relations we can't pursue efforts to neutralize Hezbollah's capabilities, and our Noriega ev is very explicit in stating that Hezbollah is going to strike US personnel and we must act now to neutralize such a threat. We can't name a specific group that will supply Hezbollah with weapons or if Hezbollah will use it's own but likely culprits include the Iranian Rev Guard, Quds Forces, Iranian Govt, Venezuelan Govt or any number of fundamentalist Islamic groups based in Latin America like say Jamaat al-Muslimeen. 

 

What’s Hezbollah’s motivation for using nuclear weapons?

I'm not an expert, but from my limited understanding they are angry at the US for supporting Israel, invading countries in the Middle East, etc... more ideologically they are based in a radical Shi'i religious fundamentalism that warrants holy war. From wikipedia:

During the years prior to its official founding, Hezbollah was held responsible or partially responsible for several attacks on Western (mostly American) targets and it has been blamed for killing many Americans.[52] Hezbollah has denied involvement in the attacks, but its manifesto does claim that "the whole world knows that whoever wishes to oppose the US, that arrogant superpower, cannot indulge in marginal acts which may make deviate from its major objective. We combat abomination and we shall tear out its very roots, its primary roots, which are the US."[9] Hezbollah supporters chant "Death to America" in demonstrations every year.[53] This attitude mirrors the attitude of the Iranian government.[54]

Hezbollah leader Fadlallah has told an interviewer, "We believe there is no difference between the United States and Israel; the latter is a mere extension of the former. The United States is ready to fight the whole world to defend Israel's existence and security. The two countries are working in complete harmony, and the United States is certainly not inclined to exert pressure on Israel."[55]\

 

Why is your Pascual and Huddleston 9 evidence tagged as the president when it says the secretary of the treasury?

It says Obama can use OFAC to license whatever he wants... "This power has been used over the past fifteen years by various republican and Democratic administrations to license a variety of commercial transactions between the United States and Cuba"

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two follow ups: So you are claiming Hezbollah has nuclear weapons?

 

Where specifically did you answer why Hezbollah wants to use nukes? You said why they don't like the US but that's not the same thing.

 

Would you defend Wikipedia in a duel to the death as a reliable source? If I can get a teacher to say Wikipedia is bad for education, will you concede that you're literally killing debate by ruining our education?

 

1NC should be up tomorrow. No promises, I have homework.

 

Spoiler, in regards to my earlier conundrum:

 

Decisions, decisions. Lacan or DnG? Hmmmmm....

Por que no las dos?

Edited by SnarkosaurusRex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two follow ups: So you are claiming Hezbollah has nuclear weapons?

hezbollah has the capacity to get nuclear weapons. basically it's a prolif internal link I guess... if we don't pass the plan, they will get them and use them when US latin american relations collapse. if we do pass the plan, we can revitalize our relationship with cuba (which spills over) and cooperate on terrorist prolif neutralization. does that answer your question?

 

Where specifically did you answer why Hezbollah wants to use nukes? You said why they don't like the US but that's not the same thing.

our hellman 8 ev makes the claim that terrorists will use nuclear weapons, and all our other evidence indicates that hezbollah wants to strike the united states. 

 

Would you defend Wikipedia in a duel to the death as a reliable source? If I can get a teacher to say Wikipedia is bad for education, will you concede that you're literally killing debate by ruining our education?

no, and no. but thanks anyway :D

 

1NC should be up tomorrow. No promises, I have homework.

awesome

Spoiler, in regards to my earlier conundrum:

oh gawd
 

Por que no las dos?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But…

No Derrida? Baudrillard? Negarestani? Dark Mountain Poetry Performance DeDev?

*sobs quietly*

Haha coming out of the 1AC I expect a nebulous reps K but more fun would be:

 

Lacan & DnG forever <3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, those aren't the only k's I'm running. Problem with Baudrillard is that the only stuff I have on nuclear is about deterrence, and I don't have time to read and cut his articles on terrorism.

 

 

At any rate, it should be 5 or 6 off. I'm trying to get a diversity of arguments since you suggested you want to get practice answering a lot of K's. I'm also spinning different k's together in ways that at least I've never seen before so we'll see how it goes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I mixed arguments that probably shouldn't have been mixed, but let's just chalk it up to rhizomatic thinking.

http://www.mediafire.com/view/ynwb97ij42v97b7/V-Debate_Round_3-1NC-To_Share.docx

Edit: Gosh darn late night verb tense disagreements. No grammar Ks PLZ.

Edited by SnarkosaurusRex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CX of 1NC

Sorry this took so long. Haha tonight I realized I had no answers to DnG, so you'll probably whoop me on it... but ah well. Also, I'm probably over the limit, but don't worry, have your block be longer to answer everything. 

General

1. You realize that Deleuze and Lacan do not couple well? Can I read performative contradictions bad?

2. Where is the empirical evidence backing up Deleuze, Lacan, Stavrakakis, and other critical theorists?

3. You realize that Lacan thinks the male penis is the square root of negative one?

4. What does this incomprehensible jargon about becoming and nomadicism?

5. Any plan inclusive kritiks?

1st Off

1. Status?

2. Could the plan occur in the world of the alt?

3. What would the alt *specifically* change/alter? Please provide an example.

2nd Off

1. Status?

2. How does 'the states's relationship to oil' allow it to control 'the flow of people, goods and information'?

3. Define fascism. Was the Third Reich fascism? Are rules in debate fascism?

4. Is there an alt and what does it *specifically* change/alter? Please provide an example.

5. What does the world look like without 'fascism' as you define it? Is this achievable?

3rd Off

1. Status? 

2. What specific things in mainstream terrorism studies are epistemologically suspect? Also, what in the 1AC is part of this? Can you provide a quote?

3.  Is there an alt and what does it *specifically* change/alter? Please provide an example.

4th Off

1. Status?

2. Rhetoric in a vdebate round leads to your impacts?

3. Is there an alt and what does it *specifically* change/alter? Please provide an example.

Edited by lolwut5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, disclaimer: My laptop is broken so I don't have easy access to my files. I'll answer what I can without the speech doc in front of me and you can post the 2AC if you want but until I get a replacement of fix a neg block will have to wait.

CX of 1NC

Sorry this took so long. Haha tonight I realized I had no answers to DnG, so you'll probably whoop me on it... but ah well. Also, I'm probably over the limit, but don't worry, have your block be longer to answer everything. 

General

1. You realize that Deleuze and Lacan do not couple well? Can I read performative contradictions bad?

While some aspects of their theories clash, it would be an oversimplification and a mistake to say that the two are diametrically opposed. No, because the arguments I have read from them don't contradict and in fact compliment each other. Well, I guess you could, but it'd be a waste of time in my humble opinion.

2. Where is the empirical evidence backing up Deleuze, Lacan, Stavrakakis, and other critical theorists?

As far as Lacan goes, his followers and practitioners of his work in France especially have seen great success in treating patients with psychotherapy. If you wish, in the beginning of "A Clinical Introduction to Lacan" by Bruce Fink, I believe he covers some of his treatment of patients in the beginning and draws from his experience in successfully treating patients throughout the work.

As far as DnG goes, just look around you to see it. A great example of this is the border between Mexico and the US; as the government has grown increasingly fearful of it's lack of control and the lack of 'order' at the border, it has responded by striating the region, building a fence and putting a portion of the state's perversion of the war machine into place to try and police the flow of migrants.

3. You realize that Lacan thinks the male penis is the square root of negative one?

Ad hom.

4. What does this incomprehensible jargon about becoming and nomadicism?

Needs clarification; first off you don't even have a proper sentence so I'm not sure what you're asking. If you need a glossary: http://www.rhizomes.net/issue5/poke/glossary.html

5. Any plan inclusive kritiks?

Do I have any, or do they exist, or do I endorse them, or will I go for one? If you're asking if I read one then not that I ca remember.

 

I don't remember all my positions or what order they were in so if it's about that in particular and not about the theory I won't be able to answer.

1st Off

1. Status?

2. Could the plan occur in the world of the alt?

3. What would the alt *specifically* change/alter? Please provide an example.

2nd Off

1. Status?

2. How does 'the states's relationship to oil' allow it to control 'the flow of people, goods and information'?

If you take a close look at the card I believe it mentions how oil is at the root off all of those things and by controlling it, it can control the rest.

3. Define fascism. Was the Third Reich fascism? Are rules in debate fascism?

4. Is there an alt and what does it *specifically* change/alter? Please provide an example.

5. What does the world look like without 'fascism' as you define it? Is this achievable?

3rd Off

1. Status? 

2. What specific things in mainstream terrorism studies are epistemologically suspect? Also, what in the 1AC is part of this? Can you provide a quote?

Check the card for the epistemological indights. If it's about terrorism it's a pretty safe bet it's referring to the stuff about terrorism in the 1ac.

3.  Is there an alt and what does it *specifically* change/alter? Please provide an example.

4th Off

1. Status?

2. Rhetoric in a vdebate round leads to your impacts?

If this is the thing I think it is (has an enemy creating card with Lacan psych) then it's about epistemology and motives more than rhetoric  provided I remember correctly.

3. Is there an alt and what does it *specifically* change/alter? Please provide an example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright, I just need to know if all of them are conditional, or one is unconditional, or something else.

If I can get that answered, I will post the 2AC. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright, I just need to know if all of them are conditional, or one is unconditional, or something else.

If I can get that answered, I will post the 2AC. 

IDK. For the sake of time let's just say they're all condo I don't really care.

(Without looking I can't really evaluate if I would want to make any uncondo or not)

Edited by SnarkosaurusRex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do I detect some *gasp* condescension here? Imagine that, coming from a critical theorist. Well let me tell you Mr. Enlightened Critical Theorist, pretty much all your credibility was lost when you said we should be insecure and analyze how the way in which we want to kill our fathers and rape our mothers leads to Islamic terrorism. And no, pragmatism is much more useful than some kind of idealized impossible line of flight away from reality where 60s hippies populate the Earth and speak French and eat vegan pastries. I ask you to check yourself. Are you living in reality or just find too much wrong in the world to retreat into Post-marxist fantasies instead of doing anything? Moreover, how dare you make me answer four conditional advocacies, as if all my life were devoted to answering nebulous epistemology indictments and imaginary bourgeoisie-based anti-capitalist theory. Sure, I'm a dirty *ewww* pragmatist and I believe that terrorists are real threats, but I ask you: are you better than that? I think not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well my 2NC strat is a lock-guarenteed to win timeframe, magnitude, and probability:

“If we allow this Tyson to keep publicly airing his beliefs, God just may strike us down with a cosmic meteor this summer. That would be ironic justice if you ask me, so we should just take this show off now before that happens.â€

http://topekasnews.com/oklahoma-protesters-threaten-secdee-union-neil-degrasse-tysons-cosmos-cancelled/

 

CP:#CancelCosmos

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do I detect some *gasp* condescension here? Imagine that, coming from a critical theorist. Well let me tell you Mr. Enlightened Critical Theorist, pretty much all your credibility was lost when you said we should be insecure and analyze how the way in which we want to kill our fathers and rape our mothers leads to Islamic terrorism. And no, pragmatism is much more useful than some kind of idealized impossible line of flight away from reality where 60s hippies populate the Earth and speak French and eat vegan pastries. I ask you to check yourself. Are you living in reality or just find too much wrong in the world to retreat into Post-marxist fantasies instead of doing anything? Moreover, how dare you make me answer four conditional advocacies, as if all my life were devoted to answering nebulous epistemology indictments and imaginary bourgeoisie-based anti-capitalist theory. Sure, I'm a dirty *ewww* pragmatist and I believe that terrorists are real threats, but I ask you: are you better than that? I think not.

Here's that perf con your so fond of you silly neocon . I'm sure that Hezbollah has WMD's, I mean look how well that turned out last time for the chicken hawks. And of course it's *oil* that we need from Cuba. How else could we keep the Military Industrial Complex all lubed up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of making that reasonable claim, you went for *wait for it* ---> Lacan and DnG.

And wtf does Neil Degrasse Tyson have to do with anything? lol. If anything he flows Aff, 'cuz he believes in SCIENCE and RATIONALITY and LOGIC.

Just because you associate with fancy postmodernists does not mean you are actually a rebel, or cool, or trendy. In fact, the real hipsters are the ones who believe in capitalism, in knowledge, in pragmatism. 

Hell, I ain't even advocating for war. I just want to make the US safe. 

Oh and btw, guess what's powering your computer? electricity from dirty fossil fuels. Your car? oil. Your heating? prob. oil.

hypocrite :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of making that reasonable claim, you went for *wait for it* ---> Lacan and DnG.

And wtf does Neil Degrasse Tyson have to do with anything? lol. If anything he flows Aff, 'cuz he believes in SCIENCE and RATIONALITY and LOGIC.

Just because you associate with fancy postmodernists does not mean you are actually a rebel, or cool, or trendy. In fact, the real hipsters are the ones who believe in capitalism, in knowledge, in pragmatism. 

Hell, I ain't even advocating for war. I just want to make the US safe. 

Oh and btw, guess what's powering your computer? electricity from dirty fossil fuels. Your car? oil. Your heating? prob. oil.

hypocrite :P

I don't have a car. Checkmate.

 

And are you really challenging my hipster cred? I'll have you know I was called a hipster by Trollenator (sic?) less than a week ago.

 

So you conceded that you side with NDGT. That means I win here and now on the #CancelCosmos CP since you conceded competition and I win on all levels of impact calc. Guess I won't need a new laptop after all, pack it up folks.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God I love this xD just cracking up

 

a philosopher who is caught equating the erectile organ to the square root of minus one has, for my money, blown his credentials when it comes to things that I don't know anything about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God I love this xD just cracking up

a philosopher who is caught equating the erectile organ to the square root of minus one has, for my money, blown his credentials when it comes to things that I don't know anything about.

The square root of -1 is that fancy I. Now compare the shape of that letter to the organ in question and...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have a car. Checkmate.

 

And are you really challenging my hipster cred? I'll have you know I was called a hipster by Trollenator (sic?) less than a week ago.

 

So you conceded that you side with NDGT. That means I win here and now on the #CancelCosmos CP since you conceded competition and I win on all levels of impact calc. Guess I won't need a new laptop after all, pack it up folks.

When did I call you a hipster?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In today's terms, the wild SnarkosaurusRex seems to be in it's natural habitat, which we will deem "YOLO'ing". However, in reality, he is wasting time while simultaneously being hipster because he uses imgur.

 

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...