Jump to content
Trollanator

Trollanator (AFF) vs learningdb8 (NEG) LA rez #?

Recommended Posts

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Last couple and then the 2AC within an hour

 

T

 

2. Haass and O'Sullivan literally say engagement can be conditional or unconditional what? Right! Our Haass and O'Sullivan card is wonderful at answering the question of economic engagement in terms of constitutionality and unconditional. I think it makes the clear delineation between the two.  They do.  But if engagement can be either why do we need to be QPQ? QPQ is literally the only way for us to have a level debate ground. I can't generate U/Q for the china DA if you're not running a viable QPQ aff.  Please explain.  Also, don't we kinda provide UQ for you cause one of our advantages is predicated off the same thesis. I don't quite know what you want me to explain. Do you want me to literally explain to you what QPQ is? And, we don't generate disad U/Q from your advantage since the two are functionally different. 

 

DA

 

1. Arnson says China influence in LA key to check Taiwanese independence.  We say Taiwanese independence is key to stop war, so this is just a new link argument.  Do you ever say independence is bad? Not necessarily. The argument that we make is that you don't solve for a Taiwain war, and this evidence would function as a link to the plan. Your argument through your evidence seems to indicate that you'll inevitably push out China by pushing them out of Cuba's oil sector  Wait but all this card says is that China is using LA to isolate Taiwan.  Thats literally what we say, so I don't see the purpose of this card.  Could you try to just explain the link story for me? Sure. The link story's predicated off of China being mad that they're being pushed out of LA (moreso, Cuba). This is a potential trading area for them.  So China gets pissed at the US for pushing them out.  What evidence says this? My Arnson evidence doesn't explicitly say "China will get pissed if they don't have access to Cuba's offshore oil sector", but it infers it throughout the warrants of the card. All you have to do is read, man. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Last couple and then the 2AC within an hour

 

T

 

2. Haass and O'Sullivan literally say engagement can be conditional or unconditional what? Right! Our Haass and O'Sullivan card is wonderful at answering the question of economic engagement in terms of constitutionality and unconditional. I think it makes the clear delineation between the two.  They do.  But if engagement can be either why do we need to be QPQ? QPQ is literally the only way for us to have a level debate ground. I can't generate U/Q for the china DA if you're not running a viable QPQ aff.  Please explain.  Also, don't we kinda provide UQ for you cause one of our advantages is predicated off the same thesis. I don't quite know what you want me to explain. Do you want me to literally explain to you what QPQ is? And, we don't generate disad U/Q from your advantage since the two are functionally different.   No I know what QPQ is lol.  I'm asking how it affects U/Q

 

 

 

And for the DA its just US-China relations as an impact right?

 

 

Edited by Trollanator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Last couple and then the 2AC within an hour

 

T

 

2. Haass and O'Sullivan literally say engagement can be conditional or unconditional what? Right! Our Haass and O'Sullivan card is wonderful at answering the question of economic engagement in terms of constitutionality and unconditional. I think it makes the clear delineation between the two.  They do.  But if engagement can be either why do we need to be QPQ? QPQ is literally the only way for us to have a level debate ground. I can't generate U/Q for the china DA if you're not running a viable QPQ aff.  Please explain.  Also, don't we kinda provide UQ for you cause one of our advantages is predicated off the same thesis. I don't quite know what you want me to explain. Do you want me to literally explain to you what QPQ is? And, we don't generate disad U/Q from your advantage since the two are functionally different.   No I know what QPQ is lol.  I'm asking how it affects U/Q Well, I should clarify. Unilateral action is based on us generating stable disad UQ. I was mis-interpreting your question earlier. QPQ is the most predictable and is only the best because it forces you, the aff, an incentive that'd be adequate to change Cuba. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nevermind. I see it. Not necessarily. The impact is genocide, warming, prolif, and disease. That's our Christensen 11 evidence. 

But you get to that from relations?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry. I had to attend a funeral and I couldn't be on yesterday or today. Can you give me 15 minutes to read your speech doc and ask CX? I'll try to write up a 2NC tonight, but in all likelihood it'll probably be tomorrow. My apologies, Trollanator. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry. I had to attend a funeral and I couldn't be on yesterday or today. Can you give me 15 minutes to read your speech doc and ask CX? I'll try to write up a 2NC tonight, but in all likelihood it'll probably be tomorrow. My apologies, Trollanator. 

No problem.  Take you're time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Relations

1) In what way do you think that your Meehan evidence is responsive to our defense on terrorism? 

 

Solvency

1) You kind of make a big concession when you say that there's a risk that US companies might not actually solve cleanups. 

2) Where in your Gibson evidence do the warrants explicitly say that drilling will happen in the SQUO? 

 

 

Oil Prices Add-on

1) LOL wut. Why add a new Adv in the 2AC, man. Should of used more ink on the Counterplan (or, in this case, computer letters). 

2) Your Bearden 2000 card says that Economic collapse ---> Extinction. Empirically, when the stock market crashed and hurt the econ in the 30;s, why didn't that trigger your impact?

 

Topicality

1) How in the world do you think you meet our interp? 

2) You say you solve our offense, but this is in terms of garnering specific link offense, not U/Q, right? 

 

Counterplan

1) Perm do the CP? How is this not severance?

2) I'm just going to flow dispo on the CP flow, so why does Dispo solve our offense? 

3) Does your CDA 11 evidence (I guess both) fuction as a solvency deficit or a DA to the counterplan? 

4) Is there any net ben to the perm?

5) Is Int'l fiat a reason to reject the arg or team?

 

Disad

1) If we don't go for defense on the Taiwain scenario, does that mean we only win a risk of a taiwan war being sparked on the disad flow?

2) Your only repsonsive argumetn on the link debate is that China won't get pissed off. That's all? 

3) Your Freidberg 05 card goes ham on dissing China and their inability to be stable especially w/ predictions. If we can't predict China's actions even within a short timeframe, how do we know that a triggered Taiwain-China war could happen on your first scenario on the Relations flow? 

4) Do you have an offensive or defensive args on the impact debate? Sorry, just tl;dr in my situation right now. 

5) ON the dispo flow, you say that condo forces you to sever out of plan text, but wouldn't dispo just create the same world?

6) Do you have an answer to our specific solvency advocate, do you functionally concede that China's tech solves back your offense better? 

 

K

1) F/W Why does Extinction come first? Actually, explain the significance of this argument in terms of your f/w (i.e is this just a framing card?)

2) How does case function as a disad to the alt? If we kick the alt and cross apply as a linear disad to the case does that moot all your offensive args on the alt flow?

3) Lol @ blippy, undeveloped theoretical objections. How in the hell is the alt vague? 

4) Why weren't you more specific about how the world of the alt functions in CX? 

5) Are vague alts a reason to reject team or arg?

6) I'll be honest, I haven't extensively read your Slomp or Hands evidence (first time reading this speech doc), so just explain them please.

7) Why does the world of the alt have to solve imperialism? Y'all talk about irrelevant shit in your cards and I don't hold you to the standard of solving for them.

8) When did I ever say that Imperialism was the R/C of your mpx?

9) Lol- Perm do alt is probs intrinsic. 

10) So, your only answer to the free trade conceded link in CX is that you don't "mean to expand cap" but just coincidentally do so? 

11) Does your "Cap sustainable" Seabra card just function as defense to our impact?

12) Lawls. How is cap K2 freedom? Aren't people dying and impoverished because of Capitalism? 

13) You say that IN QUOTE" Just because its free trade doesn't mean we are expanding capitalism", but the warrants in the first sentence of your Bandow evidence says that " expanding FREE MARKET is a far more important factor." Why do you get to make the delineation between cap and free market, but then contradict yourself? 

14) How does the alt= war?

15) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Relations

1) In what way do you think that your Meehan evidence is responsive to our defense on terrorism? 

 

Solvency

1) You kind of make a big concession when you say that there's a risk that US companies might not actually solve cleanups. Cool story bro/brodett.  Where do I even say that?

2) Where in your Gibson evidence do the warrants explicitly say that drilling will happen in the SQUO? That's the whole card.  Cuba is negotiating deals to resume drilling with multiple companies already.

 

 

Oil Prices Add-on

1) LOL wut. Why add a new Adv in the 2AC, man. Should of used more ink on the Counterplan (or, in this case, computer letters). This is another sweet story.  

2) Your Bearden 2000 card says that Economic collapse ---> Extinction. Empirically, when the stock market crashed and hurt the econ in the 30;s, why didn't that trigger your impact? LOL what?  Nuclear wars usually won't happen before nukes are invented...also the world is radically different than it was then.

 

Topicality

1) How in the world do you think you meet our interp? The plan is conditioned on Cuba excepting our tech.

2) You say you solve our offense, but this is in terms of garnering specific link offense, not U/Q, right? You're U/Q thing makes literally no sense.  How can the plan mandates change what is happening now...

 

Counterplan

1) Perm do the CP? How is this not severance? Yo its a test of competition.  You should have to negate the mandates of the plan, not just change the actor.

2) I'm just going to flow dispo on the CP flow, so why does Dispo solve our offense? Cause it enables you to kick it if we put perms, etc. on it.  If we don't, you should be able to win the flow.

3) Does your CDA 11 evidence (I guess both) fuction as a solvency deficit or a DA to the counterplan? What is a solvency deficit but a DA to the CP?

4) Is there any net ben to the perm? â€‹Ya.  Relations.  The add-on.  Environment.  AFF wins.

5) Is Int'l fiat a reason to reject the arg or team?  Team.  This CP is abusive and you should lose.  (feel free to vote now judges)

 

Disad

1) If we don't go for defense on the Taiwain scenario, does that mean we only win a risk of a taiwan war being sparked on the disad flow? Uh no.  You cannot go back and be like "JK Taiwan war will escalate and it will happen!!!!"  When I concede you're evidence, its assumed to be true.  If you try to go back on that the 2AR will be 5 mins theory.  LOL jk maybe not but don't.

2) Your only repsonsive argumetn on the link debate is that China won't get pissed off. That's all? Nope.  All of our relations resilient cards are link answers.

3) Your Freidberg 05 card goes ham on dissing China and their inability to be stable especially w/ predictions. If we can't predict China's actions even within a short timeframe, how do we know that a triggered Taiwain-China war could happen on your first scenario on the Relations flow? What are you asking?

4) Do you have an offensive or defensive args on the impact debate? Sorry, just tl;dr in my situation right now. â€‹No we don't have offense on relations being bad no.

5) ON the dispo flow, you say that condo forces you to sever out of plan text, but wouldn't dispo just create the same world?  â€‹Dispo at least gives us the choice to stick you with something so we don't have to make contradictory args.

6) Do you have an answer to our specific solvency advocate, do you functionally concede that China's tech solves back your offense better? â€‹No.  Our CDA cards both say China fails.  No we don't answer you're specific solvency advocate, but I don't think the judge is going to vote on an untested technology when its failure would cause extinction.

 

K

1) F/W Why does Extinction come first? Actually, explain the significance of this argument in terms of your f/w (i.e is this just a framing card?) This is just saying prefer extinction impacts cause ya know, hard to have a good life when you don't have a life.  Plus extinction would also wipe out possibilities for future gens.

) How does case function as a disad to the alt? If we kick the alt and cross apply as a linear disad to the case does that moot all your offensive args on the alt flow? Dude if you don't have an alt the DA is hilariously non-unique.  But the point of that arg is that alt doesn't solve case so the impacts to case get triggered in the world of the alt.

3) Lol @ blippy, undeveloped theoretical objections. How in the hell is the alt vague? I mean its just like I don't know exactly what the alt does with the government, how it functions, etc.  I'm just saying don't try and do something tricky in the block.

4) Why weren't you more specific about how the world of the alt functions in CX? Uh cause I'm aff.

5) Are vague alts a reason to reject team or arg? Just the arg for now, but if you try and get real tricky things might get abusive.  But if you don't do anything sneaky I guess you're OK just losing the alt.

6) I'll be honest, I haven't extensively read your Slomp or Hands evidence (first time reading this speech doc), so just explain them please. 

7) Why does the world of the alt have to solve imperialism? Y'all talk about irrelevant shit in your cards and I don't hold you to the standard of solving for them. Like what?  Either way, I'm not gonna be nice to you just cause you're nice to me.  You're Everest card clearly outlines imperialism as big deal along with capitalism and there is no guarantee that anything will get solved unless that goes away too.

8) When did I ever say that Imperialism was the R/C of your mlx? you're card talks about it as the r/c.

9) Lol- Perm do alt is probs intrinsic. Probs not

10) So, your only answer to the free trade conceded link in CX is that you don't "mean to expand cap" but just coincidentally do so? â€‹uh what.  not really.  more like cuba is already capitalist so we don't expand cap cause its already there.

11) Does your "Cap sustainable" Seabra card just function as defense to our impact? ya sure.

12) Lawls. How is cap K2 freedom? Aren't people dying and impoverished because of Capitalism? no.  cap allows free trade and freedom of speech and freedom of doing whatever.  communisms tend to be far less free places.  look at NK and look at the US and you'll know what I mean.

13) You say that IN QUOTE" Just because its free trade doesn't mean we are expanding capitalism", but the warrants in the first sentence of your Bandow evidence says that " expanding FREE MARKET is a far more important factor." Why do you get to make the delineation between cap and free market, but then contradict yourself? cause i felt like putting defense on the link and the impact.   

14) How does the alt= war? which card are you referring to specifically?

15) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Relations

1) In what way do you think that your Meehan evidence is responsive to our defense on terrorism? Could you please ANSWER THIS

 

 

Oil Prices Add-on

 2) Your Bearden 2000 card says that Economic collapse ---> Extinction. Empirically, when the stock market crashed and hurt the econ in the 30;s, why didn't that trigger your impact? LOL what?  Nuclear wars usually won't happen before nukes are invented...also the world is radically different than it was then. Your cards aren't in the context of nuclear war, you just say that econ decline = extinction. How? 

 

Counterplan

3) Does your CDA 11 evidence (I guess both) fuction as a solvency deficit or a DA to the counterplan? What is a solvency deficit but a DA to the CP? But, on your int'l fiat theory arg, you say that agent CP's prevent the aff from reading Disads to the CP. You just conceded that your two CSA's cards are a disad to the CP. Right???

4) Is there any net ben to the perm? â€‹Ya.  Relations.  The add-on.  Environment.  AFF wins. Wut? 

5) Is Int'l fiat a reason to reject the arg or team?  Team.  This CP is abusive and you should lose.  (feel free to vote now judges) How are agent counterplans illegit? 

 

Disad

 

 

5) ON the dispo flow, you say that condo forces you to sever out of plan text, but wouldn't dispo just create the same world?  â€‹Dispo at least gives us the choice to stick you with something so we don't have to make contradictory args. I'm sorry, but somehow I put dispo on the disad flow. My apologies. 

6) Do you have an answer to our specific solvency advocate, do you functionally concede that China's tech solves back your offense better? â€‹No.  Our CDA cards both say China fails.  No we don't answer you're specific solvency advocate, but I don't think the judge is going to vote on an untested technology when its failure would cause extinction. I did it again. Super sorry. It's been a long night. 

 

K

 

) How does case function as a disad to the alt? If we kick the alt and cross apply as a linear disad to the case does that moot all your offensive args on the alt flow? Dude if you don't have an alt the DA is hilariously non-unique.  But the point of that arg is that alt doesn't solve case so the impacts to case get triggered in the world of the alt. Umm... That's what a linear disad is... 

3) Lol @ blippy, undeveloped theoretical objections. How in the hell is the alt vague? I mean its just like I don't know exactly what the alt does with the government, how it functions, etc.  I'm just saying don't try and do something tricky in the block. Refer to number 4

4) Why weren't you more specific about how the world of the alt functions in CX? Uh cause I'm aff.  This is in response to your vague alt theory arg. You say the alt is vague, but why didn't you clarify in CX and ask how the alt functions? 

6) I'll be honest, I haven't extensively read your Slomp or Hands evidence (first time reading this speech doc), so just explain them please. Can you answer this please. 

10) So, your only answer to the free trade conceded link in CX is that you don't "mean to expand cap" but just coincidentally do so? â€‹uh what.  not really.  more like cuba is already capitalist so we don't expand cap cause its already there.  Um..... You do know that Cuba is primarily communist, right? 

12) Lawls. How is cap K2 freedom? Aren't people dying and impoverished because of Capitalism? no.  cap allows free trade and freedom of speech and freedom of doing whatever.  communisms tend to be far less free places.  look at NK and look at the US and you'll know what I mean. Who said that the world of the alt= communism?????

14) How does the alt= war? which card are you referring to specifically? your Nyquist 5 evidence. 

15) Explain the ROB?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, I'm sorry if I'm a bit sassy tonight. It's been a long day. Don't take it personal, please. I'm usually not this sassy. I promise to have the speech up tomorrow, for sure.

 

Yo it's a debate. I'm not taking anything personally don't worry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Relations

1) In what way do you think that your Meehan evidence is responsive to our defense on terrorism? Could you please ANSWER THIS

 Sorry I missed it. Cause he isn't placing a broad terrorist label all over the place but is specifically outlining Hezbollah as a threat. It's more that you're evidence isn't responsive.

 

Oil Prices Add-on

 2) Your Bearden 2000 card says that Economic collapse ---> Extinction. Empirically, when the stock market crashed and hurt the econ in the 30;s, why didn't that trigger your impact? LOL what?  Nuclear wars usually won't happen before nukes are invented...also the world is radically different than it was then. Your cards aren't in the context of nuclear war, you just say that econ decline = extinction. How? Nuclear war. Beardon talks about multiple countries that would lash out.

 

Counterplan

3) Does your CDA 11 evidence (I guess both) fuction as a solvency deficit or a DA to the counterplan? What is a solvency deficit but a DA to the CP? But, on your int'l fiat theory arg, you say that agent CP's prevent the aff from reading Disads to the CP. You just conceded that your two CSA's cards are a disad to the CP. Right??? There are no possible disads to the mandates of the plan. While solvency deficits are disads to the cp, we can't garner any offense besides case.

4) Is there any net ben to the perm? â€‹Ya.  Relations.  The add-on.  Environment.  AFF wins. Wut? The cp doesn't solve relations or the economy or the environment. The perm does.

5) Is Int'l fiat a reason to reject the arg or team?  Team.  This CP is abusive and you should lose.  (feel free to vote now judges) How are agent counterplans illegit? Well I mean international fiat is abusive. Agent CP's are probably ok, but you need to use a part of the Usfg.

 

 

 

K

 

) How does case function as a disad to the alt? If we kick the alt and cross apply as a linear disad to the case does that moot all your offensive args on the alt flow? Dude if you don't have an alt the DA is hilariously non-unique.  But the point of that arg is that alt doesn't solve case so the impacts to case get triggered in the world of the alt. Umm... That's what a linear disad is... What are you asking? I know what a linear da is.

4) Why weren't you more specific about how the world of the alt functions in CX? Uh cause I'm aff.  This is in response to your vague alt theory arg. You say the alt is vague, but why didn't you clarify in CX and ask how the alt functions? I did actually.

6) I'll be honest, I haven't extensively read your Slomp or Hands evidence (first time reading this speech doc), so just explain them please. Can you answer this please.  Slomp: so Schmitt says that Marxism is an example of not distinguishing friends and enemies which means Schmitt's theory is offense against an alternative to capitalism. Hands: cap sustainable

10) So, your only answer to the free trade conceded link in CX is that you don't "mean to expand cap" but just coincidentally do so? â€‹uh what.  not really.  more like cuba is already capitalist so we don't expand cap cause its already there.  Um..... You do know that Cuba is primarily communist, right? Well they are technically a communism but they still participate in capitalist practices and economics.

12) Lawls. How is cap K2 freedom? Aren't people dying and impoverished because of Capitalism? no.  cap allows free trade and freedom of speech and freedom of doing whatever.  communisms tend to be far less free places.  look at NK and look at the US and you'll know what I mean. Who said that the world of the alt= communism????? Well nobody but that tends to be the opposite of capitalism.

14) How does the alt= war? which card are you referring to specifically? your Nyquist 5 evidence. So when capitalism goes away, countries all over the place will have totalitarian regimes popping up and massive wars will ensue.

15) Explain the ROB? We should evaluate the effects of the plan passing, that's it.

Edited by Trollanator

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...