Jump to content
OceanDebater

CMSP Neg Strat

Recommended Posts

 K , K and more K , 

              all seriousness though :  only thing ive seen this aff drop too is some kritiks , and also have running this aff philsophers have issue we this afffffffffffff alot of them 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure the last time I hit this aff I went 1-off state PIC.  I think I won, so I guess it's a viable strategy.

 

For realz tho, straight solvency indicts for 8 minutes will probably win you the round, there's a lot of problems with CMSP.  Also, there's decent links for SOI DA's I think.

 

EDIT: Just saw your post; guess State PIC is not the best suggestion

 

EDIT2: No real USFG key warrants, so you can probably international CP the crap out of it.  Inherency-wise, I'm pretty sure private industries are already doing a lot of this because there's a pretty clear economic incentive for them to do it.

Edited by MartyP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So far against this case I've gone for T-Nonmil (at camp), T-Oceans and DDev. 3-0 against it. One of these rounds the block was ddev, the other one it was Toceans and ddev, and at camp it was 4 different Ts, NATO bad, and something in the 1nr that i don't remember. Probably more T.

 

If you haven't gotten it yet, this aff isn't T. And impact turns are tight, especially since CMSP teams run like tons of advantages which you can impact turn (in my experience). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So far against this case I've gone for T-Nonmil (at camp), T-Oceans and DDev. 3-0 against it. One of these rounds the block was ddev, the other one it was Toceans and ddev, and at camp it was 4 different Ts, NATO bad, and something in the 1nr that i don't remember. Probably more T.

 

If you haven't gotten it yet, this aff isn't T. And impact turns are tight, especially since CMSP teams run like tons of advantages which you can impact turn (in my experience). 

I guess I'll go with T.  What specific violations did you run?  I can see T- Increase development, FX T...   Not sure how you ran T-nonmil.

 

What about a Navy or DOD CP?  Without a military actor, how does the aff enforce actually using the CMSP?  Net benefit of solvency takeout + Freedom of navigation + something else (politics)?

Edited by LionDebater

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I'll go with T.  What specific violations did you run?  I can see T- Increase development, FX T...   Not sure how you ran T-nonmil.

 

It depends on their solvency advocate. Medina (the only person who says "CMSP" ever) says implementation requires coordination with the states, privates and military [T Its reporting]. Basically all the aff does is combine existing maps together from privates, states and the military. We went for t nonmil because we were able to win a violation that it's military maps and that the military uses the maps. It's not the best strategy but they screwed it up in the 2AC/1AR because they didn't have a 2AC block. We went for T oceans at CFL qualifiers because they clarified in cx that they map the oceans "and the glaciers around them" (that was also the text of their w/m. It's false but it was their clarification of the aff) We were gonna go for ddev but their w/m was a violation and they had no counterinterp. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Military CP also works well because Medina (used to be a Special Assistant to the Secretary of Defense) specifically says in her paper that "we recommend that [the US military] lead the mapping effort". If aff claims her as their solvency advocate, she easily becomes the CP solvency advocate. 

 

The solvency mechanism is really vague with this aff because they claim to "establish a federal framework" and "provide a unified planning tool". Its a frustrating aff to debate and vagueness could be convincing to some judges.   

 

Could also be somewhat extra-t considering Medina and others always describe MSP as an ideal system for oceans, coasts, and GREAT LAKES. 

 

Since its an ocean spatial management system, Heidegger (esp managerialism and calculative thought args) is a viable strat. 

 

Attached is the Medina paper most MSP affs are based on...

OceanMapping_MedinaSmithSturgis.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Could also be somewhat extra-t considering Medina and others always describe MSP as an ideal system for oceans, coasts, and GREAT LAKES. 

 

Note: if they say "coasts are the oceans" they're taking their cards out of context usually. The eez is usually what's included as a "coast" in those cards, and if it's not theirs no clear definition as to what the "coastal oceans" means.

  • Upvote 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...