Jump to content

Recommended Posts

How does Icebreakers not just die to topicality?  It's not like it has any good reasons for asking the judge to ignore T, and 'non-military' is pretty hard to meet when your agent is necessarily the coast guard...  Add whatever your generic off-case is, and why do you need to even touch on-case?  I suppose their advantages are something like Heg and .. I don't even have an and... Arctic War scenarios straight up turn them, and surely you have a Heg bad file?

 

Don't recognize MHK.

Edited by Squirrelloid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does Icebreakers not just die to topicality?  It's not like it has any good reasons for asking the judge to ignore T, and 'non-military' is pretty hard to meet when your agent is necessarily the coast guard...  Add whatever your generic off-case is, and why do you need to even touch on-case?  I suppose their advantages are something like Heg and .. I don't even have an and... Arctic War scenarios straight up turn them, and surely you have a Heg bad file?

 

Don't recognize MHK.

NSF (National Science Foundation) is the new solvency advocate that people are using (it's not T-Military) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does Icebreakers not just die to topicality?  It's not like it has any good reasons for asking the judge to ignore T, and 'non-military' is pretty hard to meet when your agent is necessarily the coast guard...  Add whatever your generic off-case is, and why do you need to even touch on-case?  I suppose their advantages are something like Heg and .. I don't even have an and... Arctic War scenarios straight up turn them, and surely you have a Heg bad file?

 

Don't recognize MHK.

MHK is Marine and Hydrokinetic technologies, essentially five types of marine renewables.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's my T file against Icebreakers. 

 

I judged a novice tournament last weekend and voted against this aff on an Flooding DA and an Environment DA that aff could not answer. Good icebreaker teams probably could throw it out, but the DA essentially says icebreakers destroy ice (no way) and this causes an increase in sea level rise. Causes flooding and destruction. This went on to an environment shell, when ice is destroyed and settles in, it mismatches salinity levels and kills arctic ecosystems. Just throwing it out there. Not too familiar with the case, but this is what I've seen against it that couldn't be sufficiently answered, even conceded.

Icebreakers ain't topical.docx

Edited by ConsultVerminSupreme
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does Icebreakers not just die to topicality?  It's not like it has any good reasons for asking the judge to ignore T, and 'non-military' is pretty hard to meet when your agent is necessarily the coast guard...  Add whatever your generic off-case is, and why do you need to even touch on-case?  I suppose their advantages are something like Heg and .. I don't even have an and... Arctic War scenarios straight up turn them, and surely you have a Heg bad file?

 

Don't recognize MHK.

Having only impact d is not the go to strat; contest the internal links that are week not the impacts because that's usually where the best scholarship is 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NSF (National Science Foundation) is the new solvency advocate that people are using (it's not T-Military) 

 

I'm pretty sure the NSF is not directly operating any icebreakers.  All the NSF does is fund research.  USCG icebreakers have room for scientists, who may get NSF funding, but it's still a coast guard vessel.  Just because the NSF advocates it doesn't mean they're going to operate it.

 

But if they insist on using the NSF to run icebreakers, there's real trade-offs involved, because the NSF operates at a near-fixed budget (~7 billion / year), and any major expenses like purchasing and operating an icebreaker would impact its ability to fund grants.  I'm sure the NSF website talks up the impact of the science its grants fund sufficiently.

 

And if they want Congress to give the NSF more funding so they can buy and operate icebreakers, CP: Buy more Coast Guard icebreakers?  Solvency advantage, because the coast guard actually has personnel trained to operate icebreakers.  And once funding goes to the NSF, Congress loses all influence over it.. I'm sure there's a politics story here (an actual politics story), but it's probably too much work.  I'd be more tempted to run a theory argument along the lines of 'CP mutually exclusive because they've artificially made themselves topical by specifying an unusual agent for what would normally be a military plan' - they basically have to have an implicit plank of plan to the effect of 'and the CG doesn't operate them'.  (Run T-non-military to stop them from hedging on this and commit to the NSF).  And probably 'the perm just becomes the CP, because the CG takes over all icebreaking operations - makes them untopical and severs advocacy'.

 

Basically, that sounds stupidly squirrelly, and it ends up taking advantage of weirdness in policy debate with how we weigh competing options.  In the real world, we'd care about things like 'just how many icebreakers do we need, anyway?'  If the CP was sufficient, there'd be no point in doing the plan, and so the plan wouldn't get done - but in policy debate we're stuck arguing theory to make that legitimate, because our approach to perms is kinda nonsensical on things like this.

 

Hmmm.. you know, I might actually vote on OSPEC on this, now that I think of it.  Specifying an agent other than the normal agent just to be topical is pretty abusive.  (I can't believe I just said I'd consider voting on OSPEC).

 

Having only impact d is not the go to strat; contest the internal links that are week not the impacts because that's usually where the best scholarship is 

 

Impact turns are not defense.  (My heg bad file has turns in it.  It's not a 'Heg is kinda weak' file, it's a 'Heg is bad, do not want' file.)

 

And if you turn the impacts, you *want* them to keep the internal link story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

five types of marine renewables.

Any time you have more than one type of renewables you just pic out of one of them. There's no way every single one is necessary to solve and there's disads to each of them (pic out of turbines, kills biod). I think JDI put out a pics file for MHKs but I'm not sure it's on open evidence.

  • 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...