Jump to content
Nethy

HELP: Translators/Moral Obligation Dilemma

Recommended Posts

I'm somewhat new to Debate (Novice going Open). I ran into a SIV Visa case that I have no idea how to debate against. I can't find a way to really argue against the US Moral Obligation.

The SIV Aff I went against only had 1 Advantage: US Obligation

  • argues that US has yet to fulfill their end of the bargain for Iraqi & Afghanistan Translators under threat of Taliban Terrorism.
  • 50,000 of them are backlogged & desperately need to come to the US (1 killed every 36 hrs) <-- 2015 card
  • ! is a structural Violence (Ppl dying is bad

Plan was vague

  • Eliminates the Cap for SIV Translators 
  • One line of text that says would reduce applicant requirements
  • Their solvency card also said that if the cap were be lowered than the Department of State would expedite visa processing.

Framing

  • Basically ignore any Large Impacts due to lower probability -i.e People dying now so, don't listen to Trump's Base 
  • US has a obligation to uphold their side

With the Advantage only being about fulfilling obligations. I have little idea on how to convince a lay judge not to vote for this plan.

In terms on Neg On-Case:

  • I could only find arguments that there were process delays which was negated by their solvency
  • I couldn't see a way to win an argument that when the translators went to the US they had borderline poverty because the Aff simply said working a low wage job is better than being dead
  • Also the card that claims a language barrier in the process of applying for visa doesn't convince me since they are bilingual in English which would mean they probably could comprehend the application.

So any of you give me ideas on what to run? If the aff is an entire moral obligation/structural Violence Impact. How can I garner offence against the case?

Foreign Cps don't seem to work because the Aff has a clear US obligation

DAs don't seemed to be very effective as people's lies at stake outweigh any potential large scale impact in most lay judges minds. (I also live in a quite conservative state that hardcore supports the military & its supporters).

Can you even argue T? (I can see T-reduce doesn't mean eliminate but i've yet to see a judge vote T on nit picky differences)

What On-Case could even work? Articles seem only to emphasize that we should do the plan and don't really list any cons except that the US processing is very slow (again solvency apparently ans. this + plan text).

Thanks in advance!

Edited by Nethy
*Fixed spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, AlistairTheKDebater said:

HRIA Cp should work

uh if the plan doesn't list the actor, run A-Spec

 

I'm quite unfamiliar with either of these.

Does HRIA CP argue that US must conduct a human rights review to ensure consistency with human rights obligations? If so, why is this necessary?

 

A-spec is agent specification right?

Would I argue that by not specifying a specific agent in the plan text- the educational value of debate is harmed?

 

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

7 hours ago, Nethy said:

 

Does HRIA CP argue that US must conduct a human rights review to ensure consistency with human rights obligations? If so, why is this necessary?

 

yea the NB to HRIA is that it sets precedent for human rights review, which prevents authoritarian backsliding, which would lead to war

there are some other net benefit cards for that cp too

7 hours ago, Nethy said:

A-spec is agent specification right?

Would I argue that by not specifying a specific agent in the plan text- the educational value of debate is harmed?

 

 

Yes, and that it's unfair to the neg because then if your card is specific to a certain agent,the aff just say they aren't using that

so that would make the aff a moving target

also not specifying the agent destroys the negs ability to run agent cps or agent das

so you have fairness arguments mainly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×