Jump to content

brhs09

Member
  • Content Count

    103
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by brhs09

  1. well the time is a cube thing, well that is a K creatively called time cube, constructed by the master cubist and self-proclaimed smartest man in the world, Gene Ray if you do not support the time cube you deserve to die because you are evil. and there actually is a link, although it is not really a great one the link is that you are trying to debate. Since you are going into the round to win you are not accepting the time cube which says that all things have their opposites. Therefore if you win you must also lose, therefore it is a double win. if you do not accept it you justify the damnation and erradication of the human race, if you do accept it you must stop debating and have a double win. And no the person who runs timecube does not link to the cube himself bc they are advocating a double win if you do not accept it that is not their fault they do not run it to win the round, they run it in hopes that both teams win the round. you can learn all about the wonderous time cube at www.timecube.com as far as the earth being flat? idk about that one if i had to guess its some kind of time space continuoum K saying time and space do not exist so therefore there is no progress... idk but it sounds interesting i wonder what the implications of it are.
  2. anyone know how to counter this? ive looked around for a little while but idk exactly what to look for. Is there any decent ev saying that the Coast Guard shouldnt be in charge of human trafficking?
  3. brhs09

    Kritik List

    agamben ageism capitalism civil disobedience coercion chronopolitics corporation personhood death=good deschooling development disaster porn empire timecube environmental manangement speciesism ivory tower gender curiosity gift of Death global-local imperialism kato marxism militarism national service K Nayar K Neolibertarianism Normativity Objectivism orientalism Popped Collar Queer Theory Radical Activism CLS Dice Rolling Securitization Spanos Statism terr talk threat con. volunteerism zupancic Badiou feminism gregorian calendar heidegger intersectionality Kappeler Lacan Marxism Privacy War Games Ras Putin(nonviolence) Zizek Thats the main ones that i can think of plz keep adding to the list
  4. What would be a good strat against a CG case claiming a Human Rights adv. (similar to the one that is on the evazon...) any help would be greatly apreciated ty
  5. ok there is a difference b/w mil and nonviolence depending on how it is run. the way i run militarism is pos/neg peace which is not the same as nonviolence. it may be similar, but pos peace accepts that violence will happen but we need to work at the grassroots problems to prevent the underlying causes of violence instead of viewing war as a single isolated event. they are similar yes but you cannot answer them both the same way.
  6. there are always exceptions, but it duz not happen very often. for example most teams that qual for nats do indeed run at least one oncase argument, and most teams that do not run at least 1 on case argument do not qual for nats. just bc one person did it does not mean that anyone else can or should have that as a regular strat. at least throw some bs argument out on solvency even if its just one card that could cast doubt on S or turn an advantage you dont have to go for it hard, but you should at least do something
  7. ok then put it up on sendspace or something
  8. you should always have at least some generic oncase just incase they straight turn your DA's or just completely destroy them somehow so you have at least something left to fall back on
  9. lol that is pretty amazing. that is the mark of a true masterdb8r
  10. well i agree completely that it is the quality of the evidence and debaters, but the more evidene the easier it is IMO. I personally have 5 tubs (one tiny one with one expando for aff, 3 neg tubs, and another small one for pens, dictionary, copy of the constitution, etc.) but mostly we have that for intimidation. I am not saying that a team with more evi is necesarily better, but that team has a good chance of at least making the other team scared. if you hit a team w/ 10 tubs of evi, you are getting a little nervous because you feel they are better even if they are not. You assume that they are because they probably did a shitload of research. Now there is something to be said for knowing your arguments too. So personally what i do is i find the most common arguments that i will use, and i learn them incredibly well, and then i keep all the rest as just back up in case i hit some random argument that you could not have expected (ie timecube... goddamn i hate that K finally found answers to it but i still dont like it) so thats my advice learn the key things really well like theory framework big DAs and common Ks (militarism, fuko, nietsche, nonviolence, mayb even terror talk) and understand the main cases and case areas but dont get rid of anything (except ridiculous things that you know you wont need in a round like ER aff from last year) bc even if you know your shit analytically it duznt usually get a whole lot of weight unless you can card it.
  11. thanx i did cut a Rosen 03 card, but its very specific to Middle east withdrawal... ill cut a longer version of the ferguson card and yeah the warrants were really good i went online right after the round that i heard it and i cut it myself, luckily the team that i hit didnt understand what it said bc their coach cut it for them, i bsed something along the lines of "but seaver says himself that it is still worthwile as a theory card showing that no US leadership would have dire implications... etc" and the judge bought it enough.
  12. ok i know that Frank Seaver (vice pres. of national debate coaches association) published something saying that khalilzad is outdated and essentially has no place in a debate round. So are there any better US leadership advantage authors that would be after 9/11? and/or how would you answer that khalilzad is outdated? Me and my partner have a pretty decent case but leadership is our biggest adv., so i would like to have a good impact card and it loses a lot of credibility when you have the vice pres of the NDCA say your impact card is outdated... any help would be greatly apreciated
  13. in Wacfl they are: Peace Corps Linguists Coast Guard Draft Cit Corps (only in area of Disaster Relief) and surprisingly, its not hard to win on T. i have won a number of rounds on T even though the case is blatantly topical. its all about the skill of the T debater, and my partner is beast at T and im alright, so we usually win when we run T even if its BS
  14. bc it is just that retarded and should not ever be run
  15. just wait until you actually hit it for the first time and dont know what the hell is going on... not fun.
  16. um...audit, the us code ev says the cg is only part of the AF if its under the navy. Right now the CG is under HLS and i haven't found anything saying that HLS is under the AF. You need to reread your US code ev and not take things out of context. 2, Yes cut your own evi. thats just laziness besides camp evi by definition sucks. 3,How the hell does the CG act as a diplomatic tool? when is the last time the CG did any diplomacy missions? their job is to patrol the water, if anything it would piss off imigrants bc the CG catches them and sends them back to their country... hardly a diplomatic tool. 4, Ok so people wont run terr. talk. CG still can't S terr. so the terr/port security adv. is a wash. 5, No mil. DA's bc CG not AF... but if it was it would give alot of options but all are very easily beaten. 6, Not necessarily terr. talk but i usually use militarism/positive peace against it. But it doesn't really matter any K is beatable it just depends on the skill of the debater. if u can't beat the K, your probably not a masterdebater... 7,Navy is not a diplomatic tool, but neither is the CG so who cares? besides if you ran a Navy CP you would run into problems with topical CP's bc the Navy is part of the AF. i guess you could have really good blocks but topical cp's are pretty abusive... 8,I agree T is completely beatable you just have to...well...not suck. Right your own blocks don't rely on crappy evidence from camp's. 9, FX is a retarded T for this year everything is and always will be FX T. Get over it whoever was whining about it. 10, umm... Navy does deal w/ pirates, this is just a little of the article i found online: Cyclones, Firebolt and the Persian Gulf Pirates by Adam Geibel October 22, 2003 the U.S. Navy Cyclone class gunboats have found themselves a new career in the Persian Gulf; chasing pirates.
  17. I think your misinterpreting the US code ev. it specifically says that the Coast Guard is not part of the armed forces when it is NOT opporating as a service of the Navy. And The Pike 04 ev shows that CG is now part of HLS. Unless you can either prove that HLS is under the Armed Forces or change your plan text to move CG from HLS and put it under the navy or something but then you run into problems with Xtra T... and all the advantages you would claim from it pretty much suck. i mean port security and biodiversity are the most common and those are easy to destroy with simple alternate causality and no solvency claims. as far as pirates goes...idk, i havnt actually read or heard it, but it doesn't seem like it would have all that great of internal links and probably outlandish impacts. What is it going to claim, that without the coast guard piracy is going to get out of control? What sense does that make? There arent many pirates on our coast anyway they would go to other places with even worse security than here. I agree that you can't solve for terrorism, but the terr talk K is just retarded and is easily beaten with common sense arguments. I mean common just saying "thats a terrorist" is not going to honestly cause terrorism. YOU ARE A TERRORIST there i said it. now how many of you guys are now terrorists because i said that? and simple Terr. Talk straight turns that are easy to come by. Find someone with the Mason Terr. Talk File from I guess 2 years ago there are some decent answers in that but yeah honestly if you can't beat the k, thats just you sucking, run framework or something. It may have more links to Ks, but you should still be able to beat them. The only T that would have any merit is the not part of AF, substantially FX and establish are easily beaten Overall CG is a winnable case, but its probably not the easiest to win. I have hit it about 10 times in 3 tournaments and haven't lost to it yet, but then again the people who ran it at villager for the most part didn't know what they were doing...
  18. Ok so your aff and you hit a CP, say "Consult Nato" or "Con-Con" or something it duznt really matter what the CP is, and they run it conditionally. You run theory saying Conditionality bad because it creates multiple worlds, its a time suck because they can kick it at any time, etc. and they answer with "all arguments are conditional. You (the neg) can kick a DA at any time and that is not "abusive" so there is no abuse by using a conditional CP. How do you go about answering that and / or what other arguments should you use against conditional/dispositional CP's? Im JV this is my 2nd year and im still trying to understand the whole Theory stuff. So thanks for all your help
  19. alright ppl i dont get on very often, but i do have about 40 camps worth of evi including Dartmouth and Michigan full, so if anyone would like to trade for some stuff i would be happy to trade just send me a PM with what you want and what you are willing to trade
  20. someone might have this already but i have LDI and JDI full
  21. im still there you left after one week kenton lol we are getting more affs and more neg stuff this week
  22. how do i get involved in the pool, im going to liberty
×
×
  • Create New...