Jump to content

Spark

Member
  • Content Count

    161
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

-21 Unreal troll

About Spark

  • Rank
    Longtime Member
  • Birthday 09/13/1994

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    flamerofmoria
  1. I must thank you for the well-played public forum insult... well done, brolorb.
  2. So after i have 2 tubs and extra accordions, what do i do brolorb? I'm still confused!?!?!?
  3. Assuming that you are right (which I am not conceding at this point), why would North Korea change their minds just because we decide to stop displaying our hegemony? Why would they not still attack us for the "Crimes" we have already committed?
  4. 1. Who is the actor of the alternative? 2. So for political predictions to be okay, we... have to decide if they are true or not? Because that happens to be what I get from "question the truth values". 3. Your Massumi evidence actually indicates that prevention is good. He argues this in context of stopping the root cause of a conflict, AKA discussion and talks. How is this different from things like the six-party talks with North Korea and the ability to stabilize relationships as described in the 1AC Thayer evidence? 4. Given that we can avoid taking sides (as per Dolman 3) once we have weaponry in space, while we have to take sides in the squo, how are we less able to "take curative measures" as described in your Massumi evidence? 5. Answer the question: How does Dillon account for the last several centuries in which the security paradigm has been rampant, but humanity has not only survived, but flourished? No clever questions as responses. Every other country in the world uses a security paradigm, not just the US. Every country has for a long time. Why has nothing bad happened? 6. I will rephrase my last question in more general terms. Absent US hegemony, what is keeping the number of complicated relationships (Thayer) from becoming unstable and exploding (so to speak)? Obviously the entire world will not suddenly become non-securitizing, if the US were to stop following a security paradigm and enforcing a policy of deterrence, what is stopping these wars?
  5. 1. Under what conditions can you drop the alternative? 2. Am I allowed to weigh the affirmative against the K? 3. Your Massumi evidence indicates an argument about pre-emptive action. Can you point to anywhere in the 1AC that argues that pre-emptive attacks are good? 4. Absent political predictions, what basis do we use to form our future political actions? 5. More importantly, absent political predictions, what evidence is there that indicates that your understanding of the impact of the security paradigm is accurate? 6. Your second Massumi card indicates that our mode of thought necessitates pre-emptive action. Can you point out a card in the 1AC that indicates that we would take rash and unreasonable actions with space weaponry? 7. How does Dillon account for the last several centuries in which the security paradigm has been rampant, but humanity has not only survived, but flourished? 8. How does the singular rejection of the affirmative on an online forum that gathers very little attention from outside readers spill over into the political field? 9. Absent a United States presence globally, what is preventing North Korea from using its nuclear arsenal as leverage against Japan and, following your understanding of the security paradigm, culminating in Japanese rearmament and a massive arms race or war?
  6. Spark

    True Blood?

    wait! now the minotaur isnt feared either?!?!? What happened to the giant maze and the minotaur chasing after... Theseus? I think Theseus. Damn, our scary movie culture is falling like a rock...
  7. just be sure never to double turn yourself!
  8. ya see, i have camp starting sunday, so id like to get this round atleast started by then...
  9. Now that is probably true; if you delayed the counterplan, then the negative can easily win that the coutnerplan would never pass. However, if you had evidence indicating that, should Obama present X piece of legislation (the counterplan) it would pass very quickly, but Obama isn't presenting it, then doesn't that mean that you win that the delay permutation is legit?
  10. well no. Let's pretend that immediacy is a plank of the plan and counterplan (in real life, we will assume that it is a required and assumed plank) Therefore, spiking out of immediacy is like spiking out of a plank of a multi-plank counterplan. You can't do that with the plan, because that is severance. But, permutations have to be all of the plan and part of the counterplan, not necessarily all of it (though it can be all of it). Therefore, severing out of immediacy is only justifiable on the counterplan.
  11. His rational is that the permutation must do all of the plan (including immediacy), but not all of the counterplan (spike out of immediacy). My problem with this, though, is that specifying a time is then intrinsic. Maybe it would be legit to spike out of immediacy and not specify when, but that makes it impossible to determine when the counterplan would happen (very possibly never, seeing as how the bottom of the docket never hits the top) and thus lose all solvency.
  12. Heg is better than your mom was last night.
  13. Spark

    True Blood?

    It really shows how little monsters and blood-sucking creatures have left when no one is scared of the awe-inspiring and fear-striking vampire, and has actually taken the concept and made it into a romance. Its why I hate Twilight too. Think about it... vampires were once the fear of the world, and now they have no respect any more. Imagine if something like that happened to US Hegemony. God, it scares me to even think about it...
×
×
  • Create New...