Jump to content

LiamTheGreat

Member
  • Content Count

    91
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

11 Good

About LiamTheGreat

  • Rank
    Registered User
  • Birthday 06/22/1972

Profile Information

  • Name
    Liam Hancock
  • Biography
    2012
  • Interests
    Debating
  • Occupation
    First Affirmative, Second Negative
  1. Does somebody smarter than me want to write one of those for the military deployment topic?
  2. Octofinals -Carrollton DG d. New Trier CS (Kevin Hamrick, Mike Kearney, Matt Struth) -St. Marks BM d. Glenbrook North MP (Jeff Buntin, Brian Rubaie, Alex Lamballe) -Bronx Science EM (Neg) d. (3-0) Glenbrook South DT (Aff) (Aaron Hardy, Robbie Quinn, Kyle Vint) -St. Paul Central JQ d.(2-1) Lexington EV (Jenny Heidt, Chris Crowe (sat), Brian DeLong) -Kinkaid BK d.(2-1) Glenbrook North SS David Heidt, Chase Burton, Jacob Polin -Westminster Schools AT d. (2-1) Chattahoochee CR (Mike Greenstein, Michael Klinger (sat), Tara Tate) -McDonough RB (Neg) d.(2-1) Whitney Young GH (Aff) (Michael Antonucci, John Warden, Carly Wunderlich(sat)) -Rowland Hall AF d.(2-1) Woodward Academy PP (Berthiaume, Forslund, B. Peterson) Quarterfinals St. Marks BM v. St. Paul Central JQ Kinkaid BK v. Rowland Hall AF Carrollton DG v. McDonough RB Westminster AT v. Bronx EM
  3. yeah thats not effectually topical, or extra topical or anything. Its just plain not topical so as much as it may have other advantages, u won't be winning many t debates
  4. Plan: The United States federal government should pass legislation recognizing the extermination and forced migration of Armenians in the early 19th century as genocide. (the plan text could probably be written better, main idea is that the U.S. recognizes the armenian thing as genocide) effectually topical because a ton of our troops and supplies that go to iraq go through turkey first, and they'll make us decrease that if we recognize the armenian issue as genocide Is it possible to win this as being justifiably topical if all your advantages are predicated off of how sweet it would be if we recognized that issue as genocide?
  5. i was wondering about this i can't figure out whether specifying the mechanism will be a good thing for the neg or a bad thing. It almost seems like the mechanism could be some sort of plank that all your advantages could be based off of like : the usfg should reduce military presence by sending substituting pbj's for troops. and all the advantages are about how sweet pbj's are, not how sweet decreasing troops is
  6. yes but would it be extra topical to redeploy troops to a resolutional country?
  7. could we use the idea of the neitzsche dice roll concept like by reducing our troops, we accept the possibility of war? i'm too experienced with anything nietzsche says btw
  8. pullin troops out of south korea escalates the korea situation to war north/south korea war escalates globally war is fricken sweet- hillman
  9. would a narrative change whether the aff links to itself? something about how as americans we have caused uneccesary and evil violence and such
  10. i miss my sps would it be extra topical to specify in the resolution that we use some form of military sattelite to reduce our troop deployments? and i guess a more general related question will it be extra topical this year to specify our mechanism in our plan text?
  11. i like the idea of an antimilitarism k aff with a feminist twist!
  12. Baudrillard baby! and my lovely Spanos
  13. i'm not saying k affs are bad, i'm saying that they increase when the number of good policy affs decreases, and i'm saying that when there are many of them, spark and wipeout apply less that year spark and wipeout will be considerably more prominent next year than they were last year because not only is it a foreign topic, but a military topic. Just because you can list of 4 k affs doesn't disprove this
  14. thats somewhat of an oxymoron, but i give you credit for putting "good" in quotations probably issues with whether the mechanism should or shouldn't be specified we might get some wierd grammatical issues with the "and/or" in the resolution and the "one or more" parts in the resolution
×
×
  • Create New...