Jump to content

CRusso

Member
  • Content Count

    427
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by CRusso

  1. Youcan still do cross-x. Plus that's not even close to an abusive 1nc.
  2. Sorry, lot of school work. T 1. Why do our first 4 we meets not apply? 2. How do you lose ground when there's more PMCs in Afghanistan than any other form of presence? Wouldn't this give you more access to credibility DAs, stability DAs, POLITICS DAs, lol to name a few? 3. What's the point of your extra T section? 4. How do you lose ground if we're still removing a substantial amount of military presence? De-Dev 5. What economic system will be used post-collapse? 6. Your evidence on transition says that the "people" will not be violent. How does this effect the elites in power, or are they just going to chill while there's a people's revolution going on? 7. Your Lewis evidence says millions will die. Doesn't this grant a pretty large risk of war?
  3. OK... way to be a douche. Here's the 1nc anyways http://www.mediafire.com/?o9nbtmyrh64616j
  4. Sure. I can get the 1nc up when those questions are answered.
  5. 1. What is our extended nuclear deterrent presence? You didn't answer this. 2. Will there be troops in Japan post plan? yes we are removing nuclear deterrents and all troops related or operating the nuclear deterrents OK, your Bandow evidence says ANY form of the U.S. protecting Japan creates a security breakdown in Asia. How do you solve this? 4. Your Eberstdat evidence says U.S. protection of SOKO leads to all this bad shit - how does the plan solve when we still have troops in SOKO post plan? well its not troops who can magically fly to SOKO and save them from NOKO its the nuclear deterrents. SO when we remove nuclear deterrents japan can deal with the problems in the region No, your evidence says that it is the alliance between the U.S. and SOKO that fails to create peace - how does the plan end the alliance if we still have a bilateral treaty through our troops? 5. What is the alliance like between SOKO and Japan right now? doesn't matter at all they want to protect the region bc NOKO is fucked up OK, how do we even know then that they will cooperate post plan then? 6. If American presence is the root cause of Chinese aggression, why are we only seeing Chinese aggression now when we've had bases for 50 years? Walt from 2010 specifically states that right now china wants to be a hegemon and will do whatever is necessary. The thing is they wont be as pissed at japan bc they are not really a hegemon and are just protecting the region from the scary NOKO. America right now with our nukes is just trying to look like were bad ass and throwing are nukes trying to protect the world OK, your Krauthammer evidence then says though that "China is more an old-style dictatorship, not on a messianic mission, just out for power. It is much more like late 19th century Germany" How is Japan supposed to contain China post plan if they are this evil, have a much larger nuclear arsenal than Japan, could nuke Japan by the time Japan has a nuclear arsenal, and has a much larger country than Japan? 7. Your Krauthammer evidence is indicative of the west containing China. Doesn't this make your impacts inevitable post plan? sherrill says japan can contain. we cannot. right now in the squo we are containing and its not working and its not good for our image. I'm not asking about your Sherrill evidence, your Krauthammer evidence says that if the West fails to contain China it will lead to WW3. Doesn't that make this inevitable? That evidence also says in the non underlined part the only way to solve containment is "Containment of such a bully must begin early in its career. That means building relations with China's neighbors, starting with Vietnam. For all the emotion surrounding our decision to normalize relations with Vietnam, its significance is coldly geopolitical: Vietnam is China's traditional enemy (they fought a brief war in 1979). We must therefore make it our friend. A map tells you the rest of a containment strategy: 1) a new security relationship with democratic India, now freed from its odd, cold war alliance with the Soviets; 2) renewing the U.S.- Japan alliance, now threatened by a U.S. Administration so hell-bent on selling carburetors in Kyoto that it is blithely jeopardizing the keystone of our Pacific security; and 3) cozying up to the Russians, who, however ornery elsewhere, have a common interest in boxing in China. ", how does the plan solve this? 14. What is the timeframe for Japan nuclearization? 15. Your Rhule evidence is literally indicative of U.S. military presence preventing prolif - how do you solve this?
  6. Actually this is getting redundant. Here's the 1nc. http://www.mediafire.com/?0aedhtsl45gs0oq
  7. Actually, on another note, where in the Gilbert evidence does it say removal from Iraq is key?
  8. OK I'll just post this last question any way. How specifically do we stop the government from not doing what we want though in the future? Do you we just think and it's all better?
  9. 7. You say we can challenge politics with a new contraption. What is that new contraption? The contraption is explained in the critical text under the plan text. Yes, you say a politics of flux, a continuously changing strategy. Does this strategy have any goal or is it just follow desire? The goal is to, with our bottom-up strategy, create change in how we relate to the government. To truly engage the political, rather than be ran over by it. What does engaging the political mean though. Is it simply being aware of government politics, or is it storming into the white house and executing everyone? 11. How does your revolution spill out from this room? We're in different rooms, silly. Funny. How does it spill over from this debate. How does it convince the masses to become one with desire and change anything? Or are you just fiating everyone in the U.S. accepts your criticism? We don't expect that everyone will instantly join our protests, we present a political strategy and defend that if given the choice, an agent should affirm our methodology. We create the mutations and escapes that our Patton evidence talks about with our critical text. So if nobody else affirms your criticism, why should the judge vote aff? 12. Why is specifically removing troops from Iraq key to break down this fear of death obsession? It's not necessarily a death obsession, but a inability to be a part of the political scene. Removing troops from Iraq is key to engage politics in a way that is what the individual wants. Rather than letting the government overcode citizens as tolerable opposition, we engage the system and get what was wanted in the first place. This doesn't answer my question. Why is removing our troops from Iraq key instead of say, South Korea?
  10. 7. You say we can challenge politics with a new contraption. What is that new contraption? The contraption is explained in the critical text under the plan text. Yes, you say a politics of flux, a continuously changing strategy. Does this strategy have any goal or is it just follow desire? 9. What does the plan do? Could you specify further? You say substantially reduce military presence in Iraq. What does this mean? 11. How does your revolution spill out from this room? We're in different rooms, silly. Funny. How does it spill over from this debate. How does it convince the masses to become one with desire and change anything? Or are you just fiating everyone in the U.S. accepts your criticism? 12. Why is specifically removing troops from Iraq key to break down this fear of death obsession?
  11. 1. What happens when the judge votes aff? 2. How is a molecular understanding of politics different from normal politics? 3. Do you claim fiat? 4. Will the state remain post-plan? 5. How do you change desire? 6. What is worse than death and why? 7. You say we can challenge politics with a new contraption. What is that new contraption? 8. How do you change liberalism? 9. What does the plan do? 10. Will you stand by your plan the entire round? 11. How does your revolution spill out from this room? 12. How does following desire solve?
  12. haha I actually already started another v-debate, but I want to do this. Give me a sec to post cross-x.
  13. 1. What is our extended nuclear deterrent presence? 2. Will there be troops in Japan post plan? 3. Why is now the key time for any of this? Most of your evidence if from the early 2000s. 4. Your Eberstdat evidence says U.S. protection of SOKO leads to all this bad shit - how does the plan solve when we still have troops in SOKO post plan? 5. What is the alliance like between SOKO and Japan right now? 6. If American presence is the root cause of Chinese aggression, why are we only seeing Chinese aggression now when we've had bases for 50 years? 7. Your Krauthammer evidence is indicative of the west containing China. Doesn't this make your impacts inevitable post plan? 8. Your Kupchan evidence that American presence prevents Asian stability if from 98. Why haven't we seen your imapcts? 9.The U.S. has many bilateral alliances with Asian countries, such as Japan and South korea - if those nations become engaged in combat, does the U.S. just chill there and watch? 10. Will there be no conflict in Asia post plan? 11. When are we going to see these countries declare war your Layne in 96 evidence is indicative of? 12. What are your credentials behind your "World" source? 13. Your Perkovich evidence says Japan hates nuclear weapons in its territory. Doesn't this take out your entire aff?
  14. CRusso

    Pump up songs

    Anybody listen to hardcore?
  15. It says specifically in the first sentence, Dems are rejecting the FTA with South Korea. hmm wonder what the block is going to look like.
  16. Liberal economics are the exact same thing as liberal politics duh
  17. Sorry for the delay. Got sick last night. Here's the 2AC. WC is at 2408. http://www.mediafire.com/?unsa7799akxodn6
  18. OK just one more question on econ - even if the United States economy crashes and we have this shift, what's to stop other industrial nations like China and Russia from rebuilding the economies and destroying the environment?
  19. You're cool with me. Here's cross-x. T 1. Where in our plan do we remove Iraqi PMCs? 2. How do you lose politics ground when you run politics with case specific scenarios? SKFTA 1. What's the warrant behind your Korea Daily card? 2. Your Stein evidence just says PMCs fund 20 million dollars to congress. Where does it say removing them = a politically controversial issue? 3. Your Hill evidence that SKFTA is k2 East Asian stability is from 07. Why haven't we seen collapse in Asia? 4. With recent incidents such as the persistent aggression by North Korea and China and Japan quartering over the Senkaku islands, why hasn't conflict escalated to nuclear? Afghanistan 1. Will the president have control over ALL foreign policy if we keep pmcs? 2. Your Lansford evidence says sole presidential power solves terrorism. If this is true, why is terrorism and violence increasing in Afghanistan in the squo? Econ 1. What is the alternative to growth? Do we just sit here and let the econ collapse? 2. How are we supposed to fund programs to help biodiversity in a world without a successful economy? 3. Caldwell says the time is now - that's from 02. Why hasn't this happened? 4. If the judge votes negative, will the U.S. give up searching for resources to help the economy? Heg 1. What does the international system look like without the U.S. as a hegemon? 2. When do we claim to be imperialist? Or what's the link? 2AC will be up sometime tomorrow.
×
×
  • Create New...