Jump to content

Photo
- - - - -

China-- jswegthefuture (aff) vs nonegfiat (neg)


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 Nonegfiat

Nonegfiat

    Topicality is a voting issue

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 667 posts
466
Excellent

Posted 14 June 2017 - 05:48 PM

It's going down. 2750/1625, judges welcome!


  • 0

DOUBLE BIND- Either the harms of the aff are true and they can't solve until they control the levers of power OR the harms are constructed and you reject them for alarmism


#2 vmanAA738

vmanAA738

    Top Speaker

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 587 posts
323
Excellent
  • Name:Vinay

Posted 14 June 2017 - 06:06 PM

I can judge


  • 0

virilio's acceleration hypothesis is real in college/today's world


#3 jswegthefuture

jswegthefuture

    Varsity

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 97 posts
73
Excellent
  • Name:jonathan lee
  • School:camas

Posted 14 June 2017 - 06:30 PM

1ac -

i don't have a word counter on verbatim - can someone check?

Attached Files


  • 0

#4 Nonegfiat

Nonegfiat

    Topicality is a voting issue

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 667 posts
466
Excellent

Posted 14 June 2017 - 06:40 PM

1ac -

i don't have a word counter on verbatim - can someone check?

 

2714. You're good! CX will be up either tonight or tomorrow morning


  • 0

DOUBLE BIND- Either the harms of the aff are true and they can't solve until they control the levers of power OR the harms are constructed and you reject them for alarmism


#5 TheSnowball

TheSnowball

    Hall of Fame

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,682 posts
1,069
Excellent
  • Name:Ryan

Posted 14 June 2017 - 07:03 PM

something something unilateral cp
  • 2

Daily Evidence Card!
Exodus Files!

This cross-ex is taking too long.

Kafka 25 (Franz, Novelist, Translated by David Wyllie, "The Trial", 1925) //Snowball

K. was informed by telephone that there would be a small hearing concerning his case the following Sunday. He was made aware that these cross examinations would follow one another regularly, perhaps not every week but quite frequently. On the one hand it was in everyone’s interest to bring proceedings quickly to their conclusion, but on the other hand every aspect of the examinations had to be carried out thoroughly without lasting too long because of the associated stress. For these reasons, it had been decided to hold a series of brief examinations following on one after another. Sunday had been chosen as the day for the hearings so that K. would not be disturbed in his professional work. It was assumed that he would be in agreement with this, but if he wished for another date then, as far as possible, he would be accommodated. Cross-examinations could even be held in the night, for instance, but K. would probably not be fresh enough at that time. Anyway, as long as K. made no objection, the hearing would be left on Sundays. It was a matter of course that he would have to appear without fail, there was probably no need to point this out to him. He would be given the number of the building where he was to present himself, which was in a street in a suburb well away from the city centre which K. had never been to before.


#6 kylerbuckner

kylerbuckner

    novice

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,210 posts
1,158
Excellent
  • School:cabot

Posted 15 June 2017 - 06:09 AM

I wish I could get 2714 words in an 8 minute speech irl


  • 0

#7 kylerbuckner

kylerbuckner

    novice

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,210 posts
1,158
Excellent
  • School:cabot

Posted 15 June 2017 - 06:15 AM

I like this version of the Taiwan aff cuz it's not like "give Taiwan to China in exchange for less SCS tension" cuz that's p colonialist.


  • 0

#8 jswegthefuture

jswegthefuture

    Varsity

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 97 posts
73
Excellent
  • Name:jonathan lee
  • School:camas

Posted 15 June 2017 - 06:17 AM

I wish I could get 2714 words in an 8 minute speech irl

 

same

 

im probly closer to 2000 lel


  • 1

#9 Nonegfiat

Nonegfiat

    Topicality is a voting issue

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 667 posts
466
Excellent

Posted 15 June 2017 - 06:29 AM

CX:

 

Your Gross evidence seems to indicate that militarization of the Taiwan Strait has occurred in the squo because of arms deals that have already taken place. Does the plan reverse those deals or just prohibit new ones?

To what extent will China demilitarize the Strait post-fiat, and how do you know?

 

Have arms sales continued in the 2 years since the publication of your Glaser evidence?

 

Does China have any incentive to lash out in the Strait other than "it makes them look strong"?

 

Why does either side believe it's "safe to test the limits" of one another's tolerance, as your Goldstein evidence indicates? 

 

Why is the status quo different from all the other decades in which the US has been defending Taiwan?

 

On the second advantage, your Lin evidence indicates that China buffed up Iran in 1992 in response to a Taiwan arms deal. Has this happened since?

 

How does the plan solve your Wuthnow evidence? In other words, why does the plan change China's mind about selling arms to Iran? Is Taiwan their only motivation for doing so?

 

Where does the Wuthnow ev indicate that an Iran arms deal would close the Strait of Hurmuz as the tag asserts?


  • 0

DOUBLE BIND- Either the harms of the aff are true and they can't solve until they control the levers of power OR the harms are constructed and you reject them for alarmism


#10 jswegthefuture

jswegthefuture

    Varsity

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 97 posts
73
Excellent
  • Name:jonathan lee
  • School:camas

Posted 15 June 2017 - 06:51 AM

Your Gross evidence seems to indicate that militarization of the Taiwan Strait has occurred in the squo because of arms deals that have already taken place. Does the plan reverse those deals or just prohibit new ones?

the plan doesn’t reverse old arms sales, no. we resolve militarization - a) fiat; restricting future sales moderates escalation

To what extent will China demilitarize the Strait post-fiat, and how do you know?

they’ll withdraw strait military forces and missiles threatening taiwan. we know b/c - a) china is interested in the plan and hates arms sales so they won’t cheat; even if they cheated, we would revert to the pre-plan squo and i’d read 2ac add-ons about the perception of making the deal being good

 

Have arms sales continued in the 2 years since the publication of your Glaser evidence?

they occur in multiple year cycles, but the last sale was in 2015 - obama rejected the proposal for end-of-term sales at the end of 2016

 

Does China have any incentive to lash out in the Strait other than "it makes them look strong"?

1 - miscalc

2 - risk underestimation

3 - sovereignty and nationalism - i guess that these are “wanting to look strong” in a sense

 

Why does either side believe it's "safe to test the limits" of one another's tolerance, as your Goldstein evidence indicates? 

1 - mismatched perceptions - each side thinks the other will be rational enough to back down

2 - empirically, china and the u.s. provocatively like to contain each other to show dominance - it’s a consistent aspect of both sides’ behavior

 

Why is the status quo different from all the other decades in which the US has been defending Taiwan?

i think we’ve read multiple 1ac cards (lam, swaine, etc.) explaining why a sale now would be especially volatile

i also think other decades didn’t have the same nationalist dynamics or xi

 

On the second advantage, your Lin evidence indicates that China buffed up Iran in 1992 in response to a Taiwan arms deal. Has this happened since?

yes - after almost every arm sale to taiwan, actually

i think Lin only talks about the ’92 example in that part of the article but pretty clearly established a consistent taiwan-iran linkage

 

How does the plan solve your Wuthnow evidence? In other words, why does the plan change China's mind about selling arms to Iran? Is Taiwan their only motivation for doing so?

the justification china tells the u.s. and the international community is that their arms deals with iran are a reaction to u.s. sales to taiwan - the plan removes that justification

we also have some super sick reverse causality cards in the 2ac if you’re interested

 

 

Where does the Wuthnow ev indicate that an Iran arms deal would close the Strait of Hurmuz as the tag asserts?

wuthnow says it triggers destabilizing activities” and provocative activities, etc. - those sorts of strait tensions sound like closing hormuz…

 

even if hormuz doesn’t get closed, that’s why our Smoltczyk ev is an impact to hormuz tensions, not hormuz closure


Edited by jswegthefuture, 15 June 2017 - 06:51 AM.

  • 0

#11 Nonegfiat

Nonegfiat

    Topicality is a voting issue

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 667 posts
466
Excellent

Posted 15 June 2017 - 07:21 AM

 

they’ll withdraw strait military forces and missiles threatening taiwan. we know b/c - a) china is interested in the plan and hates arms sales so they won’t cheat; even if they cheated, we would revert to the pre-plan squo and i’d read 2ac add-ons about the perception of making the deal being good

 

So in the world of the aff, China entirely removes its military presence from the straight while Taiwan still maintains the billions of dollars worth of arms that the US has already sold them?

 

 

 

i think we’ve read multiple 1ac cards (lam, swaine, etc.) explaining why a sale now would be especially volatile

 

Can you name me some warrants?

 

 

i also think other decades didn’t have the same nationalist dynamics or xi

 

What nationalist dynamics?

 

 

 

the justification china tells the u.s. and the international community is that their arms deals with iran are a reaction to u.s. sales to taiwan - the plan removes that justification

we also have some super sick reverse causality cards in the 2ac if you’re interested

 

So China will stop selling arms to Iran because it can't point the finger at the US and Taiwan?

 

 


  • 0

DOUBLE BIND- Either the harms of the aff are true and they can't solve until they control the levers of power OR the harms are constructed and you reject them for alarmism


#12 jswegthefuture

jswegthefuture

    Varsity

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 97 posts
73
Excellent
  • Name:jonathan lee
  • School:camas

Posted 15 June 2017 - 12:05 PM

 

 

 

So in the world of the aff, China entirely removes its military presence from the straight while Taiwan still maintains the billions of dollars worth of arms that the US has already sold them?

sure

 

 

Can you name me some warrants?

nationalist pressures means xi is uniquely willing to act out of fear of ccp instability

every 1ac ev that substantiates impact uq, etc.

 

 

What nationalist dynamics?

19th party congress

current state of ccp instability

arms sales are seen as impinging on chinese national interests because it's western interference in a strictly china-taiwan issues + china historically doesn't want taiwan getting arms, esp. now, etc.

 

 

So China will stop selling arms to Iran because it can't point the finger at the US and Taiwan?

sure, or at least sales would be substantially reduced yea

 


  • 0

#13 Nonegfiat

Nonegfiat

    Topicality is a voting issue

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 667 posts
466
Excellent

Posted 16 June 2017 - 11:54 AM

cool, i'll get to the 1nc either today or tomorrow. Lemme apologize in advance that im not gonna be able to stay super on top of this debate, which is my fault because i started 2 at the same time. I have every intention of doing and completing this round, i might just be a bit slow


  • 0

DOUBLE BIND- Either the harms of the aff are true and they can't solve until they control the levers of power OR the harms are constructed and you reject them for alarmism






Similar Topics Collapse

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users