Topic Meetings - Day 2 - List of countries considered in possible sets of resolutions
Security Guarantees (only)
Palestinian Authority
Hybrid (Security Guarantees and Foreign/Economic/Security/ Assistance)
Palestinian Authority
CEDA Topic Blog
CEDA Topic: Topic Meetings - Day 2 - List of countries considered in possible sets of resolutions
Hybrid (Security Guarantees and Foreign/Economic/Security/ Assistance)
No to Afghanistan and no to Isreal. Why?
Negatives would have little or no uniqueness to disad positions. We and NATO remain in Afghanistan at the current Afghanistan government's request. Contrary to some people's opnion, the U.S. is not an "occupation force" from the view of the official Afghanistan government.
Isreal is obvious--we already provide Isreal with more economic and military aid than almost any other country. We also have security and joint defense agreements with Isreal.
Stock issues may be old hat, but inherency seems to be an essential place to find link uniqueness. To use a previous example; the "pressure now underview" from the China topic should be avoided.
If there is a desire to allow the AFF to topically engage isreal it should be explicit in the topic. Greta is right... As a community, we ere on the side of limits and the neg will win lots of these debates. The implicit v/ explicit overrule debate proves.
Perhaps listing countries is a wrong way to go altogether. How about:
"Resolved the USFG should sustanially increase constructive engagement with one or more Islamic governments in the Middle East. "
The countries int he Middle East such as Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia are constitutionally Islamic Governments.
Lebanon and Israel would be excluded. The PLA would be included.
This makes the topic more elegant and provides the Affirmative with room to breath.