Proliferation- the US should impose sanctions on China to ...



Case Suggestions

Proliferation- the US should impose sanctions on China to get them to stop selling nuclear by agreeing to weapons to countries such as India/Pakistan. Ratify MTCR- missile tech control regime/stop prolif (Chico/LACC)

Human Trafficking- China should be moved from tier 2 to tier 3 by US state department for their rampant human trafficking. (San Francisco)

IPR (intellectual property rights)- the US should complain to the WTO (world trade organization) that china is not complying with international IPR laws. (CSUN/Pepperdine/Sacramento)

N. Korea-the US should impose sanctions on China until they agree to engage in six party talks with N. Korea to stop proliferation (Cal Poly SLO)

Tiananmen Square- Free Speech –the US should impose sanctions on China until they establish a committee to resolve the Tiananmen square incident (Cal Poly SLO)

Olympics- the USFG will not take part in the Chinese Olympics unless China reforms its HR policy (FCC)

Tibet-the USFG will impose parent sanction on China until they recognize Tibet as an independent state

Case Suggestions

Proliferation- the US should impose sanctions on China to get them to stop selling nuclear by agreeing to weapons to countries such as India/Pakistan. Ratify MTCR- missile tech control regime/stop prolif (Chico/LACC)

Human Trafficking- China should be moved from tier 2 to tier 3 by US state department for their rampant human trafficking. (San Francisco)

IPR (intellectual property rights)- the US should complain to the WTO (world trade organization) that china is not complying with international IPR laws. (CSUN/Pepperdine/Sacramento)

N. Korea-the US should impose sanctions on China until they agree to engage in six party talks with N. Korea to stop proliferation (Cal Poly SLO)

Tiananmen Square- Free Speech –the US should impose sanctions on China until they establish a committee to resolve the Tiananmen square incident (Cal Poly SLO)

Olympics- the USFG will not take part in the Chinese Olympics unless China reforms its HR policy (FCC)

Tibet-the USFG will impose parent sanction on China until they recognize Tibet as an independent state

COMS 151 Fall 2005

Professor Cruz-Boone Policy Debate Handout

Policy debate is a research-based activity. Students are judged based on their ability to provide relevant evidence supporting the arguments they make. You are strongly encouraged to take notes.

Voting Affirmative

In the first speech the affirmative team will provide a plan they will defend for the entire round. The affirmative team should win, if you observe that they have disproved all of the negative arguments. Three parts to the plan that the affirmative must adequately defend/prove with evidence in their first speech are

1. Harms-proof of a significant problem that currently exists.

2. Inherency-establishing that something is stopping that problem from being fixed

3. Solvency- the plan of action they advocate fixes the “harm” or problem they posed

Voting Negative

In order to win, the negative must use evidence to disprove any of the aforementioned 3 areas. Two other kinds of arguments the negative might make are

1. Topicality- if the plan fits into the parameters of the provided resolutions.

2. Disadvantages- something bad that happens as a result of supporting the aff’s plan

The negative should win, if the affirmative does not adequately respond/disprove any of the arguments presented & explained by the negative.

COMS 151 Fall 2005

Professor Cruz-Boone Policy Debate Handout

Policy debate is a research-based activity. Students are judged based on their ability to provide relevant evidence supporting the arguments they make. You are strongly encouraged to take notes.

Voting Affirmative

In the first speech the affirmative team will provide a plan they will defend for the entire round. The affirmative team should win, if you observe that they have disproved all of the negative arguments. Three parts to the plan that the affirmative must adequately defend/prove with evidence in their first speech are

1. Harms-proof of a significant problem that currently exists.

2. Inherency-establishing that something is stopping that problem from being fixed

3. Solvency- the plan of action they advocate fixes the “harm” or problem they posed

Voting Negative

In order to win, the negative must use evidence to disprove any of the aforementioned 3 areas. Two other kinds of arguments the negative might make are

1. Topicality- if the plan fits into the parameters of the provided resolutions.

2. Disadvantages- something bad that happens as a result of supporting the aff’s plan

The negative should win, if the affirmative does not adequately respond/disprove any of the arguments presented & explained by the negative.

HARVARD:

Ob1 Chinese wildlife

Demand for wildlife products = rapid extinction

Trade in wildlife products exploits neighbors in SE Asia

Ad1 Pathogens

Pathogens in SEA jump from animals to humans

Wildlife products uniquely dangerous (bird flu)

Human actions threaten disease worldwide

Illegal wildlife trade risks widespread disease spread

= Avian Influenza

Dwarf previous outbreaks

Pandemic risks human extinction

Viruses = biggest threat

Diseases Collapse China == global economic collapse and Chinese instability

SARS empirically proves our argument

Diseases hurt every economic indicator

Global interdependence exacerbates problem

Economic collapse = NW (Bearden)

Controlling illegal wildlife key

Any solution must include china

Ad 2 Ecocatastrophe

Lots of species at risk

Key to biodiversity hot spots

Trafficking for bushmeat = biggest threat to survival of extinctions

= rapid increase in human induced extinctions

Threatens critical ecosystems

Unsustainable use threatens ecosystems

Rate key

SEA focus = best strategy for slowing rate

Focus on hot spots key

Rate key to ecosystem resiliency

Adaptation fails

Plan : USFG dip/ec pressure through CITES to stop wildlife trade

(paraphrased)

Solvency

CITES can solve China

External Pressure on SARS gave domestic political capital to act –

plan is the same

US CITES pressure on China empirically solves

Econ/Dip pressure from CITES solves

Olympics = unique opportunity to act w/ pressure

CITES = best forum

Carrots/sticks good

New dip incentives into CITES solves in long term

Plan empirically effective

cites:

Solvency

US Law vital to cites

UC Davis Jnl of Int'l Law 00

"the lacey act provides the real teeth behind CITES"

Integrating new diplomatic efforts into CITES solves china

"In considering china's approach to wildlife"

Empirically dip/ec pressure solves

Bear Alliance 95

animalalliance.ca/projects/bearlliance.html

the new non-exploitative consciousness

Olympics = unique window

Animal People 01



a seven-year window of opportunity

CITES solves with carrots and sticks

Reeve 01

assets/VY01.Reeve.pdfp

147

the combination of carrots, in the form of

SARS proves international pressure couched in the issue of disease

prevention is effective and acceptable to the PRC

Temple Law Review 2004

China was responsible for the problem the world was calling

External Pressure to stem sars gave PRC political capital to act

Temple law review again

"Chinese authorities took visible . . . confiscated tens of thousands

of animals"

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download