homeschool debate | Forums Wiki

HomeSchoolDebate

Speech and Debate Resources and Community
Forums      Wiki
It is currently Sat Nov 25, 2017 10:40 am
Not a member? Guests can only see part of the forums. To see the whole thing (and add your voice!), just register a free account by following these steps.

All times are UTC+01:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 12 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Jun 01, 2014 4:00 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 5:14 pm
Posts: 100
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Region V (Manhattan KS)
So for anyone who hasn't been looking at the '14-'15 NCFCA resolution thread recently, you might not know that lots of us TPrs don't quite like how the TP Resolution C has that word "approach" in it ("Resolved: The United States should significantly reform its approach to international terrorism") and we think that that may have potential for some squirrely Aff cases (like changing the way the US thinks about IT instead of a real policy).

So what I am proposing is that if TP choice C is chosen to be the TP resolution for the '14-'15 season, that within the next 5 days we have as many people as we can get to e-mail Mrs. Hudson, and every other person on the Board of Directors, suggesting a rewording of the resolution (yes that is possible, they have reworded resolutions after they have been chosen in the past, and if you look at the page that first proposes them, it says "Final wording subject to change".) that does not have that word "approach" in it and instead makes it clear that you have to change/create a policy concerning IT. (It would be best if we had a lot of them sent within the first day of it being announced. And it may even be more powerful if as many people as possible who will be attending Nationals, personally go up to Mrs. Hudson or anyone on the BoD and personally request a rewording.)

One thing that I should point out is that, this does not mean that TP C will be chosen. I am only doing this now so that we can be prepared for it if it is chosen. So if it isn't chosen, I (or a mod) will delete this topic and you will not have to worry about it.


So those explanations done, here is the potential rewordings that I would suggest:

"Resolved: The United States should significantly reform one or more of its policies regarding International Terrorism"

This topic is now officially open for discussion of how to reword it (ex. should we suggest they change it from the US to the USFG? Should we suggest that they limit it to International Terrorism specifically from one or more specific continents? etc.).

Please feel free to also suggest your own rewording that we can discuss, and hopefully we can have a rewording that we all agree with before Nats.

_________________
Non nobis Domine, Sed nomini Tu o da gloriam


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Jun 01, 2014 4:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2013 4:55 am
Posts: 211
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: VA
Yes.

Just yes.

Also, do we wanna define what kind of terrorism? Or would that make it too narrow?

Either way, I'm fully on board.

_________________
NCFCA Region IX (FASD)

Reagan Bass/Justin Moffatt '12-'16


Retired.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Jun 01, 2014 6:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 9:28 pm
Posts: 2889
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: I'm not lost! I'm locationally challenged. -John M. Ford
Masked Midnight wrote:
Quote:
Also, do we wanna define what kind of terrorism? Or would that make it too narrow?
One could. The league was likely hoping to make this a foreign/international policy resolution as much as possible though; hence the inclusion of 'international' terrorism -- this is to preempt domestic AFF cases.

Which might happen anyway, if an AFF case targets foreign nationals in the US.

Disclaimer: I think this is a really terrible resolution.

18 U.S.C. ยง 2331 wrote:
"International terrorism" means activities with the following three characteristics:

Involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law;
Appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
Occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S., or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum.*

I suggest that the words "international terrorism" needs to be changed as well. Maybe to "change its approach to acts of terrorism occurring outside the US."

Otherwise, presto-chango, you have a domestic resolution with people running national security cases which have the TSA targeting foreign nationals or something like that.

EDIT: Ooh, or could do "change its response to acts of terrorism occuring outside the US." I like the word "response" - I think it would make it significantly narrower and perhaps marginally debatable.

_________________
There cannot be a crisis next week. My schedule is already full.
- Henry Kissinger


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jun 02, 2014 3:48 am 
Offline
I know not this "leverage" of which you speak.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 5:52 pm
Posts: 2285
Home Schooled: Yes
And, refreshingly, it's not, "USFG should significantly reform X policy."

_________________
This account doesn't express the opinions of my employers and might not even express my own.


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jun 02, 2014 3:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 5:14 pm
Posts: 100
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Region V (Manhattan KS)
Sharkfin wrote:
EDIT: Ooh, or could do "change its response to acts of terrorism occuring outside the US." I like the word "response" - I think it would make it significantly narrower and perhaps marginally debatable.
the word "response" may have the same problems as "approach" does.

So I may suggest "significantly reform a policy in responce to acts of terrorism occuring outside the US."?

_________________
Non nobis Domine, Sed nomini Tu o da gloriam


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jun 02, 2014 5:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2013 4:07 am
Posts: 1393
Home Schooled: Yes
I like the "one or more policies" thingy. Way better.

Also, another big problem with this one: it says "approach to terrorism." What the heck does that even mean? The US doesn't HAVE any "approach to terrorism." They have an approach to ENDING terrorism, but that's different. "Approach to terrorism" makes it sound like the US is engaging it terrorism, which makes no sense. Changing it to "one or more policies regarding" fixes this problem.

As for people who think the res. is too broad, I have a question: you argue that people will run cases regarding the TSA. Why is that bad? Seems like a pretty legit case idea to me. And it IS international, because it is terrorism between two nations. There is totally nothing wrong with a res. allowing TSA changes, that'll just make it fun.

_________________
Check out my new website!

"Never quote yourself on internet forums" - Gabriel Blacklock, 2014


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jun 02, 2014 6:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2008 2:40 am
Posts: 1179
Home Schooled: No
Resolved, that the United States federal government should significantly reform policies and/or programs administered by the State Department's Bureau of Counterterrorism.


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Jun 04, 2014 2:52 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 5:14 pm
Posts: 100
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Region V (Manhattan KS)
Cyberknight wrote:
Also, another big problem with this one: it says "approach to terrorism." What the heck does that even mean? The US doesn't HAVE any "approach to terrorism." They have an approach to ENDING terrorism, but that's different. "Approach to terrorism" makes it sound like the US is engaging it terrorism, which makes no sense. Changing it to "one or more policies regarding" fixes this problem.
The point of this topic is to find a way to reword the res specifically so that it doesn't have "approach" in it.

I like that wording also. So what I am thinking of submitting is "Resolved: The United States should significantly reform one or more policies regarding acts of terrorism occurring outside the US." Does that sound good?

_________________
Non nobis Domine, Sed nomini Tu o da gloriam


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Jun 05, 2014 12:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 4:19 am
Posts: 54
Home Schooled: Yes
"One or more of its policies" and "acts of terrorism." That sounds awesome.

P.S. Thanks for starting this thread. :D

_________________
The Bible has a say on every topic, even debate!
Job 13:18 "Behold, I have prepared my case; I know that I shall be in the right."
Proverbs 18:17 "The first to plead his case seems just, until another comes and [cross-]examines him."


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Jun 14, 2014 3:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 5:14 pm
Posts: 100
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Region V (Manhattan KS)
Well... sadly this topic will not be needed anymore :cry:.

I will leave it up to the mods to decide if it should be deleted or kept.

_________________
Non nobis Domine, Sed nomini Tu o da gloriam


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 12 posts ] 

All times are UTC+01:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited