DDI09-BQ-Military-Neg

DDI09-BQ-Military-Neg - Military Case Negs Strategy

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Military Case Negs Strategy Sheet…………………………………………….………………………………………………………2 SS Cross-ex……………………………………………………………………………………………………….3 SS Lab 1NC…………………………………………………………………………………………………...4-19 SS 1NC Add-on.………………………………………………………………………………………………...20 CJ Cross-ex……………………………………………………………………………………………………...22 CJ 1NC……………………………………………………………………………………………………….23-34 CJ Politics Links…………………………………………………………………………………………….35-36 CJ 2NC………………………………………………………………………………………………………37-47 Terms……………………………………………………………………………………………………………48 1 Strategy Sheet SS: First off, the strat should be case, the two T’s, and a security K. An alternative version is using the universal CP with the targeting net benefit instead of the K, but this strategy is slightly weird and you might get abusive theory run on you. The case is about 3-5 pages of AWESOME inherency/non-uniqueness on the advantages that also addresses the internal links. It really doesn’t need any impact defense/turns, but you can pick some out of a hege file if you like. As a note, if they start attacking the quals on the first two cards, you argue: quals aren’t important for these two cards because they only report on the government’s actions and do not provide any opinions or the like. I suggest reading the cards in detail so you understand the small differences between these cards and the aff’s cards. These subtle differences are enough to win the debate, but they could easily spin it off as aff cards if you don’t know what they actually say. The case is also pretty dense, so you may want to consider putting some in the block. The two T’s are both good, but the first one about “in” should DEFINITELY go for the extra T argument for the case turn, and you won’t be able to run the CP+net benefit without it (so you really have to know how to debate extra T). The second T is really up to you, but it probably should be a timesuck. As a warning on the CP…if you lose on the perm, you would lose the debate, and I’ve never really debated with this CP, so I can’t say how good it is. Plus, the CP text IS their plan…which is why you need to win the extra T argument so that you can sever the non-topical part of the plan and reintroduce it as your CP. In addition, you MAY have to go into a ground debate if they put theory on you. Just say that their plantext is going out of aff ground and extend with T arguments, which kills our ability to run...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 12/20/2010 for the course K 101 taught by Professor Staff during the Fall '10 term at UMass Lowell.

Page1 / 48

DDI09-BQ-Military-Neg - Military Case Negs Strategy

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online