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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Afghanistan Troop Switch Disadvantage Samford Debate Institute Opening Packet AFGHAN TROOP SWITCH DISADVANTAGE Thesis: The thesis of this disadvantage is that a substantial reduction in the US military presence in the world will cause the troops to be reallocated to Afghanistan—worsening the terrorist risk and emboldening the Taliban. President Obama is currently launching a large troop surge in Afghanistan, which makes the country a likely target for troops that are reduced elsewhere. However, our troop presence in Afghanistan only causes an increase in civilian casualties and resentment among the people of Afghanistan, making the security situation worse. This disadvantage is particularly potent against teams that do not identify what will be done with the troops that are removed from one of the topic countries. The Negative can argue they will merely be reallocated elsewhere, preventing the benefits to overall troop readiness and morale, while making the situation in Afghanistan worse at the same time. Obviously, this disadvantage should only be run against non-Afghanistan cases, as the Affirmative plan in an Afghanistan case would be withdrawing all the troops from Afghanistan, making the impacts to the disadvantage advantages to the Affirmative case.
Background image of page 1

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

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Afghanistan Troop Switch Disadvantage Samford Debate Institute Opening Packet Afghan Troop Switch DA Shell (1/1) A. Uniqueness: A lack of troops is inhibiting the us ability to expand the war in Afghanistan. UPI, 2010. “Report: Too few troops in Afghanistan.” April 29, 2010. Online. Internet. Accessed April 29, 2010 at Even with additional U.S. troops deployed to Afghanistan, combat levels are inadequate to conduct operations in most key areas, a Pentagon report indicates. The congressionally mandated report released Wednesday said coalition forces decided to concentrate on 121 districts in Afghanistan, but have enough troops to operate in only 48 districts, reported. B. Link: Previous troop reductions in Iraq prove: Troop reductions in one country will merely cause a re-allocation of said troops to Afghanistan. Robert Kagan, 2009 (senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace), February 3, 2009, “No Time to Cut Defense.” Online. Internet. Accessed April 25, 2010 at dyn/content/article/2009/02/02/AR2009020202618.html · Finally, everyone knows the U.S. military is stretched thin . Some may hope that Obama can begin substantially drawing down U.S. force levels in Iraq this year. No doubt he can to some extent. But this is an especially critical year in Iraq. The most recent round of elections is only one of three: District elections are in June and all-important parliamentary elections are in December. The head of U.S. Central Command, Gen. David Petraeus, is unlikely to recommend a steep cut with so much at stake.
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 02/23/2012 for the course DEBATE 101 taught by Professor None during the Spring '12 term at Berkeley.

Page1 / 13


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