Appeasement-Disadvantage---Starter-Pack---Samford

Appeasement-Disadvantage---Starter-Pack---Samford -...

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: APPEASEMENT DISADVANTAGE Thesis: The thesis of this disadvantage is that a substantial reduction in the US military presence in the world will be perceived as weakness by Obama, undermining his tough stance against rogue regimes like Iran. Obama is presently engaged in a high stakes gambit to pressure Iran into giving up its nuclear arsenal. However, unilateral troop withdrawals from allied nations will make it appear as if Obama is backing down to rogue nations, emboldening Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to stand firm against Obama. The continuation of Iran’s nuclear weapons arsenal would be disastrous: risking widespread Middle Eastern proliferation and an attack by Israel. Now is a critical moment for Obama to stand firm and not give rogue nations like Iran hope that he will back down to tyrannical regimes. Obama must remember the lesson of the 1930’s and not behave like Neville Chamberlain in the face of despotic, rogue regimes. Appeasement DA Shell (1/2) A. UNIQUENESS: Obama is engaging in a successful multilateral approach to pressure Iran over its nuclear program now—he is avoiding perceptions of appeasement in the status quo. Matt Duss, 2010 . “Neocons Dismiss The Views Of The Military (Again) To Call For (Another) Preventive War.” April 20, 2010. Online. Internet. Accessed April 26, 2010 at http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/04/20/neocons-dismiss-the-views-of-the-military -again-to-call-for-another-preventive-war/ Finally, it shouldn’t even need to be said that President Obama’s approach hardly qualifies as “appeasement” of Iran — unless you’re someone for whom any strategy that doesn’t involve huge numbers of people being blown up by U.S. bombs equals “appeasement.” Seriously: President Obama just hosted a very successful nuclear security summit that, in addition to front- and-centering vital nuclear non-proliferation issues that the Bush administration could barely be bothered with, has resulted in significantly more international unity around efforts to pressure Iran over its nuclear program — the very sort of unity made impossible by the Bush administration’s neocon-inspired belligerence . It’s says something very troubling about the lack of accountability in American politics that these same characters should come again now, calling for another preventive war, using the same clever argumentative method of simply insisting that such a war will go splendidly and will achieve all of our aims with no unintended consequences, and be taken remotely seriously. B. LINK: American defense pullbacks embolden US adversaries LIKE IRAN—it feeds the perception that Obama is weak. 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 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp- dyn/content/article/2009/02/02/AR2009020202618.html · What worries allies cheers and emboldens potential adversaries. The Obama administration is right to reach out and· What worries allies cheers and emboldens potential adversaries....
View Full 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 / 15

Appeasement-Disadvantage---Starter-Pack---Samford -...

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