{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

MGW10-QV-Israel-DA-Answers

MGW10-QV-Israel-DA-Answers - MGW 2010 Q/V Lab Israel...

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
MGW 2010 Israel Disadvnatage Q/V Lab Israel Disadvantage Answers Israel Disadvantage Answers ..................................................................................................................................... 1 2ac Israel (1) ............................................................................................................................................................. 2 2ac Israel (2) ............................................................................................................................................................. 3 2ac Israel (3) ............................................................................................................................................................. 4 AT//Israel DA – Oil Access 2AC .............................................................................................................................. 5 Strikes Good 1AR (1) ................................................................................................................................................ 6 Strikes Good 1AR (2) ................................................................................................................................................ 7 Strikes good – A2 Retaliation*** .............................................................................................................................. 8 No Relations 1AR (1) ................................................................................................................................................ 9 No Relations 1AR (2) .............................................................................................................................................. 10 A2 Israeli first-strike Iran (1) ................................................................................................................................... 11 A2 Israeli first-strike Iran (2) ................................................................................................................................... 12 A2 Israeli first-strike Iran (3) ................................................................................................................................... 13 A2 Israeli first-strike Iran (4) ................................................................................................................................... 14 A2 Iran will attack Israel ......................................................................................................................................... 15 There are a number of ways in which the affirmative team can respond to this disadvantage. There are many different strategic routes in the “affirmative answers” section; be sure to look these over and decide what sorts of answers you’ll want to make. Good Luck 1
Background image of page 1

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
MGW 2010 Israel Disadvnatage Q/V Lab 2ac Israel (1) ( ) US Security Commitment is irrelevant – poor Israeli decision-making ensures enemies will rise-up regardless Wieseltier 6-3 [Leon. Literary of the New Republic, PhD from Harvard. “Operation ‘Make the World Hate Us’” The New Republic, 6/3/10//MGW-JV] Israel does not need enemies: it has itself . Or more precisely: it has its government. The Netanyahu -Barak government has somehow found a way to lose the moral high ground , the all-important war for symbols and meanings, to Hamas . That is quite an accomplishment. Operation Make the World Hate Us, it might have been called . I leave it to others to make the operational criticisms of the Israeli action, and will say only that even my amateurish understanding of the tactical challenge posed by the interdiction of the boats suffices to suggest that there were other ways to do this. I also will not pretend to a perfect grasp of what happened on board the Mavi Marmara. I have pondered the videos that both sides have released, and concluded that the Israeli soldiers sliding down that rope had no intention of attacking the people on board and that the people on board had no way of being confident of this. I cannot expect Palestinians and their supporters to believe the best about the Israeli army. (This is what Israeli hardliners call “the restoration of deterrence.”) I do not doubt that some of the activists on the ship welcomed a confrontation with Israel, but the Israelis should not have obliged them . In any event, what took place on that deck looks to me like a tragic misunderstanding. Yet there was no reason to think that anything else would have transpired. The important point is that the killing of civilians on the Mavi Marmara —I understand that they were “armed” with metal bars and a knife, but still they were civilians, and soldiers are trained to respond unlethally to the recklessness of a mob— cannot be extenuated by reference to “asymmetrical warfare” and Israel’s right to defend itself. This was not warfare , at least of the physical sort.
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.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}