List Group - Goals
This analysis is designed to supplement the original controversy paper in terms of wording choices for a list-oriented resolution(s).As the original topic paper suggests, on pages 91-92
“Given our research, we suggest inclusion of the following war po
• designate and detain enemy combatants;
• conduct covert military operations;
• use domestic wiretapping;
• deploy military force without congressional approval (e.g., UAVs, Offensive Cyber Operations,
*Support for United Nations or NATO operations,*
Preventive or Preemptive unilateral action)…
we want to be clear that not all of these powers must be included and these do not haveto be the only presidential war powers that can be included.
There are many other issues such asauthorization to use nuclear weapons, regulation of military personal, operation of military courts andother matters that could be debated
and are discussed within the literature. We selected these areaslisted above because they appear to be the most recently and frequently debated issues in the literature
The proposed resolution discusses several of the above areas deemed most viable fordebate on this topic. It excludes support for United Nations or NATO operations andpreventive or preemptive unilateral operations from the original paper in favor of more developed debate in the other areas.We also noted that controversy paper authors indicated a desire for a list of specificpowers in the resolution. Some original phrases in the controversy paper wereperhaps too loose or broad and this analysis attempts to tighten up wording to allowquality areas for debate, while restricting areas we might not want to debate such as
“deploy weapons to X country”.
Kelly Young on the CEDA Forum(http://www.cedadebate.org/forum/index.php?topic=4800.msg10633#msg10633):
“Your concern is a valid one that we considered as we drafted the paper. We think the conventional or
non-nuclear issues are rather robust without bringing in all of the nuclear weapon authority issues. Forthis reason,
we think a list of specific powers would be the best option.
options on page 92 of the paper attempt to specify to exclude areas like nuclear
Unfortunately with these wording, our intent does not match well with our product. The
‘Deploy military forces without congressional approval’ likely allows for no first use and deploy