SDI ‘08Elections Impact – Iran
Obama Good – Iran
Obama Good – Iran......................................................................................................................................................................................1Iran 1NC......................................................................................................................................................................................................2Iran Internal – Obama Will Engage..............................................................................................................................................................4Iran Internal – Obama Will Engage..............................................................................................................................................................5Iran Internal – McCain will strike................................................................................................................................................................6Strikes Bad - Afghanistan............................................................................................................................................................................7Strikes Bad – Economy/oil shocks...............................................................................................................................................................8Strikes Bad - Nato........................................................................................................................................................................................9Strikes Bad - Russia...................................................................................................................................................................................10Strikes Bad – South Asia............................................................................................................................................................................11Strikes Bad – Succession...........................................................................................................................................................................12Strikes Bad - Terrorism..............................................................................................................................................................................14Strikes Fail 2NC.........................................................................................................................................................................................15A2: Israeli Strikes Worse...........................................................................................................................................................................16Engagement Good – Iran Prolif.................................................................................................................................................................17Ext – Iran Prolif Impact.............................................................................................................................................................................18Engagement Good – Leadership................................................................................................................................................................19Ext – Engagement Solves Leadership........................................................................................................................................................20Engagement Good – Democracy................................................................................................................................................................21Engagement Good – Iraq...........................................................................................................................................................................23Ext – Engagement Good – Iraq..................................................................................................................................................................24Engagement Good – Russia.......................................................................................................................................................................25A2: Engagement = Appeasement..............................................................................................................................................................27A2: Engagement Incentivizes Prolif..........................................................................................................................................................28A2: Engagement Empowers Hardliners....................................................................................................................................................29Iran Says Yes..............................................................................................................................................................................................30A2: Say No – Ahmadinejad.......................................................................................................................................................................31......................................................................................................................................................................................................................31
1
SDI ‘08Elections Impact – Iran
Iran 1NC
McCain will strike IranClemons, 08
(Steve, editor of Washington note, huffington report,
)
On Iran and its nuclear program, McCain has been so flippantly bellicose -- singing "Bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran" to the Beach Boys tune-- that some conservatives have warned that a President McCain would take America to war with Iran.McCain last Sunday said: "There's going to be other wars... I'm sorry to tell you, there's going to be other wars. We will never surrender butthere will be other wars."Presumably, McCain was suggesting his view that a war with Iran was inevitable. When asked by Joe Scarborough about McCain'sstatement, Pat Buchanan replied: "That is straight talk... You get John McCain in the White House, and I do believe we will be at war withIran." Buchanan said, "That's one of the things that makes me very nervous about him," adding, "There's no doubt John McCain is going to be a war president... His whole career is wrapped up in the military, national security. He's in Putin's face, he's threatening the Iranians,we're going to be in Iraq a hundred years."
Strikes cause Syria to retaliate against Israel with smallpoxCorsi ’07
(Jerome,- writer for Wordnet daily, citing Jill Bellamy-Dekker, director of the Public Health Preparednessprogram for the European Homeland Security Association under the French High Committee for Civil Defense “Syria readywith bio-terror if U.S. hits Iran” http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54542)
An American biodefense analyst living in Europe says
if the U.S. invades Iran
to halt its nuclear ambitions,
Syria is ready torespond with
weapons of mass destruction – specifically
biological weapons.
"
Syria is positioned to launch a biological attack on Israel
or Europe should the U.S. attack Iran," Jill Bellamy-Dekker told WND."The Syrians are embedding their biological weapons program into their commercial pharmaceuticals business and their veterinary vaccine-research facilities. The intelligence service oversees Syria's 'bio-farm' program and the Ministry of Defense is well interfaced into the effort."Bellamy-Decker currently directs the Public Health Preparedness program for the European Homeland Security Association under the FrenchHigh Committee for Civil Defense.
She anticipates a variation of smallpox is the biological agent Syria would utilize
.
The impact outweighs nuke warSinger ’01
(Clifford,- is a professor of nuclear engineering and director of the Program in Arms Control, Disarmament,and International Security at the University of Illinois at Urbana—Champaign “Will Mankind Survive the Millennium?”http://www.acdis.uiuc.edu/research/S&Ps/2001-Sp/S&P_XIII/Singer.htm)
In recent years the fear of the apocalypse (or religious hope for it) has been in part a child of the Cold War, but its seeds in Western culture goback to the Black Death and earlier. Recent polls suggest that the majority in the United States that believe man would survive into the futurefor substantially less than a millennium was about 10 percent higher in the Cold War than afterward. However fear of annihilation of thehuman species through nuclear warfare was confused with the admittedly terrifying, but much different matter of destruction of a dominantcivilization. The destruction of a third or more of much of the globe’s population through the disruption from the direct consequences of nuclear blast and fire damage was certainly possible. There was, and still is, what is now known to be a rather small chance that dust raised byan all-out nuclear war would cause a so-called nuclear winter, substantially reducing agricultural yields especially in temperate regions for ayear or more. As noted above mankind as a whole has weathered a number of mind-boggling disasters in the past fifty thousand years even if older cultures or civilizations have sometimes eventually given way to new ones in the process. Moreover the fear that radioactive falloutwould make the globe uninhabitable, publicized by widely seen works such as "On the Beach," was a metaphor for the horror of nuclear warrather than reality. The epidemiological lethal results of well over a hundred atmospheric nuclear tests are barely statistically detectableexcept in immediate fallout plumes. The increase in radiation exposure far from the combatants in
even a
full scale nuclear
exchange
at the height of the Cold War
would have been modest
compared to the variations in natural backgroundradiation doses that have readily been adapted to by a number of human populations.
Nor is there any reason tobelieve that global warming or other insults to our physical environment
resulting from currently usedtechnologies
will challenge
the
survival
of mankind as a whole beyond what it has already handily survived through thepast fifty thousand years. There are, however,
two technologies
currently under development that may
pose a
more serious
threat to
human
survival
. The first and most immediate is biological warfare combined with genetic engineering.
Smallpox is the most
fearsome
of natural
biological
warfare
agents in existence
. By the end of the next decade,
global
immunity
tosmallpox
will
likely
be
at a
low
unprecedented since the emergence of this disease
in the distant past, while
the opportunity for it to spread
rapidly across the globe
will be
at an all time
high
. In the absence of othercomplications such as nuclear war near the peak of an epidemic, developed countries may respond with quarantine andvaccination to limit the damage. Otherwise mortality there may match the rate of 30 percent or more expected inunprepared developing countries. With respect to genetic engineering using currently available knowledge and technology,the simple expedient of spreading an ample mixture of coat protein variants could render a vaccination response largelyineffective, but this would otherwise not be expected to substantially increase overall mortality rates. With development of new biological technology, however,
there is a possibility that a variety of
infectious agents may be engineered
for combinations of greater than natural virulence and mortality, rather than just to overwhelm currently
available
antibiotics or
vaccines
.
There is no
a priori known
upper limit to the power
of this type of technologybase, and
thus the survival of a
globally connected
human family may be in question
when and if this isachieved.
2
SDI ‘08Elections Impact – Iran3
Search History:
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
p.
More From This User
Notes
Load more
