|
i'll just repost the thing i wrote in the Debate forum on the topic of nukes seeing as this topic is starting to go into terrorism
On the general subject of nuclear weapons, i believe that disarmament and treaty signing is just a whole bunch of shit that would not get rid of the nuclear threat in the world.
The main concern nowadays is with terrorism and their factor in using nukes. Now, with the deterioration of the russian nuclear missile program and because of the intense depression that russia is going through, many of the former-soviet scientists are underpaid, and most are in a state of poverty. Thus, terrorists, who have a fair amount of funding from middle-eastern states such as IRaq or Iran, are able to pay these scientists that are, for the most part, desperate to feed their families. I remember reading a card with a quote by a russian scientist basiclly sayin that, "What do I care that a country in the west would get attacked with a nuclear bomb? I have kids to feed, immediate problems that i have to fix now, and because these terrorists are offering me a solution, i'll take it."
Thus, on to my main point, policy actions such as CTBT or Disarm only affect the state of the "lawful" world. It does nothing to prevent what happens underneath the surface, in relation to rogue groups and terrorists. In fact, i believe that if someone wrote an aff on that, it would be highly successful because for the most part, it is true. It is hard fact. Outlaw organizations that do not submit to international law are the most dangerous ones out there and are quite capable of obtaining a nuclear weapon and detonating it.
IMO, that is the threat in the world today, and the most realistic.
Onto the subject of deterrance and morality. The moral kritik tied into the Disarm aff is a whole bunch of shit also =). First off, morals are something that is never constant, it is a social construct used to explain and personalize the idea of justice. however, "morality" for each person is different. That is why there is disagreement, and that is also why using morality as an argument is such a problem. Also, I have a Firebaud (or something) card that basiclly states that by forcing morals on someone through discourse such as the 1ac, one is commiting the worst evil in the world by snuffing out true freedom of ideas and beliefs and making others conform to such a standard. Cool counter-kritik to use =)
__________________
ni pour ni contre; ça m'est égal
"The weight of this sad time we must obey,/ Speak what we feel, not what we ought to say./ The oldest hath borne most; we that are young/ Shall never see so much, nor live so long."
King Lear (V.3.300-304)
|
05-31-2002 01:28 AM
. Im sure as hell not going to live into a nuclear blasted world ;)
)
