Current LD topic

I affirm: The United States is justified in using private military firms abroad to pursue its military objectives First, the definition of justified according to princeton.net is to "show to be reasonable or provide adequate ground for" Second, the resolution by the statement to pursue its military objectives implies that it is a means to do so, but that doesnt mean the U.S. will not pursue those objectives with a negation. The value for the round is GLOBAL STABILITY: 1. The US is within the context of a global society. As such, we cannot separate the policy actions of the U.S. from the overarching impacts that are created. 2. All values are dependent on global stability. his is true because morality and justice cannot be exercised to the greatest extent if the environment in which it is being applied is unstable. 3. Global stability has the greatest link to any impact calculus, especially in terms of magnitude on the fact that the impacts being analyzed would be affecting the entire global community. 4. Reasonability, as implied by the resolution has to be weighed somehow. Global stability gives the largest encompassing weighing mechanism in the round since it is observable and weigh-able as opposed to other competing values like justice and morality. 5. The exercise of rights can only be maximized via a stable environment. If global stability is not maintained, the right to exercise ones rights would be impeded on a massive level. E.g. because of the war on terror, the patriot act was implemented The criterion for global stability is: MAINTAINING US HEGEMONY Kagan ’11 The Price of Power The benefits of U.S. defense spending far outweigh the costs Jan 24, 2011, Vol. 16, No. 18 Terrorists constantly search for safe havensto and carry out attacks. American military actions make it harder to strike and are why for a decade there has been no repetition of September 11. To the degree we limit our ability to deny them haven, we increase chances they will succeed. • American forces have for decades prevented the outbreak of major war, provided stability, and kept open international trading routes, making possible an unprecedented era of growth and prosperity.A nuclear-armed North Korea threatens war with South Korea and fires ballistic missiles over Japan someday capable of reaching Nations turn to Washington for reassurance If the U S cannot provide that assurance they will have to choose building nuclear weapons. In the Middle East, Iran seeks to build its nuclear arsenal, prospects of new instability in the region grow every day as a decrepit regime in Egypt clings to power, A nuclear-armed Pakistan seems to be ever on the brink of collapse. Prospect of war between Hezbollah and Israel grows, with it the possibility of war between Israel and Syria and Iran. Nations in the region increasingly look to Washington for reassurance, and if they decide the United States cannot be relied upon they will succumb to Iranian influence or build their own nuclear weapons offshore balancing it had led to great, destructive wars in the past and would likely do so again. Their new global strategy was more likely to deter major war and therefore be less destructive and less expensive in the long run. . Contention 1: PMFs are necessary to maintain US hegemony A) Military Readiness. Rakowsky 2006 Kateryna, J.D. Candidate, Experts recognize thatwithout contractors, our military simply cannot project itssuperiority abroad." The Pentagon estimates that there are approximately 20,000 civilians working in Iraq, "driving trucks, serving food and conducting other duties." Yet experts place figures at closer to 80,000 to 100,000, once security personnel are taken into account. (PBS) , observes that military contractors employ up to 155,000 individuals in Iraq, including those hired to handle support/logistics, security, and reconstruction efforts. Allison Stanger and Mark Eric Williams, “Private Military Corporations: Benefits and Costs of Outsourcing Security,” Outsourcing permitted the United States to allocate military resources more efficiently, thereby enhancing the military’s overall agility. Washington could have implemented its Andean counternarcotics policy without DynCorp or MPRI simply by deploying U.S. special forces By contrast, employing PMCs enabled Washington to implement its Andean policy without undermining America’s own military readiness by placing a larger reservoir of talent at Washington’s disposal without straining its all-volunteer force. B) Air Power. Michael Rich; John Birkler; Mark Lorell. ―Defense Industry Goliaths, RAND Corporation. August 2003. Today only three American companies—Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Grumman—are capable of leading the design of a manned military aircraft, and major contracts for which they can compete will emerge only once every other decade or so. For perhaps the first time the U.S. military is relying on only one prime contractor to design and build its new tactical fighters: Lockheed Martin, an amalgamation of more than a dozen former major aerospace companies, is developing the F-22 and the F-35. AND this is key to heg Hazdra ‘01 (Richard, Major – USAF, Air Mobility: The Key to United States National Security Strategy, Fairchild Paper, August, http://aupress.au.af.mil...) Air mobility is a form of airpower that should be exploited to its fullest because of the positive political gains from noncombat operations, deterrence, and combat when necessary. However, steady-state operations in support of the NSS have created an unprecedented use of AMC forces and resources that are currently targeted for wartime use. The United States is likely to continue a policy of intervention. The concept of rapid global mobility has become the means to achieve military intervention and, as such, has become the backbone of both military and peacetime operations. The force structure of AMC is straining to execute these steady-state operations. Further growth in these operations is beyond the capability of AMC's current force structure. Meilinger ‘03 (Philip S., Retired Air Force Colonel and Dir SAIC, Air and Space Power Journal, 3-10, http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil...) The reason for this emphasis on air and space power among our soldiers, sailors, and marines is their realization that military operations have little likelihood of success without it. It has become the American way of war. air and space power increasingly has become our primary joint weapon. Air and space dominance also provides our civilian leadership with flexibility. Air and space power permits new types of strategies that make war on things rather than on people and that employ things rather than people. This is America's strength- one that we must ensure.