Sleeping with the enemy has a positive effect.

Greetings herr judges and much greeting to my opponent. Let us begin this battle of wits. I trust you will judge fairly and honestly. ======================================== Definition of "sleeping with the enemy"|| ======================================== http://www.wisegeek.com... "The phrase "sleeping with the enemy" is often used to describe a situation involving a non-adversarial relationship between two individuals or entities that would normally be unfriendly or adversarial. This frequently includes business deals between competitors, joint projects tackled by enemies, and political maneuverings that require the cooperation of competing parties. Sometimes, sleeping with the enemy involves cooperating just for the purpose of gaining inside information or the upper hand in a competitive situation. In other situations, however, opposing parties may actually work together for the good of a common goal." ================================ Why CON cannot win this debate"| ================================ Unfortunately, this is a debate which my opponent literally cannot win as the resolution contains a single flaw that works in my favor; the resolution quite clearly states that "X" has a positive effect. Take notice of the article "a." In other words, this resolution isn't discussing what is on balance or anything of the sort, rather, it is only demanding that I prove that there is A positive effect to sleeping with the enemy. It is the contenders job to prove that there is/are no positive effect/s to sleeping with the enemy. This is indeed a tremendous burden, but such is the nature of this resolution. Basically, as long as you buy at least "one" of the positive effects which I point out, I win this debate. ================================================ What good can come from sleeping with the enemy?| ================================================ The good that comes from "sleeping with the enemy" is a no brainier. Working together, joining forces, becoming comrades (you name it!) promotes an opportunity for peace. And the opportunity to promote peace is indeed positive as we must keep in mind that peace is the destroyer of conflict (which is negative). Not only that, but in sleeping with the enemy, assets are increased and the enemies who are now working together can get far more accomplished than they could alone. Also, any of the positive effects implied by my source works too. Now, whether or not there are any negative effects is completely besides the point, because the point is to demonstrate whether or not there is a positive. For instance, one can argue that there were many negative effects from the atomic bomb being sent down to Hiroshima, but one cannot deny that there was at least one positive effect to come from this occurrence (which was the end of World War II). In other words, I can at any point acknowledge negative effectives while affirming my stance. Thus, if my opponent admits to there being positive effects (or an effect), but contends that there are negative effects, you are to dismiss his case altogether. ====================== Preemptive strike | ====================== Usually, I wouldn't do this so early in the round and would just wait for my opponent to use the arguments I know he/she most likely intends to use, however, I not only have the space to do so, but will get more of an opportunity to argue against these points. Plus, less room for CON to maneuver. If CON doesn't bring this up, you're free to dismiss this contention. He will probably come back and argue that he can win this debate by listing more than one positive effect as the resolution only refers to "A" positive effect. This would be conceding to the resolution. Allow me to demonstrate with an example: Lets say someone asks you if you have a dollar and you happen to have 9 dollars. Now, in response, would you say "Well no, I don't have a dollar." Colloquially, you would do no such thing. Rather, you'd respond in saying "Yes." This is because you DO have a dollar. In addition to a dollar, you have multiple amounts of dollars. Thus, unless the resolution were to say "There is ONLY a single positive effect", my rendering of it is quite valid. And that's all for now.