Resolved: The United States Ought Not to Provide Military Aid to Authoritarian Regimes

I begin my speech with rebuttals: My opponent speaks of forcibly pushing authoritarian regimes toward democracy. This, However, Is completely insensible, As this would violate our treaty in NATO. As NATO offered the Marshall plan {1}, Which in simplistic terms, Stated that we won't forcibly take Communism out of current Communist countries. However, We would contain the current Communist countries and keep the spread of Communism contained (however, The debate of the Cold War is a whole other can of worms). As NATO applies these same concepts in current issues, And we are still in NATO, We shouldn't take into account that we should force Dictators out of their country, Merely keep the current ones in containment and influence them as the world Hegemonic power {2}. As for training troops, I argue that training these troops and giving arms to the countries would be Morally CORRECT! As I stated in the Contention 2: stabilizing the country is the first step to Democracy. By democratizing countries, There is a less chance they will do morally questionable actions, And would lead to a more democratized America. A more democratized America should be valued over my opponent's attack, Because this will lead to more, Well, Democratized and stable nations. Isn't that what we all want? A stable, Peaceful world with less dictators and more representative leaders prepared to make the right decisions? If you don't want the idea of a peaceful nation in mind voters, Vote against me and vote Affirmative (Pro). Next, I will talk of my opponent speaking of how my Terrorism DA is non sequitur, However, This isn't true. Take this example in mind: You are North Korea, And you (North Korea) have recently engineered ICBM's (Inter-Continental Ballistic Missiles) capable of reaching America. However, You do not want to attack America (me) because I have better forces and do not feel prepared for war. However, I have recently lost troops because I don't have political power. Would it not be the perfect opportunity to attack if I look weak and have my back turned? If you had the opportunity to attack while I was unguarded, You would take every chance to attack! Weaken my forces so war becomes strategically in YOUR favor! Attacking me would be in your favor now, And this is what losing Bahrain would look like to terrorists. And this is the reason why 9/11 was a true catastrophe. We were unprepared for an attack, Had so many miscommunications and had many problems face us during the attack. This was the problem behind the catastrophe, And this is exactly what could happen if the Affirmative is given the vote in today's debate. Would you, The voter, Want another 9/11? Would you, The voter, Want countless lives lost, And families torn apart? Yes, There is retaliation, But the damage has been done. People will be scarred for life, And others will never come back. This is what happens assuming my opponent is voted in today's resolution. Next, Comes the attacks One, My opponent tells us that no amount of money or strategic landmark and no body of water is worth helping corrupt regimes. However, I can prove today that it IS good to help these regimes. 1. It stabilizes the region, Leaving the country more open to democracy. 2. It gives a strategic landmark to attack Terrorists. It would be inefficient to attack a terrorist group in the Middle East if we live halfway across the world from them. 3. I don't care as much about the landmarks and the money, I care about the people. We can prevent another terrorist attack if we help these regimes! Not only can we save our people, But theirs as well. I shall give another Example: Keep in mind it is hypothetical, So Iran is not obviously the only example and most likely not the best. . . Assume you live in Iran. Terrorists attack your city, But the only forces capable of preventing the forceful takeover of the attack is American Troops and Iranian troops supplied by Americans. The Americans stop supplying your troops and leave. Now, Iranian troops are inefficient and can not provide defense for you anymore. Lives in your town are taken and you are taken hostage with your town to negotiate for money. Even if U. S. Retalitates, You can not bring back the lives taken. My opponent says that we don't help regimes for a good cause, But we do. By aiding these regimes [militarily], We save the native country we occupy and save their lives, And for these reasons, I stand firm over my opponent in the debate.