Resolved: That the United States should intervene in another nation's struggle for democracy.

==Answers he gave==1. Save money--> As Ive said mltiple times he doesnt give a reason why spending money his bad. He lacks an impact. Moreover, he doesnt give a tradeoff argument, i.e. use X money for Y. --> His analysis of Iraq and Afghanistan is weak. First, Iraq is for the most part secure. This is why Obama is now focusing his attention to Afgahnistan. Second, our mission will asically be complete when we rout Al Qaeda out of the FATA region. --> He doesnt tell you why he outweighs. Ill explain laterwhy I do.2. Polceman Analogy--> The US leaving the world stage is very different than a policeman dying. The word is unipolar atm. His example would make sense if there was one police station and everyone got slaughtered and no one else could take up the role as efficiently. 3. Iraq and Afgahnistan want us out--> This doesnt answer my question. However, it is imortant to note that US withdrawral from the Middle East will result in horendous scenarios, e.g. Iran gaining regional hegemony. TURN: this turns his implied econ argument. Iranaian dominance in the middl east will result in the stoppage of oil shipments and production which willl cripple the US economy.--> The afghans and Iraqis dont want us out. The onyly plausible argument is that they want PMFs removed, but that doesnt men the US in general.4. Diplomacy solves Iran--> If this is true than how come there program hasnt been majorly hindered? --> Tightening the embargo doesnt solve because IRan has the implicit consent of Russia and China,5. Search and destroy solves--> And what do you do when they have safe haven within other nations? Ascan be seen from the Osama Bin Laden killing, Pakistan has claimed violation of national soverignty--> To actually sp terrorist groups from functioning, allies are needed to prevent safe havens. TURN: Democracy solves since it gives the US an ideological ally in the Middle East.6. Yes, when country asks--> You can vote Pro. He has admitted that the US can intervene when asked. Even though this is a condition, it is a very loose condition which affirms. E.g. the libyan rebels had asked for US and NATO support.7. Depends--> I would like my opponent to give an example of a good and desirable autocracy. If he cannot, prefer democracy as the best form of government. ==His 2nd Speech==Opp C2He says that my argument about democracy isnt warranted.--> Refer to my last rebuttal. I clearly state democracy helps to promote economic development and education reform. These are two clear warrants. My argument is that terrorism is the result of an uneducated and desperate populous. As I mentioned, you dont see major terrorist groups coming out of the the US and BritianRed Scare--> TURN: The Marshall plan prevented the spread of communism in Europe. This can be seen that countries which were not forcefully taken over the USSR stayed democracies. How does democracy eliminate economic hardship?--> Just compare the GDP of the majority of democratic countries to autocracies. That should tell you right there.--> The analytic however is that: 1) Democracies promote free trade, 2) Democracies promote free market, 3) Democracies promote equity The US has xenophobia and religious intolerance too--> This is the worst argument of "he did it too".The US does not promote religious intolerance as an insitution of governental action. We are granted the right to religion. Autocracies dont have this however, which fuels extremist and terrorist activity since there is no other recourseMy C3He says hegemony is imperialism--> Um no. Hegemony refers to the extent of power a nation can wield, economically, militarilly and diplomatically. Impeialism refers to a country taking over another system. --> He drops the impacts. Extend them. US hegemony is necessary to solve terrorim, instability and nuclear proliferation. This will outweigh any Con arguments because 1) a threat of a nuclear terror srike needs to be evaluated as first priority because it directly affects the lives of American citizens and the very economic thread of the US. 2) These problematic scenarios are likely because if the US withdraws from the Middle Eastern stage, that area will become apolar with Iran as the regional dominance. Opp C3He brings up inflation, global recessions, add to the debt--> No impact as Ive said multiple times--> The debt wont harm us unless we are dropped as the world's reserve currency--> Plans are already being put into affect which will drastically alter the debt, e.g. the Ryan Plan. Most of these plans dont cut military and aid all that much. The debt can thus be solved otherwiseMiscellanious Arguments1. The US might fail in promoting democracy--> He needs to weigh this. Dont accept it as true until he tells you why its ultra important--> We probably will succeed since we are the worlds hegemon. 2. Karzai--> Since he is dependent on the US for support, any major transgressions will result in him being removed from power. Also, economically Afgahnistan has benefited due to US modernization, free market and free trade. 3. Free Trade --> His argument again never responds to the Olson evidence. Olson tells you that it is analytically and empirically true that democracies promote free trade anbd free market much more than autocracies. Unless he can actually respond to he evidence, ignore this argument--> This solves an econ impact he might be going for with the debt. As long as free trade is being promoted, the US benefits economcally.