Developing countries should prioritize environmental protection over resource extraction.

I. PrefaceI want to clarify the definition of a resource. re·source a source of supply, support, or aid, especially one that can be readily drawn upon when needed.I have specifically provided this definition, due to what constitutes a resource was not stated by my opponent. Since it was not defined nor stated, we will assume that it is any resource, supply, support, or aid. In addition, it will obviously be assumed these resources can be extracted, therefore, the resolution most likely is referring to mining, oil, ect.I will be narrowing what I argue in this debate to 1 or 2 nations. The main conduit for my arguments will be through the country of Ethiopia, which I choose due to its direct history relating to this debate, and that I'm already knowledgable on green concerns over their. The audience should be aware, that if I can prove that at least one nation benefits more from resource extraction, then the entire BOP of my opponent is obliterated. Fortunately, I will also try to convey my messages on a international scale. II. New rules made in R2My opponent has made two new rules in R2, that I was not ready nor aware of, and these should be diregarded. If you have rules you want listed, you must do this in R1, which you specifically made an acceptance round. I hope you can respect this, and these are the following two rules which will not apply to our debate....1. Argument made where enviormental protection directly conflict with resource extraction2. Contentions (Only me), cannot be argued that hold both enviornmental and resource extraction equally.I am in opposition to both of these new rules, and the audience should not hold me by things stated after I accepted the debate. Please remember that when casting your vote.III. Water ProblemThere are a dozen African nations that have suffered serious droughts within the past decade. With droughts come crop shortages, or famine, and without food, everyone within the nation slowly starve. Including the middle class, who sustain the job creators, and slowly, you are left with a collapsed economy.These nations are completely desolate, and there is not enough food in the world to satisfy them all. Back in the 70's, their was a military junta called the Derg in Ethiopia. Suffering serious famines left most of the nation in serious pain. With a 10% literacy rate, and the majority of its citizens living in extreme poverty, it became the UN food bag of the world. Ethiopia has about 40 large river masses, but almost no irrigation. The Derg adopted a rapid industrialization policy that tore into the earth, forcing fast irrigation at low costs. Millions of lives were saved, and crop production soared, and while the nation was still hurt by the famine, in about 8 years, Ethiopia went from having a 10% literacy rate to a 63% one.Several other nations adopted this forced irrigation policy, and although it hurt the land, it uplifted millions into the middle class, and everyone else could survive on more than 30 grains of rice a day (Some people in Africa are lucky to get 10). Tell me that Africa should of sat their and watch the bodies pile up?IV/V. United Nations Millennium Goals vs United Nations International Poverty Benchmarks We all know the toll famine took on the world in the 70's. Let me explain the story of China, who was the only nation to achieve the UN international poverty benchmark, and they did it through prioritization of resource extraction over enviornmental protection. China, over a course of 20 years, lifted about 650 million people out of poverty. Do you know how they did this? They carved paths through rare earth deposits. They scorched land so it would grow back fertile. Many Chinese farmers began using intense pesticide formulas designed to kill swarms of bugs. This created a food, material, and population surplus. Not only does China have enough resources to build products itself, but it has millions of raw materials to ship to foreign manafacturers. It's clear how they did this. They took the earth for all it beared, and put that to use for the 650 million people making less than 1.25$ a day (Adjusted to USD).VI. Surplus of MoneyThe ultimate goal for every modern capitalist, is to make net profit on investments. Not small profits, Large profit margins. Ussually enough to create a surplus of money. You see, green technology isn't used much because it's expensive. That's right, green technology like windmills or clean earth boreholes can cost up to twice as much in both upkeep and expenses than their normal counterparts.The universal theory in economics is that one must spend money to make money. The same applies here. A nation can afford to be more green later, if it is less green now. Mining companies can't make a profit if their nations start telling them to double their upkeep costs. Nor can impovershed farmers buy food if they are forced to use the expensive fatigucides imported from Germany.Third world nations are to poor already, and its easy to just say they need to be more green, but when you really start weighing the costs on a macro scale, your presented with millions of problems. The BOP requires my opponent to respond to this point with much detail. If nations can become profitable, then we can consider new fancy solar panels, or draining wharves (Don't know their real name). VIII. ConclusionThe opposition has done nothing, besides stating all the benefits of being green. She has not told us all the details we need. How can nations afford it? Who's @ss do they need to kiss to get the resources. These are important questions, that have failed to be answered by her OP.Let's not insult the audience's intelligence. They already know the song and dance. Keep the world clean and preserved, and we'll be happy and beneficial in the long run! Yay! I would agree for a nation on the magnitude of the United States of France, but third world nations are "undeveloped" and for the most part, "untouched".We should not be opposed, and actually encourage, the beneficial exploitation of the resources that will allow them to become a more profitable and enviornmentally concious nation in the future.