President Obama's plan for increasing troops in Afghanistan is best for the United States

Thank you I will first refute my opponent's arguments then I will continue to build my own. ===== ProC1, Rebuttal: Because there are only 100 Al-Qaeda reported remaining, 30,000 additional troops are unnecessary. Gen. McChrystal wrote in more than half of his 66 page letter that we needed the men to fight off and control the insurgencies. However, my opponent just stated that the additional 30,000 troops are NOT going to be used to rid Afghan of these said insurgencies, but that they will be establishing the government and strengthening the boarders. If this were the case, why would Gen. McChrystal (who is stationed in Afgan) report the need of 40,000 troops to rid the country of Afghanistan of these insurgencies? Yes it is necessary to strengthen the Afghan government so that the Al-qaeda and Taliban forces do not have a nesting area to take over and gain control in. BUT, when we have already contributed about 71,000 troops, we should not need to send 30,000 more. We should demand more help from our other allies so that we not are continuing to waste OUR money, men, and time. ProC2, Rebuttal: My first rebuttal also stands for my second yet again. Also, yes we are getting very little help from very few allies in a war that is not ours. Like i said, it is not really even our war. Why are we obligated to take complete control in strengthening the Afghan government and preventing insurgency growth or intrusion? Because we are doing this mostly for the sake of Israel and Afganistan, our other allies should take more initiative. WE ARE NOT THE GLOBAL POLICE, and because of this, we should not have the full responsibility and obligation of the task in Afghan. Because we practically do, and the ratio of benefit isn't equivalent, this is not in the best interest of the United States. ===== ConC1, We don't have the tools to continue a war in Afghanistan: Okay, so we have water. However we do not have the money. We are indeed getting all the essentials necessary to continue this "war," however in doing so. our country is doing farther and farther in debt. For a war that is not directly benefitting us, further debt is not worth it. Continuing a war that creates this additional debt is not in our country's best interest, especially when it will not directly benefit us and could ultimately fail completely. ConC2, This country is by the people, for the people: My opponent stated "At this point...*stats*" My opponent failed to point out that "at this point" was prior to the new year, and prior the "war tax" initiation. David Obey from CNN said "..when war taxation begins, and the general citizens of the U.S. discover the realities of this never ending war, poilitians need to be ready to put up a fight.." Newsy generally stated that it is not America's citizen's responsibility to pay for a war that is not their fault or problem or choice. Families of the soldiers being sent off do not approve of the war either. These families know firsthand that an unnecessary abundanace of men are being sent off for a war that is primarily benefitting two other countries before our own. ConC3, Terrorists are different form militaries: My opponents has a circular argument concluding that our efforts must have helped; however, this is an illogical fallacy. What proves that it was us that brought the count down? The terrorist groups could have dispearsed on their own and scattered to attack other weak countries. We need to handle the remaining insurgencies and build the Afghan government by using policing and intelligence so that we do not end up like the Soviets. In late 1986 Soviet armed forces commander, Marshal Sergei Akhromeev, told then-Soviet General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev, "Military actions in Afghanistan will soon be seven years old. There is no single piece of land in this country which has not been occupied by a Soviet soldier. Nonetheless, the majority of the territory remains in the hands of rebels." Soon Gorbachev began the Soviet withdrawal from its Afghan misadventure. Thousands were dead on both sides, yet the occupation failed to produce a stable national Afghan government. ConC4, Terrorist Attacks still happen: The fact that terrorist attacks are still happening in the U.S. proves that no matter how much control we attempt to have on Middle Eastern countries, there will always be rebels and haters ready to initiate riot and attack. Also, we do not have the upper hand that we wish, even within those Middle Eastern countries: 2008 May 26, Iraq: a suicide bomber on a motorcycle kills six U.S. soldiers and wounds 18 others in Tarmiya. June 24, Iraq: a suicide bomber kills at least 20 people, including three U.S. Marines, at a meeting between sheiks and Americans in Karmah, a town west of Baghdad. June 12, Afghanistan: four American servicemen are killed when a roadside bomb explodes near a U.S. military vehicle in Farah Province. July 13, Afghanistan: nine U.S.soldiers and at least 15 NATO troops die when Taliban militants boldly attack an American base in Kunar Province, which borders Pakistan. It's the most deadly against U.S. troops in three years. Aug. 18 and 19, Afghanistan: as many as 15 suicide bombers backed by about 30 militants attack a U.S. military base, Camp Salerno, in Bamiyan. Fighting between U.S. troops and members of the Taliban rages overnight. No U.S. troops are killed. Sept. 16, Yemen: a car bomb and a rocket strike the U.S. embassy in Yemen as staff arrived to work, killing 16 people, including 4 civilians. At least 25 suspected al-Qaeda militants are arrested for the attack. Nov. 26, India: in a series of attacks on several of Mumbai's landmarks and commercial hubs that are popular with Americans and other foreign tourists, including at least two five-star hotels, a hospital, a train station, and a cinema. About 300 people are wounded and nearly 190 people die, including at least 5 Americans. 2009 Feb. 9, Iraq: A suicide bomber kills four American soldiers and their Iraqi translator near a police checkpoint. April 10, Iraq: :A suicide attack kills five American soldiers and two Iraqi policemen. ===== Summary: First, my opponent actually never proved that we have the money to continue this war. Also, I never stated that we were in the war ONLY to prevent insurgencies, I simply stated that the General requested more troops specifically to prevent the insurgencies. I have proved that we do not have the money for this war, and in tern, our country is paying for it. We have sent too many soldiers for the small job remaining. Therefore we are indeed wasting time, men, and money. Terrorist attacks will always happen despite our efforts in Afghan. It is not our responsibility to be the global cops and therefore we should not take such a huge role in this war that is not benefitting us. I have proved how this war and sending 30,000 additional troops is NOT in the United States best interest. Thank you. Sources (for entire debate): U.S.constitution.org CapeCod Times CNN FreedomMedium.com InfoPlease.com Newsy.com HuffingtonPost.com ObamaAdmin.com NY Times I thank my opponent for accepting this debate. I strongly urge a vote in favor of the negation to this resolution.