Resolved: Economic sanctions ought not be used to achieve foreign policy objectives

Thanking my opponent for joining me in this debate, I will continue in the cross-examination. "how would you define diplomatic goals? " Diplomatic goals are, put simply, the aim in question of a purported system of action. For example, the wish for an establishment of closer relations with China could be referred to as a "diplomatic goal. " Likewise, the wish for control over a particular country's actions, such as military actions, is also such a goal; albeit one too often wrongly solved with the imposition of sanctions. "clarify your premise and criteris in short? " I apologize if I was not succinct in my opening. In short, I value a. ) how well a policy achieves what it sets out to do and b. ) how many people are positively/negatively affected through this. My premise is to show how sanctions fit neither of these criteria. "define diplomatic action:" I do not completely understand the need for such definitions as "diplomatic action" or "diplomatic" goals"; however, I will comply. A diplomatic action can be either be depicted as a political move to achieve a diplomatic goal or, as I explained in my case, one such that focuses entirely on peaceful methods based on diplomacy to achieve goals, one that I have showed to be superior to sanctions in certain cases. "define the term siege in short:" Siege: a blockade, whether militaristic or economical, of a city or fortified place to compel. it to surrender. Though sanctions are not a literal "siege" with the accompaniment of catapults, they have much of the same and, may I add, desired, effect on the inhabitants of the targeted nation. "are you trying to say that you think sanctions are pretty much going into a country and killing everyone? " I understand the interpretation behind this claim; however, I have not given it support in my case. I simply said that sanctions can cause immense damages to innocents, a fact that is undeniably undesirable in most any situation. Sanctions are not genocidal in nature; however, they have immense destructive potential that is often applied- noting more, nothing less. "how are people effected by sanctions? " I believe I have already mentioned this, so I will simply refer my opponent to a further read-through of my case. However, if necessary, I will supply further information. Joseph Galvin, using the case of Panama, says "The indiscriminate distribution of the economic costs of sanctions is another factor that limits their effectiveness. In target countries any economic costs inflicted may fall on the elements of the population that the sanctions are designed to support; that is the case in South Africa where diminished U. S. business presence brings hardships and loss of economic opportunity to former black employees and other blacks who benefited from programs sponsored by those companies. U. S. sanctions reportedly have severely damaged the economic welfare of Panamanians, and there are some reports that the resulting economic hardships are turning Panamanians against the United States, even though popular support for Noriega apparently remains low. " "please source your definition of ought:" Though I have paraphrased, the original source can be seen at . http://www.merriam-webster.com...