War in Afghanistan

I'd like to begin by pointing out that Con is in fact lying; he most definitely did take all of his arguments from the site that I mentioned. Because he did not present one original argument, nor did he cite the source of the place he stole the arguments from, he therefore has plagiarized his R1 arguments and it should be noted at least as far as conduct points goes in this debate. That said, I'd also like to note that Con has dropped several points that I made in the last round. For the purpose of clarity, I put all of the arguments in numerical form so as to be sure that none of them were dropped. I'm going to point out which arguments Con completely failed to address my keeping up with the same numerical pattern. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1. Regarding the casualties of war, Con posits that even one death over a "false war" is a crime. However, it is not a false war that we're fighting in Afghanistan. Let it be known that we're not at war with Afghanistan itself. We are engaged in a war with the Taliban who have taken over the region. The Taliban has attacked us, and now we're going after them. The war is IN Afghanistan but not WITH Afghanistan (to clarify). Therefore the casualties of war are indeed sad, but as I said, there are casualties in every war. They waged an attack on us, and we're fighting back just as people do in every war. This is really moot point. 2. Con points out that Bush accused al Qaeda of having WMDs. This is FALSE [1]. Bush accused Saddam Hussein in IRAQ of having WMDs; in order to gain support to infiltrate Iraq in search of these WMDs, Bush attempted to link Saddam to al Qaeda. However, this turned out to be irrelevant as Iraq had no WMDs. 3. Con has dropped my 3rd bullet regarding corruption in Afghanistan; however he addresses this reality when talking about the president and the type of elections that they have over there. I will address that when we get to the accompanying bullet for that argument (number 6). 4. Con has dropped m 4th argument: we shouldn't trust the Taliban agreements. 5. Con has dropped my 5th argument: leaving Iraq would help us win the war in Afghanistan. 6. While Con makes a good point that corruption is hard to get rid of in Afghanistan, he fails to provide a better solution. Should we just back down and let these corrupt people seize control of the government?! No, doing so would have even worse results and impacts on America. Instead, we should try to eliminate the corruption any way that we can. If they threaten to shoot, then we should shoot back. After all, violence seems to be the only solution that these people will respond to. Of course we should also seek to use non-violent means in the form of monetary agreements and incentives via treaties, threats, etc. first. 7. Con dropped my 7th argument: I asked about our alliances and why we should leave Afghanistan to Taliban control. 8. Con dropped my 8th argument: regarding countries like Iran and Pakistan being launching pads for terrorism. 9. Con dropped my 9th argument: the war in Afghanistan and its economic effects in the U.S. 10. Con dropped my 10th argument: regarding Taliban recruitment in Afghanistan. So as you can see, Con has not addressed or refuted many of my arguments, though he promises to in the final round. I'd like for Con to go back and acknowledge each separate argument and point that I made individually in numeral order, so as to ensure to try and combat all of my points. For now, I'll respond to Con's new argument as well: Con says that we can't win a war in which our enemies use guerrilla warfare. However, there have been several books and strategies which have been written detailing how you can win such a war. One of them notes, "The successful practice of guerrilla warfare requires an intricate knowledge of the opponent's structure whether military, governmental, commercial, economic, or political" [2]. As such, we can assume that if we keep our intelligence secret and the Taliban unaware of what we have up our sleeves, etc., then they will not be able to successfully beat us in that way. Further, it is almost universally agreed upon that the way to win such a war is to establish a non-corrupt government to challenge the terrorist resistence [3]. So, there is actually a way to win this war. Back to Con for now. [1] http://www.commondreams.org... [2] http://calldp.leavenworth.army.mil... [3] http://www.washingtonpost.com...