A2 Civilian Casualties Civilian casualities will be limited Matthew Kroenig (professor of Government at Georgetown University and a Stanton Nuclear Security Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations) February 2012 Foreign Affairs, http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/136917/matthew-kroenig/time-to-attack-iran Washington would be able to limit civilian casualties Iran built its most critical also in any campaign. nuclear plants, such as the one in Natanz, away from heavily populated areas. For those less important facilities U.S. precision-guided that exist near civilian centers, such as the centrifuge-manufacturing sites, missiles could pinpoint specific buildings while leaving their surroundings unscathed. The United States could reduce collateral damage further by striking at night or leaving less the even simply those important plants at little cost to overall success off its target list the of the mission. Although Iran would undoubtedly the majority of the victims would be military publicize any human suffering in the wake of a military action, the personnel, engineers, scientists, and technicians working at the facilities The alternative to strikes is prolif or strikes later, comparatively worse options ‘07 (Louis Rene, professor @ the University of Purdue, May 8, pg. http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20070508/cm_csm/yberes) Due to delays, the success of strikes A more important reservation about preemption involves tactical difficulties. against certain key Iranian targets may already be in doubt. Worse, such strikes would probably entail high civilian casualties because Iran has deliberately placed military assets amid civilian populations an international crime called "perfidy." But further delay – will only multiply the number of casualties from any future operation, or in the worst-case scenario – – allow Iran to become fully nuclear.
A2 Civilian Casualties Civilian casualities will be limited Matthew Kroenig (professor of Government at Georgetown University and a Stanton Nuclear Security Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations) February 2012 Foreign Affairs, http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/136917/matthew-kroenig/time-to-attack-iran Washington would also be able to limit civilian casualties in any campaign. Iran built its most critical nuclear plants, such as the one in Natanz, away from heavily populated areas. For those less important facilities that exist near civilian centers, such as the centrifuge-manufacturing sites, U.S. precision-guided missiles could pinpoint specific buildings while leaving their surroundings unscathed. The United States could reduce the collateral damage even further by striking at night or simply leaving those less important plants off its target list at little cost to the overall success of the mission. Although Iran would undoubtedly publicize any human suffering in the wake of a military action, the majority of the victims would be the military personnel, engineers, scientists, and technicians working at the facilities The alternative to strikes is prolif or strikes later, comparatively worse options ‘07 (Louis Rene, professor @ the University of Purdue, May 8, pg. http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20070508/cm_csm/yberes) A more important reservation about preemption involves tactical difficulties. Due to delays, the success of strikes against certain key Iranian targets may already be in doubt. Worse, such strikes would probably entail high civilian casualties because Iran has deliberately placed military assets amid civilian populations – an international crime called "perfidy." But further delay will only multiply the number of casualties from any future operation, or – in the worst-case scenario – allow Iran to become fully nuclear.
MGW12___Elections___Obama_Bad_UNT_2012.docx