Introduction The purpose of this is to highlight that in order for the affirmative to increase space cooperation with Chinahe plan must overturn what is called the Wolf Amendment. The Wolf Amendment states that no funds may be spent by NASA or OSTP, (Office of Science and Technology Policy) to "develop, design, plan, promulgate, implement or execute a bilateral policy, program, order or contract of any kind to participate, collaborate or coordinate bilaterally in any way with China or any Chinese-owned company unless such activities are specifically authorized by law after the date of enactment of this act. The story of the DA says that removing the Wolf Amendment allows China access to U.S. space information allow China to accelerate its military challenging U.S. primacy around the – world (aka U.S. Leadership) A multipolar (multiple countries competing for who is the dominant country in the world) risk . a unipolar world only country how other countries act. There is a distinction here, smaller conflicts like civil wars could still occurbut a unipolar worldthose conflicts are less likely to spiral out of control. The affirmative can make several answers 1. The Wolf Amendment is failing now—this argument says that the Wolf amendment fails at from accessing information. 2. China steals from the U.S. now—this argument is a bigger push on the link by saying China is already stealing now, that means China should have already stolen the information it needs. 3. No impact—Hegemony/U.S. Leadership is not key to peace. The argument here is that analysts have done studies of peace and U.S. Leadership and have found no correlation between the two. Added for additional help is a better template on how negative and affirmative teams should interact with help improve clash and argumentation. each other’s arguments. This will hopefully
Introduction The purpose of this is to highlight that in order for the affirmative to increase space cooperation with Chinahe plan must overturn what is called the Wolf Amendment. The Wolf Amendment states that no funds may be spent by NASA or OSTP, (Office of Science and Technology Policy) to "develop, design, plan, promulgate, implement or execute a bilateral policy, program, order or contract of any kind to participate, collaborate or coordinate bilaterally in any way with China or any Chinese-owned company unless such activities are specifically authorized by law after the date of enactment of this act. The story of the DA says that removing the Wolf Amendment allows China access to U.S. space information allow China to accelerate its military – challenging U.S. primacy around the world (aka U.S. Leadership) A multipolar (multiple countries competing for who is the dominant country in the world) risk . a unipolar world only country how other countries act. There is a distinction here, smaller conflicts like civil wars could still occurbut a unipolar worldthose conflicts are less likely to spiral out of control. The affirmative can make several answers 1. The Wolf Amendment is failing now—this argument says that the Wolf amendment fails at from accessing information. 2. China steals from the U.S. now—this argument is a bigger push on the link by saying China is already stealing now, that means China should have already stolen the information it needs. 3. No impact—Hegemony/U.S. Leadership is not key to peace. The argument here is that analysts have done studies of peace and U.S. Leadership and have found no correlation between the two. Added for additional help is a better template on how negative and affirmative teams should interact with each other’s arguments. This will hopefully help improve clash and argumentation.
Espionage-DA-2016-2017.docx