I am preparing another affirmative (and negative arguments to go along with it) so that students can have debates about some new things in the second semester. I would like you to vote on one of the options presented and return the ballot to me before noon on Thursday December 22nd.The results will be announced by the end of the day on the 23rd and the argument will be posted to the Website by the 1st of the new year.

The new affirmative will be about Guantanomo bay and will say that the United States federal government should either charge the detainees at Gunatanomo or they should let them go.

Many of the same arguments about racial profiling and terrorism will still be part of the argument, but several new arguments such as international credibility will come into play as well. In addition to adding some variety to the debates I think this will also allow students to debate a case that is in the headlines more and see and research in_the_news stories about what it is they are debating. Furthermore the literature about this topic may be more accessible than the law review evidence we currently use.

The Vote is about whether novices should be able to debate this case, The JV students will be able to use it starting at the first tournament of 2006.

Voting Instructions: Rank the Choices 1,2,3,4 No ties, you can leave things blank, a 1 is worth 5 points, a 2 is worth 3, a 3 is worth 2, and a 2 is worth 1.

Option #1-_______ Novices in the second semester can use either the current Affirmative or the New Guantanomo Bay Affirmative. An evidence packet similar to the beastie will be distributed to all students.

Option #2-_______Novices will continue to be restricted to the current plan and the current evidence packet.

Option #3-_______ The Guantanamo bay argument can be used as an advantage to the current affirmative, but the current affirmative is still the only one allowed.

Option #4-______ Only The new Guantanomo Bay affirmative can be used by novices in the second semester.

Outline of the Guantanomo Bay argument

I. Harms-

• The united states is detaining enemy combatants at Guantanamo Bay without charging them with a crime.

• Detaining enemy Combatants without charge justifies racial profiling in the war on terror

• Detaining Enemy combatants without charge hurts American credibility in the war on terror

II. Inherency-

• The Courts have ruled that detainees at Guantanamo must be charged but have left it up to the defense department to decide when and right now it appears as if the defense department will neve charge any of the detainees.
 

Plan- The usfg should either charge or release the Guantanamo bay

detainees immediately.

III. Solvency-

• The US must send a clear signal that they will cooperate with the law in the war on terror

• If the detainees are guilty then charging them will legitimate the stance of the US

• If the US can increase its international credibility by fixing the problems at Guantanamo bay it will be easier to fight the war on terrorism because other nations will be more cooperative.