Unilateral Military Force Con Speech

699 Words3 Pages
My partner and I disagree with the resolved: Unilateral military force by the United States is justified to prevent nuclear proliferation A few definitions to set the stage for the debate: Unilateral- a unilateral action or decision is done by only one of the groups involved in a situation. <http://www.ldoceonline.com/Government-topic/unilateral> Justified- Demonstrated or proven to be just, right, or valid. <http://www.answers.com/topic/justify> Prevent- to stop something from happening or someone from doing something. <http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/prevent> Nuclear proliferation- a term used to describe the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons-applicable nuclear technology and information, to nations which are not recognized as "Nuclear Weapon States" by the Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons, also known as the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty or NPT. < http://definitions.uslegal.com/n/nuclear-proliferation%20/> In order for the Pro to win this debate, unilateral military force by the United States must not only be proven to effectively prevent nuclear proliferation, but also be justified. Unilateral action on the part of the United States creates the very problems it claims to prevent, and places people in danger. Contention 1: Military force will create massive backlash United States Military Action Angers the World Foreign Policy analyst Murtaza Hussain best articulates this reality: “While the stories of American brutality in places such as Korea are unknown or ignored by the overwhelming majority of Americans, they are less quickly forgotten by the citizens of the countries which have suffered and continue to suffer horrific atrocities at the hands of US troops. Polls of regions such as Latin America have shown anti-American sentiment to be even more rife; a legacy of

More about Unilateral Military Force Con Speech

Open Document