Tournament: 1AC | Round: 1 | Opponent: All negative teams thus far | Judge:
WE BEGIN WITH CONTENTION ONE: DIVIDED WE FALL
THE CUBAN EMBARGO HAS STIFLED DEMOCRATIC GROWTH AND KEPT THE CASTRO REGIME IN POWER, ALLOWING FOR HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES UNDER THEIR RULE. DOUG BANDOW, A SENIOR FELLOW AT THE CATO INSTITUTE DETAILS IN DECEMBER 2012 THAT
Doug Bandow, senior fellow at the Cato Institute and the author of a number of books on economics and politics. He writes regularly on military non-interventionism, “Time to End the Cuba Embargo,” December 11, 2012. http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/the-pointless-cuba-embargo-7834
During the Cold War, Cuba offered a potential advanced military outpost for the Soviet Union.
.......
One of the best definitions of insanity is continuing to do the same thing while expecting to achieve different results.
?
THE EMBARGO’S PURPOSE IS TO DEGRADE THE PEOPLE OF CUBA. DR LOUIS PEREZ, PROFESSOR OF HISTORY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA, EXPLAINS IN 2010 THAT
Dr. Louis A. Perez Jr., the J. Carlyle Sitterson professor of history and the director of the Institute for the Study of the Americas at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Want change in Cuba? End U.S. embargo, September 21, 2010, http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/09/20/perez.cuba.embargo/index.html
Fine words.....(Cuba has one of the highest suicide rates in the world; in 2000, the latest year for which we have statistics, it was 16.4 per 100,000 people.)
THE RAMIFICATIONS OF THIS POLICY ISOLATE CUBA FROM THE INTERNATIONAL GLOBAL ECONOMY, ALL THE WHILE PERPETUATING HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES. DOCTOR ALBERTO COLL DEATAILS IN 2007 THAT
Dr. Alberto R. Coll, duel PH. D. and JD from the university of Virginia, Professor of Law and President of International Human Rights Law Institute at DePaul College of Law, formerly of Georgetown University’s department of international relations, Harming Human Rights in the Name of Promoting Them: The Case of the Cuban Embargo, 2007, UCLA Journal of International Law and Foreign Affairs, Fall, 12 UCLA J. Int'l L. and For. Aff. 199
The Cuban embargo is not a limited set of economic sanctions affecting a few carefully targeted areas....Thus, though the embargo is now promoted as a means of improving human rights, the embargo has had the opposite effect of harming human rights.
AND DENIAL OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE FACE SURVIVAL SUBVERTS THE VALUE TO LIFE. DR. DANIEL CALLAHAN EXPLAINS IN HIS 1973 BOOK
Daniel Callahan, Co-founder and former director of The Hastings Institute, PhD in philosophy from Harvard University,“The Tyranny of Survival” 1973, p 91-93
There seems to be no imaginable...they succeeded in not doing so.
CONTENTION TWO: PRIDE COMES BEFORE THE FALL
NINE ADMINISTRATIONS AFTER THE EMBARGO WAS ENACTED, THE UNITED STATES REMAINS COMMITTED TO ITS FAILED POLICY. PROFESSOR SILVIA AYUSO DETAILS IN 2012 THAT
Silvia Ayuso, professor at the University of Navarra IESE Business School, “ANALYSIS: Lifting Cuba's embargo, a domestic taboo for the US”, 5 Feb 2012 http://article.wn.com/view/2012/02/05/ANALYSIS_Lifting_Cubas_embargo_a_domestic_taboo_for_the_US/#/related_news
Half a century and nine US presidents later...'But ending the embargo is not in the near term.'
AND THE UNITED STATES HAS FURTHER ISOLATED ITSELF FROM THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITIES’ CRIES TO END THE EMBARGO. CAROL J. WILLIAMS, FOREIGN CORRESPONDANT FOR THE LA TIMES, WRITES IN 2012
Carol J. Williams, Los Angeles Times international affairs writer. Former foreign correspondent, 25 years covering Europe, Latin America, Asia and the Middle East., Widely condemned U.S. policy on Cuba unlikely to change soon, 11/16/12, http://articles.latimes.com/2012/nov/16/world/la-fg-wn-us-cuba-embargo-20121115 /
Washington and Havana have taken baby steps...Peters said, "there is no way in the world that Cuba is going to be a front-burner issue for President Obama in his second term."
THUS JOHN AND I SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING PLAN: THE UNITED STATES FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD SUBSTANTIALLY INCREASE ITS ECONOMIC ENGAGEMENT TOWARD CUBA BY REPEALING THE CUBAN DEMOCRACY ACT, THE LIBERTAD ACT, AND THE CACR. FURTHERMORE, CONGRESS SHOULD REMOVE CUBA FROM THE TRADING WITH THE ENEMY ACT. FINALLY, CONGRESS SHOULD AMEND THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT TO INCORPORATE CUBA INTO THE US SPONSORED ECONOMIC AID PROGRAMS. WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO DEFINE TERMS AND CLARIFY INTENT.
(Note, we footnote that the Libertad act is the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act and that the CACR is the Cuban Assets and Control Regulations Act).
CONTENTION THREE: LOVE THY NEIGHBOR
DR TRAVIESO-DIAZ IN 2009 EXPAINS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT’S ROLE IN NORMALIZING ECONOMIC ENGAGEMENT WITH CUBA…
Matias F. Travieso-Diaz, J.D., Columbia University School of Law, Ph.D., The Ohio State University, LIFTING THE CUBAN EMBARGO: THE NEW LABORS OF HERCULES?, 2009, http://www.ascecuba.org/publications/proceedings/volume19/pdfs/traviesodiaz.pdf
Whatever the motivating factor...Those interested in a smooth transition process should be represented and heavily involved in these efforts.
?
AND ENDING THE EMBARGO WILL BE SUCCESSFUL IN STOPPING HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES AND THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY TO STOP THE EXTREME POVERTY IN CUBA. BANDOW EXPLAINS THAT…
Doug Bandow, senior fellow at the Cato Institute and the author of a number of books on economics and politics. He writes regularly on military non-interventionism, “Time to End the Cuba Embargo,” December 11, 2012. http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/the-pointless-cuba-embargo-7834
Ending the embargo would have obvious economic benefits...Allowing more contact with Americans likely would make that day come sooner.
THE TIME IS NOW, US ACTION IS SPECIFICALLY NECESSARY. KATRINA VANDEN HUEVEL, EDITOR OF THE NATION CONCLUDES IN 2013 THAT…
Katrina Vanden Huevel, editor, publisher, and part-owner of the magazine The Nation, The US Should end the Cuban Embargo, July 2, 2013, http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-07-02/opinions/40316090_1_embargo-limited-private-enterprise-odebrecht
Is there a greater example of utter folly than America’s superannuated policy toward Cuba?...But it is long past time for the United States to turn to a policy that will engage Cuba rather than isolate ourselves.
WE END OUR AFFIRMATIVE WITH CONTENTION FOUR: REVELATION
FIRST IS THE INTERPRETATION: THE JUDGE SHOULD EVALUATE ONLY WHAT IS IN THE REALM OF PROBABLE NOT WHAT IS POSSIBLE, BECAUSE AS WE ALL KNOW, ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE. PROFESSOR NICHOLAS RESCHER EXPLAINS IN HIS 1983 BOOK THAT:
Nicholas Rescher, University of Pittsburgh Professor of Philosophy, “Risk: A Philosophical Introduction to the Theory of Risk Evaluation and Management” 1983
A probability is a number between zero and one...it is emphatically not a satisfactory index of the overall seriousness or gravity of a situation of hazard.
SECOND IS OUR IMPACT:
STOP CONJURING BOGEYMEN – FAILING TO ADHERE TO OUR STANDARDS CREATES POLICIES BASED ON FEAR RATHER THAN REASON AND MAGNIFIES POLICY PARALYSIS. BRUCE SCHNEIER DETAILS IN MAY 2010:
Bruce Schneier is a security technologist, and author of "Beyond Fear: Thinking Sensibly About Security in an Uncertain World." “Worst-case thinking makes us nuts, not safe” May 12, 2010 http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/05/12/schneier.worst.case.thinking/
There's a certain blindness that comes from worst-case thinking...And when people don't need to refute counterarguments, there's no point in listening to them.
FINALLY IS OUR EMPIRICAL PROOF: SINCE THE ADVENT OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS, NO EVENT HAS LED TO NUCLEAR CONFLICT--NEITHER KOREA AND VIETNAM, NOR SEPTEMBER 11 OR IRAQ. MOST IMPORTANTLY, IF THE CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS DID NOT ESCALATE TO NUCLEAR EXCHANGE NEITHER SHALL THE EMBARGO BEING LIFTED. JONATHAN TEPPERMAN DETAILS IN 2009:
Jonathan Tepperman formerly Deputy Managing Editor of Foreign Affairs, is Assistant Managing Editor at Newsweek. Published Aug 29, 2009 (“Why Obama Should Learn to Love the Bomb” http://www.newsweek.com/id/214248/page/1)
These efforts are all grounded in the same proposition: that, as Obama has said several times, nuclear weapons represent the "gravest threat" to U.S. security...This may well be a rational bet to take, especially if that first risk is very small indeed. But it's a tough case to make to the public.