My partner and I Negate the resolution, resolved; The benefits of post 9/11 security measures outweigh the harms to personal freedom
To start we offer the following observations:
The Con side must prove that the harms to personal freedom outweigh the benefits of security measures or that the harms and the benefits are equal The Pro side must prove that (1) the benefits claimed even exist and (2) they must further show that, assuming these benefits exist, they outweigh all harms to personal freedom
Contention 1: Increasing democracy as a security measure increases terrorism
According to Drew Schaub, Department of Political Science, Penn StateThe level of democracy variable is positive and statistically significant. As the democracy score of a country increases by 1 point, its expected number of transnational terrorist incidents increases by 4.4%. The evidence is consistent with the argument that democracy, by ensuring the political rights of its citizens, gives terrorist groups more freedom in association, reducing the costs of their engaging in terrorist activities. Now according to, Eric Neumayer, London School of Economics, Journal of Peace Research, A one standard deviation increase in US military aid raises the expected count of anti- American terrorism most by 114%, followed by arms exports and military personnel, in which a one standard deviation increase leads to an increase of 45% and 30%... Their model showed that US military support had substantively strong effects on foreign terror on Americans: a significant rise on the measure of military aid (equal in statistical terms to a one standard deviation change) increased anti-American terrorism by 135 per cent. The same rise in arms exports corresponded to an increase in terrorism of 109 per cent and of 24 per cent in the case of military personnel. Georgetown University states “Meanwhile the use of military force can exacerbate the terrorist threat by stoking anger against the United States and...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document