Aff Answers to Counterplans 1 A2 Afghanistan Corruption cp 2
Binding Consultation Less Effective
Download 0.88 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Binding Consultation Less Effective
Binding Consultation Less EffectiveCeding power to the military leads doesn’t lead to an effective policy – nothing changes Partridge 5/24 (Teddy, reporter for the Seminal, http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/50577) GAT The Lieberman sham compromise on Don’t Ask Don’t Tell cedes control of the military from the law-making and law-executing branches of government to the United States military. In effect, this law says open service is legal, but only when the military pleases. Joe Lieberman, Monday’s progressive hero, has not introduced a repeal of Don’t-Ask-Don’t-Tell. The legislative language in the much-heralded compromise leaves everything up to our formerly civilian-controlled military and formerly subordinate-to-the-President Secretary of Defense. Sure, there’s a structure for repeal, but there are lots of hoops the military can elect to jump through. Or not. This isn’t repeal. This is repeal with a trigger. And the trigger is in the hand of the President, along with his Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Who do you think holds the whip hand on military matters there? Everything remains exactly the same: Section 654 of title 10, United States Code, shall remain in effect until such time that all of the requirements and certifications required by subsection (b) are met. If these requirements and certifications are not met, section 654 of title 10, United States Code, shall remain in effect. In fact, that clause is entitled "No Immediate Effect on Current Policy." Until the President, the Secretary, and the Chairman complete, certify and accept the idea that the time for open service has arrived. All of these must occur before the policy will change: (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by subsection (f) shall take effect only on the date on which the last of the following occurs: ARM10802 S.L.C. (1) The Secretary of Defense has received the report required by the memorandum of the Secretary referred to in subsection (a). (2) The President transmits to the congressional defense committees a written certification, signed by the President, the Secretary of Defense, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, stating each of the following: (A) That the President, the Secretary of Defense, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have considered the recommendations contained in the report and the report’s proposed plan of action. (B) That the Department of Defense has prepared the necessary policies and regulations to exercise the discretion provided by the amendments made by subsection (f). (C) That the implementation of necessary policies and regulations pursuant to the discretion provided by the amendments made by sub-section (f) is consistent with the standards of military readiness, military effectiveness, unit cohesion, and recruiting and retention of the Armed Forces. Note that all the excuses-language previously justifying this homophobic policy are included in the final paragraph: military readiness, military effectiveness, unit cohesion, and recruiting and retention. Not one of which has been a problem for any of our many allies that have implemented open service. In other words, the legislative branch has ceded its law-making power to the formerly subordinate-to-the-Executive military. Until the military is ready to implement open service, it won’t happen. (And just in case you weren’t completely satisfied with your purchase, there’s a bonus section to ensure that no benefits are provided to anyone possibly affected by any eventual DADT repeal in violation of the Defense of Marriage Act.) This is a sham — a sop to the Democrats’ left-of-the-left, as you might expect from anything organized by Joe Lieberman. Binding Consultation Less EffectiveDeferring all military decisions to binding consultation with the military is simply not realistic – it is inevitable that the civilian sphere must make some military decisions Cook & Ulrich 6 (Martin L., U.S. Air Force Academy; Marybeth P., Department of National Security and Strategy at U.S. Army War College, November 2006, Journal of Military Ethics, Vol. 5, No. 3, p. 161-182) GAT This analysis points to a more subtle and nuanced characterization of the ideal civil military relationship than is typical in civil military relations literature. There the tendency is to take for granted the professional expertise of the military and frame the question solely in terms of the degree to which that advice is or is not heeded by civilian leaders. Indeed, the imagined ideal tends toward a pole which suggests that civilian leaders make the core determination that the political ends being sought warrant use of military force for their achievement (and, in consultation with the highest levels of military leadership, that those goals are indeed achievable by military means). But after that determination is in place, military officers (and at times political leaders, such as Bush’s deferment to his commanders on troop levels) often imagine the ideal case to be one in which civilians defer all subsequent operational decisions to military expertise. One unfortunate consequence of that way of looking at things is that it views every intervention of civilian leadership into operational decisions as an inappropriate encroachment of civilians into the sphere of proper military expertise. But since all uses of military force are inevitably ‘politics by other means’, civilian leaders will necessarily be monitoring closely the political consequences of the details of the conduct of military operations. Eliot Cohen’s outstanding set of case studies chosen for Supreme Command illustrates multiple instances of near-certain defeat of national interests had not civilian leaders remained engaged in the process of strategy adaptation and oversight of military operations in wartime (Cohen 2002). A2 Consult Nato CP Directory: files files -> Answer True False 2 points Question 2 files -> Integer programming and game theory files -> 4 Integer Programming files -> Bpa vehicle Window Repair Scenario #1 task: Procure vehicle window relacement. Objective files -> Pop Warner History files -> North Carolina Inclusion Initiative Mapping Where Children with ieps are Being Served Purpose files -> Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Program Data: Standard 1 Exhibit 4d files -> Hanban – asia society confucius classrooms network 2010 request for proposal files -> Northern England’s set-jetting locations Download 0.88 Mb. Share with your friends:
|