Election Disadvantage
CTBT Good – AT: Deterrence
Download 1.8 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- The SSP will maintain the U.S. nuclear arsenal – all evidence flows our way
- Defense Cuts – Obama Will Cut
- Obama maintains military cuts
- Obama cuts the defense budget and restructures military
CTBT Good – AT: DeterrenceNo impact – conventional deterrence and current weapons are enough to solveMedalia 2008 (Jonathan Medalia, specialist of National Defense for the Congressional Research Service, 3/12/2008, Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Issues and Arguments, p. 16) CTBT supporters hold that current nuclear weapons suffice for deterrence; no adversary leader would gamble that they would not work, or that the United States would not use them if severely provoked. At the same time, supporters see nuclear weapons as most unlikely to be used, regardless of their characteristics or yield, because of the norm that has built up since 1945 against their use. Current nuclear weapons deterred a Russian or Chinese nuclear attack during the Cold War, it is argued, and will continue to do so, especially as the probability of such attack must be judged as remote. U.S. conventional forces, the treaty’s supporters claim, deter threats from other nations. Use of these forces is credible, they can be precisely targeted, and they would create very much less collateral damage than nuclear weapons. Further, it is argued, adversaries could readily counter new U.S. nuclear capabilities. Nuclear weapons to destroy chemical or biological weapons could be defeated by placing the weapons deep underground; even earth penetrator weapons could not destroy them because the heat and radiation of the blast would not reach down that far. More simply, the weapons could be moved to nondescript buildings in cities or to caves in rural areas; U.S. intelligence, in this view, could locate few if any sites. Earth penetrators could be defeated by deeper burial, greater hardening, tunneling under a mountain, or dispersing assets to secret aboveground locations. The SSP will maintain the U.S. nuclear arsenal – all evidence flows our wayKimball 2008 (Daryl G. Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association, 8/22/2008, The Enduring Value of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and Prospects for Its Entry Into Force, p. http://www.armscontrol.org/node/3300) The other key issue is whether the United States can continue to rely on its stockpile stewardship program to maintain its arsenal under a permanent CTBT? The short answer is: yes. As the U.S. National Academy of Sciences reported in July 2002, the United States "has the technical capabilities to maintain confidence in the safety and reliability of its existing nuclear-weapon stockpile under [a test ban], provided that adequate resources are made available to the Department of Energy's nuclear-weapons complex and are properly focused on this task." Though the Energy Department has determined each year for the last decade that the U.S. nuclear arsenal remains safe and reliable without nuclear testing, some claim—as they did in 1999—that as time goes on there may be age-related problems in the nuclear stockpile. (3) The good news is that all of the technical evidence available shows that such concerns are greatly overstated. New government studies on plutonium longevity completed in 2006 have found that the plutonium primaries of most U.S. nuclear weapons have a minimum lifetime of 85 years, which is twice as long as previous estimates. According to the National Academy panel, which included three former lab directors, age-related defects mainly related to non-nuclear components can be expected, but nuclear test explosions “are not needed to discover these problems and is not likely to be needed to address them.” Rather, the panel says, the key to the stewardship of the arsenal is a rigorous stockpile surveillance program, the ability to remanufacture nuclear components to original specifications, minimizing changes to existing warheads, and non-explosive testing and repair of non-nuclear components. Thomas D’Agostino, acting National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) administrator said in March 2007 that “stockpile stewardship is working. This program has proven its ability to successfully sustain the safety, security and reliability of the stockpile without the need to conduct an underground test for well over a decade.” Defense Cuts – Obama Will CutObama plans to cut $480 billion, if not more, in Pentagon spendingBaker, 2012 (Peter Baker, staff writer for the New York Times, 5/24/2012, “Military Will Remain Strong With Cuts, Obama Tells Cadets,” New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/24/us/politics/military-will-withstand-cuts-obama-says.html) President Obama vowed on Wednesday to keep the military strong even as he winds down the wars of the last decade and takes the budget knife to Pentagon spending in an age of increasing government austerity. Addressing the graduating cadets of the Air Force Academy, Mr. Obama said spending cuts were inevitable for the armed forces but he promised to guard against reductions that would compromise the nation's security. Dismissing talk of national decline, he described an ''American century'' in which the United States would continue to flourish. ''Yes, as today's wars end, our military, and our Air Force, will be leaner,'' he told a stadium filled with the blue uniforms of the next generation of pilots and other officers. ''But as commander in chief, I will not allow us to make the mistakes of the past. We still face very serious threats. As we've seen in recent weeks, with Al Qaeda in Yemen, there are still terrorists who seek to kill our citizens.'' He added: ''We'll keep our military, and our Air Force, fast and flexible and versatile. We will maintain our military superiority in all areas: air, land, sea, space and cyber.'' Mr. Obama's commencement address was his first at a military academy since the last American troops left Iraq, ending nearly nine years of conflict, and came just days after he agreed with NATO allies on a plan to close out the combat mission in Afghanistan. In effect, he used the occasion to outline a vision for the next stage in the nation's struggle against terrorism, one that shifts away from large commitments of ground troops and relies more on diplomatic and economic power while drawing on more help from allies. ''You are the first class in nine years that will graduate into a world where there are no Americans fighting in Iraq,'' Mr. Obama said. ''For the first time in your lives -- and thanks to Air Force personnel who did their part -- Osama bin Laden is no longer a threat to our country. We've put Al Qaeda on the path to defeat. And you are the first graduates since 9/11 who can clearly see how we'll end the war in Afghanistan.'' He said that his policies would end those wars while still making the country safer, and he noted that the graduates would have fewer deployments and more time to train and rest between missions than their predecessors. But Mr. Obama went into little detail about how financial restraints would affect the Air Force and the military at large. He has proposed a spending plan for the Pentagon that includes nearly $480 billion in cuts over 10 years, but that amount could increase sharply if his administration and Congress do not reach agreement on a plan to avoid deeper automatic cuts currently programmed into law. Republicans have said Mr. Obama is already cutting the armed forces too deeply. A budget plan released by the Obama administration in February called for reducing the number of active-duty Air Force personnel by 3,900 as well as an additional 6,000 from the Reserves and National Guard. Under that plan, about 500 aircraft would be retired as well. Since then, the Guard's political patrons have fought back and persuaded Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta to reverse some of those cuts, foreshadowing continued struggles in the months and years ahead over how to divvy up scarcer resources. Romney Reverse Military Cuts Obama maintains military cutsO’Connor, 2012 (Patrick O’Connor, staff writer for the Wall Street Journal, July 8, 2012, “Military Cuts Loom as Late Campaign Issue,” Wall Street Journal, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303292204577515220443609642.html) The Obama administration, including Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, has warned about what these cuts would mean for military readiness and urged Congress to find savings elsewhere. But Mr. Obama has pledged to veto legislation offered by House Republicans in May that would roll back the military cuts using money saved by paring federal funds for food stamps, Medicaid and other social services. Defense Cuts – Obama Will Cut Obama cuts the defense budget and restructures militaryRumbaugh 2012(Russell Rumbaugh, co-director of the Stimson Center's Budgeting for Foreign Affairs and Defense program. The Stimson Center is a nonprofit organization that seeks to strengthen institutions for peace and security, build regional security and reduce weapons of mass destruction and transnational threats. Rumbaugh is a former Democratic staff member on the Senate Budget Committee, 1/6/2012, “Obama's defense cuts are too timid,” CNN, http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/06/opinion/rumbaugh-defense-cutbacks/index.html) (CNN) -- The defense budget is going down. Thursday, President Obama personally announced a new strategy to align with the new limits created by the Budget Control Act of last fall. The announcement was light on the budget details to emphasize "strategy." But strategy documents come and go -- it's in budgets that we'll see actual change. The biggest change is a smaller Army — reports suggest troop numbers down to levels last seen in the late 1990s. This change is justified by the strategy's de-emphasis of stability operations like Iraq and Afghanistan and renewed focus on Asia, where naval and air forces are the main tool. If the strategy's blueprint is followed, we could see a fundamental change to our force structure and military posture—more airpower and naval, and fewer ground forces. But everyone Thursday went out of their way to hedge at every turn. Most notably, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey stressed that we weren't giving up the capacity to fight land wars. Deputy Secretary of Defense Ash Carter said his theme was reversibility. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said our military will never do just one thing. The President said our military will be ready for the full range of contingencies and threats. 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 1.8 Mb. Share with your friends:
|