**Uniqueness 2 Generic Links 16


Impacts- Econ Good- Terrorism I/L



Download 0.75 Mb.
Page56/68
Date02.06.2017
Size0.75 Mb.
#19904
1   ...   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   ...   68

Impacts- Econ Good- Terrorism I/L


Growth solves terrorism
Schaefer 2001 (Brett D., Jay Kingham Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs in the Center for International Trade and Economics at The Heritage Foundation, Heritage Foundation Backgrounder #1508, "Expand Freedom to Counter Terrorism", December 6, http:Ilwww.heritage.orglResearch~~radeandForeignAid/BGi 508.cfm)

The governments of those countries must be held reslponsible for policies that undermine or oppose freedom, stifle economic qrowth, and help create the circumstances under which terrorism flourishes. America's battle in Afghanistan against the Taliban regime and al-Qaeda terrorist network is merely the first skirmish in a long war. If the war on terrorism is to be won, and if this victory is to be sustainable, America must focus on encouraging the qovernments of developing countries to embrace economic liberty in order to counter the poverty and desperation upon which terrorist qroups depend.



Impacts- Econ Good- Terrorism I/L



Economic decline leads to increased risk of nuclear terrorism
Warrick, 8 (Joby, staff writer, Washington Post, 11/15/08)

Intelligence officials are warning that the deepening global financial crisis could weaken fragile governments in the world's most dangerous areas and undermine the ability of the United States and its allies to respond to a new wave of security threats. U.S. government officials and private analysts say the economic turmoil has heightened the short-term risk of a terrorist attack, as radical groups probe for weakening border protections and new gaps in defenses. A protracted financial crisis could threaten the survival of friendly regimes from Pakistan to the Middle East while forcing Western nations to cut spending on defense, intelligence and foreign aid, the sources said. The crisis could also accelerate the shift to a more Asia-centric globe, as rising powers such as China gain more leverage over international financial institutions and greater influence in world capitals. Some of the more troubling and immediate scenarios analysts are weighing involve nuclear-armed Pakistan, which already was being battered by inflation and unemployment before the global financial tsunami hit. Since September, Pakistan has seen its national currency devalued and its hard-currency reserves nearly wiped out. Analysts also worry about the impact of plummeting crude prices on oil-dependent nations such as Yemen, which has a large population of unemployed youths and a history of support for militant Islamic groups. The underlying problems and trends -- especially regional instability and the waning influence of the West -- were already well established, but they are now "being accelerated by the current global financial crisis," the nation's top intelligence official, Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell, said in a recent speech. McConnell is among several top U.S. intelligence officials warning that deep cuts in military and intelligence budgets could undermine the country's ability to anticipate and defend against new threats.

Impacts- Econ Good- Heg


Downturn in econ causes spending cuts that destroy heg
Thompson 9 (Loren, chief executive officer of Lexington, Armed Forces Journal, Mar 9, http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2009/03/3922551) ET

As if all this were not enough, the parts of the defense program that are politically easiest to cut — the investment accounts — are the parts that contribute most tangibly to long-term military power. If military pay and benefits are slashed, the consequences are felt quickly in the field and on Capitol Hill. The same is true if readiness accounts are cut. With military health care costs having risen 144 percent during the present decade, there are compelling reasons to try to restrain their further growth (one Pentagon panel called cost increases in military health care an “existential threat” to the future defense posture). But investment in the future is almost always easier to cut than current consumption, because the near-term consequences in the field are imperceptible, and the domestic impact is felt in only a handful of congressional districts. The bottom line, then, is that the current defense program will probably not be sustainable if the decline of the economy continues, and when the cutting begins to bring military outlays into closer alignment with available resources, the first items to go will be those that contribute most to the nation’s long-term military power. In other words, the erosion of national economic power will be paced by the erosion of national military power.
Economic downturn destroys heg
Pape 9 (Robert , poli sci @u of Chicago, Chicago Tribune, 3.8.9, http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-perspec0308diplomacymar08,0,4785661.story) ET

For nearly two decades, the U.S. has been viewed as a global hegemon—vastly more powerful than any major country in the world. Since 2000, however, our global dominance has fallen dramatically. During the Bush administration, the self-inflicted wounds of the Iraq war, growing government debt, increasingly negative current account balances and other internal economic weaknesses cost the U.S. real power in a world of rapidly spreading knowledge and technology. Simply put, the main legacy of the Bush years has been to leave the U.S. as a declining power.  From Rome to the United States today, the rise and fall of great nations have been driven primarily by economic strength. At any given moment, a state's power depends on the size and quality of its military forces and other power assets. Over time, however, power is a result of economic strength—the prerequisite for building and modernizing military forces. And so the size of the economy relative to potential rivals ultimately determines the limits of power in international politics. The power position of the U.S. is crucial to the foreign policy aims that it can achieve. Since the Cold War, America has maintained a vast array of overseas commitments, seeking to ensure peace and stability not just in its own neighborhood, the Western hemisphere, but also in Europe, Asia and the oil-rich Persian Gulf. Maintaining these commitments requires enormous resources, but American leaders in recent years chose to pursue far more ambitious goals than merely maintaining the status quo. 
And, hegemonic decline leads to transition wars – the impact is extinction
Nye 90 (Joe, Sultan of Oman Professor of International Relations and former Dean of the Kennedy School at Harvard and one of the most influential and respected contemporary IR scholars, pg 17) ET

Perceptions of change in the relative power of nations are of critical importance to understanding the relationship between decline and war. One of the oldest generalizations about international politics attributes the onset of major wars to shifts in power among the leading nations. Thus Thucydides accounted for the onset of the Peloponnesian War which destroyed the power of ancient Athens. The history of the interstate system since 1500 is punctuated by severe wars in which one country struggled to surpass another as the leading state. If as Robert Gilpin argues, international politics has not changed fundamentally over the millennia, “the implications for the future are bleak. And if fears about shifting power precipitate a major war in a world with 50,000 nuclear weapons, history as we know it may end.


Download 0.75 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   ...   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   ...   68




The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2024
send message

    Main page