states ought not possess nuclear weapons-analysis

10NFL1-Nuclear Weapons www.victorybriefs.com Page 1 of 199

TOPIC ANALYSIS BY RYAN HAMILTON

11

TOPIC ANALYSIS BY TARA NORRIS

16

TOPIC ANALYSIS BY CHRISTIAN KEIL

22

TOPIC ANALYSIS BY TODD RAINEY

30

TOPIC ANALYSIS BY CAMERON BAGHAI

37

TOPIC ANALYSIS BY SAAD ASAD

49

AFFIRMATIVE EVIDENCE

54

DETERRENCE FAILS
54
NUCLEAR WEAPONS ARE NOT GUARANTEED TO DETER NON-NUCLEAR STATES
IN CRISES
54
NUCLEAR ADVANTAGES DO NOT PROVIDE A COERCION BENEFIT VIS-À-VIS
OTHER NUCLEAR STATES
54
NUCLEAR WEAPONS DO NOT DETER OTHER WMD
55
ANY ACCIDENTAL USE OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS WILL BREAK DOWN
DETERRENCE
55
DETERRENCE FAILS DUE TO THE POTENTIAL IRRATIONALITY OF STATE
LEADERS
55
GROUPTHINK MAY COMPROMISE LEADERSHIP RATIONALITY
56
DETERRENCE FAILS DUE TO THE RISK OF UNAUTHORIZED USE
56
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE STILL ENCOURAGES PHYSICAL COERCION BETWEEN
NUCLEAR STATES.
57
NUCLEAR WEAPONS ARE INSUFFICIENT TO STOP WAR BETWEEN NUCLEAR AND
NON-NUCLEAR STATES.
57
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE IS COUNTERINTUITIVE TO CREATING PEACE.
57
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE IS BASED UPON THE IMAGE OF ARMAGEDDON
EVENTUALLY LEADING US TO DESTRUCTION.
58
NUKES HAVENʼT BEEN USED BECAUSE OF LACK OF STRATEGICITY AS OPPOSED
TO DETERRENCE.
58
A COMMITMENT TO DETERRENCE IS A COMMITMENT TO PROLIFERATION.
58
NUKES ARENʼT ABLE TO ADEQUATE SECURE A COUNTRY LIKE CONVENTIONAL
MILITARY FORCES.
59
NUCLEAR WAR ISNʼT IRRATIONAL – IT JUST SEEMS SO BECAUSE THE STAKES
ARE SO HIGH.
59
NUCLEAR WEAPONS DECREASE GLOBAL SECURITY AND INTERNATIONAL
INSTABILITY
60
DETERRENCE IMMORAL
61
DETERRENCE IS IMMORAL.
61
DETERRENCE IS NOT MADE MORAL BASED ON THE CONDITIONAL ACTIONS OF
OTHER COUNTRIES.
61
INTENDING TO USE NUCLEAR WEAPONS CONDITIONALLY CAN BE MORALLY
OBJECTIONABLE, EVEN IF THEY ARE NEVER USED
62

10NFL1-Nuclear Weapons www.victorybriefs.com Page 2 of 199

NUCLEAR DETERRENCE VIOLATES THE JUS IN BELLO CONDITIONS OF JUST WAR
DOCTRINE
62
NUCLEAR RETALIATION