418 SS NMD 2AC

8/14/2019 418 SS NMD 2AC

1/9

Westminster 08-09Neha SS

NMD 2AC

1. Their link is awful- it says that Poland wants us to invest in the Polishair force. The U.S. changing the type of fuel it uses wont be traded for

NMD.

2. We control Uniqueness- threats to the United states are High- missiledefense prevents these attacksINVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY11/7/2007 Missile Defense Before It's Too Latehttp://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialcontent.asp?secid=1501&status=article&id=279331529327444&secure=770

Is it possible that Democrats are still skeptical that a missile shield willactually work? If so, evidence that it will has reached the point that it can nolonger be denied. Or is their lack of support simply due to a reflexive opposition tothe military and toward symbols of what they perceive to be projections of U.S.

power? Either way, their actions could leave us vulnerable to nuclear attackfrom a rogue nation such as Iran (see editorial at left) or North Korea, whichis supposedly backing down on its nuclear weapons program but will remain athreat as long as its communist regime stays in place. The risk doesn't end,however, with those two legs of the Axis of Evil, both of which are on the StateDepartment's list of terrorist states. Nuclear-armed Pakistan is now an ally, yet itcould become an enemy depending on how its internal turmoil is resolved .Both al-Qaida and the Taliban have powerful bases in the region. What if theMusharraf government one day falls and one of those terrorist groups suddenly hasthe keys to a nuclear arsenal? It's just as plausible that the threat could come fromany of the Mideast nations that want to keep up with Iran's nuclear program. WithEgypt making its announcement last week, there are now 13 countries in the

region that have in the last year said they want nuclear power. They canclaim, as Iran has, that they want it merely for energy. But the step from nuclearpower to nuclear weapons is not that far. Given the volatility of the region, it wouldbe wise to make sure that all precautions and that includes a missiledefense are taken. Even Russia, with its extensive nuclear weaponry, couldbe a threat. President Vladimir Putin has raised objections to America's allying withformer Soviet satellites to place U.S. missile defense components in their countries.

This, warns Putin in language reminiscent of the Cold War, will turn Europe into a"powder keg." For his part, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has declared:"The arms race is starting again." Are congressional Democrats prepared to leave usonly partly protected in a world where nuclear arms might soon begin to spread likea Southern California wildfire? Some have looked at the Democrats' actions and

said, emphatically, yes. "Their aim," Heritage Foundation defense analyst BakerSpring said earlier this year, "is to force the U.S. to adopt a position that prohibits itfrom developing much less deploying missile defense interceptors in spaceunder any circumstance and for all time." Since they hold the majority in Congressand might also take the White House next year, Democrats owe the nation moreforward thinking on matters of national security. Missile defense is not a merepolitical issue to be used to score points. It's at the core of a real life-and-deathstruggle.

1

8/14/2019 418 SS NMD 2AC

2/9


3. Poland wants military aid as the quid pro quo -- plan would not affectthatRIA Novosti August 1, 2008

.Tusk said then: "We need firm guarantees from Washington that the deployment of amissile defense base will enhance Poland's security," but that on this issue "we didnot achieve a result that would be satisfactory to Poland."In long-running negotiationswith the U.S., Warsaw has been pushing Washington to spend billions of dollarsimproving Poland's air defenses in exchange for allowing the deployment of theinterceptor missiles.

2

8/14/2019 418 SS NMD 2AC

3/9


NMD 2AC

4. Turn - Iran makes European missile defense necessarySpace & Missile Defense Report 8/4/08

Iran refused to abandon its illicit nuclear materials production program, with anobstinate statement issued by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, according tothe International Herald Tribune.Fears that Iran might build nuclear weapons and launch them on missiles aimed atEurope or the United States are the driving force behind plans for a European MissileDefense system that would be installed in the Czech Republic and Poland, based onthe U.S. Ground-based Midcourse Defense system in Alaska and California.Ahmadinejad said Iran won't give up a single iota of its nuclear rights, even as aSaturday deadline arrived for Iran to abandon the production program or suffersanctions in addition to those already in place. Western leaders fear that Iran will usethe nuclear materials to build nuclear weapons to mount atop its ever longer-rangemissiles, rather than to fuel nuclear power plants as Iran claims.

5. Cooperation with Russia avoids impactJohn C. Rood, Acting Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and InternationalSecurity Washington, DC March 31, 2008, State Department Documents andPublications

The negotiations we have held with Poland and the Czech Republic have broughtabout strong complaints by Russia, including reprehensible threats to target missilesat Poland and the Czech Republic. In response, the Administration has sought to allayRussian concerns, by engaging in the most extensive and far-reaching dialogue of itskind. In this process, we have learned a great deal about Russia's concerns, including

the fact that Russia's primary concern is that these facilities would be placed in NATOstates that formerly were part of the Warsaw Pact. The Russians have explained that ifthese missile defense facilities were located elsewhere in Europe that they would notbe concerned. As part of this dialogue, the United States has also offered far-reachingproposals on missile defense cooperation. Our thought has been that missile defensecooperation is the best confidence building measure we could offer, which is why lastApril the U.S. offered to cooperate with Russia across the full spectrum of missiledefense activities. Since then, we have gone further, offering the prospect of a jointregional missile defense architecture between Russia, the United States, and NATO.

3

8/14/2019 418 SS NMD 2AC

4/9


NMD 2AC

6. Missile defense is key to avoid nuclear miscalculation and war inEurope and the Middle East.Space & Missile Defense Report 4/21, 2008 Monday Missile Defense

Prevents War L/N

Missile Defense Makes War Less Likely, Rather Than Precipitating Conflict: GeneralAnother Minuteman Overhaul May Be Needed U.S. moves to form a multi-layeredballistic missile defense (BMD) shield help to avert conflict, much as the vast U.S.arsenal of nuclear weapons dissuades any who otherwise would attack Americantargets, a general said. His comments counter statements of Russian leaders, whoallege that U.S. plans to emplace a Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD)system in Europe are an offensive threat aimed at Russian intercontinental ballisticmissiles (ICBMs). Maj. Gen. Roger W. Burg, commander of the 20th Air Force atWarren Air Force Base, Wyo., made his comments during a breakfast seminar of theNational Defense University Foundation at the Capitol Hill Club in Washington. Burg

said he sees the American array of ICBMs tipped with nuclear weapons asa force for peace, because no one would dare attack the United Statesand elicit a devastating nuclear retaliation. Similarly, he said U.S.development of a ballistic missile defense shield shoulddeter enemiesfrom attacking the United States, its allies or interests, and perhaps makeenemies back away entirely from developing weapons of massdestruction. On another point, Burg said the current fleet of Minuteman ICBMs isabout 80 percent through a recapitalization plan to improve their capabilities, butwarned that Congress will have to fund a further refurbishment of theICBM fleet if the Minuteman is to be pushed from its 2020 design life limitto 2030. Separately, a similar view on missile defense as a facilitator of peacecame from the Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance (MDAA). According to MDAA, the

creation of a U.S. missile defense shield provides any president of the United Stateswith an option other that mutual assured destruction attacks, if an enemy launchesa missile attack on American targets. Missile defense systems can avertnuclear war, according to the MDAA. "With the continued movement of Iranin its role in Iraq as well as its doubling of centrifuges for enrichment ofuranium which was displayed last week in Washington D.C. and Tehran, our nationhas limited options, of which military action is one," according to MDAA. Somehave said that the United States should strike Iranian nuclear productiontargets, annihilating them before the missiles-wielding Middle Easternnation gains the power to use nuclear blackmail against other MiddleEastern nations, European countries or the United States. "We believethat the advent of deployed missile defense systems on the borders andbeyond Iran will give our nation another option that it currently does nothave, so that we can prevent future conflict and protect our men andwomen of the armed forces," according to MDAA. That referred to those plansfor a GMD defense shield based in the Czech Republic (radar) and Poland(interceptors in silos). "Most important is the international mandate andcooperative efforts being done today that was reflected by the NATOendorsement of 26 nations for missile defense to protect, deter anddissuade the threat from Iran," MDAA asserted. Russia had pressured NATO invain, demanding that it not endorse the U.S. GMD plan. But now, with the United

4

8/14/2019 418 SS NMD 2AC

5/9


States on the verge of gaining Czech and Polish permission to base the GMDsystem there, Russia has turned more conciliatory. "It is also very significantthat the country that was most opposed to missile defense has made achange on its position, as Russia is now working with the United Stateson a strategic framework on missile defense," the MDAA observed

5

8/14/2019 418 SS NMD 2AC

6/9


NMD 2AC

7. Proliferation inevitable absent a successful missile defense to detertheir development and useLt. Gen. Henry A. Obering, October 2007, is director of the United States Missile Defense

Agency, ARMS CONTROL TODAY, http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2007_10/Obering.asp

The last two major conflicts in southwest Asia involving U.S. armed forcesfeatured several short-range ballistic missile launches by Iraq, demonstrating agrowing reliance by our adversaries on standoff strike capabilities. Withballistic missiles and missile technologies widely available on the globalmarket, we expect an acceleration of ballistic missile and nuclear, biological,and chemical weapons proliferation. North Korea and Iran, in particular,continue investments in ballistic missiles, which are an increasingly attractivemeans of delivering a conventional or mass destruction payload. These twogovernments see tremendous value in developing more capable, more lethalmissiles, which may be used to blackmail or deter the United States or its allies from defending

their interests. Pyongyang and Tehran are striving to acquire longer-range ballistic missiles thatwill travel far beyond their borders, and they continue to rely on and receive foreign assistance forthese development efforts. The U.S. intelligence community estimates that Iran could have a long-

range ballistic missile capable of reaching the United States by 2015. North Korea and Iranflew medium-range missiles in several demonstrations this past year. NorthKorea demonstrated improvements in targeting accuracy and validated theoperational status of its short-range ballistic missile force.The July 2006 launchesmarked the highest number of missiles ever fired by North Korea in a 24-hour period.[2] Inaddition, as part of these launches, North Korea attempted to fly the Taepo Dong-2, which isprojected to have an intercontinental range. Although North Koreas long-range demonstrationfailed shortly after launch, there are signs that Pyongyang has not lost interest in developing along-range ballistic missile capability. Importantly, Iran is following a similar development andacquisition pattern, using technologies and lessons learned from shorter-range systems to developlonger-range systems. North Korea has demonstrated its capability to develop a nuclear device.When you combine this with its efforts to develop and operationalize ballistic missiles, it is notunreasonable to assume that North Korea is looking at ways to prepare a nuclear payload formissile delivery. We also need to be concerned about North Koreas rather significant traderelationship with Iran. Iran is a concern, given Tehrans growing involvement in nuclearenrichment, which could provide the fissile material for nuclear bombs. We must take this trendtoward weapons proliferation seriously. For many years, the international community and theUnited States have tried to limit the proliferation of these missiles using arms control measures,both positive and negative incentives, with some success, but the spread of these weaponscontinues. A major factor in this proliferation is the value countries place on these weapons,

precisely because historically there has been no defense against them. Without a defenseagainst these weapons, they will continue to be valuable as a means to coerce

or intimidate the United States and our allies and friends around the world. Inaddition, our adversaries are looking for ways to make their offensive forcesmore survivable using dispersal methods, concealment techniques, and deeplyburied storage sites and command posts as well as tunnels to protectoperational sites. In other words, reliance on preemption to deter anadversarys use of nuclear ballistic missiles or retaliatory operations to destroyoffensive assets after a devastating attack on our cities is increasinglybecoming a high-risk approach to ensuring our defense. Although deterrencewill always play an important part in U.S. defense strategy, robust counters toenemy ballistic missiles must include effective missile defenses.

6
http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2007_10/Obering.asp#2http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2007_10/Obering.asp#2

8/14/2019 418 SS NMD 2AC

7/9


b. Proliferation causes extinctionVictor Utgoff, Deputy Director of the Strategy, Forces, and Resources Division of the Institute forDefense Analysis, SURVIVAL, Fall,2002, p. 87-90

In sum, widespread proliferation is likely to lead to an occasional shoot-out with nuclear

weapons, and that such shoot-outs will have a substantial probability ofescalating tothe maximum destruction possible with the weapons at hand. Unless nuclearproliferation is stopped, we are headed toward a world that will mirror the American WildWest of the late 1800s. With most, if not all, nations wearing nuclear 'six-shooters' ontheir hips, the world may even be a more polite place than it is today, but every once in awhile we will all gather on a hill to bury the bodies of dead cities or even whole nations.

7

8/14/2019 418 SS NMD 2AC

8/9


NMD 2AC

8. Ukraine makes US - Russia not uniqueSvitlana Korenovska, THE WASHINGTON TIMES July 31, 2008 The WashingtonTimes

Crimea, the peninsula immortalized in the mid-19th-century war pitting Britain andFrance against Russia, is again at the center of a growing dispute between Moscowand the West. At issue is whether there is enough room, good will or both for navalfleets from NATO and Russia to share the Black Sea. Russia wants its fleet to remainheadquartered in Sevastopol beyond May 2017, when its $93-million-a-year leasefrom Ukraine is set to expire. Ukraine, which hopes to join NATO within the nextdecade - a move adamantly opposed by Moscow - wants the Russian navy out of itscountry before the lease expires. Predictably, the issue surfaces at least once eachyear - as it did Sunday, when Russia celebrated its Navy Day by firing a salute acrossSevastopol's harbor, where Ukrainian battleships anchor beside their Russiancounterparts like scowling next-door neighbors."Russia has never made a secret of its desire to retain its presence in Sevastopol after2017," said Adm. Vladimir Vysotsky, commander of the Russian navy. "After all, it is anatural basing area that has evolved historically," the admiral said, according to theRIA Novosti news agency. A few days earlier, Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenkotold Russia to begin preparing without delay for its withdrawal by 2017. "The start ofnegotiations on the removal of Russia's Black Sea fleet from Ukrainian territory shouldbe included in the agenda of our relations," he said during a press conference lastweek. The fleet issue has lately roiled a contentious relationship between the twoneighbors that goes back centuries. Russia's Catherine the Great annexed Crimeafrom Ukraine in 1783. In the mid-19th century, Crimea served as the battlefield forBritain, France and other allies to fight Russia. Soviet leader Nikita S. Khrushchev gaveCrimea back to Ukraine in 1954. During the chaos that followed the collapse of theSoviet Union, Russia and Ukraine divvied up the Black Sea fleet. According to the1997 Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Partnership, Ukraine leased the Sevastopolbase to Russia. The rent was applied toward Ukraine's debt to Russia, which suppliesthe country with natural gas. Inevitable tensions over Crimea have been exacerbatedby Ukraine's attempts to join NATO. "If Ukraine joins NATO, well, the alliance getsaccess to a port on Russia's underbelly," said John Daly, a Eurasian foreign affairs anddefense policy analyst for the Jamestown Foundation. Russian objections kept Ukrainefrom being offered a Membership Action Plan (MAP) - a key step to NATO membership- at the alliance's April summit in Bucharest, Romania. The decision is expected to bereviewed in December. During a visit to Ukraine last month, NATO Secretary General

Jaap de Hoop Scheffer sought to defuse tensions over the possible presence of thealliance in Crimea. "It does not mean NATO bases on Ukrainian soil," he said. "It doesnot mean any Ukrainian soldier will be forced to take part in NATO's operations ormissions. That's a myth, a big myth, and let me debunk that myth in your presencetoday." However, many analysts consider the basing of Russia's fleet a key issuedetermining whether Ukraine's bid for NATO membership will ever succeed. "Russianswant to keep their fleet there to maintain the presence, which in a way is a kind ofleverage to exert on Ukraine and to keep their finger on the pulse," said SteveLarrabee of Rand Corp. "As long as the [Russian] fleet is there, there's little likelihoodthat NATO would bring Ukraine into the alliance," he said. "Most of the memberswould be afraid to bring Ukraine there with the Russian presence on Ukrainian soil."

8

8/14/2019 418 SS NMD 2AC

9/9


Markian Bilynskyj, vice president of the U.S.-Ukraine Foundation, says Russia's navalpresence in Ukraine is potentially more divisive than U.S. plans to set up a missiledefense in Poland and the Czech Republic, both NATO members. "The Black Sea fleetissue is a much more pertinent, much more substantial challenge for the Russians,since it would require a large Russian investment to relocate the fleet," Mr. Bilynskyjsaid. "It is a psychological question for the missile defense system, but for the Black

Sea fleet, it is the whole question of jobs, military strategy, political strategy in thatpart of the world." Oleksandr Sushko, a director of the Center for Peace, Conversionand Foreign Policy of Ukraine, warns against underestimating the symbolic importanceof Crimea to the Russian navy. "There are 46 warships of different classes, includingsubmarines. Most of them are quite old and outdated. ... For Russia, it is moresymbolic issue than military one" Still, he said, it would be hard for Russia to find analternative to Sevastopol with its well-developed infrastructure.

9

418 SS NMD 2AC

Documents

Transcript of 418 SS NMD 2AC