Neg

On the December 1st, 2009, President Barack Obama gave an address during which he
outlined his plans for the war in Afghanistan. In short, his plan is as follows: 2 brigades,
one from the Marines, and one from the Army, are to be sent to Afghanistan over the next
six months. With the addition of these 30,000 (thirty thousand) troops, the number of
American troops in Afghanistan will rise to over 100,000 (one hundred thousand). With
all of this in mind, my partner and I stand in firm negation of the resolution that President
Obama's plan for increasing troops in Afghanistan is in the United States' best interest.
We disagree for five main reasons. First, this surge will cost vast amounts of money that
the United States does not have. Second, the U.S. does not have a moral obligation to
Afghanistan. Third, our troops will only be killed. Fourth, more troops will not help us
achieve our objective, and fifth, more troops will not prevent another terrorist attack.

To begin, I will start with what we know. The war on terror is costing the United States
vast amounts of money. In fact, according to the National Priorities Project, the U.S. has
spent over $235.5 billion dollars in Afghanistan alone. Now we expect to see another
$40 billion dollars going into Afghanistan with this troop surge. Currently, the U.S. is in
debt 12 trillion dollars! Spending more money on this troop surge would not be in our
economic interests, and would only worsen our financial state.

Next, The U.S. is not morally obligated to send more troops to Afghanistan. A recent
poll from Afghanistan suggests that that public support of the troops is at 40%, and is
steadily falling. It is obvious that the people in the region do not want us there. So why
do we remain? Officially, we are staying to help repair their country. A country that we
have destabilized. And now that they want us out, I think that we owe it to them to
leave. But most importantly, the United States does not have anything to gain by sending
more troops or even staying in Afghanistan at all. What this resolution calls for is the
"United States best interest," and we obviously have nothing to gain and everything to
lose by sending more troops.

Third, our troops are dying, and it is only getting worse. According to the department of
defense, 319 US troops have died in the year 2009; fully twice the number of deaths the
previous year. And the year before that? 117 troops were killed in action. The trend is
appalling. Almost exponentially, more of our troops are getting killed. The Taliban and
other terrorist groups have learned how best to fight us, and avoid getting caught. Now,
they can kill our troops with ease, and expect little to no retaliation. By sending more
troops into Afghanistan, we are sending more and more U.S. citizens in to harms way.
With the U.S. army stretched thin as it is with soldiers serving multiple longer tours of
duty, and we cannot afford to lose any more human lives in Afghanistan.

Fourth, more troops will not help us achieve our objective in Afghanistan. (What is "our
objective"?) After we re-established their government, we are remaining in Afghanistan
for the sole purpose of keeping terrorist groups from posing a threat. However, as you
can see with the statistics that I have provided earlier, only more of our troops are getting
killed, and we are not one step closer to destroying the Taliban and al Qaeda. In fact, the
Taliban has moved its base of operations into Pakistan. Thus we would almost be
sending our troops into the wrong country.

Finally, in the United States, we are at a very low risk of being harmed in any way by
terrorists in Afghanistan, or elsewhere in the Middle East. Since 911, we have stepped up
security and have thwarted many attempted terrorist attacks. We are not threatened by
the terrorists in Afghanistan, or any other nation for that matter, and these potential
terrorists that would and up going to America and committing acts of terror will not be
stopped by sending more troops. The 9/11 hijackers and the Christmas Day bomber were
not involved in militant activities before their attack. The Christmas Day bombing
proves that sending more troops is ineffective as the terrorists have simply moved to
another country, in this case Yemen, to use as a base of operations. By sending troops to
Afghanistan, we are not keeping terrorists out of America; that is a job for national
security, and the $40 billion dollars should be going there.

Obama's plan to send more troops to Afghanistan is not in our interests because it would
be ineffective in terms of preventing terrorism. It would simply increase the number of
troops lost in the fighting in addition to costing tens of billions of dollars which we do not
have. While some may argue that we have a moral obligation to stay in the country, the
Afghani people disagree, and we should respect their wishes. For these reasons, my
partner and I strongly urge you to vote con.

Pro

I think we all remember the day that 2 airliners crashed into the world trade centers.
Since then, the United States has vowed to take revenge. We have done everything in our
power to try and stop the terrorists that did that to us. Recently, Obama has created a plan
to send 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan. My partner and I stand in firm affirmation of
the resolution that President Obama's plan for increasing troops in Afghanistan is in the
United States' best interest. A key definition in this debate is that of “The united states
best interest”.All this means is that the United States has to benefit from this troop
increase. My partner and I stand in affirmation of this resolution for 4 key reasons, those
being, that the troop level is needed to stop terrorists, it stabilizes the region, unites the
US, and that the plan works.
First, Obama’s plan to increase troops is beneficial to the United States because
it stops terrorists. Terrorist attacks are much more costly than any war we wage in
Afghanistan. According to Ripper McCord, you won't find an estimate of the cost of war
in Afghanistan that comes anywhere close to the toll on our economy following 9/11. The
troop increases in Afghanistan stop terrorist attacks! Since we sent troops there after 9/11,
there has not been a serious terrorist attack on US soil. USA Today, once the Taliban is
back in power in Afghanistan, al-Qaeda will not be far behind. Our top nemesis will be
able to salvage a victory in the very place from which it launched the 9/11 attacks eight
years ago. Al-Qaeda will have its favorite bases and sanctuaries back, as well as a major
propaganda win. Without this troop increase, the terrorists will grab a hold of
Afghanistan, and be able to launch attacks everywhere, including the United States. We
also need to fear for the Afghanistan people. Terrorists are evil people, and they will also
hurt the people in that region, and it is the United States moral obligation to stop this.
Second, Obama’s plan stabilizes the region, which is in the United States best
interest. One country that is extremely sought after by terrorists is Pakistan, which
possesses nuclear weapons. If the United States allows Afghanistan to be ruled by
terrorists, then the Taliban will undoubtedly spill into Pakistan. This is extremely bad for
several reasons. First and foremost, the terrorists could and most likely would get their
hands on nuclear weapons that they would use on the United States. Second, according to
the Economist “Pakistan, with 170m people and nuclear weapons, is vulnerable to the
Taliban’s potent mixture of ethnic-Pushtun nationalism and extremist Islam”. This is in
the US’s best interest because it is morally unjust to allow an ally to have it’s people
massacred, and quite possibly, it’s nuclear weapons stolen and used.
Third, another vital reason that Obama’s plan is in the United States best interest
lies in the internal political battle. Ever since the United States was founded, there have
been multiple political parties, ideas coming from multiple sides. Right now, the most
prominent parties are the Liberals, or Democrats, and the GOP, or Republicans. The
United States thrives through the competition of multiple parties, and ideas come from
both sides. If one side became to much larger than the other, the United States would be
hurt, in that ideas really only come from one side. When most liberals are asked about
troop increases in Afghanistan, they oppose. When most Republicans are asked, they
approve, but suggest many more troops than 30,000. What Obama has done is taken the
middle ground, between the 2 parties. According to the Huffington Post in December,
Obama’s plan will trigger the revival of the GOP. This is in the United States best interest
because it allows the United States to have ideas coming from different parties, which is
how the United States thrives.
Lastly, the plan for Obama’s troop increase will work to the resolution.
According to our interpretation of the resolution, all this plan has to do is stop terrorists
and stabilize the region, which is it’s intended purpose. One key way to stabilize the
region is to create more security forces. According to the USA Today on Sep. 4, more
forces are required to train Afghanistan security forces, and Obama’s plan for troop
increases accomplishes this. More so, according to the Washington Monthly, the renewed
and better resourced American effort in Afghanistan will, in time, produce a relatively
stable and prosperous Central Asian state. All the more, other countries support our war
on Afghanistan. According to a Reuters article from November, the UK plans to send 500
more troops, and France is being asked to send 1,500.
In conclusion, Obama’s plan to send more troops to Afghanistan is in the United
States best interest. First, it stops terrorists from manifesting in Afghanistan, which is
vital to the United States. Second, it stabilizes the region, which is our moral duty, and
doesn’t allow the Taliban to spill over into Pakistan, which is essential for US security.
Third, it unites the US and allows it to continue it’s 2 party system. Last, the plan works
to stop terrorists and stabilize Afghanistan. By stopping terrorists, stabilizing the region,
uniting the US, and with the fact that the plan works, president Obama’s plan will work.
Thank you for listening.