[eDebate] South America?

[Andrew Michael-Don Casey]

2 things

1.)	I also agree with the call to leave the resolutional wording open. 
Although yes a lot of K teams will disregard most of the resolution, if 
the wording is open most of us are more likely to be topical. A lot of 
us defended that an overrule happen on the courts topic because (so 
long as we got to pick the grounds for overrule) it allowed for a lot 
of aff diversity, as compared to china where we were forced to defend 
economic and diplomatic pressure. 
2.)	I disagree with the idea that South America won’t have big diverse 
impacts. There are tons of environment, trade, oil, terror, and 
democratization debates to be had. I also think this has a bigger 
diversity of impact areas than an intelligence topic would.
3.)	If the resolutional wording was staying the way it has been I would 
be quite concerned with an intelligence topic. Noah is probably right 
that there could be a couple of decent impact areas, but if the wording 
goes sour then anything good about those impact areas will be devolved 
back into terrorism advantage debates. (note, i understand this concern 
is easily applicable to south america)

-AC

-----------------------------------------
**CONFIDENTIALITY** -This email (including any attachments) may
contain confidential, proprietary and privileged information.  Any
unauthorized disclosure or use of this information is prohibited.