Boost Phase Neg Brief

Boost Phase Intercept Negative
Scholten/Wiedenmeyer
1

Topicality

1. Not a military presence or commitment

A. Standard

-Real World

-Reverse Osmosis
(looking at the plan text on its face should prove a substantial reform to our Military policy)

B. Interpretation

-Foreign Military Presence

Bradford Dismukes (analyst with the Center for Naval Analyses, The U.S. Military Presence Abroad,
Strategic Review, pg. 55)

Presencedeploying and operating forces forward to influence, short of combat, what foreign
governments think and doplays a crucial role in a national strategy of engagement and
enlargement. Operating ground, air, and sea forces overseas is a linchpin of the national strategy:
unless the United States does so successfully, the strategy could fail, yielding an isolationist
alternative and greater risks for U.S. security and economic interests.

-Foreign Military Commitments

International Relations Research Institute , School of International Relations, University of Southern
California in September 1976, The Measurement of International Military Commitments for Crisis
Early Warning TR&A Technical Report #33, Threat Recognition and Analysis Project
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a030685.pdf
Access date: 11/28/12

An international military commitment, as understood here, is a particular type of international
relationship which occurs among nations. The essential feature of a military commitment which
distinguishes it from other types of International relations Is that it Implies that the decision-
makers of an actor nation have an explicit interest in the security of another nation, and that
this Interest could lead to the use of force In support of maintaining the target nation's security.

C. Violation
-not a military presence or a commitment
(not a presence because drones are not troops, and not a commitment because the U.S. does not have
an explicit interest in the security of South Korea)

D. Impacts
-No fiat -A priori

2

2. Substantial

A. Standard

-Real World
Pretty self explanatory

-Reasonability
Within the resolution, the Aff plan must be proven to be substantial within the confines of what
would be considered reasonable.

B. Interpretation

-substantially

The Free Dictionary
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/substantially
To a great extent or degree.

C. Violation

-Not substantial number of Drones

Friends Committee on National Legislation on September 21st, 2012, Understanding Drones
http://fcnl.org/issues/foreign_policy/understanding_drones/

According to recent reports, the Pentagon now has some 7,000 aerial drones, compared with fewer
than 50 a decade ago.

D. Impact

- No Fiat

- A Priori

3

Extended Range for South Korea
BBC News, South Korea expands ballistic missile system range, October 7, 2012
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-19861583 Accessed: February 5, 2013

South Korea has announced a deal with the US to almost triple the range of its ballistic missile system, saying
this will counter the threat from North Korea. The whole of the North, along with parts of China and Japan,
will be within South Korea's new 800km range.

Criterion

Net benefits net benefits and stock issues should be considered

Observation

1. Evidence Standards All aff evidence should be specific to the NCADE system and deterring short-range
missiles
2. Conflicting reviews Postol and Lewis hated the Patriot system, which was created by Raytheon, and love
the NCADE system, which is also created by Raytheon

Raytheon website
http://www.raytheon.com/businesses/rids/businesses/patriot/patriot_amdp/index.html

Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems is the prime contractor for Patriot a long-range, high-altitude, all-
weather system and the systems integrator for the PAC-3 missile.

William J. Broad and David E. Sanger for the New York Times on May 17th, 2010
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/18/world/18missile.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

The system is highly fragile and brittle and will intercept warheads only by accident, if ever, said Dr. Postol,
a former Pentagon science adviser who forcefully criticized the performance of the Patriot antimissile system
in the 1991 Persian Gulf war.

Inherency

Aegis system

4

Solvency

1. Effective missile defense

a. Five drones needed unproven, for long range missiles
Theodore Postol PhD 09

George N. Lewis and Theodore A. Postol for the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists on November 1st, 2010, How
U.S. Strategic Antimissile Defense Could Be Made to Work
http://bos.sagepub.com/content/66/6/8.full.pdf+html

In general, the use of this highly robust but specialized defense against much shorter-range and relatively
mobile missiles with short powered-flight times will drive the performance requirements and the size of the
resulting systems to monstrous proportions and expense--and will result in systems with highly questionable
workability.

b. NCADE system works not ready, hugely expensive, test did not involve UAVs
Global Security 11

(same card)
George N. Lewis and Theodore A. Postol for the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists on November 1st, 2010, How
U.S. Strategic Antimissile Defense Could Be Made to Work
http://bos.sagepub.com/content/66/6/8.full.pdf+html

In general, the use of this highly robust but specialized defense against much shorter-range and relatively
mobile missiles with short powered-flight times will drive the performance requirements and the size of the
resulting systems to monstrous proportions and expense--and will result in systems with highly questionable
workability.

Global Security in 2011
http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/systems/ncade.htm

On 03 December 2007 a seeker characterization test for the Net-Centric Airborne Defense Element (NCADE)
was successfully conducted today at approximately 11:07 a.m. EST at White Sands Missile Range (WSMR), NM.
Preliminary indications were that planned flight test objectives were achieved. This test involved the
successful imaging at close range of a boosting Orion sounding rocket by an NCADE seeker equipped AIM-9X
missile launched from an F-16 Aircraft.

5

2. Historical success

a. U.S. tests old tests, long range missile tests
Missile Defense strategic Alliance? 07

Achraf Farraj (research intern) for the Arms Control Center on December 3rd, 2007
http://armscontrolcenter.org/issues/missiledefense/articles/scripted_missile_defense_not_success/

The Missile Defense Agency (MDA) conducted a test of its Ground-based Midcourse Defense system (GMD)
also called National Missile Defense on September 28, 2007 in which a target missile fired from Alaska was
struck by an interceptor launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. Riki Ellison, head of the
Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance, called the $85 million test a "remarkable technical feat" and claimed it
"gives our country security and reassurance" that GMD "can and will protect our public from long-range
ballistic missiles."

b. Israeli system success no number of drones, one test, mid range missile tests, different system,
cannot compare Iron Dome
Federation of American Scientists 12

Yahoo News on November 25th, 2012
http://news.yahoo.com/israel-successfully-tests-missile-defense-system-184817893.html

Israel successfully tested its newest missile defense system Sunday, the military said, a step toward making
the third leg of what Israel calls its "multilayer missile defense" operational. The "David's Sling" system is
designed to stop mid-range missiles. It successfully passed its test, shooting down its first missile in a drill
Sunday in southern Israel, the military said.

Yahoo News on November 25th, 2012
http://news.yahoo.com/israel-successfully-tests-missile-defense-system-184817893.html

The next generation of the Arrow, now in the development stage, is set to be deployed in 2016. Called the
Arrow 3, it is designed to strike its target outside the atmosphere, intercepting missiles closer to their launch
sites. Together, the two Arrow systems would provide two chances to strike down incoming missiles.

6

3. Boost phase capability

a. Success against North Korea C/A Solvency 1 response
4 star General Mike McCormick 12

b. Adequate response time allowed not specific to short range
Zen Luwang? 11

Advantage

1. Regional security

a. Nuclear missile threat to South Korea MAD theory, South Korean deterrence, China, NK is weak,
NK tests are weak
CNN 12 ABC 12 Bloomberg 12 BBC 12

Tony Burman Former Director of CBC News, Dallas Star, Burman: North Koreas nuclear threat, April 14,
2012, http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/1161130--burman-north-korea-s-nuclear -threat
Accessed: November 28, 2012

In this latest North Korean incident, there are deep fears that events once again are careening out of control
on the Korean Peninsula. Until a few weeks ago, there were hints that Washington and Pyongyang were
coming together on key issues, but that prospect seems to have suddenly vanished for no discernible reason.
Now, in the face of growing North Korean provocations, Japan and South Korea are warning they will retaliate
if their air space is threatened.

Reuters, Ben Blanchard Editor and Correspondent for Reuters, China makes veiled warning to North Korea
not to carry out missile test, April 25, 2012, http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04 /25/us-korea-north-
china-idUSBRE83O09220120425 Accessed: November 28, 2012

"Peace and stability on the Korean peninsula and in Northeast Asia bears on China's national interest and also
bears on the interests of all relevant parties," Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Cui Tiankai told a news briefing.
"China will oppose anything which might jeopardize peace and stability on the Korean peninsula and in
Northeast Asia, as this would damage China's national security interests and the interests of the relevant
parties as well," he said, when asked about the possibility of a new nuclear test by North Korea.

b. Missile system deployed
c. Impacts

-Protect innocent human life cannot be achieved with plan
Bruce Bechtol PhD 11

-Prevent radiation cannot be achieved with plan
Bruce Bechtol PhD 11

7

Mandates: 1. Enforce a boost phase drone missile defense against North Korea, Funding: $152.5 million for
the first year. Then it will go down to approximately $142 million/yr. Source for funding = "Congressional
allocation."

Solvency

1. KN-06 Short Ranged Missiles

KN-06 Missile Description
The Chosun Ilbo, a Korean Newspaper, N.Korea 'Successfully Test Fired Short-Range Missile' June
14, 2011, http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2011/06/14/2011061400518.html Accessed:
January 22, 2013

The KN-06 is a surface-to-air missile that shoots down enemy fighters. Unlike previous North Korean
missiles, such as the KN-02 inter-continental ballistic missile that follows an arch-like trajectory,
the KN-06 is stored in a launching tube and fired vertically toward a flying target. It is similar to the
Russian S-300, which is used to shoot down other missiles, and seems to be based on technology
that North Korea secretly obtained from China, Russia and other countries. Showing its evolution
from the S-300, which had a range of between 75 km and 90 km, the KN-06 is apparently capable of
hitting targets up to 150 km away. Each launcher truck can hold two to three missiles.

SK believes NK tests KN-06s
Strategy Page, a military news service, No Honor Among Thieves June 16, 2011,
https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htada/20110616.aspx Accessed: January 22, 2013

June 16, 2011: South Korea believes that the recent test of the North Korean KN-06 ballistic missile was, in
fact, a test of a homemade surface-to-air missile. Based on what South Korean intelligence reports, the KN-06
appears to be a clone of the Russian S-300.

2. Decoys deployable

Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, Theodore Postol PhD in Nuclear Engineering from MIT, George N. Lewis PhD in
experimental solid physics from Cornell University, How US strategic antimissile defense could be made to
work, November 1, 2010, http://bos.sagepub.com/content/66/6/8.full.pdf+html Accessed: February, 4,
2013

The Missile Defense Agency also mistakenly expects that countermeasures like decoys would drift apart,
making later attempts to shoot down warheads more feasible. However, decoys and other devices can easily
be tethered together with strong and light strings to prevent them from drifting apart beyond any practical
distance desired by the adversary.

8

2013
Because the defense system is limited to the use of infrared and radar sensors, an adversary can easily make
it impossible for radars and homing interceptors to reliably identify either the location of warheads attached
to rocket bodies, or the separated warheads when they are surrounded by pieces of debris or decoys roughly
the same size as the warheads.

3. Reapers are incapable of Maneuvers
Winslow Wheeler Director of the Straus Military Reform Project of the Center for Defense Information, The
MQ-9s Cost and Performance, February 28, 2012 http://nation.time.com/2012/02/28/2-the-mq-9s-cost -
and-performance/ Accessed: February 5, 2013

Reaper (like Predator) is fundamentally incapable of defending itself. It lacks any ability to sense threats 360
degrees around itself; while it can see below and somewhat to the sides, it is through a soda straw
(depending on the setting of the sensors). If it does observe a threat, it is incapable of doing anything
effective about it; not only is it quite slow, but with a high aspect ratio wing varying from 55 to 86 feet and a
frail airframe unable to withstand more than a mild two G maneuver,[16] it is incapable of agile movement
to get out of the way of immediate threats.

4. Drones provide No Defense against Short Ranged Missiles
BPI Drones/Stealthy Drones ineffective vs. SRBMs
2013

These stealthy drones would have the effect of making the operational patterns of the defense unpredictable,
a highly desirable operational goal for such a system. Stealthy drones would also be able to penetrate an
enemy's airspace if required. Perhaps of greater importance, stealthy drones would deny an adversary any
information about operational patterns or practices, making the defense even more difficult for an adversary
to understand and yet more intimidating. It must be emphasized that this proposed missile defense system
will not address threats from shorter-range ballistic missiles.

9

5. No Threat from SRBMs
No Dong SRBMs are political weapons
International Institute for Strategic Studies, North Koreas Ballistic Missile Programme, 2012
http://www.iiss.org/publications/strategic-dossiers/north-korean-dossier/north-koreas-weapons-
programmes-a-net-asses/north-koreas-ballistic-missile-programme/ Accessed: February 4, 2013 Brackets
Added

Nonetheless, given its low numbers and poor accuracy, the No-dong [Missile] is probably more a political
weapon than an effective military instrument. In one wartime scenario, for example, North Korea could fire a
small number of conventionally armed missiles and threaten to escalate to unconventional warheads if the US
and its allies did not accept a cease-fire. Presumably, Pyongyang recognises that the actual use of a nuclear
warhead (if it has one) would be suicidal, but it calculates that the threat that it might take desperate
measures in extremis serves an important deterrent function.

Hwasong Missiles Ineffective
International Institute for Strategic Studies, North Koreas Ballistic Missile Programme, 2012
http://www.iiss.org/publications/strategic-dossiers/north-korean-dossier/north-koreas-weapons-
programmes-a-net-asses/north-koreas-ballistic-missile-programme/ Accessed: February 4, 2013

Targeting doctrine and armament for Hwasong-5/-6 missiles is uncertain. Some Hwasong-5/-6 missiles are
equipped with unitary high-explosive warheads and perhaps submunition bomblets, intended for delivery
against cities, and military-related command locations, ports, and airports throughout South Korea.
Inaccuracy and missile defences would limit the missiles military effectiveness against any target.

6. Necessary Personnel Not Allocated
Winslow Wheeler Director of the Straus Military Reform Project of the Center for Defense Information, The
MQ-9s Cost and Performance, February 28, 2012 http://nation.time.com/2012/02/28/2-the-mq-9s-cost -
and-performance/ Accessed: February 5, 2013

Reapers infrastructure necessitates at least 171 personnel for each CAP: these include 43 mission control
personnel, including seven pilots and seven sensor operators, 59 launch, recovery and maintenance
personnel (including six more pilots and sensor operators), 66 Processing Exploitation Dissemination
personnel for intelligence and its support (including 14 more maintenance personnel) and three other
equipment personnel.

10

Disadvantages

1. Violation of Sovereignty

A. Drones violate a country's sovereignty
New York Times, Tom Tschida, Predator Drones and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) September 29, 2010
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/u/unmanned_aerial_vehicles/index.html
Accessed: February 7, 2013

Justly or not, drones have become a provocative symbol of American power, running roughshod over national
sovereignty and sometimes killing innocents. With China and Russia watching, the United States has set an
international precedent for sending drones over borders to kill enemies including, in at least a few cases, its
own citizens.

B. Aff Plan violates airspace sovereignty

C. Brink North Korean threats/tests

D. Impact

-North Korea Declares War

Mark Fitzpatrick, director of the non-proliferation and disarmament program at the International Institute
for Strategic Studies, USA Today,N. Korea experts see repercussions in rocket's success December 12, 2012
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2012/12/11/south-korea-north-korea-rocket/1762567/
Accessed: February 7, 2013

The West has imposed economic sanctions on North Korea, causing suffering for the North Korean people,
but the USA is not in position to impose the ultimate sanction of a military attack, "because it would start a
second Korean war, and America's ally, the South Korean capital (of Seoul), would go up in flames,"
Fitzpatrick said.

-Lives Lost

11

2. Chinese retaliation

A. Uniqueness

-China condemns Actions which jeopardize security
Reuters, Ben Blanchard Editor and Correspondent for Reuters, China makes veiled warning to North Korea
not to carry out missile test, April 25, 2012, http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04 /25/us-korea-north-
china-idUSBRE83O09220120425 Accessed: November 28, 2012

"Peace and stability on the Korean peninsula and in Northeast Asia bears on China's national interest and also
bears on the interests of all relevant parties," Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Cui Tiankai told a news briefing.
"China will oppose anything which might jeopardize peace and stability on the Korean peninsula and in
Northeast Asia, as this would damage China's national security interests and the interests of the relevant
parties as well," he said, when asked about the possibility of a new nuclear test by North Korea.

-China provides for North Koreas economy

New York Times, North Korean Leader Vows High-Profile Retaliation Over New U.N. Sanctions January 27,
2013 http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/28/world/asia/north-korea.html Accessed: February 7, 2013

China provides all of North Koreas fuel and remains its biggest trading partner, but analysts believe that its
influence on the recalcitrant government in Pyongyang is limited. China has been thus far reluctant to use its
economic leverage, fearing that it would only drive its neighbor into more provocations, which would be a
blow to Chinas interest in maintaining stability in the region.

B. Aff Plan affects stability negatively

-China sides with North Korea

-U.S dragged into the conflict
C. Impact

-Global Instability

12

3. China calls out U.S debt

A. Background

-China is largest foreign U.S debt holder
Kimberly Amadeo M.S from the Sloan School of Business, 20 years senior-level experience in economic
analysis and business strategy working for major international corporations.Who Owns the U.S. National
Debt? January 8, 2013 http://useconomy.about.com/od/monetarypolicy/f/Who-Owns-US-National-
Debt.htm Accessed: February 20, 2013

The breakout of foreign-held debt shows that China was the largest holder, at $1.161 trillion (as of October
2012, most recent data).

B.

-China involved in war

-Calls out U.S debt treasuries

-China Sells U.S debt

C. Impact

-U.S files for Bankruptcy

-Economic Collapse

Congressional Research Service, Wayne Morrison Specialist in Asian Trade and Finance, Chinas Holdings of
U.S. Securities: Implications for the U.S. Economy December 6, 2012
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL34314.pdf Accessed: February 20, 2013

Many U.S. policymakers have expressed concern over the size of Chinas holdings of U.S. government debt. For
example, some contend that China might decide to sell a large share of its U.S. securities holdings, which could
induce other foreign investors to sell off their U.S. holdings as well, which in turn could destabilize the U.S.
economy. Others argue that China could use its large holdings of U.S. debt as a bargaining chip in its dealing
with the United States on economic and non-economic issues.

Boost Phase Neg Brief

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Boost Phase Neg Brief

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Boost Phase Intercept Negative

Potrebbero piacerti anche