My Value is National sovereignty.

National Sovereignty is the right

to let the government govern and control their own people. When we
invade other states we become more imperialist and dehumanize the
people in that country. When National Sovereignty is kept, culture
thrives under no outside regimes and helps the economy. It helps the
economy by ensuring that it is safe to invest into businesses in the
country, without the threat of a breakdown.
My criterion is Deontology. One of the fundamentals of Deontology,
which I will be focusing on, is that we cant use people as a means to
an end. This leads to dehumanization. Dehumanization is the most
important impact because if there is we dehumanize people, there is
no point to life.
Contention 1: When the United States intervenes in another country
we use that country as a means to an end.
Bruce Bueno de Mesquita and George W. Downs, professors at NYU,
Summer 2006
Intervention and Democracy, International Organization, Volume 60, No. 3,
pp. 627-649, http://www.jstor.org/stable/3877822

intervening democracies will view the governmental structure

of a target state instrumentally. That is, the value that they assign
to it will have less to do with its intrinsic characteristics than
with the impact that its policies are likely to have on the
leader's political survival. While this does not rule out the possibility that democratic
leaders will support a democracy in the target state, it does mean that a necessary condition for doing so

the leader of the intervening state will have to believe that

the resultant democracy is likely to adopt policies that are
regarded as desirable by the intervening leader's winning
coalition. Given that the intervening state is a democracy, these will usually involve issues such as
security, trade, and access to resources.
is that

When the US intervenes in other countries they 1. They break national

Sovereignty 2. They use the people as a means to an end.
Contention 2: When we intervene with the internal political process of
other states we become an imperialism country and create
dehumanization. Looking at the resolution we try to see if we are
justified to intervene in internal political affairs. This means if we were
to go into a foreign state then we would probably establish democracy.
Imperialism is extending one countrys power through force. If we go
into country, breaking their national Sovereignty
Linda Tuhiwai Smith, (Professor at University of Waikato), 1999
The struggle to assert and claim humanity has been a
consistent thread of anti-colonial discourses on colonialism
and oppression. This struggle for humanity has generally been

framed within the wider discourse of humanism, the appeal to

human rights, the notion of a universal human subject , and
the connections between being human and being capable of
creting history, knowledge and society. The focus on asserting
humanity has to be seen within the anti-colonial analysis of
imperialism and what were seen as imperalisms dehumanizing
imperatives which were structured into language, the
economy, social relations and the cultural life of colonial
societies. From the nineteenth century onwards the processes of
dehumanization were often hidden behind justifications for
imperialism and colonialism which were clothed within an ideology
of humanism and liberalism and the assertion of moral claims
which related to a concept of civilized man. The moral justifications did not
necessarily stop the continued hunting of Aborigines in the early nineteenth century nor the
continued ill-treatment of indigenous peoples even today.
Dehumanization is bad
Darrell Fasching, Professor of Religious Studies at University of South Florida, 1993, The Ethical
Challenge of Auschwitz and Hiroshima, pg 155-156
Although every culture is inherently utopian in its potentiality, the internal social dynamic through which its
symbolic world-view is maintained as a sacred order has a tendency to transform it into a closed
ideological universe (in Karl Mannheims sense of the ideological; namely a world-view that promises
change while actually reinforces the status quo) that tends to define human identity in terms

Historically the process of

dehumanization has typically begun by redefining the other as, by
nature, less than human. So the Nazis did to the Jews, and European
Americans did to the Native Americans, men have done to women,
and whites to blacks. By relegating these social definitions to the
realm of nature they are removed from the realm of choice and
ethical reflection. Hence those in the superior categories need feel
no responsibility toward those in the inferior categories. It is simply
a matter of recognizing reality. Those who are the objects of such
definitions find themselves robbed of their humanity. They are
defined by and confined to the present horizon of culture and their
place in it, which seeks to rob them of their utopian capacity for
theonomous self-transcending self-definition.
advantageous to some and at the expense of others.

If the United States intervene they will be imperialist, and dehumanize

the place they are intervening.
Contention 2: Not only do we create dehumanization but also we can
create nuclear war.