Valley Debate WDM AFF:
September-October Topic

We affirm the resolution is resolved: Unilateral military force is justified to prevent nuclear proliferation.
First, we contend that: Deterrence will not last.
Sub Point A: Deterrence will eventually lead to war. As stated here by George Shultz, in the Wall Street Journal, March 2011, “Today, the Cold War is almost 20 years behind us, but many leaders and publics cannot conceive of deterrence without a strategy of mutual assured destruction. We have written previously that reliance on this strategy is becoming increasingly hazardous. With the spread of nuclear weapons, technology, materials and know-how, there is an increasing risk that nuclear weapons will be used.”
(Shultz, George P., Perry, William J., Kissinger, Henry A., Nunn, Sam; Deterrence in the Age of Nuclear Proliferation; Wall Street Journal; March 7th, 2011)

Due to the development of technology and the spread of nuclear weapons, we have clear evidence that deterrence will not last, and will only lead to war. Another example of this is once again by George Shultz in the wall street journal, March 2011, “But even with the deployment of thousands of nuclear weapons on both sides of the Iron Curtain, the Soviet moves into Hungary in 1956 and Czechoslovakia in 1968 were not deterred. Nor were the numerous crises involving Berlin, including the building of the Wall in 1961, or major wars in Korea and Vietnam, or the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979. In the case of the Soviet Union, nuclear weapons did not prevent collapse or regime change.”
(Shultz, George P., Perry, William J., Kissinger, Henry A., Nunn, Sam; Deterrence in the Age of Nuclear Proliferation; Wall Street Journal; March 7th, 2011)

As explained here, deterrence had no effect on the war as a whole, and the Soviet Union was not intimidated by the collection of nuclear weapons that Czechoslovakia had. That said, eventually deterrence will have no affect…

Categories: Papers