Damien+CG+-+Trevor+Chenowith+&+Andres+Gannon+aff

=TOC -- Round 1= No Medical Teams Advantage New Scenario Scenario Three: Containment First, Now is the time to choose between containment or engagement of China in Africa. Thompson, Assistant Director of the Freeman Chair in China Studies at the CSIS, 5 (Drew, “China’s Emerging Interests in Africa: Opportunities and Challenges for Africa and the United States,” African Renaissance Journal, July / August) Second, We can’t kick China out of Africa even if we wanted to. Amosu, Senior Policy Analyst for Africa at the Open Society Institute, 3-9-2K7 (Akwe, “China in Africa: It’s (Still) the Governance, Stupid,” FPIF Discussion Paper, http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/4068) Third, The plan is necessary to reverse Chinese perceptions of containment and boost trust. Lieberthal, Professor & Distinguished Fellow at the William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan, 2K1 (Kenneth, “U.S. Policy Toward China,” Brookings Institution Policy Brief, Number 72, http://www.brookings.edu/printme.wbs?page=/comm/policybriefs/pb72.htm) Nuclear war Hadar, Adjunct Scholar of the Cato Institute, 96 (Leon, Jan 26th, “The Sweet-and-Sour Sino-Americna Relationship”, Cato Policy Analysis No. 428 http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-248.html) (jvgokw55xspaxr55nt1c3x55))/en/Page.DoingBusiness.aspx)

=Chinese Medical Teams Aff= China’s emergence as...a global influence. China’s ambitious, new...its oil imports. Up to now...into that commitment. The time has...medical team obligations. The limited influence...the statistical level. In China, growth...likely would ensue. But imagine a...seems to prefer. Few if any...for potential disaster.” China’s new safari...responsible as well. The relationship between...accordance international norms. As China increasingly...the African people. Given the rising...a damning confrontation. Still, though some...anywhere else. China's development needs...China-US relations. China’s new strategic...civil society spheres. As China’s petroleum...serious geo-strategic conflict. The United States...their bilateral relationship. Because the economies...lead to war. China is another...no deterrent effect. The US estimates...above everything else. Although there are...the Gates Foundation. The second and...of strategic trust. China is effectively...could do so. USAID conducts competition…as “American aid.” On Thursday, the...often minimally involved. China is, of...at any price.
 * Observation One: The Status Quo**
 * First, China is racing to increase aid, investment, and influence in Africa. They view it as a critical national security objective.**
 * Gill, Freeman Chair in China Studies at the Center for International Studies, 2K7 (Bates, “Assessing China’s Growing Influence in Africa,” China Security, Summer, Volume 3, Number 3) **
 * Second, The U.S. is also massively increasing its aid and influence in Africa**
 * Gill, Freeman Chair in China Studies at the Center for International Studies, 2K7 (Bates, “Assessing China’s Growing Influence in Africa,” China Security, Summer, Volume 3, Number 3) **
 * Third, The problem is that there is no substantial cooperation between the two.**
 * Gill, Freeman Chair in China Studies at the CSIS, 2K7 (Bates, “China’s Expanding Role in Africa: Implications for the United States,” A Report of the CSIS Delegation to China on China-Africa-U.S. Relations, January, **[|**http://www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/chinainafrica.pdf**]** ) **
 * Plan 1: The United States federal government should pass legislation substantially increasing funding for Chinese medical teams sent to topically designated areas.**
 * Plan 2: The United States federal government should pass legislation substantially increasing grants for Chinese Provincial Health Bureau Medical Team programs for topically designated areas.**
 * Plan 3: The United States federal government should pass legislation substantially increasing assistance to topically designated areas through the provision of grants for Chinese Provincial Health Bureau Medical Team programs in topically designated areas.**
 * Advantage One: Medical Teams**
 * Lack of U.S. funding collapses China’s ability to send medical teams.**
 * Shinn, former ambassador to Burkina Faso & Ethiopia & Professor at Elliott School of International Affairs at George Washington University, 2K6 (David, “Out of the Box Idea: China, Africa, and the United States Health Care Cooperation,” Washington Journal of Modern China, Volume 8, Number 1, Spring/Summer) **
 * Second, Medical teams are critical to China’s ability to build good-will in Africa and allow them to open new export markets. Africa is critical to China’s future.**
 * Gu, Chair of East Asian Politics & Director of the Institute of East Asian Politics at Bochum University in Germany, 2K5 (von Wuewu, “China Returns To Africa,” Trends East Asia Study, Number 9, February, **[|**http://www.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/oaw/poa/pdf/TEA%20S9.pdf**]** ) **
 * Third, Exports are critical to sustaining Chinese economic growth. The alternative is collapse.**
 * Stratfor 9-20-2K7 (“Global Market Brief: Major Economies' Recession-Fighting Tools,” **[|**http://www.stratfor.com**]
 * /products/premium/read_article.php?id=295584) **
 * That causes World War Three**
 * Plate, Prof at UCLA, 6-28-2K3 (Tom, “Neo-Cons A Bigger Risk to Bush Than China”, Straits Times) **
 * That’s the biggest risk of nuclear war**
 * Knight Ridder 3-10-2K (“Top administration officials warn stakes for U.S. are high in Asian conflicts”) **
 * Advantage Two: China**
 * Africa is a critical test case for U.S. Sino aid collaboration. Now is the time to offer China a bigger stake in setting the foreign aid and global health agenda.**
 * Kurlantzick, Visiting Scholar in the China Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2K6 (Joshua, “Beijing’s Safari: China’s Move into Africa and Its Implications for Aid, Development, and Governance,” Carnegie Endowment Policy Outlook, Number 29, November, **[|**http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/kurlantzick_**]
 * outlook_africa2.pdf) **
 * Second, It’s a critical time to reengage China and solidify cooperation**
 * Hills, former U.S. Trade Representative, 4-26-2K7 (Carla, “Engaging the New China,” International Herald Tribune) **
 * Scenario One: Cold War**
 * First, The plan is critical to building the healthy development of U.S. – Sino relations**
 * Wenping, Researcher with the Institute of West Asian & African Studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, 4-10-2K7 (He, “SINO-US COOPERATION CAN BENEFIT AFRICA EVEN MORE,” China Daily) **
 * Second, The plan is critical to building broad-based cooperation with China across the world**
 * Gill, Freeman Chair in China Studies at the Center for International Studies, 2K7 (Bates, “Assessing China’s Growing Influence in Africa,” China Security, Summer, Volume 3, Number 3) **
 * Third, Cooperation on health in Africa is a litmus-test for the entire U.S. – Sino relationship. If we can’t cooperate there, we won’t be able to cooperate anywhere.**
 * Kurlantzick, Visiting Scholar in China Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 11-9-2K6 (Joshua, Continental Shift", The American Prospect, **[|**http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=continental_shift**]** ) **
 * Last, Strong U.S. – Sino relations and cooperation prevents extinction. Cooperation is the only way to solve economic stability, terrorism, crime, prolif, and disease spread.**
 * Wenzhong, PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2-7-2K4 (Zhou, “Vigorously Pushing Forward the Constructive and Cooperative Relationship Between China and the United States,” **[|**http://china-japan21.org/eng/zxxx/t64286.htm**]** ) **
 * Scenario Two: Hot War**
 * First, Increasing health cooperation is critical to avoiding a strategic trap in Africa. Lack of cooperation ensures that mutual suspicions will cause U.S. – Sino conflict.**
 * Gill, Freeman Chair in China Studies at the CSIS, 2K7 (Bates, “China’s Expanding Role in Africa: Implications for the United States,” A Report of the CSIS Delegation to China on China-Africa-U.S. Relations, January, **[|**http://www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/chinainafrica.pdf**]** ) **
 * Second, The focus on securing oil ensures that lack of cooperation escalates to a full geo-strategic conflict between the U.S. and China.**
 * Hatemi, Professor at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, 2K7 (Peter, “Oil and Conflict in Sino-American Relations,” China Security, Summer, Volume 3, Number 3) **
 * Third, The plan is critical to building the overall strategic relationship. It prevents misunderstandings and miscalculations from escalating.**
 * Garrett, Director of Asia Programs and former consultant to the DOD, 2K4 (Banning, “U.S.-China Cooperation on the Problem of Failing States and Transnational Threats, USIP Special Report, Special Report Number 126, **[|**http://www.usip.org/pubs/specialreports/sr126.html**]** ) **
 * Fourth, The risk of miscalculation is high. Even in a world where nobody wants a war, absent better cooperation, increased U.S. assistance will be misperceived. It will cause a miscalculated conflict between the U.S. and China.**
 * Hatemi, Professor at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, 2K7 (Peter, “Oil and Conflict in Sino-American Relations,” China Security, Summer, Volume 3, Number 3) **
 * Conflict escalates and causes nuclear war**
 * Johnson, Journalist, 5-14-2K1 (Chalmers, “Time to Bring the Troops Home,” The Nation, Volume 272, Number 19) **
 * And, It destroys civilization**
 * Cheong, Journalist, 2K1 (China, Will Taiwan Break Away? The Rise of Taiwanese Nationalism, p. 7) **
 * Observation Two: Solvency**
 * First, the plan increases the number of Chinese Medical Teams solving African health problems and boosts U.S. - Sino relations**
 * Shinn, former ambassador to Burkina Faso & Ethiopia & Professor at Elliott School of International Affairs at George Washington University, 2K6 (David, “Out of the Box Idea: China, Africa, and the United States Health Care Cooperation,” Washington Journal of Modern China, Volume 8, Number 1, Spring/Summer) **
 * Second, the plan is necessary to build strategic trust between the U.S. and China – Which is the only way to ensure the success of other strategies of engagement.**
 * Frost, Research Fellow at Institute for National Strategic Studies at the National Defense University, Visiting Fellow at the Institute for International Economics, former Counselor to the USTR, 2K4 (Dr. Ellen, “Preventing State Failure: Steps Toward Closer Cooperation Between China and the United States,” Presented at The U.S.-China Conference on Areas of Instability and Emerging Threats, **[|**http://www.acus.org/docs/0402-Preventing_State_Failure_Closer_Cooperation_China_United_States.pdf**]** ) **
 * Third, Arguments about whether Chinese aid is good or bad are irrelevant. We can’t kick China out even if we wanted to.**
 * Amosu, Senior Policy Analyst for Africa at the Open Society Institute, 3-9-2K7 (Akwe, “China in Africa: It’s (Still) the Governance, Stupid,” FPIF Discussion Paper, **[|**http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/4068**]** ) **
 * The plan is topical. It is U.S. public health assistance provided through grant partners to sub-Saharan Africa. They will not have a better card than this.**
 * US AID (last updated – no publication date) 11-5-2K7 (“Doing Business With USAID, **[|**http://eastafrica.usaid.gov/(S**]
 * (jvgokw55xspaxr55nt1c3x55))/en/Page.DoingBusiness.aspx) **
 * And, This is consistent with how aid actually works. Most aid is given through third parties.**
 * Engber, Slate Magazine Contributing Columnist, 5-26-2K5 (Daniel, consulted with Steve Radlet of the Center for Global Development & Roslyn Matthews of USAD for the article, “Do Governments Take Checks?: How the United States gives foreign aid,” **[|**http://www.slate.com/id/2119648/**]** ) **
 * Last, Our policy of engagement is not a strategy of appeasement. It is the only way to ensure that China becomes a responsible stakeholder in the international system while protecting our interests**
 * Perry, Former Secretary of Defense, 10-30-95 (William, “U.S. Strategy: Engage China, Not Contain It,” Remarks as delivered by Secretary of Defense William H. Perry to the Washington State China Relations Council, **[|**http://www.fas.org/news/china/1995/di10109.htm**]** ) **

=EL-Shifa AFF=

PLAN TEXTS
Ghill - The United States federal government should pass H.R. 5290 of the 106th Congress

Ghill 2 – The United States federal government should pass H.R. 5290 of the 106th Congress.

Ghill 3 – The United States federal government should appropriate monies for the rebuilding of the El-Shifa Pharmaceutical factory.

Meadows 1 – The United States federal government should substantially increase funding for the rebuilding of the El Shifa Pharmaceutical factory that was attacked by the United States on August 20, 1998.

Meadows 2 – The United States federal government should substantially increase funding for the rebuilding of the El Shifa Pharmaceutical factory.

Meadows 3 – The United States federal government should pass legislation substantially increasing funding for the rebuilding of the El Shifa Pharmaceutical factory that was attacked by the United States on August 20, 1998.

Meadows 4 - The United States federal government should pass legislation substantially increasing funding for the rebuilding of the El Shifa Pharmaceutical factory.

Meadows 5 – The United States federal government should pass legislation substantially increasing budgetary appropriations and funding for the rebuilding of the El Shifa Pharmaceutical factory.

I think that’s it….or at least I hope so…sorry about all the changes. Basically 4 teams that all changed plan texts in certain rounds based on certain opponents.

GHILL 1AC
Observation One: The Status Quo

First, In response to the bombings of our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, the U.S. destroyed the Al Shifa pharmaceutical plant in Sudan because we thought it was producing CBWs – Instead of cooperating with Sudan, we took a go-in-alone approach European Sudanese Public Affairs Council, 98 (September, “Confused, Inconclusive And Contradictory”: An Assessment And Analysis Of The American Government’s “Evidence” For The Cruise Missile Attack On Sudan” http://www.espac.org/al_shifa_pages/al-shifa_1.asp)

Second, The U.S. made a mistake – The plant wasn’t making CBWs – Our intelligence was bad Ahmed, Director of the Institute for Policy Research & Development, Researcher at the Islamic Human Rights Commission, teaches undergraduate courses in International Relations at the University of Sussex, ’01 (Nafeez, October 22, “United States Terrorism in the Sudan: The Bombing of Al-Shifa and its Strategic Role in U.S.-Sudan Relations” http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq16.html)

Third, We destroyed Africa’s single most important facility in the provision of medicine Becker, of the International Action Center in New York & Members of Former Attorney General Ramsey Clark’s delegation to the El Shifa Pharmaceutical Plant which gathered evidence refuting the claim that the plant made CBWs, 98 (Richard, “Sudan: Diversionary Bombing,” web site of the Institute for Media Analysis, www.covertaction.org/content/view/105/75/)

Specifically, Destroying the plant undermined Africa’s access to malaria medication Clark, of the Newstatesmen, 3-20-2K (Malcom, “Bad air and rank hypocrisy” Newstatesmen, http://www.newstatesman.com/200003200023)

Last, We still haven’t taken responsibility for our mistake by providing compensation for the attack even though Sudan wants us to BBC News, 8-20-’07 (“Sudan Commemorates Al-Shifa Bombing, Hopes For Better Relations With USA” lexis)

Observation Two: Terrorism Credibility

First, Refusal to take responsibility destroys our international credibility and cooperation needed to fight terrorism and guarantees future terrorist attacks Mideast Mirror, 1998 (Aug 24th, “Why Washington's Arab allies won't support its missile strikes”)

Second, Taking responsibility and rebuilding the plant is critical to creating the international cooperation needed to solve terrorism Lewis, twice winner of the Pulitzer Prize, taught at Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism and James Madison chair in First Amendment issues, ’99 (Anthony, September 1, “Abroad at Home; Weighing the Price” New York Times, lexis)

And, Terrorism risks complete extinction Alexander, Professor & Director Inter-University Center for Terrorism, 2K (Yonah, “Terrorism in the Twenty-First Century: Threats and Responses,” Depaul Business Law Journal, Fall 1999 / Spring 2000)

We’ll Isolate Several Scenarios:

Scenario One: Nuclear Terrorism First, New terrorists are increasingly likely to both acquire and use nuclear weapons Lippman, Professor of Criminal Justice at the University of Illinois-Chicago, 2K3 (Matthew, “The New Terrorism and International Law,” Tulsa Journal of Comparative and International Law, Volume 10)

Second, That causes escalation and full-scale nuclear retaliation Speice, JD Candidate Marshall-Wythe School of Law, College of William and Mary, ’06 (Patrick, February, “Negligence And Nuclear Nonproliferation: Eliminating The Current Liability Barrier To Bilateral U.S.-Russian Nonproliferation Assistance Programs” 47 Wm and Mary L. Rev. 1427, William and Mary Law Review, lexis)

Scenario Two: Bioterrorism First, terrorists are on the verge of acquiring bioweapons – they won’t be deterred Van Evera, Professor of Political Science and International Relations at MIT, ’06 (Stephen, September, “Confronting The Specter Of Nuclear Terrorism: Special Editor: Graham Allison: Assessing U.S. Strategy In The War On Terror” 607 Annals 10, American Academy of Political and Social Science, lexis)

Second, International cooperation is the only way to prevent catastrophic bioterrorism Joseph, Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security, ’06 (Robert, March 29, “U.S. Strategy to Combat the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction” Written Statement to the Senate Armed Services Committee Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities, http://www.state.gov/t/us/rm/63877.htm)

Third, Even one bioterror attack would kill millions Livingstone, chief executive of GlobalOptions, considered one of the nation’s preeminent authorities on terrorism, ’99 (Neil, February 3, “Clinton Anti-Terror Plan Is Correct” Newsday, lexis)

And, Even a small attack would cause nuclear retaliation triggering nuclear World War III Hymers, Ret. Lt. Colonel in the US Army, published over a hundred articles, summa cum laude Masters Degree in Theology, 2K1 (Robert, “The Roots of Terrorism”, http://www.rlhymersjr.com/Online_Sermons/11-04-01PM_TheRootsOfTerrorism.html)

And, Our impact is bigger than any impact they will read. Use of a bioweapon causes extinction Ochs, has published articles in the Baltimore Sun, Baltimore Chronicle, Science magazine and the website: www.freefromterror.net, past president of the Aberdeen Proving Ground Superfund Citizens Coalition, member of the Depleted Uranium Task force of the Military Toxics Project and a member of the Chemical Weapons Working Group, 6-9-2K2 (Richard, “Biological Weapons Must Be Abolished Immediately,” http://www.freefromterror.net/other_articles/abolish.html)

Scenario Three: South Asia First, Terrorists will target South Asia and trigger an Indo-Pak nuclear exchange and uncontrolled nuclear proliferation Alexander, Senior Fellow at the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies, Director of its International Center for Terrorism Studies, Director of the Inter-University Center for Terrorism Studies and Co-Director of the Inter-University Center for Legal Studies, 2K (Yonah, April 11, “South Asian storm clouds” Jerusalem Post)

Second, That nuclear war escalates and causes extinction Caldicott, Former Prof @ Harvard, Founder of the Nuclear Policy Research Institute, Nobel Peace Prize Nominee, 2K2 (Helen, The New Nuclear Danger, p. xii)

And, Proliferation causes massive nuclear war Utgoff, Deputy Director of the Strategy, Forces, and Resource Division of the Institute for Defense Analysis, ‘02 (Victor, Survival, “Proliferation, Missile Defence and American Ambitions”)

Scenario Four: Isolationism New terrorist attacks will cause isolationism Juster, Unde Secretary of Commerce for Industry and Security, ’02 (Kenneth, August 15, “Corporate Sector Workshop: Senior Corporate Leadership Perspective” http://www.bis.doc.gov/news/2002/kijspeecharlington8_15.htm)

Nuclear War Khalilzad, Policy Analyst at the Rand Corporation, 95 (Zalmay, “Losing the Moment?: The United States and the World after the Cold War,” The Washington Quarterly, Spring)

The United States federal government should pass H.R. 5290 of the 106th Congress

Observation 3: We Solve

First, The plan is necessary to restore our global image, our credibility, and international cooperation needed to solve international crises Lane, Chairman of the Center for Contemporary Diplomacy, 1998 (William, “U.S. Urged to Back U.N. Investigation into Sudan Attack”, US Newswire)

Second, Just apologizing isn’t enough – it’s a hollow gesture – offering compensation is critical Mideast Mirror, 1998 (Sep 25th, “You can't fight terrorism without consistency and dialogue, U.S. told”)

Third, The consensus is on our side – the plant wasn’t producing weapons – not taking any responsibility because it could have crushes our credibility Ahmed, Director of the Institute for Policy Research & Development, Researcher at the Islamic Human Rights Commission, teaches undergraduate courses in International Relations at the University of Sussex, ’01 (Nafeez, October 22, “United States Terrorism in the Sudan: The Bombing of Al-Shifa and its Strategic Role in U.S.-Sudan Relations” http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq16.html)

Fourth, The plan is critical to properly compensating the victims and getting the plant rebuilt. Waiting to act only furthers the injustice and does more damage to our global leadership Bandow, Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute, 8-10-2K1 (Doug, “Making it right in Sudan; U.S. owes damages for pharmaceutical bombing,” Washington Times)

Observation Four – Pre-Empts

First, Your corruption arguments don’t link Rohrabacher, Republican Representative from the 46th District in California, 9-25-2K (Dana, “H.R. 5290 [106th]: To provide private relief for Salah Idris of Saudi Arabia and El Shifa Pharmaceuticals Industries Company relating to the bombing and destruction of the El Shifa Pharmaceutical plant in Khartoum, Sudan, and for other purposes,” http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h106-5290)

Second, Your aid trade-off disad doesn’t link Rohrabacher, Republican Representative from the 46th District in California, 9-25-2K (Dana, “H.R. 5290 [106th]: To provide private relief for Salah Idris of Saudi Arabia and El Shifa Pharmaceuticals Industries Company relating to the bombing and destruction of the El Shifa Pharmaceutical plant in Khartoum, Sudan, and for other purposes,” http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h106-5290)

Third, Providing aid to increase pharmaceutical manufacturing is at the heart of the topic Garrett, Senior Fellow in Global Health at the Council on Foreign Relations, 4-18-2K7 (Laurie, “Fiscal 2008 Appropriations: State, Foreign Operations,” Statement to Committee on Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs, CQ Congressional Testimony)

And, All of your perception disads aren’t unique – We already unfroze the owners bank accounts The Independent, ‘99 (May 4th, “U.S. Admits Sudan Bombing Mistake”) And, You can’t win a unique disad – We are the biggest donor to Sudan already Bureau of African Affairs, 8-15-’07 (State Department Documents and Publications, “Fact Sheet: United States Policy on Sudan” lexis)

And, Bush has quadrupled aid to Africa and Sudan already Agence France-Presse 2-5-2K7 (“US boosts foreign aid as part of international security drive, P. Lexis)

MEADOWS 1AC(s)
Observation One: The Status Quo

First, In response to the bombings of our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, the U.S. destroyed the Al Shifa pharmaceutical plant in Sudan because we thought it was producing CBWs – Instead of cooperating with Sudan, we took a go-in-alone approach European Sudanese Public Affairs Council, 98 (September, “Confused, Inconclusive And Contradictory”: An Assessment And Analysis Of The American Government’s “Evidence” For The Cruise Missile Attack On Sudan” http://www.espac.org/al_shifa_pages/al-shifa_1.asp)

Second, The U.S. made a mistake – The plant wasn’t making CBWs – Our intelligence was bad Ahmed, Director of the Institute for Policy Research & Development, Researcher at the Islamic Human Rights Commission, teaches undergraduate courses in International Relations at the University of Sussex, ’01 (Nafeez, October 22, “United States Terrorism in the Sudan: The Bombing of Al-Shifa and its Strategic Role in U.S.-Sudan Relations” http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq16.html)

Third, We destroyed Africa’s single most important facility in the provision of medicine Becker, of the International Action Center in New York & Members of Former Attorney General Ramsey Clark’s delegation to the El Shifa Pharmaceutical Plant which gathered evidence refuting the claim that the plant made CBWs, 98 (Richard, “Sudan: Diversionary Bombing,” web site of the Institute for Media Analysis, www.covertaction.org/content/view/105/75/)

Specifically, Destroying the plant undermined Africa’s access to malaria medication Clark, of the Newstatesmen, 3-20-2K (Malcom, “Bad air and rank hypocrisy” Newstatesmen, http://www.newstatesman.com/200003200023)

Last, We still haven’t taken responsibility for our mistake by providing compensation for the attack even though Sudan wants us to BBC News, 8-20-’07 (“Sudan Commemorates Al-Shifa Bombing, Hopes For Better Relations With USA” lexis)

Observation Two: Terrorism Credibility

First, The bombings not only have destroyed our international credibility but will cause an increase in terrorist recruitment and incentive to acquire WMD capabilities Close, Arab affairs specialist for the CIA for twenty-six years & an independent consultant on the region, 98 (Raymond, “The Only Effective Defense Against Terrorism is To Rebuild America's Reputation For Fairness,” The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, November)

Second, Taking responsibility and rebuilding the plant is critical to creating the international cooperation needed to solve terrorism Lewis, twice winner of the Pulitzer Prize, taught at Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism and James Madison chair in First Amendment issues, ’99 (Anthony, September 1, “Abroad at Home; Weighing the Price” New York Times, lexis)

And, Don’t bother reading your Iraq takes out the case arguments. Not only was the Al Shifa bombing a necessary precondition for the war but the bombing was the single biggest boost to bin Laden’s power and prestige. Bovard, Policy Advisor for the Future of Freedom Foundation, 12-6-2K4 (James, “Sudan: Don’t Forget the Past Follies,” Freedom Daily, The Future of Freedom Foundation, http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0410c.asp)

And, You can’t solve our advantage with a counterplan – The plan is critical to acquiring information needed to break down terrorist networks. Marks, of the Reveille, 3-8-2K2 (Brian, “An example of how not to fight terrorism,” University Wire)

And, terrorists are on the verge of acquiring bioweapons – they won’t be deterred Van Evera, Professor of Political Science and International Relations at MIT, ’06 (Stephen, September, “Confronting The Specter Of Nuclear Terrorism: Special Editor: Graham Allison: Assessing U.S. Strategy In The War On Terror” 607 Annals 10, American Academy of Political and Social Science, lexis)

Second, Even one bioterror attack would kill millions Livingstone, chief executive of GlobalOptions, considered one of the nation’s preeminent authorities on terrorism, ’99 (Neil, February 3, “Clinton Anti-Terror Plan Is Correct” Newsday, lexis)

And, Even a small attack would cause nuclear retaliation triggering nuclear World War III Hymers, Ret. Lt. Colonel in the US Army, published over a hundred articles, summa cum laude Masters Degree in Theology, 2K1 (Robert, “The Roots of Terrorism”, http://www.rlhymersjr.com/Online_Sermons/11-04-01PM_TheRootsOfTerrorism.html)

Observation Three – Preemption

First, The attack on Sudan set a dangerous precedent against adhering to international norms against preemptive conflict. Our actions have opened the door for other countries to follow our lead and launch their own preemptive strikes. Adherence to the norms is critical. Brennan, Louisiana Law Review & Recipient of the Association Henri Caitant award for the best paper on a civil or comparative law topic, 99 (Maureen, “Avoiding Anarchy: Bin Laden Terrorism, the U.S. Response, and the Role of Customary International Law,” Louisiana Law Review, Summer, 59 La. L. Rev. 1195)

Second, The precedent we set with Al Shifa sets the stage for world war as other countries emulate our policy and launch preemptive strikes against their enemies. Close, Arab affairs specialist for the CIA for twenty-six years & an independent consultant on the region, 98 (Raymond, “The Only Effective Defense Against Terrorism is To Rebuild America's Reputation For Fairness,” The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, November)

Scenario One: India & Pakistan

First, Our doctrine of preemption will give India a green-light to preemptively attack Pakistan Nischalke, Doctor, 9-27-2K2 (“Acrimonious Exchanges Raise Fear of New Regional Tensions After Gujarat Attack,” Wold Markets Analysis)

Second, These conventional strikes will escalate to nuclear war. LA Times 6-2-2K2 (“One Misstep Away From Nuclear War”)

That causes extinction Caldicott, Former Prof @ Harvard, Founder of the Nuclear Policy Research Institute, Nobel Peace Prize Nominee, 2K2 (Helen, The New Nuclear Danger, p. xii)

Scenario Two: China

First, China is ramping up for a pre-emptive strike against Taiwan AFP 7-13-2K7 (“US military prepared for 'worst' with China”)

Second, China will use our doctrine of preemption as a model and justification – Adhering to international norms against unjustified preemption is critical to avert conflict. Harris, Convener of the North-East Asia Program at the Australian University in Canberra, 10-10-2K2 (Stuart, “First strike will suit opportunists,” The Australian)

PLAN (SEE THE PLANS PAGE)

Observation 4: We Solve

First, Just apologizing isn’t enough – it’s a hollow gesture – offering compensation is critical Mideast Mirror, 1998 (Sep 25th, “You can't fight terrorism without consistency and dialogue, U.S. told”)

Second, The consensus is on our side – the plant wasn’t producing weapons – not taking any responsibility because it could have crushes our credibility Ahmed, Director of the Institute for Policy Research & Development, Researcher at the Islamic Human Rights Commission, teaches undergraduate courses in International Relations at the University of Sussex, ’01 (Nafeez, October 22, “United States Terrorism in the Sudan: The Bombing of Al-Shifa and its Strategic Role in U.S.-Sudan Relations” http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq16.html)

Third, The plan is critical to properly compensating the victims and getting the plant rebuilt. Waiting to act only furthers the injustice and does more damage to our global leadership Bandow, Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute, 8-10-2K1 (Doug, “Making it right in Sudan; U.S. owes damages for pharmaceutical bombing,” Washington Times)

The plan is critical to restoring our global commitment to international leadership Lane, Chairman of the Center for Contemporary Diplomacy, 1998 (William, “U.S. Urged to Back U.N. Investigation into Sudan Attack”, US Newswire)

And, The plan reverses the international precedent set by the Al Shifa attack Mideast Mirror 8-25-98 (“The Arabs and the "message of force" delivered by American cruise missiles”)

And, The plan reaffirms our commitment to international norms of justice and fairness. U.S. Newswire 8-19-2K3 (“Sudan Embassy: Time for the United States to Take Responsibility”)

Observation Five – Pre-Empts

 First, Your corruption arguments don’t link Rohrabacher, Republican Representative from the 46th District in California, 9-25-2K (Dana, “H.R. 5290 [106th]: To provide private relief for Salah Idris of Saudi Arabia and El Shifa Pharmaceuticals Industries Company relating to the bombing and destruction of the El Shifa Pharmaceutical plant in Khartoum, Sudan, and for other purposes,” http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h106-5290)

Second, Your aid trade-off disad doesn’t link Rohrabacher, Republican Representative from the 46th District in California, 9-25-2K (Dana, “H.R. 5290 [106th]: To provide private relief for Salah Idris of Saudi Arabia and El Shifa Pharmaceuticals Industries Company relating to the bombing and destruction of the El Shifa Pharmaceutical plant in Khartoum, Sudan, and for other purposes,” http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h106-5290)

 Third, Providing aid to increase pharmaceutical manufacturing is at the heart of the topic Garrett, Senior Fellow in Global Health at the Council on Foreign Relations, 4-18-2K7 (Laurie, “Fiscal 2008 Appropriations: State, Foreign Operations,” Statement to Committee on Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs, CQ Congressional Testimony)

And, All of your perception disads aren’t unique – We already unfroze the owners bank accounts The Independent, ‘99 (May 4th, “U.S. Admits Sudan Bombing Mistake”) And, You can’t win a unique disad – We are the biggest donor to Sudan already Bureau of African Affairs, 8-15-’07 (State Department Documents and Publications, “Fact Sheet: United States Policy on Sudan” lexis)

And, Bush has quadrupled aid to Africa and Sudan already Agence France-Presse 2-5-2K7 (“US boosts foreign aid as part of international security drive, P. Lexis)