Berkeley 2009 <Author Name>

<File Name> <Tournament Name>

T Supplement- Regents
T Supplement- Regents.................................................................................................................................................................1 Withdrawal....................................................................................................................................................................................2 Reduce...........................................................................................................................................................................................3 Military Presence...........................................................................................................................................................................4 Police Presence..............................................................................................................................................................................7 Its- TNW = NATO........................................................................................................................................................................8 AT: We Dont Get Turkey AFFs...............................................................................................................................................10 Aff- NATOs TNW = U.S. TNW................................................................................................................................................11 Its- Afghanistan soldiers = NATO..............................................................................................................................................12 Substantial- Troops......................................................................................................................................................................12 Substantial- D.O.D definitions....................................................................................................................................................13 Substantial Reduction= 20%.......................................................................................................................................................14 Substantial- TNW .......................................................................................................................................................................15 Substantial- PMCs.......................................................................................................................................................................16

Berkeley 2009 <Author Name>

<File Name> <Tournament Name>

Withdrawal
Withdrawal means the removal of all troops, contractors and interests Bennis 2009 (Phyllis, Institute for Policy Studies, Obama to Announce Iraq Troop Withdrawal, February 26, 2009)
http://www.ips-dc.org/articles/1117 If this plan were actually a first step towards the unequivocal goal of a complete end to the U.S. occupation of Iraq, it would be better than good, it would be fabulous. But that would mean this withdrawal would be the first step towards a

complete withdrawal of all U.S. troops, pulling out of all the 150,000+ U.S.-paid foreign mercenaries and contractors, closing all the U.S. military bases, and ending all U.S. efforts to control Iraqi oil.

Berkeley 2009 <Author Name>

<File Name> <Tournament Name>

Reduce
Reduce means to decrease or change Cleveland industrial Square v. Cleveland Board of Zoning Appeals 1992 "Reduce" means "to lessen," or "to change to a different form." Reduce means to make smaller State v. Knutsen, 2003 71 P. 3d 1065 - Idaho: Court of Appeals January 29, 2003
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4180324369703559674&q=%22reduce+means%22&hl=en&as_sdt=2002 To "reduce"

means to diminish in size, amount, extent or number, or to make smaller, lessen or shrink.

Berkeley 2009 <Author Name>

<File Name> <Tournament Name>

Military Presence
Military Presence is defined as bases, military aid, active duty personnel, and combat threats Ladan Nekoomaram November 10, 2009 (US military presence in foreign countries exceeds rest of world,
http://inews6.americanobserver.net/articles/us-military-presence-foreign-countries-exceeds-rest-world) Military presence is defined by any nation where the U.S. has a military base, where the U.S. is military aid, active duty military personnel, or where U.S. soldiers are engaged in combat theaters.

providing

Military presence is air force, army, navy and marines Lt. Col. Greg Laffitte April 24, 2009 (887th Expeditionary Security Forces Squadron, An instrument of peace . . .
http://assets.mediaspanonline.com/prod/2357222/nbe_04242009A32.pdf Camp Bucca is the largest theater internment facility in Iraq. The numbers of detainees are slowly decreasing as they are reintegrated into the Iraqi justice system. Military personnel deployed to Camp Bucca have an incredible mission that they perform with pride and professionalism 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The American military presence here is best defined as a team approach with Air Force, Army, Navy and Marine Corps personnel quietly and diligently accomplishing one of the most important strategic missions here in theater. We are collectively known as part of the Multinational Force-Iraq and play a significant role in assisting the people of Iraq on their continued journey toward peace and prosperity.

Military presence in Kuwait include substantial Kuwaiti airbases and a Kuwaiti brigade Secretary of Defense William J. Perry to the American Bar Association, Aug. 6, 1996 (Volume 11, Number 77
The Risks If We Would Be Free http://www.defense.gov/speeches/speech.aspx?speechid=959)

Our military presence includes substantial airpower operating out of Saudi and Kuwaiti airbases. This permits us to enforce the U.N.-sponsored "no-fly" zone over Iraq. Our presence also includes naval forces operating continuously in the Arabian Gulf, also enforcing United Nations sanctions. And it includes two brigade sets worth of pre-positioned military equipment -- one in Kuwait and one afloat offshore -- and we are adding a third brigade set in Qatar. (In Iraq/Afghanistan) Military presence includes: infantry, armor, airborne deployment, intelligence forces, security, logistics, and infrastructure CARL BOGGS summer 2006 ([professor of social sciences and film studies at National University in Los Angeles. He
is the author of numerous books on social theory, European politics, and American politics, including the anthology Masters of War (Routledge, 2003) and Imperial Delusions: American Militarism and Endless War (Rowman and Littlefield, 2005). Most recently he is the author (with Tom Pollard) of The Hollywood War Machine: Militarism in American Popular Culture (Paradigm Publishers, forthcoming). ]Pentagon Strategy, Hollywood, and Technowar http://ww3.wpunj.edu/newpol/issue41/Boggs41.htm)

The crisis of an all- volunteer military illustrates a flawed premise of technowar and RMA -- that a smaller, flexible, more high-tech armed forces can serve U.S. imperialism better at a time when conventional ground warfare has largely exhausted its potential. The present volunteer model goes back to 1973, when 40 years of conscription was finally scrapped -- an inevitable outcome of the Vietnam War. The difficulty facing war planners today is that global domination requires far more than superior technology and firepower, especially when ground troops are needed in large numbers for counterinsurgency, a lesson U.S. elites seemingly never absorbed from Vietnam. The United States presently has 1.4 million troops in uniform, but less than one-third are available for field operations and fewer yet serve as front-line troops. In Iraq and Afghanistan, the military presence includes not only large infantry, armor, and airborne deployments but forces required for intelligence, security, logistics and ongoing infrastructural tasks. Despite privatization of certain support activities, such undertakings cannot be sustained for long without reimposing some version of the draft, an option fraught with new and likely unacceptable political costs.

Berkeley 2009 <Author Name>

<File Name> <Tournament Name>

A military expedition may be determined by the designation of officers, organization of men and purchase of military stores John Bouvier, Francis Rawle 1914 (Bouvier's law dictionary and concise encyclopedia, Volume 3
http://books.google.com/books?pg=PA2336&lpg=PA2336&dq=%22constitute%20a%20military %22&sig=4thg9qS2fnb2J3KAToh_j6R5gw&ei=jRooTILMJcP68Abx24m2Dw&ct=result&id=sIWPAAAAMAAJ&ots=RbFOH2Iwyh&output=text)

No particular number of men is necessary to constitute a military expedition under the act; Its character may be determined by the designation of the officers, the organization of the men in regiments or companies, and the purchase of military stores; U. S. v. Ybanez, 53 Fed. 536. Where insurgents carrying on war against a foreign country sent a vessel to procure arms in the United States, the purchase of such arms and placing them on board the vessel was held not within 5286, though they were Intended to be used by the Insurgents in carrying on war against a foreign country, if they were not designed to constitute any part of the furnishings of the vessel herself; U. S. v. Trumbull, 48 Fed. 09. Placing munitions of war on a vessel, with Intent to carry them to insurgents in a foreign country, but without intent that they shall constitute any part of the furnishings of the vessel, is not within the act; The Itata, 49 Fed. 646. One who provides the means for transporting a military expedition on any part of Its journey, with knowledge of its ultimate destination and unlawful character, commits an offence under 5286; Hart v. U. S., 84 Fed. 799, 28 C. C. A. 612. Sec. 5283 Is not applicable to such a case; 13 Op. Att. Gen. 177.

Berkeley 2009 <Author Name> Danes 2009 (Anita, The Cost of the Global U.S. Military Presence, July 3, 2009)

<File Name> <Tournament Name>

Military Presence is territories and possessions for the purpose of the military and projecting power.
Because the United States retains territories and possessions such as Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and American Samoa, primarily for the purposes of the military and projecting military power, this report includes territories and possessions in its definition of global military presence. In other words , any troops, bases, or other military presence in U.S. territories or possessions is counted as overseas. Fewer than 2% of bases and only a few thousand personnel are located in these territories and possessions. Yet, as the nature of global presence shifts, territories will become more important for housing troops overseas.

Military presence includes access, bases, facilities, port visits, overflights and military advisors Harkavy 1989 (Robert E, Bases Abroad: the global foreign military presence)
http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=j5J10im3ETMC&oi=fnd&pg=PR12&dq=%22military+presence %22&ots=cZkXhpoGMm&sig=QcbtDs8ZBoQ1A7J1j9nnRQksKlI#v=onepage&q&f=false The above discussion of definitions- revolving mainly around the terms foreign military presence, access, strategic access, base, facility, installation, and so on- serves to initiate a discussion of the boundaries of this study. Those boundaries are cast rather wide to encompass virtually anything that might satisfy the virtually self-explanatory criterion of fitting all three of the words which constitute FMP- foreign, military and presence. That incorporate not only the obvious- large air and naval bases, satellite tracking facilities, etc.- but also port visits, overflights and perhaps cadres of military advisors beyond the usual handful normal to an arms transfer relationship. But there are some other issues: those historical location in time and of geographical scope or emphasis.

Military presence is bases and facilities, combat units, advisor groups and headquarters Harkavy 1989 (Robert E, Bases Abroad: the global foreign military presence)
http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=j5J10im3ETMC&oi=fnd&pg=PR12&dq=%22military+presence %22&ots=cZkXhpoGMm&sig=QcbtDs8ZBoQ1A7J1j9nnRQksKlI#v=onepage&q&f=false One might prefer the use of a still broader term, foreign military presence. Everything that falls under the headings of bases and facilities would thereby be included. So too would large military formations (combat units, etc.) and military advisory groups, and headquarters operations which may be spread around the office buildings in the centre of a host city.

Berkeley 2009 <Author Name>

<File Name> <Tournament Name>

Police Presence
Police presence is a counter-insurgency training force The Washington Post 2008 (Michael Abramowitz, Staff writer, Terrorism Fades as Issue in 2008 Campaign; But
both Obama and McCain Use National Security to Frame Larger Issues September 11, 2008) McCain has proposed some similar policies, calling for a "deployable police presence" to train foreign police to counter Islamic extremists. He calls for a new civil-military agency patterned after the World War II-era Office of Strategic Services to infiltrate terrorist networks, among other tasks. He has also said it was a

"mistake" to dismantle the U.S. Information Agency in 1998 and fold its functions into the State Department. "We need to re-create an independent agency with the sole purpose of getting America's message to the world -- a critical element in combating Islamic extremism," McCain said last summer in New Hampshire. Police Presence indicates training and filling in for regional forces
Dobbins 2003 (James F. special envoy for Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan. The current Director for International Security and Defense Policy at RAND Americas Role in Nation-building: From Germany to Iraq) http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a714052619 A more recent innovation has been dispatching US and international police to supplement the efforts of military forces to provide security for local inhabitants. These initiatives have differed greatly in scope and scale. Some have principally consisted of training programmes for local law enforcement officers; others have been major operations that have included deploying hundreds or thousands of armed international police to monitor, train, mentor, and even substitute for indigenous forces until the creation of a proficient domestic police force. Figure 3 shows numbers of foreign police per thousand inhabitants over time for the four cases that featured significant deployments of international police.

Police presence is aided by military forces

Global Security.org 2005 (Appendix C: The Infantry Battalion in Low-Intensity Conflict) http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/7-20/Appc.htm Police are a permanent government presence throughout the country. They are a valuable source of information. They also prevent and punish criminal action, and seek out the insurgent infrastructure. They may be aided by paramilitary and military organizations. For the police to be effective, they must be sufficiently protected from insurgent attack. (2) Military forces (host country or US) can help guarantee police presence in the face of the insurgent threat. The military forces add strength to the defense, permitting a government presence in larger areas than the police alone can maintain. More importantly, military forces can provide much greater security than can police and paramilitary forces. If the enemy attacks, military forces reinforce friendly outposts. Thus, these forces must be ready to act and mobile.

Berkeley 2009 <Author Name>

<File Name> <Tournament Name>

ITS- TNW = NATO

Nuclear weapons in Turkey belong to NATO Meier, 4-28-1998 (Oliver, Berlin Information-center for Transatlantic Security statement coordinator, "NATO
Nuclear Weapons Transfers," http://www.bits.de/public/articles/om280498.htm)

Mr. Chairman, we would like to draw attention to a case of nuclear proliferation that has been moving up the diplomatic and political agenda since 1995. Under NATO nuclear sharing arrangements, 150-200 US nuclear
weapons remain deployed in Belgium, Germany, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Turkey, and the United Kingdom. Under NATO nuclear sharing arrangements, these countries are involved in consultations on the possible use of these weapons and training for employment of these weapons of mass destruction. It is also clear that the other member states of the Alliance Canada, Denmark, Iceland, Luxembourg, Norway, Portugal, and Spain pursue diplomatic policies which support the nuclear policies of the three nuclear weapon states in NATO, France, the United Kingdom and the United States . The three

candidate members, Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary, have adopted the same approach. We believe that these arrangements - which enable some non-nuclear weapon states to be actively involved in the nuclear weapons policies of the Western nuclear powers - are contradicting the intent and possibly the letter of Articles I and II of the NPT. It is therefore timely and appropriate for these issues to be addressed in the NPT Review Process. NATO nuclear weapons and the associated arrangements represent a major hurdle to further and substantial steps toward nuclear disarmament. The continued deployment of these weapons in Europe and the continued practice of nuclear sharing harms the nonproliferation regime in several respects: First, it runs counter to the NPTs main purpose of limiting access to nuclear weapons. It actually widens access to nuclear weapons for training purposes in peacetime and use during wartime. NATOs system of nuclear sharing enlarges the number of states who participate in nuclear planning. Currently, all NATO member states
who wish to do so can participate in discussions on nuclear planning and doctrine. With the planned enlargement of the Alliance, the number of states eligible to participate in these arrangements will increase. Further, in case of war, the

United States still plans to transfer control over nuclear weapons to Allied countries. Current NATO policy increases the number of countries with the capability to wage nuclear war. Six states, which claim non-nuclear status under the NPT have that capability. As the distinguished delegate from Turkey said yesterday in his prepared statement, "Turkey...apart from the nuclear umbrella of NATO Alliance, does not possess nuclear weapons." TNWs in Turkey belong to NATO Richard Weitz April 12 2010 ([Ph.D., Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Political-Military Analysis, the
Hudson Institute] THE FUTURE OF NATO NUCLEAR WEAPONS ON TURKISH SOIL http://www.silkroadstudies.org/new/inside/turkey/2010/100412-TRA.pdf)

As part of the current NATO deliberation, there have been proposals to increase the number of U.S. nuclear weapons stored in Turkey as part of an alliance-wide consolidation of NATOs TNW arsenal. Some proponents of retaining NATOs nuclear-sharing arrangements favor removing them from those
European countries that no longer want them on their soil and relocating them into those countries that do, which might only include Turkey and perhaps Italy. If NATO withdrew U.S. TNW from all other European countries, the

Turkish government could find it uncomfortable remaining the only NATO nuclear-hosting state, and might request their removal from its territory as well. But then Turkey might proceed to develop an independent
nuclear deterrent in any case for the reasons described above.

NATO has TNWs in Turkey Claudine Lamond June 2009 (Tactical Nuclear Weapons in Russian Foreign Policy International security report
http://www.atlantic-community.org/app/webroot/files/articlepdf/140809_ISR%20-%20Russian%20TNW%20C %20Lamond.pdf)

The stationing of NATOs TNWs in western European states has been a continued sore point in relations between Russia and the five host states of Turkey, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany and Italy. Russia
resents the current nuclear sharing arrangement as it believes such actions are a violation of their obligations to the NPT.

Berkeley 2009 <File Name> <Author Name> <Tournament Name> Their removal or consolidation would mark an improvement in European Russian relations. U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Rose Gottemoeller has signalled that America is willing to enter in negotiations with Russia about these deployments and such discussion could begin as early as December 2009.16

The 90 TNWs in Turkey are part of NATOs arsenal Zvi Bar'el Sunday, February 21, 2010 (Haaretz Iran is regional superpower even without nukes
http://www.campaigniran.org/casmii/index.php?q=node/9441)

Of course, Netanyahu forgot to mention to Papandreou what he already knows - that there are about 90 American-made tactical nuclear weapons in Turkey, part of the NATO arsenal, which no one knows what to do with as Turkey has no aircraft dedicated to this purpose. Saudi Arabia lacks the scientific infrastructure for nuclear capability, and Egypt has for more than 25 years been debating where it will build its first nuclear reactor. A nuclear Middle East is still a distant dream.

Berkeley 2009 <Author Name>

<File Name> <Tournament Name>

AT: WE DONT GET TURKEY AFFS

The U.S. has troops in Turkey and the Turkish people hate them. You get an AFF and good ground Claudine Lamond and Paul Ingram January 23 2009 (Politics around US tactical nuclear weapons in European host
states http://www.atlantic-community.org/app/webroot/files/articlepdf/CLamondTNWinNATO.pdf)

There have been public expressions of resentment towards the US military presence in Turkey ever since the lead up to the US war with Iraq. The United States insisted on the government allowing American troops to use Turkey as a staging post, despite overwhelmingly antiwar Turkish public and political opinion. Limited permission was granted after heavy debates and delay in the Turkish parliament

10

Berkeley 2009 <Author Name>

<File Name> <Tournament Name>

AFF- NATOS TNW = U.S. TNW

When they say NATOs TNW they are referring to those belonging to the U.S. Nikolai Sokov Jul 17, 2009 (Issue 4 Tactical (Substrategic)
Nuclear Weapons http://kms1.isn.ethz.ch/serviceengine/Files/ISN/116407/ichaptersection_singledocument/6fdafccc-e91c-4e54-a3ae5cc30666948c/en/Issue4.pdf.)

When the West speaks about NATO TNW, it means American short-range assets gravity bombs intended for aircraft. Great Britain no longer has TNW and French nuclear weapons should be more properly classified as either strategic or intermediate-range. Thus, as far as NATO is concerned, the issue of TNW is effectively the issue of the limited number of U.S. nuclear weapons in Europe.

11

Berkeley 2009 <Author Name>

<File Name> <Tournament Name>

ITS- AFGHANISTAN SOLDIERS = NATO

U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan are under control of NATO Kosta Harlan June 8, 2010 (10 NATO troops killed in Afghanistan, U.S. occupation crumbling: Deadliest day on
record this year for U.S./NATO occupation http://www.fightbacknews.org/2010/6/8/10-nato-troops-killed-afghanistanus-occupation-crumbling) Ten NATO occupation soldiers were killed by Afghan resistance forces on June 7, marking the deadliest day on record for the U.S. occupation of Afghanistan. Seven of those killed were U.S. soldiers. NATO reported that five troops were killed in an insurgent attack against a police training center, two soldiers were killed in a roadside bombing attack and one in a small arms attack. One day earlier, June 6, five NATO troops were killed in small arms fire attacks, a roadside bombing and a car crash. It is unclear if the car crash was related to a resistance attack.

U.S. troops are part of NATO MSNBC 6/18/2010 (5 NATO troops killed in Afghanistan: Three Americans among the casualties
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37780826/ns/world_news-south_and_central_asia/) Five NATO troops including three Americans died in fighting Friday in Afghanistan, raising to 34 the number of U.S. troops killed in the war so far this month. NATO said Friday that two Americans died in an insurgent attack and another died in a roadside bomb explosion, but did not provide further details. The U.S. command confirmed their nationalities but did not specify where they died.

Substantial- Troops
100,000 troops are substantial D.O.D. Tuesday, March 19, 1996 (Transcript : DoD News Briefing : Mr. Kenneth H. Bacon, ATSD (PA)
http://www.defense.gov/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=448 )

A: As I said, we're not there to provoke anyone. We're there to show our interest in peace and stability in Asia. We have 100,000 troops stationed in Asia. We have a substantial military presence in Asia. We believe that this military presence has helped bring about an era of peace and prosperity throughout all of Asia and we're interested in preserving that. We believe that all the countries in Asia are also interested in preserving that atmosphere of peace and prosperity.

12

Berkeley 2009 <Author Name>

<File Name> <Tournament Name>

Substantial- D.O.D definitions

Substantial reduction is at least 50% (in joint ACAT ID programs) Office of the security of defense (D.O.D) April 5, 2002 (DoD 5000.2-R MANDATORY PROCEDURES FOR MAJOR DEFENSE ACQUISITION PROGRAMS (MDAPS) AND MAJOR AUTOMATED INFORMATION SYSTEM (MAIS) ACQUISITION PROGRAMS http://exploration.nasa.gov/documents/TTT_052005/DoD50002R.pdf?q=dod-financial-managementregulation-volume-2b-chapter-17) C7.10.3.12. The DoD Components shall not terminate or substantially reduce participation in joint ACAT ID programs without Requirements Authority review and USD(AT&L) approval; or in joint ACAT IA programs without Requirements Authority review and ASD(C3I) approval. The USD(AT&L) or ASD(C3I) may require a DoD Component to continue some or all funding, as necessary, to sustain the joint program in an efficient manner, despite approving their request to terminate or reduce participation. Substantial reduction is defined as a funding or quantity decrease of 50 percent or more in the total funding or quantities in the latest President's Budget for that portion of the joint program funded by the DoD Component seeking the termination or reduced participation. Substantial reduction is at least 25% (in international cooperative ACAT ID programs) Office of the security of defense (D.O.D) April 5, 2002 (DoD 5000.2-R MANDATORY PROCEDURES FOR MAJOR DEFENSE ACQUISITION PROGRAMS (MDAPS) AND MAJOR AUTOMATED INFORMATION SYSTEM (MAIS) ACQUISITION PROGRAMS http://exploration.nasa.gov/documents/TTT_052005/DoD50002R.pdf?q=dod-financial-managementregulation-volume-2b-chapter-17)
C7.11.3.2. The DoD Components shall not terminate or substantially reduce participation in international cooperative ACAT ID programs under signed international agreements without USD(AT&L) approval; or in international cooperative ACAT IAM programs without ASD(C3I) approval. A DoD Component may not terminate or substantially reduce U.S. participation in an international cooperative program until after providing notification to the USD(AT&L) or ASD(C3I). As a result of that notification, the USD(AT&L) or the ASD(C3I) may require the DoD Component to continue to provide some or all of the funding for that program in order to minimize the impact on the international cooperative program. Substantial reduction

is defined as a funding or quantity decrease of 25 percent or more in the total funding or quantities in the latest President's Budget for that portion of the international cooperative program funded by the DoD Component seeking the termination or reduced participation.

13

Berkeley 2009 <Author Name>

<File Name> <Tournament Name>

Substantial Reduction= 20%

Substantially is 20% less Cheney 91(Annual Report to the President and the Congress, January 1991)
http://osdhistory.defense.gov/docs/1991%20DoD%20Annual%20Report.pdf An important result of the new GPALS policy approach is that out year funding requirements will be reduced substantially. Total out year funding costs for GPALS will be approximately 20 percent less than previous Phase I estimates for FY 1992-97. Research on follow-on technologies will continue to be funded, but at a more relaxed pace and schedule, to provide a hedge against future potential threats in the post -Col d War era.

14

Berkeley 2009 <Author Name>

<File Name> <Tournament Name>

Substantial- TNW
Only a reduction of 16,000 TNWs is a substantial START proves Haralambos Athanasopulos, 2000 (Nuclear disarmament in international law, http://books.google.com/books?
id=P0KfUGzIp_IC&pg=PA108&lpg=PA108&dq=%22The+Legal+Impact+of+the+START+I+Treaty+on+the+U.S.Soviet+Nuclear+Disarmament+Process. %22&source=bl&ots=QX89jxHuxZ&sig=NmpzYY2hspfUfh5wz4uiDB3ge0I&hl=en&ei=PtonTLzpK4iHnQeT4eG8Bg& sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBIQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22The%20Legal%20Impact %20of%20the%20START%20I%20Treaty%20on%20the%20U.S.-Soviet%20Nuclear%20Disarmament%20Process. %22&f=false) The Legal Impact of the START I Treaty on the U.S.-Soviet Nuclear Disarmament Process. A legal evaluation of its impact on U.S.-Soviet bilateral nuclear disarmament clearly shows that the START I Treaty constitutes a significant development to this end. Indeed, the fact that both parties are obliged to reduce through elimination and conversion their

lethal strategic offensive nuclear arms by approximately 7,000 strategic nuclear warheads, which at the time of the signature of the treaty numbered about 23,000 leads to the conclusion that the START I Treaty requires a substantial reduction in the U.S.-Soviet strategic nuclear arsenals. Despite these reductions, both
parties will still have deployed nearly 16,000 strategic nuclear warheads, which are more than enough to destroy not only themselves, but civilization itself many times over in a U.S.-Soviet nuclear war.

Turkey has 50-90 TNWs Claudine Lamond and Paul Ingram January 23 2009 (Politics around US tactical nuclear weapons in European host
states http://www.atlantic-community.org/app/webroot/files/articlepdf/CLamondTNWinNATO.pdf) While exact figures of US tactical nuclear weapons in Europe are classified (NATO does not publish figures on its nuclear arsenals); it is believed there are approximately 200-350 US tactical nuclear weapons in Europe.2 In Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands there are said to be 10-20 TNW B-61s based at each of the following airbases: Kliene Brogel, Buchel and Volkel. In Italy around 50 TNW are thought to be based on the Aviano airbase and 20-40 on the Ghedi Torre airbase. The

United States is believed to hold around 50-90 TNW at the Incirlik airbase in Turkey.

15

Berkeley 2009 <Author Name>

<File Name> <Tournament Name>

Substantial- PMCs
Contractors are a substantial part of the war in Iraq U.S. Congress October 30, 2009 Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction Quarterly Report to the United
States Congress http://www.sigir.mil/files/quarterlyreports/October2009/Report_-_October_2009.pdf

Contractors continue to play a substantial role in supporting U.S. military and diplomatic operations and sustainment, as well as reconstruction programs, in Iraq. DoD reports that as of August 2009, almost 174,000 contractor personnel were working in Iraq. For a breakdown by agency, see Table 2.7. These

16