Gangsta Blocks

DDI 2008 SS
Bozman/Kapustina

RANDOM BLOCKS

POLITIX IMPACT CALC………………………………………………………………………………………………………2

AT: BUSH STRIKE IRAN.............................................................................................................................................................
AT: BUSH STRIKE IRAN..............................................................................................................................................................
AT: ENERGY NOT KEY- MUST READ.......................................................................................................................................
AT: ELECTIONS TOO FAR AWAY...............................................................................................................................................
AT: U OVERWHELMS THE LINK...............................................................................................................................................
AT: Congress CP Perm………………………………………………………………………………………………………….8

1
Gangsta Blocks
DDI 2008 SS
Bozman/Kapustina

Politix Impact CALC

AND, Only Middle Eastern war cause extinction.

Bahig Nassar, Arab Co-ordinating Centre of Non-Governmental Organizations, and Afro-Asian People’s Solidary Organization,
11/25/02, keynote paper for Cordoba Dialogue on Peace and Human Rights in Europe and the Middle East,
http://www.inesglobal.org/BahigNassar.htm

Wars in the Middle East are of a new type. Formerly, the possession of nuclear weapons by the United States and the Soviet
Union had prevented them, under the balance of the nuclear terror, from launching war against each other. In the Middle East,
the possession of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction leads to military clashes and wars. Instead of
eliminating weapons of mass destruction, the United States and Israel are using military force to prevent others from acquiring
them, while they insist on maintaining their own weapons to pose deadly threats to other nations. But the production,
proliferation and threat or use of weapons of mass destruction (nuclear chemical and biological) are among the major global
problems which could lead, if left unchecked, to the extinction of life on earth. Different from the limited character of former
wars, the current wars in the Middle East manipulate global problems and escalate their dangers instead of solving them.

2
Gangsta Blocks
DDI 2008 SS
Bozman/Kapustina

AT: BUSH STRIKE IRAN

Bush will pursue diplomacy until the end of his term, but the next administration is unpredictable
Washington Post, 8-3-08, “'Bomb Bomb Iran'? Not Likely,” David Ignatius, staff reporter, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
dyn/content/article/2008/08/01/AR2008080102872.html, KAPUSTINA

Analysts speculate about the danger of a U.S. or Israeli military attack on Iran before the Bush administration departs office
next January. But if you read the tea leaves carefully, the evidence is actually pointing in the opposite direction.
One sign that the diplomatic track is dominant for now is that the administration plans to announce late this month that it will
open an interest section in Tehran, a senior official disclosed Thursday. This will be an important symbol, as it will be the first
American diplomatic mission in Iran since the U.S. Embassy there was seized in 1979. The official described it as an effort to
"reach out to the Iranian people." The Iranian government has long had an interest section in Washington. The administration's
wariness of military options is also clear from recent efforts to dissuade Israel from attacking Iranian nuclear facilities. Mike
McConnell, the director of national intelligence, traveled to Israel in early June; he was followed in late June by Adm. Michael
Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Both officials explained to their Israeli counterparts why the United States
believes an attack isn't necessary now, because the Iranians can't yet build a nuclear weapon, and why an attack would damage
U.S. national interests.
McConnell and Mullen also informed the Israelis that the United States would oppose overflights of Iraqi airspace to attack
Iran, an administration official said. The United States has reassured the Iraqi government that it would not approve Israeli
overflights, after the Iraqis strongly protested any potential violation of their sovereignty.
We have made our position abundantly clear to the Israelis and indeed to the world, not just in our public statements but in our
private conversations, as well," said Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell.
Though the administration has often been portrayed as divided over military options against Iran, an official denied there are
now any sharp rifts. "There is uniformity across the U.S. government about the way to proceed with Iran," the official said.
"Everyone from this White House, including the vice president's office, is in agreement that the military option is not the best
option at this point, and we should pursue diplomatic and economic pressures."
U.S. opposition to an Israeli military strike now is based on four factors, the official said. First, a strike would retard the Iranian
nuclear program without destroying it. (One intelligence estimate is that an attack would delay the Iranians by just two months
to two years.) Second, a strike would rally support for the unpopular government of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad when he
faces growing economic difficulty. Third, an attack would undermine U.S. policy in Iraq, when the United States appears to be
making some progress, and in Afghanistan. And, finally, a strike against Iran, as with any military action, would have
unpredictable consequences.
In evaluating the Iranian nuclear threat, the United States and Israel are using different intelligence. U.S. analysts believe Iran
can't produce a bomb before the end of 2009 and probably not until the 2010--2015 time frame, according to a senior U.S.
intelligence official. The Israelis, however, fear that Iran could enrich enough uranium for a weapon sometime next year. By
late 2009, the Israelis warn, the Iranians could produce the 1,000 kilograms of low-enriched uranium that could quickly be
converted to the 25 kilos of highly enriched fuel needed for a bomb.
Reassuring the Israelis of U.S. resolve toward Iran will be a tricky challenge for the next administration. A pro-Israel think
tank, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, has already tried to lock in a consensus policy through a high-level task
force that included advisers to both presidential campaigns.
The June 2008 report of the institute advocated "preventive military action" against Iran and warned: "An American
commitment to deterrence, especially if seen by Israelis as a substitute for prevention, is itself likely to spur Israel to consider
independent action." Among the signatories were Anthony Lake and Susan Rice, senior advisers in the Obama campaign, even
though Obama is nominally committed to seeking diplomatic talks with Iran.
The crunch on the Iranian nuclear issue will come next year, when there are new governments in Israel and the United States --
and a volatile presidential election scheduled in Iran. For now the United States and its allies, including Israel, seem willing to
pursue the diplomatic track. But if that doesn't work -- and there are no signs yet that Tehran is willing to bend -- all the deadly
options will remain on the table.

3
Gangsta Blocks
DDI 2008 SS
Bozman/Kapustina

AT: BUSH STRIKE IRAN

Bush won’t strike Iran regardless of election- will pursue diplomatic solutions until the end of his term
USA Today, 4-10-06, “Bush: Iran strike plans 'wild speculation'” http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-04-10-iran_x.htm,
KAPUSTINA

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Bush said Monday that force is not necessarily required to stop Iran from having a nuclear
weapon, and he dismissed reports of plans for a military attack against Tehran as "wild speculation."
Bush said his goal is to keep the Iranians from having the capability or the knowledge to have a nuclear weapon.
"I know we're here in Washington (where) prevention means force," Bush said during an appearance at the Paul Nitze School
of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University. "It doesn't mean force necessarily. In this case it means
diplomacy."
Taking questions from the audience, Bush also made these points:
• He declassified part of a prewar intelligence report on Iraq in 2003 to show Americans the basis for his statements about the
threat posed by Saddam Hussein. "I wanted people to see the truth," he told a questioner who said there was evidence of a
concerted effort by the White House to punish war-critic Joseph Wilson. Bush said he could not comment on the CIA leak case
because it is a matter under investigation.
• He intends to remain on the sidelines as Republicans choose their nominee for president in 2008. "I will be an interested
observer," said Bush. He said he would focus his energy on issues such as decreasing the nation's reliance on foreign oil and
finding answers to the solvency problems of Medicare and Social Security. "But I'm just going to let the politics run its course."

4
Gangsta Blocks
DDI 2008 SS
Bozman/Kapustina

AT: ENERGY NOT KEY- MUST READ

Energy is the determinant issue in the election- Obama’s lead will be destroyed if McCain gets credit
Christian Science Monitor, 8-1-08, David Cook, Obama’s lead narrows amid energy worries
http://features.csmonitor.com/monitorbreakfast/2008/08/01/obamas-lead-narrows-amid-energy-worries/, KAPUSTINA

Congress headed home Friday for a five-week recess without passing legislation to deal with high energy prices that are at the
top of voters’ concerns.
Both parties in Congress played a role in blocking action on energy. Senate Republicans prevented action on a measure to curb
speculation in oil futures. House Democratic leaders employed voting procedures that effectively blocked Republicans from
forcing a vote on opening new areas to oil exploration, a step with widespread Congressional support.
The stalemate has been driven, in part, by each party’s desire to keep the other from seizing the political high ground on an
issue of paramount importance to voters as the November elections draw closer.
A Quinnipiac University poll released Thursday showed that energy and the gasoline crisis have “emerged as the dominant
economic issue,” said Clay Richards, assistant director of Quinnipiac’s Polling Institute. Mr. Richards spoke at a Monitor-
sponsored breakfast for reporters on Thursday morning.
The new Quinnipiac poll examined voter attitudes in three key battleground states – Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. “We gave
people a list of retirement values, real estate, gasoline prices and food prices and said which one of them is the most important
and more than one third picked gasoline prices,” Richards said. “The campaign seems to be focusing on energy.”
Voters say they are more concerned about energy than the war in Iraq, according to Peter Brown, assistant director of the
Quinnipiac poll, who also spoke at the Monitor breakfast.
The new poll found that while Senator Obama leads Senator McCain in all three states, Obama’s lead has narrowed in the past
month. Florida and Ohio are now too close to call. “It appears that Senator Obama’s trip to Europe and the Middle East did not
help him,” in terms of poll numbers, Mr. Brown said.
Energy has played a key role in Senator McCain’s improved position in the battleground state polls, Richards said. McCain
favors increased offshore drilling for oil, something Obama opposes.
“Senator McCain has narrowed Sen. Barrack Obama’s lead in Pennsylvania by five points, probably because his energy policy
is more in line in Pennsylvania – the Three Mile Island state where a surprising six in 10 voters now favor building new
nuclear power plants, “ Richards said.

5
Gangsta Blocks
DDI 2008 SS
Bozman/Kapustina

AT: ELECTIONS TOO FAR AWAY

1. Registration deadline means now is the key time for issues
Alternet, 8-4-08, Steven Rosenfeld, “Can Obama Turn the Democratic Party Upside Down with the Biggest Voter
Mobilization Drive in History?,”
http://www.alternet.org/election08/93718/can_obama_turn_the_democratic_party_upside_down_with_the_biggest_voter_mobi
lization_drive_in_history_/, KAPUSTINA

Barack Obama's presidential campaign is seeking to register "millions" of new voters immediately after the Democratic
Convention, according to top campaign officials who say the effort is one facet of a "capacity-building" effort this summer that
includes extensively training thousands of campaign workers as community organizers.
The voter registration effort is part of a broader strategy to not just elect Obama, but also to alter the political landscape by
shifting power from Washington to the grassroots, the officials say, to cultivate a base for significant political reforms. The
campaign sees its training and voter registration efforts as the cornerstone of building a new progressive movement like the rise
of conservatism during Ronald Reagan's presidency.

6
Gangsta Blocks
DDI 2008 SS
Bozman/Kapustina

AT: U OVERWHELMS THE LINK

Obama’s win is not set in stone
Wall Street Journal, 06/28/08 http://blogs.wsj.com/politicalperceptions/2008/06/28/political-wisdom-yes-obama-
can-lose-heres’-how/

“Big, summertime leads in presidential contests can vanish,” West writes. “Comparisons are already being drawn with 1988
Democratic nominee Michael Dukakis, who looked like a mortal lock after he bounced, in late July, to a 17-point advantage
over George H. W. Bush. Obama could lose, too, if he can’t make a convincing case to millions of undecided voters who regard
him as a stranger, despite the fact that his name and face are recognized around the world.”

7
Gangsta Blocks
DDI 2008 SS
Bozman/Kapustina

AT: CONGRESS CP PERM

1. mootness doctrine- court only rules on cases in controversy- if congress changes the law and then courts overturn it, it
violates the mootness doctrine. This hurts courts credibility and undermines their decisions, turning case
Evan Tsen Lee, 2000, writes for the Harvard Law Review, law professor at UC Hastings College, “Mootness (update),”
http://www.novelguide.com/a/discover/eamc_04/eamc_04_01706.html, KAPUSTINA

History has yet to pronounce on the wisdom of this practice. Making unprincipled rulings on mootness grounds creates a
tension with the Court's tradition of giving reasoned explanations for its decisions. Lawyers and lower court judges puzzle
over technical-looking opinions that add up to little more than, "Better wait." Worse yet, unprincipled decisionmaking
threatens the very public credibility that the Court seeks to protect.