tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6865007.post3588023223220237258..comments2023-11-05T00:59:10.828-07:00Comments on decorabilia: the benefits of private military firmsJim Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09928624189124041120noreply@blogger.comBlogger21125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6865007.post-64967595714982913082011-04-24T15:44:17.844-07:002011-04-24T15:44:17.844-07:00Novice LD'er asking what my value and critereo...Novice LD'er asking what my value and critereon should be writing an affirmative case on the March/April topic?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6865007.post-8085750495142321202011-03-13T18:50:44.562-07:002011-03-13T18:50:44.562-07:00I see indications that Xeros Services is working t...I see indications that <a href="http://www.xerosservices.com/index.php" rel="nofollow">Xeros Services</a> is working to protect South Korean oil interests, but exactly how isn't detailed.Jim Andersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09928624189124041120noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6865007.post-90908250379510841142011-03-13T18:27:47.546-07:002011-03-13T18:27:47.546-07:00Are there any cards/articles that talk about the U...Are there any cards/articles that talk about the U.S. using PMFs in south korea?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6865007.post-41114292973710258352011-03-06T11:45:27.474-08:002011-03-06T11:45:27.474-08:00That's right; PMFs are primarily engaged in su...That's right; PMFs are primarily engaged in support and security operations.<br /><br />However, I'm not sure why that would matter too much, for two reasons:<br /><br />1. The services PMFs provide, even if merely logistical, are "mission critical," both in practical and moral senses.<br /><br />2. One doesn't have to be involved in offensive operations to get in trouble, militarily speaking. The infamous Blackwater incident in 2007 comes to mind.Jim Andersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09928624189124041120noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6865007.post-41249094654257995542011-03-04T09:41:24.876-08:002011-03-04T09:41:24.876-08:00Hey Jim, there is a lot of talk about PMF's be...Hey Jim, there is a lot of talk about PMF's being involved in fighting wars, but has anyone come up with a real example where a PMF was used directly and solely to complete a combat operation, it seems like everyone assumes that PMF's do combat operations, when from what I have read, they don't actively participate in combat operations, like capturing strongholds, and taking down terrorist targets.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6865007.post-55300225139839449712011-02-27T16:50:00.769-08:002011-02-27T16:50:00.769-08:00I see what you're saying, and that's the d...I see what you're saying, and that's the difficulty of finding definitions for this debate--"Private Military Firm" isn't a legal term of art, so you have to find functional definitions that fairly divide up ground. <br /><br />Compare my reading of Brooks and Shevlin with <a href="http://www.privatemilitary.org/private_military_companies.html" rel="nofollow">this definition</a>, which is equally broad:<br /><br /><i>"Private MIlitary Companies" or PMCs are on occasions referred to as "Military Firms", "Military Service Providers" (MSPs), "Privatized Military Firms" (PMFs), "Transnational Security Corporations" (TSCs), and "security contractors". All of these terms, however, point at the same phenomenon: firms offering security and military-related services that up to the 1980s used to be considered the preserve of the state.</i><br /><br />I think a case can be made that because of their aggressive posture, PMCs are the most salient PMFs, but that seems to take away Aff ground.Jim Andersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09928624189124041120noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6865007.post-19678531696676957502011-02-27T16:27:34.472-08:002011-02-27T16:27:34.472-08:00What's the difference between a firm and a com...What's the difference between a firm and a company? Because when I google private military firm, all I get is private military company. Firm is pretty much synonomous with company, is it not?<br /><br />I also looked at Brooks's article, and it makes no mention of "private military firms"; it only refers to them as "private firms."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6865007.post-9169444341178836752011-02-27T09:27:24.104-08:002011-02-27T09:27:24.104-08:00Be very, very careful with the wording: the resolu...Be very, very careful with the wording: the resolution says "private military firms," <i>not</i> "private military companies." In Brooks and Shevlin's article, "firm" is the broader designation, synonymous with the phrase "battlefield contractors," and inclusive of NSPs, PSCs, and PMCs.Jim Andersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09928624189124041120noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6865007.post-50026542543012006852011-02-27T07:38:33.764-08:002011-02-27T07:38:33.764-08:00Your source distinguishes between Nonlethal Servic...Your source distinguishes between Nonlethal Service Providers and Private Military Companies - can one use that to argue that food service and the like are nontopical?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6865007.post-53846492583490500702011-02-23T18:08:42.370-08:002011-02-23T18:08:42.370-08:00Your contentions should link through your criterio...Your contentions should link through your criterion to your value, so you'd have to show why there's a constitutional obligation to achieve safety (shouldn't be hard to do), and why / how the Constitution allows or permits their use.Jim Andersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09928624189124041120noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6865007.post-30033828784806979692011-02-23T16:59:52.965-08:002011-02-23T16:59:52.965-08:00can i have a value of safety and a vc of constitut...can i have a value of safety and a vc of constitutionality <br />if my contentions are talking about the services they provide, the new regulations they have to follow, their cost efficiency, and how incapable the military would be without themAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6865007.post-54047814899774293512011-02-14T19:38:33.558-08:002011-02-14T19:38:33.558-08:00ok, thanks so much! i think the National Military ...ok, thanks so much! i think the National Military Strategy is what i'm going to lay my framework with.Madisonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01582493559387374538noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6865007.post-23347910797082805222011-02-14T19:11:49.926-08:002011-02-14T19:11:49.926-08:00Madi, there are a few ways to approach the problem...<b>Madi</b>, there are a few ways to approach the problem. <br /><br />One is to try to outline the broad objectives as described in the <a href="http://www.jcs.mil//content/files/2011-02/020811084800_2011_NMS_-_08_FEB_2011.pdf" rel="nofollow">2011 National Military Strategy</a>: <br /><br /><i>Let us not forget, the Nation remains at war abroad to defend against and defeat threats to our homeland. Our foremost priority is the security of the American people, our territory, and our way of life. In the current operational environment, this means each component of our Joint Force will remain aligned to achieve success in our ongoing campaign in Afghanistan and security cooperation efforts with Pakistan, and against violent extremism worldwide. We must continue to prevent attacks against the United States and its allies, strengthen international and regional security, and be prepared to deter and defeat aggression that would undermine international stability as we fight these campaigns. </i><br /><br />Another is to shift focus away from the objectives, which are subject to change as the global situation changes--what if, for instance, Egypt's generals decided to attack Israel tomorrow? Or what if North Korea attacked South Korea, or China attacked Taiwain?--and to emphasize that this is a debate over principles. We can evaluate PMFs on their merits and whether they're justified without having to evaluate specific military objectives.Jim Andersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09928624189124041120noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6865007.post-12795740564454701942011-02-14T16:23:39.914-08:002011-02-14T16:23:39.914-08:00my question is this: for an aff argument, when def...my question is this: for an aff argument, when defining what the U.S. military objectives are, what is the best way to do so? simply define objectives? or is there a published version of what the military claims it's objectives to be? for instance, if the military claimed that it's objective was the security of our nation, then the only thing aff would have to prove is that the U.S. is justified in using private military forms when attempting to secure our nation, correct? If so, where could i look for a definition of the U.S. military objectives?Madisonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01582493559387374538noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6865007.post-36249422146363678342011-02-12T15:07:57.861-08:002011-02-12T15:07:57.861-08:00Email me if you're having trouble finding reso...Email me if you're having trouble finding resources online.Jim Andersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09928624189124041120noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6865007.post-88052702287628611392011-02-09T22:53:40.756-08:002011-02-09T22:53:40.756-08:00Jim,
I searched on jstor and lexis-nexis and could...Jim,<br />I searched on jstor and lexis-nexis and could not find the article. Could you post a link or be willing to e-mail a copy? Thanks!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6865007.post-67725257288878378802011-02-07T12:30:42.110-08:002011-02-07T12:30:42.110-08:00where can I find "Reconsidering Battlefield C...where can I find "Reconsidering Battlefield Contractors?" Is there an online copy of some sort?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6865007.post-57161107681453791262011-02-04T13:01:41.569-08:002011-02-04T13:01:41.569-08:00C,
I don't think that should really even have...C,<br /><br />I don't think that should really even have to be a question, it is our job as debaters to make the topic accessible to them.<br /><br />The LD rules themselves state that the arguments should be understandable to an educated non-specialist listener. Thus if you need to take a few minutes to define terms and flesh out your ideas to be sure your judge understands you case then so be it.<br /><br />Assuming the judges fall into the category of an "educated" person then any concept should be explainable to them and understandable should the debaters do a good job.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6865007.post-58927834565261622072011-02-04T12:07:08.501-08:002011-02-04T12:07:08.501-08:00Jim do you think causal, lay, or even semi educate...Jim do you think causal, lay, or even semi educated judges are going to be able to judge debates on this effectively? I dont think your average person even knows anything about private military firms, let alone military justifications for them.Cnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6865007.post-4035453393226219702011-02-04T06:49:34.849-08:002011-02-04T06:49:34.849-08:00An attack for which side?An attack for which side?Jim Andersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09928624189124041120noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6865007.post-16241166489745813472011-02-04T06:30:59.311-08:002011-02-04T06:30:59.311-08:00I have a question on how to make an attack out of ...I have a question on how to make an attack out of this claim. The claim is that under U.S law, PMC cannot engage in combat. How could you make an attack out of that?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com