Pasta Debates (CON)
It is because I disagree with such dictating countries that I negate "That the United States should nationalize oil exports and seek to join OPEC".
Now moving on to some negative observations for today's debate:
Observation 1 is that in order for my opponent to win this debate, the affirmative burden is to provide at least more than 1 exemplifying reason in which the majority believes it is politically correct to join OPEC.
Observation 2 is that in order for myself to win this debate, the negative burden is to provide at least 1 reason in which it would be negative towards the US to nationalize oil exports and seek to join OPEC.
Observation 3 is that OPEC includes the following countries; Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela (1).
The highest value of today's debate is morality. Morality can be easily defined as particular moral principles or rules of conduct (2). In order to achieve morality my value criterion will be the principle that the US shall not become a dictatorship by following the systematic conduct of OPEC, and instead promote democracy.
Contention 1 is that it is nearly impossible for the United States to join OPEC.
Countries seeking membership in the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries must have a 'substantial net export of crude petroleum' and 'fundamentally similar interests' to current members... (3)
This shows that the current state of affairs shows us that the US will probably not be able to become part of OPEC, even if they tried.
Contention 2 is that there are currently many issues between the US and Venezuelan government.
The United States' revocation of the Venezuelan ambassador's visa has put a spotlight on tense ties between the ideologically opposed nations.
President Hugo Chavez has threatened to cut off oil supplies to the United States during previous diplomatic flare-ups, but he has never taken that step.
The latest dispute is unlikely to impact oil exports to the United States, which are important to both economies, analysts and diplomats believe. But energy ties have become increasingly tense in recent years (4)
This showing that one of the countries in OPEC is having many issues with our government, especially related towards the oil exports.
Contention 3 is that Russian ties are currently providing conflict towards OPEC relations.
Saudi Arabia has dangled the prospect of real oil production cutbacks in front of Russia in exchange for Russia dropping its support for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad (5)
This showing that currently, the ties between two major oil-producing countries have increasingly conflicted.
Contention 4 is that the current presidency is completely opposed to the OPEC union.
[On January 30, 2017] President Trump signed an executive order Friday night to keep refugees from entering the country for 120 days and immigrants from seven predominantly Muslim nations out for three months. The countries affected are Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Libya, Yemen and Somalia (6)
This showing that 2 out of the 7 countries on this executive order have no relations, meaning that the presidency is now opposing such relationships with these countries, preventing the joining into OPEC.
If my opponent is able to respond to this debate in the next round then I am willing to provide negative refutations. Until then, the debate will follow upon refutations until crystallization in the last round.
For these reasons, I ask you to vote negative in this debate.
Return To Top | Posted:
2017-03-06 21:56:49 | Speak Round