Military Presence Topic Paper

Stefan Bauschard
Potential Resolutions
I think any of the resolutions fair game for the topic committee to come up
with based on additional research.
Resolved: The United States should substantially reduce its military presence
in one or more of the following: Afghanistan, Iraq, [Iran,] Estonia, Latvia,
Lithuania, Syria, Japan, Korea [add or subtract more countries]
Resolved: The United States should substantially alter its military presence in
one or more of the following: Afghanistan, Iraq, [Iran,] Estonia, Latvia,
Lithuania, Syria, Japan, Korea [add or subtract more countries]
*Resolved: The United States should substantially either increase or decrease

its military presence in one or more of the following: Afghanistan, Iraq, [Iran,]
Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Syria, [Japan, Korea,] [add or subtract more
countries, TBD on Korea and/or Japan]
*My favorite, though not necessarily convinced of J/K. I think there are a
couple problems with J/K
(a) Increase plans would move in the direction of the status quo
(b) There arent many mainstream proposals for decreases.
I wouldnt exclude at this point, but Im skeptical of the desirability of

including.
Also, if the TC thinks there is a better term than military presence, I think it
is fair for them to change it. I simply went with that based on experience and
available definitions.
I put Iran in [ ] because the case to attack Iran seems terrible and there is
probably on minimal (at best) military presence in Iran now, but it might not
Stefan Bauschard
HURT to include it in the resolution. If someone wants to run bomb Iran Aff,
best of luck to them.
Decrease could replace reduce. Some reduce definitions are included.
Stefan Bauschard
Rationale
The Pros and Cons of US military intervention in Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq,
Estonia, Latvia, Lituania, and Syria are one of the hottest topics for
geopolitical debate at the moment. The nature and role of US military
intervention in East Asia and how this relates to South Korea and particularly
Japan is always a hot topic for debates and can even interest with these other
areas through resource and diplomatic competition.
In the instances of Iraq and Afghanistan, the US had either reduced presence
almost to zero (Iraq) or had intended on reducing it to zero (Afghanistan), but
has reduced withdrawal plans (Afghanistan) and actually increased military
presence (Iraq). And there is a continued debate about intervention in Syria.
Debates about increasing or decreasing US military presence focus on
instability in these countries, Sunni-Shiite conflicts, the growing influence of
Iran, the price of oil, threats to Israel, ISIS, Al Qaeda, and other forums of
terrorism. New evidence emerges on these topics issues every single day and
there are strong advocates for both increasing and decreasing our military
presence in these regions.
Similarly, in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, (and Poland), where the US has

recently deployed 3,000 troops to support training and a show of force,
there are both advocates for increased military presence and critics who
argue that such intervention is saber-rattling and risks conflict. In addition to
arguments about US military and diplomatic credibility, these arguments
intersect debates about the threat from Russia (both to these countries and
generally) as well as overall US global leadership. Evidence is published daily
on these disputes.
In regards to Asia, especially Japan and Korea, there is a substantial of timely

(though not daily) literature about the merits of the US Japan alliance,
especially in regard to the Asia pivot, which is a highly contested idea. This
obviously strongly intersects the rise of China. These are all interesting
debates, though Im less convinced they are critical to include in the topic, if
only because they add a whole other part of the world.
I almost hate to write about critical arguments independently, because there

is a direct intersection between more theoretical arguments and policyspecific arguments on this topic that are related to militarism, imperialism,
Stefan Bauschard
orientalism, realism/idealism, feminism in foreign policy, and terror talk.
Obviously the list could go on. There is not shortage of theoretical ground,
much of which can be topically accessed.
My favorite resolution is bidirectional, but I it does limit the Affirmative plan

from going in both directions at the same time.
Stefan Bauschard
Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania,

Poland
Stefan Bauschard
Status Quo
US has deployed 3,000 trainers in Estonia, Latvia, and
Lithuania
Howard Koplowitz, 3-9-15, http://www.ibtimes.com/ukraine-crisis-us-sending3000-troops-latvia-estonia-lithuania-military-exercises-1840934
The United States is sending 3,000 soldiers near Russias doorstep for
training exercises with the militaries of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, the
Associated Press reported Monday. The deployment by the Pentagon comes
amid rising tensions with Russia on the crisis in Ukraine, in which most of the
West accuses Moscow of instigating the military conflict between pro-Russia
separatists and the Ukrainian military. Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are all
NATO countries that gained membership in the alliance in 2004. About 750
U.S. tanks, helicopters and other equipment are scheduled to arrive in the
Latvian capital of Riga next Monday, Army Col. Steve Warren told the AP. The
military exercises are expected to last three months, although Army Gen.
John OConner said the equipment will stay for as long as required to deter
Russian aggression, according to the Russian news agency Tass.
Operation Atlantic Resolve

Cheryl Pellerin, 1-12-15, http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?
id=123954
U.S. Army troops resumed Operation Atlantic Resolve land-forces training of

allied and partner forces this week as 75 Stryker combat vehicles arrived in
Eastern Europe, Pentagon Press spokesman Army Col. Steve Warren said
today. The training will take place in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland,
Warren added, and continues to demonstrate U.S. commitment to NATO
allies.
The Stryker combat vehicles are from U.S. Army Europes 2nd Cavalry
Regiment, elements of which will conduct training in Eastern Europe
alongside soldiers from allied and partner nations, Warren said, adding that
much of the training will focus on individual and team tasks.
Stefan Bauschard
Defense Department spokeswoman Air Force Lt. Col. Vanessa Hillman said
the training also will include combined, multinational platoon-level exercises
and live fires involving a combination of vehicle and foot-soldier maneuvers.
West hems in Russia a little -- https://www.stratfor.com/geopoliticaldiary/west-hems-russia-little-little
NATO: Response to the crisis in Ukraine and Security Concerns in Eastern and
Central Europe
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R43478.pdf
Stefan Bauschard
Support of EE Deployment
Article -- http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/10/the-baltic-stateswhy-the-united-states-must-strengthen-security-cooperation
Website -- http://www.defense.gov/home/features/2014/0514_atlanticresolve/
Website -- http://www.eur.army.mil/atlanticresolve/
Baltic countries welcome US support -http://dailysignal.com/2015/03/23/amid-fear-of-russian-invasion-balticcountries-welcome-us-support/
Ramping up in Europe -http://archive.militarytimes.com/section/SPECIAL15/Ramping-up-in-Europe
Russia danger to Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia -http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-31528981
Peace is over for the Baltic States -http://euromaidanpress.com/2015/04/03/the-baltic-states/
Stop Putin aggression with US forces in Eastern Europe
Stefan Bauschard
Opposition to EE Deployment
http://rt.com/op-edge/239201-us-nato-troops-baltic-states/
RT, 3-10-15, http://rt.com/op-edge/239201-us-nato-troops-baltic-states/
JJ: No, I do not think so. This is again just a show of force and partly it
exposes NATOs and Washingtons impotence over events in Ukraine. Now
that we see much more that the Europeans seemed to be decoupling their
policy from Washingtons guidance, I think there is a sense of frustration that
our hold over European security through NATO is somewhat in danger. So this
is a political show even more than a military show.
RT: Will this be more reassuring or will this potentially increase tension in
and around Europe?
JJ: I think it increases tensions in the sense that for the US to insert this kind
of force in the Baltic states right on Russias doorstep simply adds insult to
injury to the fact that we have expanded NATO so extensively in Russias
direction not for any legitimate security purpose but simply because we can,
it looked like a cost-free exercise at the time it was done. Now that the
tensions are rising between the US and Russia, there are costs associated
with it. It does contribute to a kind of hair triggered atmosphere which is in
nobodys interests.
Dangerous Brinkmanship
http://www.europeanleadershipnetwork.org/medialibrary/2014/11/09/6375e3
da/Dangerous%20Brinkmanship.pdf
Stefan Bauschard
Afghanistan
Stefan Bauschard
Status Quo
16,000 troops remain, withdrawal substantially slowed
Craig Whitlock, 2-21-15, Washington Post,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/us-nears-deal-to-modifymilitary-pullout-from-afghanistan/2015/02/21/6b3fd530-b9e1-11e4-bc30a4e75503948a_story.html
The United States and Afghanistan are nearing agreement to rewrite key
aspects of their plan for ending U.S. military involvement in the war against
Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters here, U.S. and Afghan officials said Saturday.
In a joint appearance, Afghan President Ashraf Ghani and visiting U.S.
Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter acknowledged that they are rethinking
the pace of the U.S. military withdrawal, the scope and frequency of U.S.
counterterrorism raids and whether they should keep U.S. bases open longer
than projected. Although they declined to offer more specifics, they indicated
that a new deal could be reached as soon as next month, when Ghani is
scheduled to visit Washington to meet with President Obama.
Afghan officials and U.S. military commanders have previously acknowledged
pressing Obama for more leeway in determining how quickly the remaining
10,600 U.S. troops in Afghanistan are withdrawn over the next two years. But
the comments Saturday by Ghani and Carter were the clearest sign yet that
changes are afoot.
President Obama is considering a number of options to reinforce our support

for President Ghanis security strategy, including possible changes to the
timeline for our drawdown of U.S. troops, Carter told reporters. Our priority
now is to make sure this progress sticks.
The U.S. military ended conventional combat operations in Afghanistan on
Dec. 31. American troops remain in the country to train and advise about
350,000 Afghan security forces in their fight against the Taliban.
U.S. troop levels are currently scheduled to dwindle to 5,500 by the end of
this year and to drop to zero by the time Obama leaves office in early 2017,
save for a small residual force based at the large U.S. Embassy compound in
Kabul.
Stefan Bauschard
U.S. military commanders, however, have sought more flexibility in drawing
down troop levels over that period as well as broader latitude to conduct
counterterrorism raids and airstrikes against Taliban and al-Qaeda targets.
Ghani said he was gratified by a recent Obama directive that temporarily
kept an extra 1,100 troops in Afghanistan. But he indicated he would not try
to lobby Obama to change his mind about completing the U.S. military pullout
by the end of his term, saying he respected Obamas decision.
Our relationship is not defined by the number of troops, but by the
comprehensive nature of the partnership, he added.
At least 9, 8000 will stay until the end of 2015

IB Times, 3-24-15, http://www.ibtimes.com/us-military-afghanistan-20159800-troops-remain-place-through-end-year-white-house-1857844
The United States will keep 9,800 troops in Afghanistan through the end of
2015, the White House announced Tuesday. The decision to delay the
complete withdrawal followed a meeting in Washington between President
Barack Obama and Afghan President Ashraf Ghani. The number of American
troops was originally slated to fall to 5,500 by years end.
We want to make sure we're doing everything we can to help Afghan
security forces succeed so we don't have to go back, Obama said in a White
House news conference alongside Ghani. He indicated that there are still
plans to complete the withdrawal by the end of 2016, fulfilling his pledge to
pull out of Afghanistan by the end of his second term. The slowdown in troop
withdrawal reflects our reinvigorated partnership with Afghanistan, Obama
said.
In Ghani's first visit to the White House since being elected six months ago,
the Afghan president struck a more conciliatory tone than his predecessor,
Hamid Karzai, who often tangled with the Americans. He thanked Obama and
the U.S. military in several media appearances Monday and Tuesday and
asked for the extended troop presence. "Tragedy brought us together;
interests now unite us," said Ghani, who was working in Lower Manhattan
when the 9/11 attacks occurred.
More US troops will come as part of Operation Freedom

Sentinel
Stefan Bauschard
Mint Press News, 1-6-15, http://www.mintpressnews.com/2015-time-new-usoperations-iraq-afghanistan/200501/
Considering the fanfare its capable of, the US military had quite a muted exit
from Americas longest war. The mission known as Operation Enduring
Freedom (OEF) which had been running since the 9/11 attacks of 2001, in
Afghanistan and several other countries officially ended late last month.
Maybe the celebration was subdued because there was another mission right
around the corner. OEF was replaced immediately by Operation Freedoms
Sentinel (OFS), otherwise known as the new US mission in Afghanistan. US
forces with OFS will also work as part of the new NATO-led Operation Resolute
Support, providing the bulk of that operations 12,000 total troops this year
and thousands more in 2016.
US troops supposed to be gone by 2017

Military Times, 11-24-14,
http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/pentagon/2014/11/25/new-rulesafghanistan-taliban-targets-2015/70089962/
New rules for the 9,800 U.S. troops staying in Afghanistan next year
will let commanders order airstrikes or night raids on Taliban forces
who pose a significant threat to the Afghan government, defense
officials said.
The rules came in an order recently signed by President Obama that clarified
the authorities U.S. military commanders will have after the official end of the
combat mission in December.
The new rules appear to signal an incremental expansion of the U.S. mission
in Afghanistan next year.
Six months ago, Obama announced plans to leave 9,800 U.S. troops in
Afghanistan for 2015 and limit their primary missions to two training and
advising the Afghan military and using a small cadre of special operations
troops to target al-Qaida "remnants."
With the official end of the combat mission requiring a new set of policies and
legal authorities, Obama has approved the details of precisely who U.S.
military commanders can target. In some cases, it may be Taliban insurgents.
Pentagon spokesman Rear Adm. John Kirby said Tuesday that U.S. troops
would continue targeting some, though not all, Taliban militants, and may
also provide field-level support for Afghan security forces.
Stefan Bauschard
"We won't target Taliban just merely for the sake of the fact they're Taliban
and quote-unquote 'belligerents,' " Kirby said.
However, he added: "Should members of the Taliban decide to threaten
American troops or specifically target or threaten our Afghan partners in a
tactical situation, we're going to reserve the right to take action as needed. If
they pose a threat directly to our troops or to the Afghan security forces,
certainly then they become fair game at that point."
U.S. forces also may provide "enabling support" for the Afghan military, which
may include airstrikes, medical evacuations or logistical aid.
"Clearly we know there is going to be some need for some enabling support,"
Kirby said.
Military officials emphasize there are no plans to change the troop levels that
Obama committed to Afghanistan in his May announcement, which amount to
9,800 American troops in 2015 and about half that in 2016. Obama's policy
will withdraw virtually all U.S. forces from Afghanistan before he leaves office
in January 2017.
The decision to target some Taliban forces reflects two significant
developments over the past several months the resurgence of Islamic
militants in Iraq and the new, pro-American government in Afghanistan.
Many U.S. military officials were stunned by the catastrophic collapse of
several Iraqi army divisions in May and June as militants loyal to the Islamic
State seized large swaths of northern Iraq, including the country's secondlargest city, Mosul.
The U.S. military had given the Iraqi forces billions of dollars and many years
of face-to-face training. But many of those troops simply proved unwilling to
fight.
"People are having second thoughts about their confidence in the ability of
host-nation militaries. It's always a risk when your strategy relies on someone
else to do the fighting," said Mieke Eoyang, director of the National Security
Program at Third Way.
Also influencing the American mission in Afghanistan is the election of a new
president who is far more supportive of U.S. military support than his
predecessor.
Ashraf Ghani was elected in September and promptly signed a deal with the
U.S. to keep American troops there beyond December.
But US troops will participate as part of NATOs

Operations Freedom Sentinel
Stefan Bauschard
The Times, 1-22-15, http://theweek.com/articles/534816/2015-time-somenew-operations-iraq-afghanistan
Maybe the celebration was subdued because there was another mission right
around the corner. OEF was replaced immediately by Operation Freedoms
Sentinel (OFS), otherwise known as the new U.S. mission in Afghanistan. U.S.
forces with OFS will also work as part of the new NATO-led Operation Resolute
Support, providing the bulk of that operation's 12,000 total troops this year
and thousands more in 2016.
Post-2014 Afghanistan & the Looming Consequences of Strategic

MisappreciationOriginal Research Article Pages 181-198 Thomas F. Lynch
III
The fast-moving events of Syria and Iraq in 2014 demonstrated the

enormous risk to U.S. security interests when America and its allies
have too little intelligence presence or operational agility in an area
rife with insurgency and terrorist outfits. The United States cannot fix
the region or eliminate the major challenges to security most dominant
within Afghanistan. However, America can be better postured to
support the already faltering Afghan National Security Force, better
aware of the rapidly evolving jihadist militant milieu in the Af-Pak
region, and better informed than it might otherwise be about the
evolving nature of Indo-Pakistani proxy hostilities playing out across
the border region. The promised post-2014 U.S./NATO military
presence is insufficient to meet these major requirements.
Stefan Bauschard
Should Increase Military Presence

CNN, Why the US Should Leave Troops in Afghanistan beyond 2016
http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/21/opinions/bergen-leave-troops-in-afghanistan/
The first state visit to the United States of Afghan President Ashraf Ghani and
Chief Executive Officer Abdullah Abdullah was supposed to take place in early
March. But the visit was delayed because Republican leaders had invited
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to address Congress during the
same time period.
According to two Afghan government officials involved in the planning for the
visit, the Afghan government believed American media attention would be
largely focused on Netanyahu, so the first U.S. visit of the new Afghan
president was delayed by two weeks, which is a useful reminder that there is
a sound reason why congressional leaders shouldn't unilaterally extend
invitations to foreign leaders.
Ghani and Abdullah arrived in Washington on Sunday and have had much to
discuss with the Obama administration. For the Afghan government, the
timetable of President Barack Obama's proposed troop withdrawal is the key
issue.
Obama says that the last American troops will leave Afghanistan at the end of
2016. This happens to roughly coincide with the end of his second term in
office and also fulfills his campaign promise to wind down America's post-9/11
wars.
Ghani is clearly uncomfortable with the pace of this U.S. troop withdrawal,
telling CBS' "60 Minutes" in January, "deadlines should not be dogmas" and
that there should be a "willingness to reexamine" the withdrawal date.
Is Obama's withdrawal plan a wise policy?
Short answer: Of course not.

One only has to look at the debacle that has unfolded in Iraq after the
withdrawal of U.S. troops at the end of 2011 to have a sneak preview of what
could take place in an Afghanistan without some kind of residual American
presence.
Without American forces in the country, there is a strong possibility
Afghanistan could host a reinvigorated Taliban allied to a reinvigorated al
Qaeda, not to mention ISIS, which is gaining a foothold in the region.
Stefan Bauschard
Needless to say, this would be a disaster for Afghanistan. But it would also be
quite damaging to U.S. interests to have some kind of resurgent al Qaeda in
the country where the group trained the hijackers for the 9/11 attacks.
It would also be disastrous for the Democratic Party, should it win the
presidency in 2016, to be the party that "lost" Afghanistan.
After all, the Democratic Party is viewed by some as weaker on national
security than the Republicans and it is inevitable that without some kind of
residual American presence in Afghanistan, al Qaeda would gain sufficient
strength to launch an attack from the Afghan-Pakistan border region against
American interests somewhere in the world.
On Tuesday, President Obama announced that the withdrawal of U.S. forces
from Afghanistan would be slowed and the remaining 9,800 troops would stay
there through the end of 2015. But this welcome development does not
change the central issue, which is the Obama administration's withdrawal
date of December 2016 for all U.S. forces.
Merely because the Obama administration will be almost out the door at the
end of 2016 doesn't mean that suddenly at the same time that the Taliban
will lay down their arms, nor that the Afghan army will be able to fight the
Taliban completely unaided. Nor does it mean that al Qaeda -- and ISIS, which
is beginning to establish small cells in Afghanistan -- would cease to be a
threat.
An easy way for potential Democratic presidential candidates such as Hillary
Clinton to distinguish their national security policies from Obama's would be
to say that they are in favor of some kind of long-term U.S. military presence
in Afghanistan and to argue that it would be needed to avoid an Iraq-style
outcome.
Similarly, as the Republican Party starts ramping up for the 2016 campaign,
potential candidates such as Jeb Bush can distinguish themselves from the
isolationist Rand Paul wing of the party by saying that they are committed to
a long-term presence in Afghanistan.
This U.S. military presence in Afghanistan doesn't have to be a large, nor
does it need to play a combat role, but U.S. troops should remain in
Afghanistan to advise the Afghan army and provide intelligence support.
Such a long-term commitment of several thousand American troops is exactly
the kind of force that the Obama administration was forced to deploy to Iraq
following ISIS's lightning advances there over the past year.
Selling a longer-term U.S. military presence in Afghanistan would be pushing
against an open door with that nation's government. Consider that within 24
hours of being installed, the new Afghan government led by Ghani and
Abdullah signed the basing agreement that allows American troops to stay in
Afghanistan until December 2016.
Stefan Bauschard
Consider also that the Afghan government has already negotiated a strategic
partnership agreement with the United States lasting until 2024 that would
provide the framework for a longer term U.S. military presence. Consider also
that many Afghans see a relatively small, but long-term international troop
presence as a guarantor of their stability.
It is also not in Pakistan's interests for Afghanistan to fall to the Taliban or be
thrust into another civil war. The Pakistanis have seen for themselves
repeatedly the folly of allowing the Taliban to flourish on their own soil, most
recently in the Taliban attack in December on the army school in Peshawar
that killed 132 children.
It is in Pakistan's own interest that the Afghan army is able to fight effectively
against the Taliban, which is more likely if they continue to have American
advisers at their side.
Other regional powers such as the Chinese worry about Chinese Uighur
separatists establishing themselves on Afghan soil. The Russians are similarly
worried about Islamist terrorist groups located in Afghanistan and so will not
stand in the way of a small long-term U.S. military presence in Afghanistan as
that would dovetail with their own security concerns about the country.
Keeping a relatively small, predominantly U.S. Special Forces, presence in
Afghanistan to continue to train the Afghan army past December 2016 is a
wise policy that would benefit both Afghans and Americans.
Both the Democratic and Republican parties should adopt such a plan in their
platforms as they gear up for the 2016 campaign. And Obama should do his
successor a favor by leaving this important decision up to the next President.
Should establish a security partnership

Michael OHanlon, http://www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2015/01/07protecting-afghanistan-gains-ohanlon
U.S. troop strength in Afghanistan has declined 90% from peak levels. With
Afghan security forces exceeding 350,000 troops, the real question is
deciding how fast and to what extent to further downsize. For Afghan
security, regional stability, and continued access to bases on Afghan territory
that allow us to suppress al-Qaeda in Pakistan, it is time to stop thinking in
terms of an exitand start thinking about an enduring, if limited, security
partnership. This may mean a few thousand troops and a couple of billion
dollars a year in aid for a sustained period. But whatever that cost, it is a
much smaller price than the U.S. and international community have paid in
recent yearsand a far lower price than another 9/11 .
Stefan Bauschard
Stefan Bauschard
Should Sustain Military Presence

Should sustain bases
OHanlon, Brookings, 2-20-15,
http://www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2015/02/20-us-bases-inafghanistan-ohanlon
The Obama administration has the wrong mind-set on our future U.S. military
posture in Afghanistan. Exit should not be the strategy or objective.
Protection of the homeland is the right metric. Instead of trying to leave by a
given date, we should be planning to stay. The guiding philosophy should be
to build an enduring partnership with Afghanistan to finally provide a real
payoff for all our investment there in durable bases allowing our forces to
continue to target our most dangerous enemies in a part of the world where
they still organize and operate.
Such counterterrorism capabilities have little to do with the nation-building
enterprise in Afghanistan of the past 13 years. That mission is nearly done to
a practical extent, and while Obama is being ambitious in his hopes that it
can be finished before 2017, there is logic in trying to largely complete the
job by then. There is, however, little logic in eliminating our regional
counterterrorism capability by that point. We will almost surely still need it.
We should have learned from recent experiences in Iraq and Syria, as well as
Libya, Mali and other countries, that we cannot end the terrorist threat in a
given country on our own timetable.
Of course, the pace of drone strikes and raids in the Pashtun areas of
Afghanistan and Pakistan, historically used by al-Qaeda and affiliates, can
and should decline. Indeed, according to the Long War Journal, it already has
for example, after peaking at more than 100 in 2010, the number of U.S.
drone attacks in Pakistan fell to 24 in 2014. But some need endures.
Moreover, if extremists knew that the United States no longer had capabilities
in the Pashtun belts, they would probably increase their presence there.
It is not realistic for the United States to expect Afghan forces to pursue alQaeda and its offshoots for us after we leave the country. First, Afghanistan
has no capability to fly drones in Pakistan; even if we could successfully
transfer the needed assets and expertise to the Afghans, an unlikely
prospect, such strikes would probably cause a crisis in Afghan-Pakistani
relations. Second, inside their own country, Afghanistans army and police will
continue to have their hands full with the Taliban. They may not have the
capacity to go after key al-Qaeda-linked targets, many of which matter much
more to us than to them.
Stefan Bauschard
Keeping two to three U.S. bases in eastern Afghanistan Bagram near Kabul,
Kandahar in the south, perhaps Khost or Jalalabad in the east would be
adequate for counterterrorism purposes. With two or three operating areas,
each with 1,000 to 2,000 Americans, the United States would have assets
within 150 miles or less of the key areas of Pakistan and Afghanistan. That is
a comfortable tactical operating distance for both drones and helicopters
carrying commandos.
Maintaining these bases might cost $5 billion to $10 billion per year. That is
real money, but it is less than the effective cost of keeping naval assets in the
Arabian Sea to do the same job much less well. It is far less than the $100
billion a year we spent at the peak of the war. And it is immeasurably less
than the cost that could result from another large-scale terrorist attack
against the United States.
Although the main purpose of such an enduring U.S. military presence in
Afghanistan would be counterterrorism, there could be additional benefits.
We could continue to mentor modest numbers of Afghan forces at those
bases, above and beyond the training mission that will continue in Kabul
under Obamas plan. These added forces could also provide us with political
leverage that could reduce the chances of civil war in Afghanistan. This is the
kind of leverage that we lost in Iraq after our 2011 departure with tragic
results.
With this approach, Obama will still have ended the main combat phase of
two major wars on his watch. This legacy would be secure. More important,
the United States would be more secure, too
Stefan Bauschard
Iraq
Stefan Bauschard
Status Quo
3400 trainers in Iraq
Global Post, 1-6-15, http://www.mintpressnews.com/2015-time-new-usoperations-iraq-afghanistan/200501/
The US significantly re-engaged in Iraq on Aug. 8, 2014, when airstrikes

began against IS, also known as ISIS or ISIL, in Iraq and Syria. Operation
Inherent Resolve has been underway for five months (though the operation
wasnt given a name until Oct. 15), and now includes a training element:
2,100 US troops are working with Iraqi and Kurdish forces in northern Iraq,
providing strategic advice, assistance, and tactical training. That number is
likely to increase to 3,400 by the end of January, to train an estimated 12
Iraqi brigades.
The US spent a billion dollars fighting IS in the first four months of Operation
Inherent Resolve. The Pentagon says current operations against IS run them
about $8 million dollars a day.
Much like in Afghanistan, US personnel in Iraq are not being explicitly
assigned to combat roles. But their work with local militaries and targeting of
extremists could mean they get caught up in fighting.
As of 2013, some 2.5 million US servicemembers had deployed one or more
times to Iraq or Afghanistan. Their ranks will grow a little larger this year.
Stefan Bauschard
Should Increase Military Presence

in Iraq
Ground troops needed to overtake Mosul, air campaign fails
Zach Coleman, February 8, 2015, Lawmakers squabble over ground troops to fight Islamic
State, http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/lawmakers-squabble-over-ground-troops-to-fightislamic-state/article/2559971 DOA: 3-1-15
United States military officials are assessing whether American soldiers are needed on the
ground. Central Command officials worry Iraqi forces might not be able to overtake
Islamic State strongholds in Mosul, Iraq's second-largest city. The U.S. is a member of a 60nation coalition that has since September conducted airstrikes against the Islamic State. Secretary
of State John Kerry said on NBC's "Meet the Press" that the U.S. was "on the road" to defeating
the Islamic State, but didn't say whether ground troops would be part of the future strategy.
Hawkish Republicans who have long pressed Obama for more decisive, aggressive action to
curb the Sunni terrorist group's advances are calling for a U.S. ground presence. Sen.
Lindsey Graham last week on CBS's "Face the Nation" suggested the U.S. should send
10,000 U.S. troops to areas the Islamic State has carved out to impose caliphate. "An aerial
campaign will not destroy them," Graham said, adding, "You're going to need boots on the
ground, not only in Iraq, but in Syria."
Iraq military cant retake Mosul

Jason Ditiz, February 20, 2015, MINT Press Review, US Ground Troops likely to join Iraqs
fight against ISIS, http://www.mintpressnews.com/us-ground-troops-likely-to-join-iraqs-fightagainst-isis/202307/ DOA: 3-1-15
Despite official denials, the US war on ISIS has been careening toward another ground war in
both Iraq and Syria. The latest reports suggest the ground component of this war could be very
soon to beginning. US officials are now saying that the offensive against the ISIS-held city of
Mosul will be supported by the US, with both airstrikes and if necessary US ground troops
backing the Iraqi military. This offensive could begin as soon as April. The if necessary
qualifier means the US involvement is all but certain, as the Pentagon has repeatedly said they
dont believe Iraqs military is even close to being able to take a major city like Mosul on their
own.
Attack on Mosul will not succeed without US ground troops
Stefan Bauschard
Maggie Ybarra, The Washington Times, February 20, 2015, U.S. plans large-scale operation to
take Mosul from Islamic State, http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/feb/19/us-planslarge-scale-operation-take-mosul-islamic-/?page=all DOA: 3-2-15
The U.S. is planning to join a large-scale air and ground coalition offensive to free Mosul,
Iraq, from the clutches of Islamic State militants in coming weeks, but analysts fear the effort
will lack the resources to succeed - most notably U.S. boots on the ground. The plan, part of a
larger undertaking dubbed Operation Inherent Resolve, will be the first challenge for Defense
Secretary Ashton Carter in trying to balance the expectations of the White House with the needs
of the military. Many policy analysts say the choices Mr. Carter makes in the Iraq operation will
be indicative of his style of leadership at the Pentagon. In June, the Islamic State - also known by
the acronyms ISIL and ISIS - took the northern city of more than 1 million people, Iraq's
second-largest, after waging a violent assault that prompted Iraqi police to flee their posts. The
size of the Islamic State's presence in the region was estimated to be as high as 14,000, although
U.S. officials say they don't have a good current estimate. The U.S. military has spent months
preparing for the large-scale operation, which will depend largely on the tactical strength of
Iraqi security forces, Kurdish fighters, tribal police and warplanes belonging to various
members of the 40-nation coalition, which includes Jordan and Britain. International forces
have been trying to isolate Mosul by cutting off communication lines between members living
within the city and outside forces.Pentagon officials say the effort to reclaim Mosul is likely to
launch the spring, soon after Mr. Carter has been brought up to speed on the coalition's strategy
and operational needs. An official for U.S. Central Command, which oversees military operations
in the Middle East, told reporters Thursday that a force of 20,000 to 25,000 Iraqi security forces,
Kurdish fighters and regional police will be tapped to defeat the 1,000 to 2,000 Islamic State
militants who are camped out in Mosul. That attack depends on whether international forces are
able to quickly train Iraqi and Kurdish fighters. The military may change its plans if the delivery
of pertinent combat equipment is delayed or if more training is needed, the official said. "The
mark on the wall that we are still shooting for is the April-May time frame," the official said.
"There's still a lot of things that need to come together, and as we dialogue with our Iraqi
counterparts, we want them to go in that time frame because if you get into Ramadan in the
summer in the heat, it becomes problematic if it goes much later than that."
Without ground troops, efforts to recapture Mosul will fail

Jim Michaels, February 25, 2015, USA Today, Will US troops be drawn back into Iraq war?,
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/02/25/mosul/23955799/ DOA: 3-1-15
WASHINGTON A coming Iraqi offensive to drive the Islamic State out of Iraq's secondlargest city renews a debate on whether U.S. forces should play a larger role in the operation
despite the risk of drawing them back into a war.
The White House has pledged to keep American forces out of combat, but Iraq would suffer a
major setback in Mosul if its troops falter because U.S. advisers are restricted in what they can
do, security analysts say. Failure to retake Mosul from the militants would "reverse all the gains
we made since August," when the United States launched airstrikes to stem the Islamic State's
Stefan Bauschard
advances in Iraq, said James Jeffrey, a former U.S. ambassador to Iraq. "A lot is riding on this
operation," said David Barno, a retired lieutenant general. There are about 3,000 U.S. troops in
Iraq, including hundreds of trainers and advisers. They are limited largely to protected bases, not
any battlefield, because of White House concern that an expanded military role could lead to
"mission creep," the slow expansion of involvement in another war four years after U.S. combat
troops withdrew from Iraq.
Stefan Bauschard
Combat Troops Needed to Prevent Genocide

Combat troops needed to prevent Christian genocide in Iraq
Simon Caldwell, February 10, 2015, Catholic Philly, Iraq Needs US Ground Troops to Fight
ISIS, http://catholicphilly.com/2015/02/news/world-news/archbishop-iraq-needs-u-s-boots-onground-to-fight-islamic-state/ DOA: 3-1-15
Chaldean Catholic archbishop called for the redeployment of U.S. and British troops in Iraq
to prevent the genocide of Christians and other minorities by Islamic State militants.
Archbishop Bashar Warda of Irbil, Iraq, said he believed the U.S. had a duty to finish the
mission in his country by ridding the Ninevah Plain of extremists who last summer drove
some 120,000 Christians from their homes. He described the Islamic State as a cancer
which had to be cut out if it was not to infect future generations of Muslims and create a
potentially greater threat than Afghanistan under the Taliban and al-Qaida. I would like to
see American or European or international troops alongside Iraqi troops working to liberate these
lands, not alone but together, he told Catholic News Service after meeting with some British
politicians in the House of Lords Feb. 9. Definitely, I would like to see more involvement
more airstrikes, because that is also needed, he said. U.S. military expertise and resources
were crucial in defeating the Islamic State, he told CNS, because neither the Iraqi army nor
the Kurdish Peshmerga militia were sufficiently trained or equipped for the job. They (the
Americans) know how to tackle these terrorist groups, said Archbishop Warda. The sooner they
finish the mission the better, because this is a cancer which needs to be stopped and treated,
because otherwise we would have generations of people growing up with the Islamic State
mentality. He added: We have to stop this cancer now, and we have to go for very difficult
measures sometimes and very difficult decisions. We have got 1.8 million displaced people in
Kurdistan, he added. It is not just Christians; everyone is there.
Stefan Bauschard
Ground Troops Generally Needed

Ground troops needed to defeat ISIS
Jonathan Broder, Newsweek, February 27, 2015, Jordan Goes All in Against ISIS, but for How
Long, http://www.newsweek.com/2015/02/27/jordan-goes-all-against-isis-how-long-306093.html
DOA: 3-2-15
The addition of Jordanian troops into the fray would be a welcome development in Washington,
where ground forces remain a highly sensitive topic. Military experts say somebody's ground
troops--be they American, Iraqi or Arab--will be required to prevail against ISIS. Until now,
Iraqi Kurds and Shiite militias have been holding the line against ISIS on the ground,
assisted by U.S.-led airstrikes.
ISIS cant be defeated without ground troops

RT.com, October 21, 2014, McCain Insists on Sending US ground troops to Iraq, Syra,
http://rt.com/usa/197916-mccain-troops-syria-iraq/ DOA: 3-1-15
The longtime senator from Arizona said over the weekend that he would use his perch on
the committee to advocate sending ground troops to buttress US-led airstrikes against
extremist group Islamic State (also known as ISIS and ISIL), which has come to control large
areas of Iraq and Syria since the latters civil war brought the group to prominence. "Frankly, I
know of no military expert who believes we are going to defeat ISIS with this present strategy,"
McCain said at a Pacific Council on International Policy conference, according to The Huffington
Post. McCain has hit the campaign trail ahead of election day to support his partys Senate
candidates. The GOP has painted President Obamas foreign policy and national security policies
as weak as well as insufficient in the fight against jihadist group du jour, Islamic State. "We may
be able to 'contain,' but to actually defeat ISIS is going to require more boots on the ground,
more vigorous strikes, more special forces, further arming the Kurdish peshmerga forces and
creating a no-fly zone and buffer zone in Syria," McCain said. Syrian President Bashar Assad, a
fellow foe of Islamic State, must be removed from office if the US wants to see success against
extremism in the region, McCain added.
Stefan Bauschard
10,000 Troop Proposal

Proposal idea 10,000 ground troops
Eric Pianin, January 27, 2015, Fiscal Times, McCain: Get Ready for US Troops on the Ground
in Iraq and Syria, http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/01/27/McCain-Get-Ready-US-TroopsGround-Iraq-and-Syria DOA: 3-1-15
The three key components of McCains approach are these:

1.
Expand the U.S. force in Iraq from the current 2,300 troops to 10,000 to assist
Iraqis troops. Rather than keeping U.S. service members confined to bases and
headquarters, many of them would be dispatched to the front lines to direct or call
in air strikes and take other steps to assist the Iraqis.
2.
Establish safe zones or no-fly zones in neighboring Syria. McCain initially was
reacting to news reports last year that ISIS was attempting to assemble a modest
air force with pilots trained by Iraqi military defectors. While that threat has yet to
materialize, McCain and administration officials have considered establishing a
Syrian no-fly zone to protect civilians from airstrikes by the Syrian government.
3.
Expand aid and military assistance to moderate Syrian rebels to help them fight
back against ISIS and Syrian president Bashar al-Assad. AsThe Washington Post
noted, Assad appears to be buoyed by months of U.S. and allied air strikes against
ISIS that have taken enormous pressure off of him while he continues to destroy
rebel forces seeking to topple him.
Stefan Bauschard
Should Not Increase Military

Presence in Iraq
Stefan Bauschard
Military Intervention Increases the Threat

Military intervention increases the Islamic State threat
Ramzy Mardini, September 12, 2014, Mardini, is a nonresident fellow at the Atlantic Councils
Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East, Washington Post,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-islamic-state-threat-isoverstated/2014/09/12/acbbebb2-33ad-11e4-8f02-03c644b2d7d0_story.html DOA: 3-1-15
A more accurate assessment would be that U.S. military intervention has tremendous propaganda
value for the Islamic State, helping it to rally other jihadists to its cause, possibly even Salafists
who have so far rejected its legitimacy. Moreover, to the extent that the group poses any threat to
the United States, that threat is magnified by a visible U.S. military role. Obamas restraint in the
use of military power in recent years has helped keep the Islamic States focus regional on its
efforts to establish an Islamic caliphate in the Middle East rather than on launching attacks
against the United States. Its only with the U.S. militarys return to Iraq and the prospect of U.S.
intervention in Syria that the groups focus has begun to shift.
Increasing the US presence will infuriate the Sunnis

Zach Beauchamp, September 18, 2014, Vox, Obama and His Generals,
http://www.vox.com/2014/9/18/6338589/obama-generals-isis-iraq DOA 3-1-14
Even if the United States reinvaded Iraq to destroy ISIS which there is no indication it would
do there's no guarantee that even this would succeed. The United States did defeat al-Qaeda in
Iraq in the late-2000s, but it had lots of Iraqi help. The Bush administration's 2007 troop surge
would have failed if the Sunni population wasn't already turning against al-Qaeda there. "I take
the somewhat modest position that the action of 6 million Iraqis may be more important than
those of 30,000 American troops and one very talented general," Doug Ollivant, the National
Security Adviser for Iraq from 2005 to 2009, told me. Without changing Sunni views of ISIS and
the Iraqi government, a stepped-up US ground presence might only further infuriate the Sunni
population.
Iraq war proves ground troops fuel, not arrest insurgencies

Eric Pianin, January 27, 2015, Fiscal Times, McCain: Get Ready for US Troops on the Ground
in Iraq and Syria, http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/01/27/McCain-Get-Ready-US-TroopsGround-Iraq-and-Syria DOA: 3-1-15
The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan prove that the massive ground forces can't keep insurgencies
down. The American invasion of Iraq didn't destroy ISIS. If anything, it gave birth to it. And the
nearly decade and a half long occupation of Afghanistan has failed to destroy either al-Qaeda or
Stefan Bauschard
the Taliban. As a result, Obama's view isn't just that combat troops are risky. It's that the record
suggests they actually wouldn't help that much.
Ground war will increase ISIS recruiting

Jason Ditiz, February 20, 2015, MINT Press Review, US Ground Troops likely to join Iraqs
fight against ISIS, http://www.mintpressnews.com/us-ground-troops-likely-to-join-iraqs-fightagainst-isis/202307/ DOA: 3-1-15
The US war strategy for months has been basically laying out different pitfalls that could force
them to launch a ground war in response, including putting 320 lightly armed troops on the front
line in Anbar Province as trainers, waiting for them to get attacked so theyd have to be rescued
by more ground troops. ISIS has gained enormously from the US war, bolstering their recruitment
dramatically across the world. The ground war will likely add to this influx of recruits to resist
another American invasion.
Stefan Bauschard
Ground Troops Fail

US cant defeat ISIS in Syria
The US plan to intervene in Syria against ISIS today short of a full invasion requires enlisting
either Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad, who benefits from ISIS's existence, or the moderate Syrian
rebels, who are disorganized and hard-pressed by Assad already, to coordinate a major offensive.
That seems improbable, to say the least.
Foreign ground troops fail to arrest insurgencies

Obama's position isn't unreasonable. A 2009 paper by Yale political scientist Jason Lyall and
Colonel Isaiah Wilson III, a West Point professor, looked at a dataset of 286 insurgencies between
1800 and 2005. They found that, since World War I, counterinsurgents have tended to lose and
foreign occupying troops have a particularly bad success record when fighting local insurgencies.
Given America's history in Iraq, and the fact that Iraq's Prime Minister opposes the use of
American combat troops, it wouldn't be surprising if Iraqis treated American combat troops like
an occupying force.
Stefan Bauschard
Not Enough Troops

We wont be able to limit ground troops to 10,000 and ground troops wont
stop beheadings
Dayton Daily News, March 1, 2015 , ISIS: What does it want? What should we do?;
SHARING ALL SIDES DEALING WITH ISLAMIC STATE,
http://www.allsides.com/news/2015-02-16-0743/battle-against-islamic-state-expands-egyptbombs-libyan-affiliate DOA: 3-1-15
Jim Newell in Salon:

The Islamic State may have killed just enough hostages to get the Holy War with the West that it
wants. A new CBS poll shows that, for the first time, a majority of Americans (57 percent) are in
favor of sending their neighbors' sons to go fight ISIS on the ground. To deploy ground combat
troops, into Syria and Iraq, and wherever else they may surface, for a land war. Over the past six
months, these figures have jumped a bit higher with each additional round of executions. Since,
no matter how many members of ISIS are killed, it will be impossible to stop every last
execution, this majority will probably increase. And that makes one wonder, too, how the
political rhetoric surrounding the issue of ground troops will change, especially with the hawkish
rhetoric arms-race that is a GOP presidential primary just beginning. It may well mean that the
consensus GOP candidate opinion goes from a soft "we have to be prepared to send ground troops
into Syria and Iraq, if need be" to the harder, Lindsey Graham position of "we have to send in
ground troops now - but just like 10,000 or so." We should send in ground troops, but not that
many, and not for too long, and without much difficulty. In other words, we'll see the war
proposal sold, as they always are, as the ever-elusive "short war" or "weekend war." We just send
about 10,000 of our boys in there - into Iraq, into Syria - to kill a bunch of people and then ISIS
will be destroyed and the region will be peaceful and we can hightail it out. ... If a politician
really thinks that the United States needs to send in ground troops to stop ISIS from
consolidating power and spreading, go ahead and make the arguments, but don't assume
that it will be easy to prevent from escalating in troop numbers and duration. How will
"victory" be defined? Especially since, just as happened in the Iraq war, terrorists
worldwide are going to flock to the front lines as soon as the Americans show up, to get a
piece of the action.
Successful ground campaign would require 30-50,000 American troops

Dayton Daily News, March 1, 2015 , ISIS: What does it want? What should we do?;
SHARING ALL SIDES DEALING WITH ISLAMIC STATE,
http://www.allsides.com/news/2015-02-16-0743/battle-against-islamic-state-expands-egyptbombs-libyan-affiliate DOA: 3-1-15
Stefan Bauschard
Obama is doing plenty, for now From the Left: by Kevin Drum in Mother Jones: The drumbeat
for President Obama to "do something" to fight ISIS is growing louder every day among
prospective Republican presidential candidates. It's all a bit weird, since Obama rather plainly is
doing something, as interviewers repeatedly point out whenever the subject comes up. But no
matter. It's a good sound bite, and in any case, whatever Obama is doing, Republicans insist they
want to do more. ... At a first guess, a full-scale assault on Mosul would likely require at least 2-3
times as many troops and result in several hundred American deaths. And Mosul is only a
fraction of the territory ISIS controls. It's a big fraction, but still a fraction. So this is what I
want to hear from Republican critics of Obama's ISIS strategy. I agree with them that training
Iraqi troops and relying on them to fight ISIS isn't all that promising. But the alternative is likely
to be something like 30,000 to 50,000 troops committed to a battle that will result in
hundreds of American casualties. Are Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz willing to own
up to that? If they are, then good for them and we'll let the American public decide who's got the
better strategy. But if they're not, then it's all just a con job for the rubes. The GOP candidates are
screaming for "more," but not willing to acknowledge what "more" really means. Let's hear it,
folks. When you say "more," what do you really have in mind? Candidates for president shouldn't
be allowed to get away with nothing more than vague grumbles and hazy bellicosity any longer.
Let's hear the plan.
Stefan Bauschard
US Diplomacy Superior
US better off in a diplomatic role
Ramzy Mardini, September 12, 2014, Mardini, is a nonresident fellow at the Atlantic Councils
Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East, Washington Post,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-islamic-state-threat-isoverstated/2014/09/12/acbbebb2-33ad-11e4-8f02-03c644b2d7d0_story.html DOA: 3-1-15
While some military action is necessary to defeat the Islamic State, that effort should be driven by
regional actors, not a Western power. The United States is far better positioned to assume an
active diplomatic role, facilitating consensus and cooperation among local and regional players. If
the common threat could compel these actors toward local collaboration, national compromise
and regional rapprochement, there may emerge an opportunity to bring them together to finally
settle the civil wars plaguing the Middle East
Diplomacy essential to resolve the conflicts that are supporting ISIS

Sultan Barakat, February 22, 2015, Barakat is director of research at the Brookings Doha
Center and senior fellow at the Center for Middle East Policy. He is known for having pioneered
both scholarship and practice in the field of post-war recovery. In 1993 he founded the Post-war
Reconstruction and Development Unit, a world-leading center at the University of York. His
current research focus is state fragility and recovery in the Middle East, as well as the role of
Qatar in conflict mediation. Barakat has been published widely, and has over 25 years of
professional experience working on issues of conflict management, humanitarian response and
post-conflict recovery and transition, Jordan, Egypt, and Response to ISIS; Beyond Air Strikes,
http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/markaz/posts/2015/02/19-jordan-egypt-isis-response
DOA: 3-1-15
Though military action will remin an unavoidable policy against ISIS, a greater role must be lent
to diplomacy and development in rooting out the power vacuums that allow such a group to
thrive. For Jordan, this means redoubled efforts by the international communityespecially the
United States, Russia, and Iranto find a political solution to the Syria conflict that has
exacerbated the Kingdoms pressing social, political, and economic problems. As we noted in a
recent review of policy towards the country, foreign diplomats and Jordanian officials must work
together ensure that aid dollars flow towards reinforcing a productive economyone that can
stand to incorporate the hundreds of thousands of refugees and the legions of unemployed alike.
Stefan Bauschard
A2: Need US Troops to Free Mosul

Iraqi and Kurdish forces can free Mosul
Jim Michaels, February 25, 2015, Will US troops be drawn back into Iraq war?,
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/02/25/mosul/23955799/ DOA: 3-1-15
The ground offensive is expected to be a tough battle. Islamic State forces may fight to hold
Mosul using civilians as human shields, rather than attempt to flee. The militants have declared
the region part of their "caliphate" and set up shadow governments. U.S. Central Command
expects a ground force of 20,000 to 25,000 Iraqi and Kurdish troops to free Mosul. To arm them,
the Pentagon is rushing arms and ammunition to Iraq, including a $17.9 million shipment this
week. Though the attacking force will vastly outnumber the 1,000-2,000 Islamic State fighters in
Mosul, the militants will probably rig buildings to explode as part of their effort to defend the
city, said Kagan, who recently visited Iraq.
Iraq doesnt want US ground forces in the attack on Mosul

Maggie Ybarra, The Washington Times, February 20, 2015, U.S. plans large-scale operation to
take Mosul from Islamic State, http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/feb/19/us-planslarge-scale-operation-take-mosul-islamic-/?page=all DOA: 3-2-15
Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi told BBC News this week that Iraqi government forces
were "planning an offensive on Mosul in the next few months," with help from the U.S. Mr.
al-Abadi ruled out the need for U.S. ground troops in the campaign. He said his country
needs other forms of help, such as weapons and training, and anticipates the city could be retaken
in as little as a few months with minimal casualties.
Stefan Bauschard
Syria
Stefan Bauschard
Pro Intervention
The argument against US military intervention in Syria and why its wrong
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/wendy-pearlman/us-syriaintervention_b_4823932.html
Stefan Bauschard
Anti-Intervention
The Case against military intervention in Syria
http://www.thenation.com/article/175964/case-against-military-interventionsyria
The cost of military intervention in Syria

https://www.nationalpriorities.org/blog/2013/09/05/cost-military-interventionsyria/
Stefan Bauschard
Ukraine?
Stefan Bauschard
What is going on in the Ukraine

US trainers to the Ukraine? http://csis.org/publication/ustrainers-ukraine
Stefan Bauschard
Japan
Stefan Bauschard
Status Quo
The US-Japan alliance
https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL33740.pdf
Promises and Pittfalls for the US-Japan alliance

http://www.foreignpolicyi.org/content/promises-and-pitfalls-us-japanesealliance-trip-report-fpi-leadership-network
Stefan Bauschard
Alliance Good/Should Bolster

Strengthening the US-Japan alliance is key for stability
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/worldreport/2014/11/21/strengthening-the-us-japan-alliance-is-key-for-stability-ineast-asia
Revitalizing the US-Japan alliance

http://www.cnas.org/files/documents/publications/CNAS_Renewal_CroninKlima
nDenmark.pdf
Stefan Bauschard
Asia Presence Good

How to Keep the US focus on Asia
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/0163660X.2014.978434#abstrac
t
Stefan Bauschard
Advantage Areas
*Hegemony
-- soft power, power projection, overstretch
*Terrorism
*Middle East War
*Asia War
*Racism
*Imperialism
Sex Trafficking/Rape
Militarism
*China Rise
Stefan Bauschard
Disadvantages
Politics
Hegemony (internal link turns)
Terrorism (links and turns)
China Rise/China Encirclement
Russian nationalism
Oil prices
Military spending trade-off
Military reverse spending
Stefan Bauschard
Kritiks
Racism
Imperialism
Orientalism
Gender IR
Realism/Idealism/Constructivism
Stefan Bauschard
Definitions
Stefan Bauschard
Substantially Reduce = 50
Percent Extensions
A substantial reduction in military personnel is greater than 50%
THOMAS.gov, 92 Summary of H.R.4421, the Comprehensive Base

Closure Reform and Recovery Act of 1992 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgibin/bdquery/z?d102:HR04421:@@@L&summ2=m&)
Comprehensive Base Closure Reform and Recovery Act of 1992 - Title I:

Environmental Restoration At Military Installations To Be Closed Requires, with respect to each military installation which is on the National
Priorities List (for substantial environmental cleanup) under the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of
1980 and which is to be closed under Federal base closure Acts or otherwise
by the Department of Defense (DOD): (1) that at least 75 percent of the
environmental remedial action required under Federal law be completed
before the installation is closed or substantial reductions in its operations
have occurred; and (2) that all of the required remedial action be occurred
no later than two years after such installation is closed or substantially
reduced. Defines a "substantial reduction" as the reassignment of more than
50 percent of its personnel.
Substantial reduction is at least 50%
Pallone, 3 US Congressional Representative (Text of H.R. 3189,

introduced by Pallone, to amend Title XVII of the Social Security Act, 9/25,
http://www.theorator.com/bills108/hr3189.html)
`(7) SUBSTANTIAL REDUCTION- The term `substantial reduction'-`(A) means, as determined under regulations of the Secretary and with
respect to a qualified beneficiary, a reduction in the average actuarial
value of benefits under the plan (through reduction or elimination of
benefits, an increase in premiums, deductibles, copayments, and
coinsurance, or any combination thereof), since the date of
commencement of coverage of the beneficiary by reason of the
Stefan Bauschard
retirement of the covered employee (or, if later, January 6, 2004), in

an amount equal to at least 50 percent of the total average actuarial
value of the benefits under the plan as of such date (taking into
account an appropriate adjustment to permit comparison of values
over time); and
`(B) includes an increase in premiums required to an amount that
exceeds the premium level described in the fourth sentence of section
602(3).'
Stefan Bauschard
"substantial reduction" means 50

percent
Davignon v. Clemmey 01 (Davignon v. Clemmey, 176 F. Supp. 2d 77 )
The court begins the lodestar calculation by looking at the contemporaneous

billing records for each person who worked on the plaintiff's case. The
absence of detailed contemporaneous time records, except in extraordinary
circumstances, will call for a substantial reduction in any award or, in
egregious cases, disallowance. What is a "substantial reduction"? Fifty
percent is a favorite among judges.
Stefan Bauschard
Percent Extensions
Stefan Bauschard
Substantial reduction means 50

percent
Morse 03 (Stephen, Ferdinand Wakeman Hubbell Professor of Law &
Professor of Psychology and Law in Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania,
Fall, 1 Ohio St. J. Crim. L. 289, lexis)
I propose that the amount of punishment reduction should be inversely

related to the seriousness of the crime: the fixed reduction would be smaller
for more serious crimes and vice versa. Defendants who commit more
serious crimes and are therefore more dangerous would be incarcerated
proportionately longer than defendants convicted of less serious crimes. In
all cases, however, the reduction would have to be substantial to reflect
substantially reduced culpability. Consider by analogy the typical penalty
difference between second-degree murder and manslaughter, which often
provides for a fifty percent reduction. The law already provides for
substantial mitigation reduction for the most serious crimes.
Stefan Bauschard
In the context of energy and

environmental policy, reductions
of 50 percent are considered
"substantial"
Slawson 86 (David, Torrey H. Webb Professor of Law, University of
Southern California, May, 59 S. Cal. L. Rev. 672, lexis)
a. Studies concluding that we are underestimating the severity of the

injuries we already know: The law requires that the EPA periodically review
its standards concerning the components of air pollution. 49 The last time it
reviewed its standards for ozone was in 1979, when it weakened its so-called
"primary" standard 50 for this component by raising it [*689] from.08 parts
per million ("ppm") to.12 ppm. 51 The reduction was by fifty percent,
which, of course, is substantial. Yet, according to a 1982 Brookings
Institution study, the governmental review processes that led to the change
were neither scientifically sound nor fair. Errors in the process led the EPA
to underestimate ozone's long-term ill effects. 52
Stefan Bauschard
In the context of energy policy,

substantial reduction means over
50 percent
Reitze and Davis 93 (Arnold and Arnold, Elyce Zenoff Research Professor
of Law and Director of the LL.M. program in environmental law @ George
Washington University + Associate @ Brown, Rudnick, Freed & Gesmer,
P.C., Fall, 21 B.C. Envtl. Aff. L. Rev. 1, lexis)
Other requirements are similar to those imposed on new sources but are not
as stringent. PM limits are thirty-four and sixty-nine mg/dscm for very large
and large plants, respectively. SO[2] reductions must be seventy percent
for very large plants and fifty percent for large plants; HCl reductions must
be ninety percent for very large plants and fifty percent for large plants.
315 These new limits represent a substantial reduction in emissions if
complied with, even though they only apply to the largest MSW incinerators.
This is because this portion of the combustor universe deals with most of the
wastes that are incinerated. The air pollutants that these regulations require
removed still must go somewhere. The problem is that "somewhere" is
increasingly difficult to find.
Stefan Bauschard
Substantial reduction means up to

50 percent
Stefan Bauschard
Stefan Bauschard
Utility Europe 10/1/00 (lexis)

Web-enabled purchasing, or e-procurement, provides opportunities for
European utilities to make substantial cost reductions. For example, they are
looking at price reductions in the range of 5-10 per cent on materials and
services, and reduced inventory costs of up to 50 per cent were mentioned
by those surveyed as targets for web-enabled procurement.
Stefan Bauschard
Percent Extensions
Stefan Bauschard
In the context of environmental

and energy policy, substantial
reduction means 50 percent
Fontaine 93 (Peter, Attorney, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office
of Enforcement, 18 Colum. J. Envtl. L. 31, lexis)
Integrated permits coordinate the permitting processes of various media and

consolidate into a single document every relevant and applicable pollution
standard. Increased regulatory stringency and diminished resources have
already prompted several states, 299 and a number of European nations, 300 to
move toward integrated permit systems because they are more efficient and
make better environmental sense. In Massachusetts, the success of the
Blackstone Project in identifying cross-program environmental problems and
opportunities for pollution prevention may lay the groundwork for an
integrated permit system. New Jersey is currently implementing an eighteen
month pilot program, with funding and assistance from the EPA, that
involves the development of a single multimedia permit for three companies
which volunteered to test the concept. 301 One noteworthy fact is that the
project incorporates pollution prevention as the principal focus of the
permits as opposed to the more traditional "end-of-pipe" controls. 302
Pollution prevention opportunities and corresponding permit limits will be
identified and established following internal audits to quantify total
pollutant-loadings to all environmental media. The project is mandated by
New Jersey's Pollution Prevention Act, which established a five-year goal of
reducing the generation of hazardous substances by fifty percent. 303
According to one of the companies participating in the project, anticipated
benefits include not only substantial reductions in pollution but also
substantial administrative and transactional efficiencies as the permits
currently held by the facility (totalling more than sixty) will be cut to one. 304
Stefan Bauschard
Stefan Bauschard
In the context of energy policy,

reductions of 55 percent are
considered "substantial"
Grumet 98 (Jason, Executive Director of the Northeast States for
Coordinated Air Use Management, Summer, 11 Tul. Envtl. L.J. 375, lexis)
In contrast, substantial NOx reductions (55 percent) can be achieved from

electric utilities for under $ 500 per ton and the 85 percent reductions
proposed by the EPA can be achieved for under $ 1,700 per ton. 99 These
figures are conservative. Many anticipate the actual costs of these controls
will be less than $ 1,000 per ton, once control technologies are optimized
and a regional trading program is implemented. Concerns over their own
fiscal "bottom lines" and basic equity has led other industries to break the
code of silence and quietly work to support the control of NOx pollution from
utilities. Although denied from the outset, it was commonly understood that
the primary goal of the OTAG was to build the case for utility controls. Had
all the industrial interests joined together and abandoned the process, the
OTAG effort would have been substantially weakened if not scuttled
altogether. One of the main reasons other industries stayed in the process
was to prevent the utilities from once again escaping regulation. 100 This
persistence and the greater cost effectiveness of utility controls seems to
have paid off. In the proposed action under Section 110, the EPA proposes to
reduce total state NOx emissions by 35 percent on average. The EPA
proposes that states fulfill this cumulative NOx reduction obligation by
achieving on average a 13 percent additional reduction in NOx emissions
from on-highway vehicles, a 14 percent additional reduction from non-road
sources (construction and agricultural equipment, trains, lawnmowers, etc.),
a 33 percent additional [*405] reduction from non-utility stationary
sources, and a 69 percent additional reduction from electric generating
utilities. 101
Stefan Bauschard
Stefan Bauschard
1nC SHellSubstantially
Reduce = 25 Percent
A. InterpretationSubstantially reduce means at least 25 percent
US Code, 10 (TITLE 10. ARMED FORCES SUBTITLE A. GENERAL

MILITARY LAW PART IV. SERVICE, SUPPLY, AND PROCUREMENT
CHAPTER 148. NATIONAL DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY AND INDUSTRIAL
BASE, DEFENSE REINVESTMENT, AND DEFENSE CONVERSION
SUBCHAPTER II. POLICIES AND PLANNING, Current as of 5/17/10, lexis)
"(f) Definitions. For purposes of this section:

"(1) The term "major defense program" means a program that is carried
out to produce or acquire a major system (as defined in section 2302(5) of
title 10, United States Code).
"(2) The terms 'substantial reduction' and 'substantially reduced', with
respect to a defense contract under a major defense program, mean a
reduction of 25 percent or more in the total dollar value of the funds
obligated by the contract.".
Stefan Bauschard
B. The Affirmative doesnt reduce

US military or police presence by
25 percent
Stefan Bauschard
C. Voting issue
1. limits allowing minor reductions allows countless variations of small
affs likes reducing a single type of intelligence gathering or a covert op in
Afghanistan or arms sales to Japan; it makes adequate research impossible
2. negative ground topic disads wont link to minor modifications, and

generic ground is vitally important to protect since there are 6 different
countries with diverse literature bases
Stefan Bauschard
Percent
Stefan Bauschard
Reductions of 20 to 25 percent are

"substantial"reductions of less
than 15 percent aren't
Thompson v. Brown Printing Co 94 (Thompson v. Brown Printing Co.,
1994 Minn. App. LEXIS 1051, lexis)
20-25 percent pay reduction is substantial but less than 15 percent is not
sufficient to show good cause to quit. An employee's difficulties with his
manager did not constitute good cause to quit where upper management
promptly responded to the employee's complaint and the manager ceased
swearing. An employee's complaints, such as being left out of meetings,
having his managerial powers taken away, and being chastised by his
supervisor, do not constitute harassment. Irreconcilable differences with a
co-worker, personality conflicts, and job frustrations do not constitute good
cause to quit.
Stefan Bauschard
"substantial reduction" means at

least 25 percentlegal doctrine
proves
Rouse 82 (Judge, California Court of Appeals, Maitland v. Employment
Development Dept., 130 Cal. App. 3d 331, lexis)
Support for defendants' position is found in Bunny's Waffle Shop v. Cal. Emp.
Com. (1944) 24 Cal.2d 735, 743 [151 P.2d 224], where the California
Supreme [***5] Court held that HN2 a "substantial reduction in earnings"
(in that instance a 25 percent wage cut) would generally be regarded as
good cause for leaving employment. (P. 743.) Plaintiff has directed our
attention to no authority, nor are we aware of any, for the proposition
that a far smaller reduction in wages, such as plaintiff's 7-2/3 percent
reduction, would constitute good cause for voluntarily leaving
employment. The conclusion that such a reduction would not furnish good
cause for leaving one's employment is especially compelling here in view of
plaintiff's own testimony that the wage reduction would not have caused her
to quit her job, without first obtaining other employment, but for her belief
that she was eligible for unemployment compensation benefits.
Stefan Bauschard
Stefan Bauschard
Substantial reduction means

between 20 and 30 percent
Stefan Bauschard
Stefan Bauschard
Money Marketing 5/13/04 (lexis)

Sesame is setting out its stall in a bid to attract new members, offering
professional indemnity premium cuts of 20 per cent to firms joining its
network as well as promising existing members substantial reductions in
their PI costs.
The mega-network says some members will see their PI premiums cut by up
to 30 per cent, with over 90 per cent seeing premiums fall by a fifth.
Stefan Bauschard

percent
Stefan Bauschard
Stefan Bauschard
Precision Marketing 2/28/03

(lexis)
Like any industry, we have key objectives. These usually focus on getting
more advertisers to use the medium. And the year-on-year growth figures
show that we are achieving this. Yet in the same breath we hear that sectors
like charities have shown a 25 per cent reduction in mailing volume over
the past few years. Why? Because our short-termist philosophy does not deal
with the fundamentals. If charities are seeing substantial reductions in
volume, will this not filter through to other sectors?
Stefan Bauschard
Percent
Stefan Bauschard
Substantial reduction means at

least 24 percent
Frost 98 (Christopher, Professor of Law, Saint Louis University School of
Law, Winter, 72 Am. Bankr. L.J. 103, lexis)
While the fast track system is widely touted as a method of reducing the
costs of Chapter 11, thus making reorganization available to small debtors,
the approach also has significant governance benefits. Managers
recognizing that a day of reckoning is close at hand will have less incentive
to delay the case in hopes of a turnaround in the debtor's business fortunes.
The data regarding fast track procedures certainly shows that the procedure
moves cases through Chapter 11 more quickly. A study of Chapter 11 cases
before and after Bankruptcy Judge Mund of the Central District of California
instituted a fast track procedure show a substantial reduction in the median
time to confirmation (24.1 percent), conversion (44.1 percent), dismissal
(53.5 percent), [*127] and in the total days in Chapter 11 (45.4 percent). 96
Stefan Bauschard

percent
Luna 97 (Erik, Member of the California Bar, Winter, 46 DePaul L. Rev. 483,
lexis)
Through education and social coercion, Americans have begun to kick the
most addictive drug on earth - nicotine. Between 1965 and 1987, the
proportion of adults smoking cigarettes dropped twenty-eight percent.
565 "We have seen a substantial reduction in the use of tobacco over
the last thirty years," argues political commentator William F. Buckley, "and
this is not because tobacco became illegal but because a sentient community
began, in substantial numbers, to apprehend the high cost of tobacco to
human health." 566 Federal Judge Robert W. Sweet adds, "If our society can
learn to stop using butter, it should be able to cut down on cocaine." 567
Education and social disapproval are the answer, not self-righteous
paternalism.
Stefan Bauschard
Stefan Bauschard
Percent
Stefan Bauschard

percentenvironmental studies
prove
Natural Resources Conservation Service 04 ("Highly Erodible Land
Conservation Compliance,"
www.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/compliance/helcindex.html)
A Substantial Reduction in Soil Erosion is defined as:

Generally, a 75% reduction of the potential erodibility (PE), not to exceed
two (2) times the soil loss tolerance (T) level for the predominant highly
erodible soil map unit in the highly erodible field.
Stefan Bauschard
Substantial reduction means at

least 70 percentcrime statistics
prove
Petersilia 97 (Joan, professor of criminology, law, and society in the School
of Social Ecology, University of California at Irvine, 22 Crime & Just. 149,
lexis)
Gerstein et al. (1994, p. 33) conclude: "Treatment was very cost beneficial:
for every dollar spent on drug and alcohol treatment, the state of California
saved $ 7 in reductions in crime and health care costs. The study found that
each day of treatment paid for itself on the day treatment was received,
primarily through an avoidance of crime. The level of criminal activity
declined by two-thirds from before treatment to after treatment. The greater
the length of time spent in treatment, the greater the reduction in crime.
Reported criminal activity declined before and after treatment as follows:
mean number of times sold or helped sell drugs (-75 percent), mean number
of times used weapon/physical force (-93 percent), percent committing any
illegal activity (-72 percent), and mean months involved in criminal activity (80 percent)."
Regardless of type of treatment modality, reduction in crime was
substantial and significant (although participants in the social model
recovery programs had the biggest reduction). In the California study, the
most effective treatment programs cost about $ 12,000 per year, per client
(Gerstein et al. 1994). UCLA researchers recently concluded: "It seems that
drug abuse treatment mandated by the criminal justice system [*192]
represents one of the best and most cost-effective approaches to breaking
the pernicious cycle of drug use, criminality, incarceration, and recidivism"
(Prendergast, Anglin, and Wellisch 1995).
Stefan Bauschard
percent
Stefan Bauschard

percentenvironmental policy
proves
Menell 90 (Peter, Acting Professor of Law, University of California at
Berkeley School of Law, 1990 COLUM. BUS. L. REV. 399, lexis)
n43 For example, in the four years following Allied Chemical Corporation's
structural changes, see supra note 22, employee injuries fell seventy-five
percent. See Coffee, supra note 22, at 456. 3M Company has also achieved
substantial reduction in environmental degradation through its
internal incentive programs. See 3 M Announces Plan to Cut Hazardous
Releases by 90 Percent, Emphasize Pollution Prevention, 20 Env't Rep.
(BNA) at 441-42 (June 16, 1989); Ling, supra note 22, at 129.
Stefan Bauschard
Substantially reduce can

Be Complete/Elimination
Stefan Bauschard
Total closures meet "substantial

reduction"
Sathre 86 (Constance, Legal Intern, Office of the General Counsel, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Spring, 16 Envtl. L. 731, lexis)
United States scientists predict that the agreement will reduce the Japanese
interception of North American salmon by approximately twenty to thirty
percent. 61 Total closure of the Bering Sea area to the mothership fleet
should result in substantial reductions in the number of salmon intercepted
from the Yukon-Kuskokwim River area. The revised research and
enforcement provisions are perhaps the most significant aspects of the
agreement, since they will contribute to our knowledge of the landbased
fisheries, and will provide the basis for future negotiations.
Stefan Bauschard
Government bans can be

considered substantial reductions
in consumptiontobacco ad bans
prove
Polin 88 (Kenneth, LL.M. Candidate, New York University, 1990, Fall, 17
Hofstra L. Rev. 99, lexis)
Thus, because advertising serves to attract new product users 238 as well as
perhaps to increase consumption by present consumers, and since tobacco
advertising has not been established without bias to have the extraordinary
effect to the contrary, a ban of tobacco advertising should serve the
substantial government interest in the reduction of tobacco use, 239 and is,
therefore, valid as "reasonably" based. 240
Stefan Bauschard
A2 Substantial means
Complete/Eliminate
Stefan Bauschard
Substantial is distinct from ALL or

FULL or COMPLETE
Sucaet 97 (Michael, practices law at the Bloomfield Hills, Michigan law firm
of Vestevich, Mallender, DuBois & Dritsas, P.C, Winter, 1997 Det. C.L. Rev.
1203, lexis)
It is no easy task to comply with all of these conditions. The process can be
lengthy and expensive. There are, however, benefits. The USEPA Policy lists
three major incentives to encourage auditing, disclosure, and prompt
corrections. A gravity based penalty is defined as that portion of a penalty
above a regulated entity's economic benefit obtained through the
noncompliance. n40 The penalties are intended to reflect the seriousness of
the violation. The first incentive identified by the USEPA Policy is that
gravity based penalties can be reduced by seventy-five percent. n41 That is,
a regulated entity may pay only twenty-five percent as a gravity based
penalty. The company must satisfy all conditions discussed above to
qualify for the seventy-five percent reduction. n42 Substantial
compliance is not sufficient. The USEPA expressly reserved the right to
collect any economic benefit realized by the regulated entity as a result of
the non-compliance. n43
Stefan Bauschard
A2 Substantially Reduce
must be
Numerical/Percentage
Stefan Bauschard
Federal courts agree

substantially shouldn't be defined
precisely to a numerical value
such as 80 or 90 percent
Curtin 03 (United States Circuit Judge of the Western District of New York,
Gateway Equip. Corp. v. United States, 247 F. Supp. 2d 299, lexis)
While the court agrees that the meanings of limitation and impairment refer
to restriction and reduction, it does not agree with the uncited definition of
"substantial" as an order of magnitude equivalent to 80 or 90 percent.
Random House Unabridged Dictionary 1897 (2d ed. 1993) defines
"substantial" as "of ample or considerable amount quantity, size," a much
less precise definition than offered by the government. It is clear that the
CB-4000 can and does transport its load over the public highway in the
course of traveling to a job [**33] site. The question is whether that
transportation function is substantially limited by its special design in the
type of material it can haul, and whether there are other factors that
substantially limit/ impair its use for over-the-road distance hauling.
Stefan Bauschard
Percentage-based definitions of a
"substantial reduction" are flawed
ignore how multiple variations
interact
Lord 95 (Senior Judge, Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, KAOLIN
MUSHROOM FARMS, INC. v. UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION BD. OF
R..., 669 A.2d 438, lexis)
While a reduction of ten percent in wages may not be substantial in some

instances, and while there is admittedly language in Steinberg Vision
Associates noting that "a 14.2% wage reduction is at the cusp," of having a
substantial impact, I cannot agree that a ten percent reduction in the wages
of a mushroom picker making $ 6 per hour is not a substantial reduction. I
cannot accept the notion of a percentage-based "cusp" because I am
convinced that the percentage varies with the wage--the less the wages, the
more impact any percentage reduction has.
Stefan Bauschard
Stefan Bauschard
There exists a distinction between

numerical and actual substantial
reductions
Stewart 03 (Andrew, JD @ William S. Richardson School of Law, Summer, 4
Asian-Pacific L. & Pol'y J. 307, lexis)
Although Prime Minister Sato ultimately succeeded in returning Okinawa to

Japan, the final terms of the reversion were not what many Okinawans, and
many Japanese, had hoped for. 258 Following a series of negotiations with the
United States, streams of domestic allegations and criticisms, 259 and minor
compromises between the LDP and fragmented [*349] opposition parties,
260
Okinawa was officially returned to Japan on May 15, 1972. 261 Although
the base reduction resulting from the reversion appeared numerically
substantial, it only amounted to 5,000 square meters of land returned to
Okinawan landowners, of which seventy-five percent had not been used for
bases. 262 Furthermore, Japan stationed 6,800 of its Self-Defense Force
(SDF) troops in Okinawa following the reversion, while no major U.S. units
were withdrawn from the islands. 263 In the end, Okinawan reversion was a
showcase for adorning Sato's political legacy 264 and an opportunity for the
LDP's conservative wing to revive national pride by removing the Okinawan
blemish from the country's collective memory. 265 It was not the liberation
from military colonialism that many Okinawans had been hoping for. 266
Stefan Bauschard
An action that materially advances

governmental interests can be
considered a "substantial
reduction"
Halberstam 99 (Daniel, Attorney Advisor, Office of Legal Counsel, U.S.
Department of Justice, April, 147 U. Pa. L. Rev. 771, lexis)
If applied with respect to tobacco advertising, Central Hudson would

demand that the restrictions materially advance, and be reasonably tailored
to advance, a substantial government interest. If preventing gambling by
Puerto Rico residents, and assisting states in preventing their citizens from
playing out-of-state lotteries each suffices to justify the restriction of
commercial speech, the reduction of the number of smokers should be
deemed "substantial" in this calculus as well. If we accept the
government's claims about the individual health consequences and the
public health costs of tobacco consumption, then the government's interest
in reducing the incidence of smoking would easily seem substantial. The
central question, then, under Central Hudson would be whether a ban on
tobacco advertising (or a more limited restriction) furthers that goal and is
reasonably tailored to doing so.
Stefan Bauschard
Substantially Reduce
Definitions (Random)
Stefan Bauschard
17 percent reduction is
"substantial"
Stefan Bauschard
Stefan Bauschard
Design Week 10/24/02 (lexis)

People in other functions were not quite this lucky though. New business
directors' pay fell 5 per cent across the country, which is perhaps curious
given the shortage reported by many recruitment agencies, unless they have
benefited from more advantageous incentive- based packages that have cut
basic pay levels. Managing directors have felt the pinch too. In our sample,
managing directors' salaries fell 17 per cent beyond London.
While our data gave London managing directors an average rise of just 4 per
cent, just over inflation, other data - particularly that from the big marketing
services networks - points to substantial reductions in managing
directors' salaries, which are most closely linked to group performance
anyway.
Stefan Bauschard
Reductions of 43 percent are

considered substantial
Sellers 84 (Joseph, Director of the Public Education Legal Services Project,
27 How. L.J. 1471, lexis)
In 1954, the Supreme Court decided Bolling v. Sharpe, 9 a companion case

with Brown v. Board of Education 10 and three other state cases. In Bolling,
the Court held that the District's racially segregated public school system
violated the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment. 11 At the time
Bolling was decided, the public school enrollment in the District of Columbia
was approximately half white. After desegregation was mandated, the
number of white students began declining while the black enrollment rose
rapidly. By 1967, white students constituted only about seven percent of
the total enrollment. 12 Although it is unclear to what extent the drop in
white enrollment was caused by desegregation, the substantial reduction in
white students attending the D.C. public schools has made [*1474]
integration impractical, if not impossible. 13
Stefan Bauschard
Reductions of 95% constitute

"substantial reduction"
Inbau 99 (Fred, Summer, 89 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 1293, lexis)
The court accepted the opinion of Florida Rock's expert, noting that the
decline in fair market value from $ 10,500 to $ 500 per acre constituted a
"substantial reduction in value." 81 Yet the court also observed that this
ninety-five percent reduction "in and of itself is not a sufficient basis for
concluding that a taking has occurred." 82 The court then stated it also must
inquire into "the owner's opportunity to recoup its investment" 83 to
determine whether compensation was required. 84 It observed that Florida
Rock had purchased the property for mining purposes and that the property
owner could recoup its investment only by engaging in this activity. 85 The
regulation thus resulted in a substantial impact on Florida Rock's
investment. 86 The court concluded that a taking had occurred, 87 and the
Government appealed for a second time to the Court of Appeals for the
Federal Circuit.
Stefan Bauschard
Stefan Bauschard
Reductions of 37% are

"substantial"
Afilalo 02 (Ari, Assistant Professor of Law, Rutgers-Camden School of Law,
Summer, 34 N.Y.U. J. Int'l L. & Pol. 749, lexis)
The United States recently put forth its proposal for the adoption in the
Doha Round of new agricultural rules. 141 The U.S. proposal includes a series
of suggested international trade laws that should improve the developing
countries' conditions and move toward eliminating the agricultural selectiveexit strategy. 142 In the realm of trade-distorting domestic support, the
United States is arguing for gradual elimination of all such subsidies. 143 The
United States is pushing for the adoption of a formula that will limit tradedistorting support to five percent of the total value of the agricultural
production of a given contracting party over a five-year period. 144 Under the
U.S. view, the Doha Round will fix a date whereby all trade-distorting
support will be phased out. 145 The United States is also advocating a
substantial reduction in the tariff rates for agricultural goods. 146 Currently,
the world average of tariffs on agricultural products is sixty-two percent,
and the U.S. average [*788] tariff on such goods is twelve percent. 147 The
U.S. proposal would call for the application of a formula to reduce all
agricultural tariffs to below twenty-five percent over a five-year period,
with the highest tariffs reduced first. 148 The United States proposes that
WTO members agree to a date for the ultimate elimination of all tariffs on
agricultural products. 149
Stefan Bauschard
Reductions of 3 percent can be

Bailey and Greenberg 98 (Michael and Aaron, Department of Psychology
@ Northwestern, Summer, 92 Nw. U.L. Rev. 1225, lexis)
Without a control group created via random assignment, one must be

cautious in drawing inferences from a study. It is not obvious, in such cases,
what an appropriate comparison would be. Two sources of data provide
recidivism rates for comparison with castrated sex offenders. First, several
of the studies have provided recidivism rates of their subjects prior to
castration. Most of these recidivism rates have greatly exceeded fifty
percent, probably because recidivists are more likely to be recommended for
castration. Second, studies have examined sex offender recidivism directly.
The best relevant study of this question followed 136 extrafamilial child
molesters (defined as an adult male having sex with a girl below the age of
fourteen or a boy below the age of sixteen when at least five years older
than the victim and unrelated to him or her), who were released from a
Canadian maximum security psychiatric facility. 25 Of one hundred and
thirty-six subjects followed (over an average of 6.3 years), thirty-one percent
were convicted of another sex offense, and an additional twenty-seven
percent were returned to the institution due to misbehavior, which was
typically sex-related. These figures suggest that the sex offenders in the
castration studies would have been likely to reoffend if not castrated, and
that the average postcastration recidivism rate of three percent was a
substantial reduction.
Stefan Bauschard
9 percent reductions can be

Sybert 94 (Richard, Executive Director of the California Center for Public
Policy, Fall, 31 San Diego L. Rev. 945, lexis)
Since 1968 immigration levels have soared, and in the 1980s the number of
newcomers surpassed that noted in 1905-1914. When even a conservative
estimate is made of illegal entries, the total number entering the country
over the 1980s exceeded nine million. . . . In marked contrast to the first
decade of the 20th century when about 85 percent of all immigrants came
from Europe, by the 1980s only 15 percent came from Europe while some 80
percent came from Latin America, the Caribbean, and Asia. . . . The 76
percent Anglo share of the 1990 national population marked a
substantial reduction from the 85 percent share in 1950. 28
Stefan Bauschard
Stefan Bauschard
Reductions between 30 and 40

percent are considered
"substantial"
Cummings 78 (United States Circuit Judge of the Seventh Circuit, United
States v. Mowat, 582 F.2d 1194, lexis)
The import of these justifications recently was reaffirmed in Aluli v. Brown,

437 F. Supp. 602 (D.Haw.), in which Mowat, Ritte, Sawyer, other individuals
and the Ohana sued Government officials to enjoin bombing activities on the
Island of Kahoolawe. In refusing to grant an injunction enjoining defendants
from using live ordinance on Kahoolawe, Judge Wong's unreported opinion
of September 15, 1977, stated (at p. 17):
"Defendants have testified that the military readiness of the Third Fleet
would be reduced by 30 to 40 percent. Although no measurement standards
were cited in arriving at these figures, the court finds that the reduction
would nevertheless be substantial. Alternative sites were considered and
rejected by defendants. The reasons given for their rejection seem
reasonable. Considering the potential loss of military preparedness, this
court finds that the balance of hardships tip decidedly toward the
defendants. [**31] "
Stefan Bauschard
10 percent reductions are

"substantial"
Sexton 85 (Judge, Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Second Circuit, Nason v.
Louisiana Dep't of Employment Sec., 475 So. 2d 85, lexis)
In Robertson, the court found that a forty percent reduction in wages was a
sufficiently substantial reduction to thereby entitle the claimant to
unemployment compensation.
In Jantzen of Louisiana, Inc. v. Blache, 464 So.2d 33 (La. App. 3d Cir. 1985),
the court found that a claimant who was employed as a machine operator,
compensated at a fixed rate for each unit produced, suffered a substantial
reduction when the rate for each finished product was reduced from $ .95 to
$ .54, thus entitling the claimant to unemployment compensation.
The jurisprudence cited serves only as a guide to assist us in determining
whether this ten percent reduction is indeed substantial. While we cannot
say precisely at what level a reduction in pay becomes substantial, we are of
the view that this reduction of just under ten percent had a significant
impact on appellant's economic status. We thus determine that the reduction
at issue is sufficiently substantial [*88] as a matter of law to be good
cause for leaving the employment.
Stefan Bauschard
Substantial reduction means

between 30 and 50 percent
Williamson 95 (Richard, Professor of Law, University of Miami, Winter, 28
Cornell Int'l L.J. 71)
n59. The U.S. Senate has voted its consent to ratification of the START I
agreement which will require substantial reductions in strategic nuclear
weapons. See START I, supra note 41. Thirty to fifty percent reductions
in strategic systems are needed for the United States and the four relevant
states of the former Soviet Union to meet the START I limits. The START
Treaty: Hearings Before the Senate Comm. on Foreign Relations, 102d
Cong., 2d Sess. 49 (1992) (prepared statement of Ronald F. Lehman II,
Director, Arms Control and Disarmament Agency). The START I agreement
entered into force December 5, 1994, following Ukraine's accession to the
NPT. Message to the Senate Transmitting the Strategic Arms Reduction
Talks Treaty, 27 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1726 (Nov. 25, 1991) (President's
transmittal to Senate); Statement of Senate Ratification of the Strategic
Arms Reduction Treaty, 28 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1836 (Oct. 1, 1992)
(Senate ratification); Remarks at a Nuclear Agreement Signing Ceremony in
Budapest, 30 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 2464 (Dec. 5, 1994). U.S. and Russian
leaders have reached agreement on a START II treaty, under which they will
reduce their total strategic warheads to 3,500 and 3,000 respectively. START
II was signed by U.S. President Bush and Russian President Yeltsin on
January 3, 1993. The treaty provides for a further two-thirds reduction in the
nuclear arsenals of each country. Treaty with the Russian Federation on
Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms, Jan. 3, 1991,
U.S.-Rus., S. Treaty Doc. No. 1, 103d Cong., 1st Sess. (1993) [hereinafter
START II]; see Ann Devroy, Bush and Yeltsin Sign Treaty to Slash Nuclear
Arsenals, Wash. Post, Jan. 4, 1993, at A1; Keeping START's Promise, Wash.
Times, Jan. 6, 1993, at G2. That will be a dramatic reduction, certainly far
better than even the most optimistic arms control advocates could
realistically have hoped for only a few years ago.
Stefan Bauschard
A2 1% Reductions ARent
Substantial
Stefan Bauschard
Reductions of less than one

percent can be substantiallevel
of personal reliance is key
Luttig 93 (Judge, US 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, Baltimore Teachers Union
v. Mayor of Baltimore, 6 F.3d 1012, lexis)
n8 To the extent that the magnitude of the ensuing economic loss from an
impaired contract (as opposed to the nature of the right impaired) is
relevant to the question of the substantiality of the impairment, we reject
the City's contention that an annual salary reduction of .95% is
insubstantial. Based upon an annual salary of $ 25,000, this amount
could represent a substantial portion of a monthly mortgage or
rental payment, or weeks of food. Indeed, because individuals plan their
lives based upon their salaries, we would be reluctant to hold that any
decrease in an annual salary beyond one that could fairly be termed de
minimis could be considered insubstantial. See, e.g., Association of
Surrogates v. New York, 940 F.2d 766, 772 (2d Cir. 1991) (A 10% reduction
in salary over 20 weeks prompted court to remark that "the affected
employees have surely relied on full paychecks to pay for such essentials as
food and housing."), cert. denied, 117 L. Ed. 2d 107, 112 S. Ct. 936 (1992)
("Surrogates"); Association of Surrogates v. New York, 79 N.Y.2d 39, 588
N.E.2d 51, 54, 580 N.Y.S.2d 153 (N.Y. 1992) (10% reduction in salary over 10
weeks "not an insubstantial impairment to one confronted with monthly debt
payments and daily expenses for food and the other necessities of life"); cf.
Sniadach v. Family Fin. Corp., 395 U.S. 337, 342 n.9, 23 L. Ed. 2d 349, 89 S.
Ct. 1820 (1969) ("For a poor man to lose part of his salary often means his
family will go without the essentials." (internal quotations omitted)).
Stefan Bauschard
One percent reductions can be

"substantial" if the degree of
reliance is extremely high
Lee 94 (Thomas, September, 72 N.C.L. Rev. 1633, lexis)
The Fourth Circuit easily concluded that the city had entered contracts with
its employees upon enacting the Ordinance of Estimates, 31 and that
the salary reductions constituted an impairment of these contracts. 32
Second, the court determined that the nearly one-percent pay reduction
was substantial 33 because the level of compensation was a contractual
inducement upon which the plaintiffs had especially relied. 34
Stefan Bauschard
A2 Substantially =
Arbitrary
Stefan Bauschard
Substantially must be given

meaning even if arbitrary
contextual uses are key
Devinsky 02 (Paul, IP UPDATE, VOLUME 5, NO. 11, NOVEMBER 2002, Is Claim "Substantially"
Definite? Ask Person of Skill in the Art,
http://www.mwe.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/publications.nldetail/object_id/c2c73bdb-9b1a-42bf-a2b7075812dc0e2d.cfm)
In reversing a summary judgment of invalidity,
found that the district court,
the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
by failing to look beyond the intrinsic claim construction evidence
erroneously
concluded the term "substantially" made a claim fatally indefinite . Verve, LLC v.
to consider what a person of skill in the art would understand in a "technologic context,"
Crane Cams, Inc., Case No. 01-1417 (Fed. Cir. November 14, 2002). The patent in suit related to an improved push rod
for an internal combustion engine. The patent claims a hollow push rod whose overall diameter is larger at the middle
than at the ends and has "substantially constant wall thickness" throughout the rod and rounded seats at the tips. The
district court found that the expression "substantially constant wall thickness" was not supported in the specification
and prosecution history by a sufficiently clear definition of "substantially" and was, therefore, indefinite. The district
court recognized that the use of the term "substantially" may be definite in some cases but ruled that in this case it was
indefinite because it was not further defined. The Federal Circuit reversed, concluding that the district court erred in
requiring that the meaning of the term "substantially" in a particular "technologic context" be found solely in intrinsic
evidence: "While reference to intrinsic evidence is primary in interpreting claims, the criterion is the meaning of words
as they would be understood by persons in the field of the invention."
Thus,
instructed that "resolution of any ambiguity arising from

may be aided by extrinsic evidence of usage and meaning of
the Federal Circuit

the claims and specification
a term in the context of the
"[t]he
question is not whether the word 'substantially' has a fixed meaning as applied
to 'constant wall thickness,' but how the phrase would be understood by persons
experienced in this field of mechanics, upon reading the patent documents."
invention." The Federal Circuit remanded the case to the district court with instruction that
Stefan Bauschard
"substantial" is a relative term

context must be used to define
Words and Phrases 2002 (Volume 40A) p. 464
Cal. 1956. Substantial is a relative term, its measure to be gauged by all

the circumstances surrounding the matter in reference to which the
expression has been used
Stefan Bauschard
"substantial" has no exact

meaningcontext is key
The word substantial is susceptible to different meanings according to the

circumstances, and is variously defined as actual, essential, material,
fundamental, although no rule of thumb can be laid down fixing its
exact meaning
Stefan Bauschard
A2 Substantially Refers to
the Ends Not Means
Stefan Bauschard
substantial refers to the nature

of use, NOT the ends resulting
from such use
C.A.9 (Cal.) 1969. Under statute providing that purchased property will be
considered used for investment credit purposes only if substantial use is
made, substantial refers to nature of use, not to profit made from
use
Stefan Bauschard
Substantial = Considerable
Stefan Bauschard
"substantial" means of real worth

or considerable valuethis is the
USUAL and CUSTOMARY meaning
of the term
D.S.C. 1966. The word substantial within Civil Rights Act providing that a
place is a public accommodation if a substantial portion of food which is
served has moved in commerce must be construed in light of its usual and
customary meaning, that is, something of real worth and importance;
of considerable value; valuable, something worthwhile as distinguished
from something without value or merely nominal
Stefan Bauschard
Stefan Bauschard
"substantial" means considerable

in amount or value
N.D.Ala. 1957. The word substantial means considerable in amount, value,

or the like, large, as a substantial gain
Substantially- to a great or significant extent
Compact Oxford English Dictionary, 8 (substantially, 2008,

http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/substantially?view=uk)
substantially
adverb 1 to a great or significant extent. 2 for the most part; essentially.
Stefan Bauschard
Substantial- considerable in
quantity
Merriam-Webster, 8 (substantial, 2008, http://www.merriamwebster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=substantially)
Main Entry: substantial

1 a: consisting of or relating to substance b: not imaginary or illusory : real,
true c: important, essential
2: ample to satisfy and nourish : full <a substantial meal>
3 a: possessed of means : well-to-do b: considerable in
quantity : significantly great <earned a substantial wage>
4: firmly constructed : sturdy <a substantial house>
5: being largely but not wholly that which is specified <a substantial lie>
Of ample or considerable amount, quantity, or size
Random House Unabridged Dictionary, 6 (Dictionary.com Unabridged,

substantial, http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=substantially&r=66)
1. of ample or considerable amount, quantity, size, etc.: a substantial sum of

money.
2. of a corporeal or material nature; tangible; real.
3. of solid character or quality; firm, stout, or strong: a substantial physique.
4. basic or essential; fundamental: two stories in substantial agreement.
5. wealthy or influential: one of the substantial men of the town.
6. of real worth, value, or effect: substantial reasons.
7. pertaining to the substance, matter, or material of a thing.
8. of or pertaining to the essence of a thing; essential, material, or
important.
9. being a substance; having independent existence.
Stefan Bauschard
10. Philosophy. pertaining to or of the nature of substance rather than an
accident or attribute.
Stefan Bauschard
Substantially = Having
Real Worth/Value/Substance
Stefan Bauschard
"substantial" means actually

existing, real, or belonging to
substance
Ala. 1909. Substantial means belonging to substance; actually existing;

real; *** not seeming or imaginary; not elusive; real; solid; true; veritable
Stefan Bauschard
"substantial" means having

substance or considerable
Ballentine's Legal Dictionary and Thesaurus 1995 p. 644
having substance; considerable
Stefan Bauschard
substantial means having worth

or value
Ballentine's Legal Dictionary and Thesaurus 1995 p. 644
having worth or value
Stefan Bauschard
Substantially = Without
Material Qualification
Stefan Bauschard
Substantially is without material

qualification
Blacks Law Dictionary 1991 [p. 1024]
Substantially - means essentially; without material qualification.
Stefan Bauschard
Substantially = In the
main
Stefan Bauschard
Substantially means including the

main part
WORDS AND PHRASES, 1964, p. 818.
Substantially means in substance; in the main; essentially; by including

the material or essential part.
Stefan Bauschard
"substantial" means in the main

Ill.App.2 Dist. 1923 Substantial means in substance, in the main, essential,

including material or essential parts
Substantially means in the most important or basic way
MacMillan Dictionary, 10 (Macmillan English Dictionary - a free English

dictionary online with thesaurus and with pronunciation from Macmillan
Publishers Limited,
http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/american/substantially)
Substantially
1 by a large amount or degree
We have substantially increased the number of programs.
The city has grown substantially.
2 very strongly made or built
a substantially built brick house
3. in the most important or basic way
The two women hold substantially equivalent positions in the two
companies.
Substantially means essentially
Encarta, 09 (Encarta World English Dictionary,

http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?
refid=1861716589)
substantially
adverb
Stefan Bauschard
Definition:
1. considerably: in an extensive, substantial, or ample way
2. essentially: in essence
Stefan Bauschard
"Substantial" Should Be
Defined on Case-By-Case
Basis
Stefan Bauschard
"Substantial" should be defined on

a case-by-case basis
Edlin 02 (Aaron, Professor of Economics and Law, University of California
Berkeley School of Law, January, 111 Yale L.J. 941, lexis)
Might price reductions of less than twenty percent qualify as substantial? In

some markets they should, and it would be reasonable to decide
substantiality on a case-by-case basis. One advantage of a bright-line
rule is that it would let incumbents know where they stand. Monopolies that
price only slightly above their average cost would be insulated from the
entry of higher-cost entrants if they could credibly convey a willingness to
price below the entrants' cost after entry, as illustrated in Part III. However,
these monopolies do consumers little harm and may enhance market
efficiency.
Stefan Bauschard
"Substantial" = More Than

50 Percent
Stefan Bauschard
Substantial means more than 50

percent
GRAND CANYON AIR v FAA 98 (caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgibin/getcase.pl?court=dc&navby=case&no=971003a)
"Substantial" may well be defined as meaning "more than half." See

Webster's Third New International Dictionary 2280 (1993) ("being that
specified to a large degree or in the main") (4th meaning).
Stefan Bauschard
"Substantial" = More Than

50 Percent + Not
All/Total/Complete***
Stefan Bauschard
Substantial means more than half,

but NOT all, wholly, or totally
Bailey v. United States 98 (Bailey v. United States, 39 F. Supp. 2d 1132,
lexis)
n4 To do this, the court will need a working definition of the terms

"substantial" and "substantially." Courts have given these terms widely
different meanings, depending on the context. See Victor v. Nebraska, 511
U.S. 1, 19, 114 S. Ct. 1239, 1250, 127 L. Ed. 2d 583 (1994) ("substantial"
means either "not seeming or imaginary" or "that specified to a large
degree" in the context of a reasonable doubt instruction, citing Webster's
Third New International Dictionary 2280 (1981)); Kluener v. Commissioner
of Internal Revenue, 154 F.3d 630, 637 (6th Cir. 1998) ("substantial" means
something less than a preponderance, but more than a mere reasonable
basis, citing 26 C.F.R. P1.6662-4(d)(3) (1997)); Id., at 639 ("substantial"
means "considerable" or "ample"); Canyon Air Tour Coalition v. Federal
Aviation Administration, 332 U.S. App. D.C. 133, 154 F.3d 455, 474 (D.C. Cir.
1998) ("substantial" may well be defined as meaning "more than half,"
"being that specified to a large degree or in the main," "not seeming or
imaginary," "considerable in amount"); York Products, Inc. v. Central Tractor
Farm & Family Center, 99 F.3d 1568, 1572-73 (Fed. Cir. 1996)
("substantially" means "considerable in . . . extent," citing American
Heritage Dictionary Second College Edition 1213 (2d ed. 1982) or "largely
but not wholly that which is specified," citing Webster's Ninth New
Collegiate Dictionary 1176 (9th ed. 1983)); Koch v. United States, 47 F.3d
1015, 1021 (10th Cir. 1995) ("substantially" means "justified in substance or
in the main -- that is, justified to a degree that could satisfy a reasonable
person." (citations omitted)); Laitram Machinery, Inc. v. Carnitech, 884 F.
Supp. 1074, 1085 (E.D.La. 1995) (definition of "substantially" in a patent
case is a jury question); C.E. Equipment Co., Inc. v. United States, 17 Cl. Ct.
293, 299 (1989) ("substantially" means "less than totally"); Darlington v.
Studebaker-Packard Corporation, 191 F. Supp. 438, 439 (N.D. Ind 1961)
("The word 'substantially' is a relative term and should be interpreted in
accordance with context of claim in which it is used."). At trial, the court will
expect the parties to propose appropriate definitions for these terms for the
court to use in deciding this case.
Stefan Bauschard
substantially = 80-90
Percent
Stefan Bauschard
Substantially means 80-90 percent

Curtin 03 (United States Circuit Judge of the Western District of New York,
Gateway Equip. Corp. v. United States, 247 F. Supp. 2d 299, lexis)
The regulations do not define "substantially," "limited," or "impaired." The

government cites Webster's Ninth New College Dictionary for the definitions
of "limit" and "impairment" as suggesting "meanings equivalent to
restriction and reduction, respectively." Item 30, p. 3, n.1. It posits that the
word "substantially" suggests "an order of magnitude equivalent to 80% or
90%." Id. It concludes that "using those definitions, 'substantially limited'
and 'substantially impaired' means that there must be an 80%-90%
restriction and/ or reduction of use by virtue of the design of the CB-4000."
Id.
Stefan Bauschard
"Substantial" = 40 Percent
Stefan Bauschard
Substantial should be defined as

40 percentbest avoids vagueness
Schwartz 04 (Arthur, Lawyer @ Schwartz + Goldberg, 2002 U.S. Briefs
1609, lexis)
In the opinion below, the Tenth Circuit suggested that a percentage figure
would be a way to avoid vagueness issues. (Pet. App., at 13-14) Indeed,
one of the Amici supporting the City in this case, the American Planning
Association, produced a publication that actually makes a recommendation
of a percentage figure that should be adopted by municipalities in
establishing zoning [*37] regulations for adult businesses. n8 The APA's
well researched report recommended that the terms "substantial" and
"significant" be quantified at 40 percent for floor space or inventory of a
business in the definition of adult business. n9 (Resp. Br. App., at 15-16)
Stefan Bauschard
Substantial Presence =
Major Military Bases
Stefan Bauschard
Substantial means major military

bases.
Stefan Bauschard
Eland 07
(Ivan Eland, Ph.D. in Public Policy and Director of Defense Policy Studies at
the Cato Institute, 6/11/07, The U.S. Military Presence in South Korea Is
Not a Model for Iraq, http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?
q=cache:R7jepIGVfiQJ:www.americanchronicle.com/articles/29324+substant
ial+%22military+presence
%22&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=safari)
The Bush administration has decided its new model for a long-term solution in Iraq is Korea. Its an
attempt to stifle the inevitable comparisons of the Iraq quagmire to Vietnam and a way to justify the
eventual reduction of U.S. forces in Iraq (to take the heat off Republican candidates in the 2008
a substantial U.S. military presence by establishing three

or four long-term major military bases. The plan would ultimately be a disaster for
elections), while retaining
the United States.
Stefan Bauschard
Substantial means major bases or

supplies in a country.
Stefan Bauschard
Rogers 02
(Paul Rogers, editor and professor of peace studies at Bradford University, 1/14/02, US entrenchment
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?
q=cache:fdPLasZokqoJ:www.opendemocracy.net/conflict/article_86.jsp+subs
tantial+%22military+presence
across central Asia,
substantial US presence in the region

for the ten years prior to 11 September. These include major bases and prepositioned supplies in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Bahrain and the huge logistics
supply centre and air base on Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean.
These developments in the Gulf are in addition to the
Stefan Bauschard
A2 HR 4421 / Comprehensive Base Closure Act
Stefan Bauschard
HR 4421 was never enacted its

not federal law
Bill Tracking Report, 92 (Bill Tracking Report for the Comprehensive Base
Closure Reform and Recovery Act of 1992, 1992 Bill Tracking H.R. 4421;
102 Bill Tracking H.R. 4421, lexis)
COMPREHENSIVE BASE CLOSURE REFORM AND RECOVERY ACT

OF 1992
SPONSOR: Representative Olympia J. Snowe R-ME
DATE-INTRO: March 10, 1992
LAST-ACTION-DATE: March 10, 1992
STATUS: Not Enacted
TOTAL-COSPONSORS: 0 Cosponsors
SYNOPSIS: A bill to establish a comprehensive recovery program for
communities businesses, and workers adversely affected by the closure or
realignment of military installations.
Stefan Bauschard
Stefan Bauschard
1NC Shell Reduce excludes Complete

Withdrawal
Stefan Bauschard
A. Interpretation - Reduce
excludes eliminate
Words and Phrases 02 (vol 36B, p. 80)
Mass. 1905. Rev.Laws, c.203, 9, provides that, if two or more cases are
tried together in the superior court, the presiding judge may reduce the
witness fees and other costs, but not less than the ordinary witness fees,
and other costs recoverable in one of the cases which are so tried together
shall be allowed. Held that, in reducing the costs, the amount in all the
cases together is to be considered and reduced, providing that there must be
left in the aggregate an amount not less than the largest sum recoverable in
any of the cases. The word reduce, in its ordinary signification, does not
mean to cancel, destroy, or bring to naught, but to diminish, lower, or bring
to an inferior state.Green v. Sklar, 74 N.E. 595, 188 Mass. 363.
B. Violation the affirmative completely eliminates US military or

police presence
C. Voting issue
1. limits they create six more affirmatives and explode the topic literature
base; we have to be accountable for the entire peace movement and answer
critical affs which require distinct strategies
2. predictability our evidence signifies the ordinary meaning of reduce;

moving beyond the ordinary meaning of words sets a precedent to interpret
the all other words unpredictably
Stefan Bauschard
1NC Shell Reduce

requires permanence
Stefan Bauschard
A. Reduce means permanent

reduction its distinct from
suspend
Reynolds 59 Judge (In the Matter of Doris A. Montesani, Petitioner, v.
Arthur Levitt, as Comptroller of the State of New York, et al., Respondents
[NO NUMBER IN ORIGINAL] Supreme Court of New York, Appellate
Division, Third Department 9 A.D.2d 51; 189 N.Y.S.2d 695; 1959 N.Y. App.
Div. LEXIS 7391 August 13, 1959, lexis)
Section 83's counterpart with regard to nondisability pensioners, section 84,

prescribes a reduction only if the pensioner should again take a public job.
The disability pensioner is penalized if he takes any type of employment. The
reason for the difference, of course, is that in one case the only reason
pension benefits are available is because the pensioner is considered
incapable of gainful employment, while in the other he has fully completed
his "tour" and is considered as having earned his reward with almost no
strings attached. It would be manifestly unfair to the ordinary retiree to
accord the disability retiree the benefits of the System to which they both
belong when the latter is otherwise capable of earning a living and had not
fulfilled his service obligation. If it were to be held that withholdings under
section 83 were payable whenever the pensioner died or stopped his other
employment the whole purpose of the provision would be defeated, i.e., the
System might just as well have continued payments during the other
employment since it must later pay it anyway. [***13] The section says
"reduced", does not say that monthly payments shall be temporarily
suspended; it says that the pension itself shall be reduced. The plain
dictionary meaning of the word is to diminish, lower or degrade. The
word "reduce" seems adequately to indicate permanency.
B. Violation the aff only suspends a military operation, it doesnt

reduce it
C. Voting issue
1. limits allowing suspension effectively doubles the size of the topic all
currently run affs can be suspended or reduced
Stefan Bauschard
2. negative ground allowing suspension destroys our disad links, it allows
them to say that the possibility of resuming presence deters or signals that
the US is still committed
Stefan Bauschard
1NC Shell Reduce = No

Future Increases in Presence
Stefan Bauschard
A. Reduce means to diminish in

size this excludes refusing to
accept future increases
Guy 91 - Circuit Judge (TIM BOETTGER, BECKY BOETTGER, individually
and as Next Friend for their Minor Daughter, AMANDA BOETTGER,
Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. OTIS R. BOWEN, Secretary of Health and Human
Services (89-1832); and C. PATRICK BABCOCK, Director, Michigan
Department of Social Services (89-1831), Defendants-Appellants Nos. 891831, 89-1832 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH
CIRCUIT 923 F.2d 1183; 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 671)
The district court concluded that the plain meaning of the statutory
language does not apply to the termination of employment one obtains on
his own. A termination, the court held, is not a refusal to accept
employment.
In this case, the plain meaning of the various words suggests that "refuse to
accept" is not the equivalent of "terminate" and "reduce." As a matter of
logic [**18] and common understanding, one cannot terminate or reduce
something that one has not accepted. Acceptance is [*1189] a pre-condition
to termination or reduction. Thus, a refusal to accept is a precursor to, not
the equivalent of, a termination or a reduction. n3
n.3 This distinction is also reflected in the dictionary definitions of the
words. "Accept" is defined in anticipatory terms that suggest a precondition
("to undertake the responsibility of"), whereas "terminate" and "reduce" are
defined in conclusory terms ("to bring to end, . . . to discontinue"; "to
diminish in size, amount, extent, or number."). See Webster's New Collegiate
Dictionary (9th ed. 1985).
B. Violation the affirmative prevents a planned deployment, it

doesnt reduce an existing deployment
C. Voting issue
1. limits they explode the topic, they force us to prepare for all current
military presence and every possible proposal to increase presence. Any aff
Stefan Bauschard
that has a card saying some deployment is likely meets their burden for a
new aff
2. negative ground they destroy our disads, all of our links are to existing
deployments
Stefan Bauschard
1NC Shell Reduce = decrease
Stefan Bauschard
A. Reduce means decrease

excludes the possibility or result
of increasing
Friedman 99 Senior Circuit Judge, US Court of Appeals for the Federal
Circuit (CUNA MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v.
UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee. 98-5033 UNITED STATES COURT OF
APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT 169 F.3d 737; 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS
1832; 99-1 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) P50,245; 83 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 799 February 9,
1999, Decided, lexis)
B. CUNA's position has another fatal flaw. Section 808 is captioned "Policy
Dividends Deduction," and 808(c) states:
(1) In general
Except as limited by paragraph (2), the deduction for policyholder dividends
for any taxable year shall be an amount equal to the policyholder
dividends [**15] paid or accrued during the taxable year.
(2) Reduction in case of mutual companies
In the case of a mutual life insurance company, the deduction for
policyholder dividends for any taxable year shall be reduced by the amount
determined under section 809.
"The amount determined" under 809, by which the policyholder dividend
deduction is to be "reduced," is the "excess" specified in 809(c)(1). Like the
word "excess," the word "reduced" is a common, unambiguous, nontechnical term that is given its ordinary meaning. See San Joaquin Fruit &
Inv. Co., 297 U.S. at 499. "Reduce" means "to diminish in size, amount,
extent, or number." Webster's Third International Dictionary 1905. Under
CUNA's interpretation of "excess" in 809(c), however, the result of the
"amount determination" under 809 would be not to reduce the policyholder
dividends deduction, but to increase it. This would directly contradict the
explicit instruction in 808(c)(2) that the deduction "be reduced." The word
"reduce" cannot be interpreted, as CUNA would treat it, to mean "increase."
B. Violation the affirmative doesnt cause a net reduction, they

result in a increase
C. Voting issue
Stefan Bauschard
1. limits allowing the aff to effectually increase military presence explodes

our research burdens
2. negative ground their affirmative creates a result that destroys all of our
disad links, which stem from the net reduction in presence
Stefan Bauschard
Reduce Definitions
Reduce means to diminish to a smaller number
Oxford English Dictionary 89 (online, at Emory)
reduce, v.
26. a. To bring down, diminish to a smaller number, amount, extent, etc., or
to a single thing.
Reduce means to make smaller
Websters 93 (Websters Third New International Dictionary, online at

Emory)
reduce
vb -ED/-ING/-S
b (1) : to diminish in size, amount, extent, or number : make

smaller: LESSEN, SHRINK
Reduce means to lessen
Oxford English Dictionary, 89 (online, at Emory)
reduce, v.
b. To lower, diminish, lessen.
Reduce means to decrease
Encarta World Dictionary 07

(http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?
refid=1861700111)
Stefan Bauschard
reduce
Definition:
1. transitive and intransitive verb decrease: to become smaller in size,
number, extent, degree, or intensity, or make something smaller in this way
Reduce means to diminish in size
Stefan Bauschard
Merriam Webster Online

Dictionary 08
(http://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/reduce)
reduce
transitive verb
1 a: to draw together or cause to converge : consolidate <reduce all the questions to one> b (1):
to
diminish in size, amount, extent, or number <reduce taxes> <reduce the likelihood of
war> (2): to decrease the volume and concentrate the flavor of by boiling <add the wine and reduce the
sauce for two minutes> c: to narrow down : restrict <the Indians were reduced to small reservations> d:
to make shorter : abridge
Reduce means to make smaller
Cambridge Advanced Learners Dictionary 08

(http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=66270&dict=CALD)
reduce
verb [I or T]
to make something smaller in size, amount, degree, importance, etc:
Do nuclear weapons really reduce the risk of war?
The plane reduced speed as it approached the airport.
My weight reduces when I stop eating sugar.
We bought a television that was reduced (from 500 to 350) in the sales.
To make a thicker sauce, reduce the ingredients by boiling for 5 minutes.
I reduced the problem to a few simple questions.
Stefan Bauschard
Reduce Definitions
Stefan Bauschard
Reduce means to weaken

American Heritage 10 (American Heritage Dictionary of the English
Language, http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/reduce)
reduce
VERB:
reduced, reducing, reduces
VERB:
tr.
1. To bring down, as in extent, amount, or degree; diminish. See Synonyms
at decrease.
2. To bring to a humbler, weaker, difficult, or forced state or condition;
especially:
a. To gain control of; conquer: "a design to reduce them under absolute
despotism" (Declaration of Independence).
b. To subject to destruction: Enemy bombers reduced the city to rubble.
c. To weaken bodily: was reduced almost to emaciation.
d. To sap the spirit or mental energy of.
e. To compel to desperate acts: The Depression reduced many to begging
on street corners.
f. To lower in rank or grade. See Synonyms at demote.
g. To powder or pulverize.
h. To thin (paint) with a solvent.
Reduce is to make smaller
Collins English Dictionary 09

(Collins English Dictionary, tenth edition, 2009, should, p. 1515)
Reduce. Vb. 1. To make or become smaller in size, number, extent, degree,

intensity, etc.
Stefan Bauschard
Reduce is to restore
Oxford English Dictionary 89

(The Oxford English Dictionary, second edition, volume XIII, 1989, p. 431)
Reduce. V. to bring back, restore, replace.

Reduce is to conquer and control
Websters Dictionary 83
(Websters contemporary American Dictionary of the English Language, 1983, p. 592)
Reduce. V. To gain control of; conquer
Stefan Bauschard
A2 Reduce excludes
eliminate
Stefan Bauschard
Reduce includes elimination

US Code 09 (26 CFR 54.4980F-1, lexis)
54.4980F-1 Notice requirements for certain pension plan amendments significantly reducing the rate
of future benefit accrual.
(c) Elimination or cessation of benefits. For purposes of this section,
the terms reduce or reduction
include eliminate or cease or elimination or cessation.
Reduce can include an elimination
Federal Register 10 (26 CFR 1.411(d)-3, Current as of 5/19/10, lexis)

(7) Eliminate; elimination; reduce; reduction. The terms eliminate or
elimination when used in connection with a section 411(d)(6)(B) [26 USCS
411(d)(6)(B)] protected benefit mean to eliminate or the elimination of an
optional form of benefit or an early retirement benefit and to reduce or a
reduction in a retirement-type subsidy. The terms reduce or reduction
when used in connection with a retirement-type subsidy mean to reduce or a
reduction in the amount of the subsidy. For purposes of this section, an
elimination includes a reduction and a reduction includes an elimination.
Stefan Bauschard
A2 Reduce excludes
suspend
Stefan Bauschard
Reduce is a form of suspension

Widener 01 Judge for US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
(CARRINGTON GARDENS ASSOCIATES, I, A VIRGINIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, Plaintiff-Appellant, v.
HENRY G. CISNEROS, SECRETARY OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, Defendant-Appellee, 1
Fed. Appx. 239; 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 634, 1/17, lexis)
Under the regulation, 24 C.F.R. 886.123, the payments to Carrington could have been stopped for good,
the contract terms aside. For construction of the contract terms, we adopt the wording of the opinion of
the district court for the next three paragraphs of this opinion which follow:
The plain meaning of the word "withhold" is "to retain in one's possession that which belongs to or is
claimed or sought by another. . . . To refrain from paying that which is due." Black's Law Dictionary 1602
(6th ed. 1990). Using this common meaning of "withhold," HUD clearly has the authority to retain
housing assistance payments. But, the HAP Contract's withhold remedy also limits how long [**7] the
funds may be retained. The housing assistance payments may be retained only "until the default under
this Contract has been cured." Tr. Ex. 8, 26. Once the default is cured, HUD may no longer keep the
retained funds. This remedy, therefore, creates a trust type relationship where HUD has the authority to
keep the withheld funds on the owner's account only while the owner is in default and thereafter must
pay out the withheld funds when the default is cured.
In contrast, the reduce-or-suspend remedy suggests a more permanent forfeiture of funds.
The word
"suspend" means "to interrupt; to cause to cease for a time; to post pone; to stay, delay, or
hinder; to discontinue temporarily, but with an expectation or purpose of resumption ."
Black's Law Dictionary 1446 (6th ed. 1990). "Reduce" means "to diminish in size, amount,
extent, or number." Webster's Third New International Dictionary 1905 (1981). <3> Based on these
definitions, "reduce" is merely a less radical form of "suspend ."
Under the common meanings of "reduce" and "suspend," HUD has the authority to discontinue housing
assistance payments entirely or diminish the size of the payments while Carrington Gardens [**8] is in
default. Like the withhold remedy, this remedy limits how long payments may be discontinued or
diminished -- only "until the default under this Contract has been cured." Tr. Ex. 8, 26. After the default
has been cured, therefore, HUD must resume full housing assistance payments. Unlike the withhold
remedy, however, under the plain language of the reduce-or-suspend remedy, HUD is under no obligation
to pay out any discontinued or diminished funds. The words "suspend" or "reduce" furnish no inference or
suggestion that HUD is obligated to retain suspended or reduced funds on the owner's account until a
default is cured. This language in the HAP Contract speaks [*243] only to HUD's obligation to begin full
payments after the default is cured. JA 546-548.
Stefan Bauschard
A2 Reduce = restore
Stefan Bauschard
Defining reduce as restore is

archaic and obsolete
Websters 93 (Websters Third New International Dictionary, online at
Emory)
reduce
vb -ED/-ING/-S
2 archaic
a : to lead back : cause to return
reduce the Protestants within the pale of the Romish Church

- Nicholas Tindal
b : to restore to righteousness: SAVE
if any of these erring men may be reduced, I have my end

- John Milton
3 a obs : REDIRECT
with these words reduce they thoughts that roam

- William Austin
b obs : to bring back
reduce , replant our bishop president

- Edward Dering
c : to bring to a specified state or condition by guidance or leadership
his task was to reduce to order the economic and political chaos
following war
- W.L.Fleming
4 archaic
a : to cause to recur
traitors that would reduce these bloody days again

- Shak.
b : to restore to a former condition
reduce them to their former shape

- Jonathan Swift
Stefan Bauschard
Stefan Bauschard
1NC Shell Its Excludes

private military contractors
Stefan Bauschard
A. Interpretation its implies

ownership
Glossary of English Grammar Terms 2005
(http://www.usingenglish.com/glossary/possessive-pronoun.html)
Mine, yours, his, hers, its, ours, theirs are the possessive pronouns used to
substitute a noun and to show possession or ownership.
EG. This is your disk and that's mine. (Mine substitutes the word disk and
shows that it belongs to me.)
B. Violation private military contractors arent owned by the government,

they are independent
C. Voting issue
1. limits including PMCs doubles our Iraq and Afghanistan research, and
its a huge, entirely separate body of research that risks overstretch
2. negative ground few of our generic disads to presence apply to PMCs,

because the aff maintains all normal US presence
Stefan Bauschard
Its Definitions
Stefan Bauschard
Its means belonging to it

Oxford English Dictionary 89 (2nd Ed., Vol. VIII, its, pg. 150)
Its, poss. pron. A. As adj. possess. pron. Of or belonging to it, or that thing;
also refl., Of or belonging to itself, its own.
B. As absolute possessive. The absolute form of prec., used when no sb.
Follows: its one, its ones.
Stefan Bauschard
Its means of itself

The Oxford American Dictionary and Language Guide 99 (Oxford
University Press, Inc., its, pg. 523)
Its poss. pron. Of it: of itself
Stefan Bauschard
Its shows possession

The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language 2006 (4th
Ed., its, pg 930)
Its: adj. The possessive form of it. Used as a modifier before a noun: The
airline canceled its early flight to New York.
Stefan Bauschard
Its shows possession of belonging

Oxford Modern English Dictionary 1996 (2nd Ed., its, pg. 528)
Its poss.det. of or belonging to it or itself
Stefan Bauschard
Its means possession

Encarta 09 (Encarta World English Dictionary,
refid=1861622735)
its [ its ]
adjective Definition: indicating possession: used to indicate that something
belongs or relates to something
The park changed its policy.
Stefan Bauschard
A2 Private contracts =
agents of the federal
government
Stefan Bauschard
Private contractors are distinct

entities from the federal
government
Barbier 7 US District Judge (Carl, TIEN VAN COA, ET AL VERSUS
GREGORY WILSON, ET AL CIVIL ACTION NO: 07-7464 SECTION: J(1)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF
LOUISIANA 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87653, lexis)
As to federal question jurisdiction, Defendants state that P&J was the prime
contractor for USACE and Gregory Wilson was its employee, with both
parties acting under the control and direction of USACE, thus invoking
derivative immunity from state tort claims. As such, Plaintiffs' claims should
have been brought under the FTCA and are governed exclusively
thereunder.
However, in their motion to remand, Plaintiffs argue that as an independent
contractor, P&J is not an employee of the federal government, and
consequently does not enjoy derivative immunity and cannot invoke the
FTCA. Plaintiffs cite United States v. New Mexico in support of the notion
that private contractors, whether prime or subcontractors, are not
government employees nor are they agents of the federal government. 455
U.S. 720, 102 S. Ct. 1373, 71 L. Ed. 2d 580 (1982). According to the Court,
"[t]he congruence of professional interests between the contractors and the
Federal Government is not complete" because "the contractors remained
distinct entities pursuing private ends, and their actions remained
[*4] commercial activities carried on for profit." Id. at 740; see also Powell v.
U.S. Cartridge Co., 339 U.S. 497, 70 S. Ct. 755, 94 L. Ed. 1017 (1950).
Stefan Bauschard
A2 Private contractors arent

Its
Stefan Bauschard
Its means associated with

Compact Oxford English Dictionary 10
(http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/its?view=uk)
its
possessive determiner 1 belonging to or associated with a thing previously
mentioned or easily identified. 2 belonging to or associated with a child or animal of
unspecified sex.
Its means related to
MacMillan Dictionary 10
(http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/american/its)
Its is the possessive form of it.

belonging or relating to a thing, idea, place, animal, etc. when it has
already been mentioned or when it is obvious which one you are
referring to
Private contractors are agents of the US government
Ausness 86 Professor of Law, University of Kentucky (RICHARD, Fall,

Surrogate Immunity: The Government Contract Defense and Products
Liability., 47 Ohio St. L.J. 985, Lexis)
The United States Supreme Court affirmed the circuit court's ruling. The
Court reasoned that the immunity that protected officers and agents of the
federal government acting within the scope of their authority should be
extended to private contractors who also acted on the government's behalf.
n71
According to the Court: ". . . [I]t is clear that if this authority to carry out
the project was validly conferred, that is, if what was done was within the
constitutional power of Congress, there is no liability on the part of the
contractor for executing its will." n72 The court also observed that the
landowner could have sought compensation from the government for his
injury in the court of claims. n73 Apparently, it thought that the plaintiff had
Stefan Bauschard
attempted to circumvent the accepted statutory procedure by suing the
contractor instead of the government. n74
Over the years, courts have advanced various theories to explain the
government contract doctrine. For example, the Court in Yearsley suggested
that the contractor partakes of the government's immunity because it has
acted as an agent of the government. In fact, some courts have limited the
government contract defense to situations where there is an actual agency
relationship between the contractor and the government.
Stefan Bauschard
Stefan Bauschard
1NC Shell Presence = physical presence/

excludes virtual presence
Stefan Bauschard
A. Interpretation Presence means visible stationing of forces
PATTERSON 8 US Navy Reserve Captain (Mark, DEFEND THE

APPROACHES!, httpwww.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?
AD=ADA486738&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf, dheidt)
Throughout history, U.S. maritime strategy has evolved in response to the

realities of a changing world. As world geo-political dynamics change, US
national priorities may change and with it the threats, risks and potential
operating environment for the nations armed forces. In response, the Navy
(including the Marine Corps) develops new strategies or modifies existing
ones to support US national strategy and priorities. One constant since the
end of World War II has been the enduring principle of forward presence as
a mainstay of US maritime strategy. The term presence encompasses many
activities from port visits to stationing ships within sight of shore to full
scale operations.1 For this paper, presence is the visible positioning or
stationing of ships, aircraft and/or personnel for the purpose of influencing,
assuring or engaging other state actors or non-state actors. The scope of
this definition includes the full range of traditional and emerging military
missions, including port visits, training (personnel and forces), Theater
Security Cooperation Programs (TSCP), personnel exchanges, humanitarian
assistance and limited or full scale permissive and non-permissive military
operations.
B. Violation the aff doesnt effect forces actually in the topic countries, it
just targets intangibles like US commitment
C. Voting issue
1. Limits they explode the topic, they allow debates over the US
military umbrella or arms sales or even how the US approaches
military consultation
2. Negative ground we lose core disads to troop reductions, like troop

shift or appeasement
Stefan Bauschard
Presence excludes virtual

presence
Stefan Bauschard
Presence requires physically being

present
Coe 97 - Professor, Criminal Law Department, The Judge Advocate
General's School, United States Army (Gregory, 1997 Army Law. 25,
Restating Some Old Rules and Limiting Some Landmarks: Recent
Developments in Pre-Trial and Trial Procedure, April, lexis)
Reviewing the Manual for Courts-Martial, the Army court held that the
speakerphone procedure violated the law because of the logical definition of
presence, the policy reasons why physical presence is required to conduct a
court-martial, and the military judge's justification for conducting the
arraignment by speakerphone. n171 The court determined that the Manual for
Courts-Martial nowhere defines "presence" in the applicable provisions. n172
Looking to the plain meaning of the word in Webster's Dictionary, the Army
court held that presence meant "the fact or condition of being present." n173
According to Webster's, "present" means "being in one place and not
elsewhere, being within reach, sight, or call or within contemplated limits,
being in view or at hand, being before, beside, with, or in the same place as
someone or something." n174
Presence refers to deployed forces, not virtual forces
Politz, 99 Circuit Judge, US Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit (UNITED

STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Salvador Vargas NAVARRO; Samuel
Pasqual Edmondson, Defendants-Appellants. 169 F.3d 228,
http://openjurist.org/169/f3d/228)
FED. R. CRIM. P. 43. The first step in interpreting the Rule is to consider the
plain, ordinary meaning of the language of the Rule. See United States v.
Ron Pair Enters., Inc., 489 U.S. 235, 241, 109 S.Ct. 1026, 1030, 103 L.Ed.2d
290 (1989). The definition of "presence" in Black's Law Dictionary is:
Act, fact, or state of being in a certain place and not elsewhere, or within
sight or call, at hand, or in some place that is being thought of. The
existence of a person in a particular place at a given time particularly with
reference to some act done there and then.
BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY 1065 (5th ed.1979) (emphasis added). The
whole dictionary definition suggests that the common-sense meaning of
Stefan Bauschard
"presence" is physical existence in the same place as whatever act is done
there. The Webster's definition suggests a similar meaning. The Webster's
Third New International Dictionary defines "presence" as:
The fact or condition of being present: the state of being in one place and
not elsewhere: the condition of being within sight or call, at hand, or in a
place being thought of: the fact of being in company, attendance or
association: the state of being in front of or in the same place as someone or
something.
WEBSTER'S THIRD NEW INTERNATIONAL DICTIONARY 1793 (1981). This
dictionary defines "present" as:
[B]eing in one place and not elsewhere: being within reach, sight, or call or
within contemplated limits: being in view or at hand: being before, beside,
with, or in the same place as someone or something.
Id. Although the dissent emphasizes the phrase "within sight or call," the
common-sense understanding of the definition is that a person must be in
the same place as others in order to be present. The plain import of the
definitions is that a person must be in existence at a certain place in order to
be "present," which is not satisfied by video conferencing.
Stefan Bauschard
1NC Shell Presence =

Visibly Linked to military
objectives
Stefan Bauschard
A. Interpretation - Presence
requires visibile links to
deterrence
Greer, 91 - Lieutenant Colonel, US Army (Charles, The Future of Forward
Presence, http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?
AD=ADA234227&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf)
To establish a conceptual framework for this paper, I developed the

following definition of forward presence within the context of national
defense: the visible employment of US military personnel and/or military
material as a deterrent outside of the continental United States (OCONUS)
at any point along the operational continuum short of involving major US
conventional forces in combat.
My simplistic definition could be subject to endless scholarly debate. It
includes small unit combat operations of limited scope and duration and
peacetime contingency operations such as Desert Shield in Saudi Arabia, but
it excludes the subsequent combat operation designated Desert Storm. It
includes our military activities in Alaska and Hawaii. It excludes any
diplomatic, economic, social or psychological activities that do not have a
military component.
The term employment in the definition could be criticized as denoting
action or movement which could exclude what some may term passive
measures such as storage of material or unmanned (i.e., automated) sites or
systems. However, there is always some activity associated with these socalled passive measures (e.g., maintenance, data collection, etc), and the
term employment also encompasses emplacement.
The more controversial aspect of my definition lies in the terms deterrent
and visible. Deterrence is the prevention from action by fear of the
consequences. Deterrence is a state of mind brought about by the existence
of a credible threat of unacceptable counteraction. Once major
conventional forces are engaged in protracted combat operations, it is clear
that deterrence, by definition, has failed.
Visibility is inextricably linked to deterrence. Visible to whom? To those we
wish to deter. This is reminiscent of the old philosophical question, If a
tree falls deep in the forest and there is no one there to hear it, does it make
a sound? In the case of forward presence, the answer is no.
Target audience is the key to the concept of visibility. A target audience may
be the world at large, the senior leadership of a specific country or
movement, the control cell of a terrorist organization or countless other
possibilities. Therefore, forward presence, by definition, also includes
Stefan Bauschard
covert activities using military personnel and/or material, as long as the
activity is visible to the targeted audience and deters that group or
individual from taking an undesired action. An invisible presence is both
contradictory and serves no useful deterrent purpose, which goes to the
heart of the issue. Deterrence is the ultimate purpose of forward presence.
B. Violation the aff doesnt decrease a deterrent role of the US military in

the target country
C. Voting issue
1. limits they explode the topic to include anything and everything the US
military does, including military musical groups and public relations
exercises
2. negative ground the topic is about changing US military strategy, we

should get the deterrence disad every debate because the topic requires
strategic realignment. They make the topic bidirectional they can
decrease troops but maintain the overall military commitment to a country
with a more efficient military
Stefan Bauschard
Presence = Visibly linked

to military objectives
Stefan Bauschard
Presence requires decreasing

perceived operational capability
not just numerical reductions in
troops
Bloomfield 6 senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International
Studies (CSIS) and president of Palmer Coates LLC. He served as Assistant
Secretary of State for Political Military Affairs from May 2001 to January
2005 (Lincoln, Reposturing the Force: U.S. Overseas Presence in the
Twenty-first Century, ed: Lords, http://www.usnwc.edu/Publications/NavalWar-College-Press/Newport-Papers/Documents/26-pdf.aspx)
Central to the new initiative was the idea that capability and commitment
could no longer, and should no longer, be measured in numbers. It was not
intuitively obvious to a nonmilitary audience in Asia that, for example,
anticipated reductions of forces permanently stationed in the Republic of
Korea would coincide with an actual strengthening of the potential combat
power the United States could bring to bear against North Korea (or the
Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea, the DPRK). As South Korean
newspapers wondered aloud whether Washington was reducing its security
commitment to their country, the North certainly grasped that the United
States was increasing its precision-strike power around the Korean
Peninsula while reducing its own forces exposure to DPRK firepower
amassed just north of the Demilitarized Zone, and it denounced the
American reconfiguration. If potential adversaries were quick to recognize
the military advantages to the United States of the planned new force
posture, the larger Asian audience could not be made to think differently
overnight. Americas role as the essential stabilizing force in Asia had long
encouraged the region to equate numerical presence with commitment and
capability. To overcome lingering doubts in Europe and Asia, the United
States will have to demonstrate its commitment to the role of ultimate
security guarantor through its actions over several years as the GDPR
posture changes are implemented.
Presence refers to the totality of US military power linked to an

explicit military objective
Blechman et al 97 President of DFI International, and has held positions

in the Department of Defense, the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament
Stefan Bauschard
Agency, and the Office of Management and Budget (Barry, Strategic Review,
Spring, Military Presence Abroad in a New Era: The Role of Airpower, p.
14)
The highly complex nature of military presence operations, with

manifestations both psychological and physical, makes their effects difficult
to identify and assess. Nonetheless, presence missions (whether employing
forces stationed abroad or afloat, temporarily deployed or permanently
based overseas, or based in the United States) are integral parts of U.S.
defense strategy. Through routine presence operations, the United States
seeks to reinforce alliances and friendships, make credible security
commitments to crucial regions, and nurture cooperative political relations.
More episodically, forces engaged in presence operations can dissuade
aggressors from hostile demands, help prevent or contain regional crises,
and, when conflict erupts nonetheless, provide an infrastructure for the
transition to war.
Given its multifaceted nature, neither practitioners nor scholars have yet
settled on a single definition of presence. Technically, the term refers to
both a military posture and a military objective. This study uses the term
presence to refer to a continuum of military activities, from a variety of
interactions during peacetime to crisis response involving both forces on the
scene and those based in the United States. Our definition follows that
articulated by the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff: Presence is the totality of U.S.
instruments of power deployed overseas (both permanently and temporarily)
along with the requisite infrastructure and sustainment capabilities.2
Stefan Bauschard
Presence = Visibly linked

to military objectives
Stefan Bauschard
Presence is a question of military

strategy not troops alone
Dismukes 95 analyst with the Center for Naval Analyses (Bradford, The
U.S. Military Presence Abroad, Strategic Review, Spring, p. 49)
As a result of decisions by the Clinton Administration, reaffirming and

strengthening policies adopted by President Bush, U.S. military overseas
presence has become a major factor affecting the deployment of U.S.
forces. The requirements established by overseas presence are now part of
the rationale for future force structure. Presencedeploying and operating
forces forward to influence, short of combat, what foreign governments
think and doplays a crucial role in a national strategy of engagement and
enlargement. Operating ground, air, and sea forces overseas is a linchpin
of the national strategy: unless the United States does so successfully, the
strategy could fail, yielding an isolationist alternative and greater risks for
U.S. security and economic interests.
Presence must be visible

Decamp 92 - MAJOR, UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS (William,
MARITIME PREPOSITIONING FORCES (MPF) IN CENTRAL COMMAND
IN THE 1990s: FORCE MULTIPLIER OR FORCE DIVIDER?,
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?
AD=ADA249957&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf
Presence missions are meant to deter aggression, preserve regional

balances, deflect arms races, and prevent power vacuums. They also cement
alliances and signal that our commitments are backed by action.1 The
National Security Strategy specifically called for
some measure of continuing presence [in the Middle East) consistent with
the desires and needs of our friends. We will work with our friends to bolster
confidence and security through such measures as exercises, prepositioning
of heavy equipment, and an enhanced naval presence.2
CINCCENT was asking for nothing more than the National Security Strategy
had already mandated.
The policy marked regional crises as the predominant military threat, and
indicated that their demands, as well as the requirements of forward
presence will determine the size and structure of the future forces of the
Stefan Bauschard
United States. The ability to project our power will underpin our strategy
more than ever. We must be able to deploy substantial forces and sustain
them in parts of the world where prepositioning equipment will not always
be feasible, where adequate bases may not be available (at least before a
crisis) and where there is a less developed industrial base and infrastructure
to support our forces once they have arrived.
Applying the policy to the ARG/MAGTF mix in the Persian Gulf, the CJCS
decreed a continuous presence of an ARG/MAGTF. Webster defines presence
as "the fact or condition of being present," and present as "being in view or
at hand."'4 The Navy decided, in effect, by their choice of ARG/MAGTF/MPS
mix, to split the force; therefore, the force that will actually be present in the
Persian Gulf will not be the force the CJCS ordered, but a smaller force less
capable. The whole force would not exist until the arrival of the fly-in
echelon (FIE). In spirit at least, this seems contrary to the implicit
preference for self-sustaining forces and a power-projection capability in
places like those described in the passage, whose description fits the Middle
East.
Eliminating the choice of visible presence through the choice of a
deployment option that necessitates it, on the ground, nullifies the benefits
of logistic self-sufficiency and immunity from political constraints, typically
enjoyed by naval forces. There is a fine line between deterrence and
provocation, and a visible presence on the ground in the Middle East could
cross that line, place the force in danger, and inhibit future U.S. regional
access and influence.
Stefan Bauschard
1NC Shell Presence = Troops
Stefan Bauschard
A. Interpretation
Substantially means including the main part
WORDS AND PHRASES, 1964, p. 818.
Substantially means in substance; in the main; essentially; by including

the material or essential part.
Presence refers to personnel stationed in a region
The Oxford Essential Dictionary of the U.S. Military 2 (by Oxford

University Press, Inc. All rights reserved, republished and cited as US
Military Dictionary at: http://www.answers.com/topic/presence)
US Military Dictionary:
presence
n.a group of people, especially soldiers or police, stationed in a particular
place: maintain a presence in the region.
Stefan Bauschard
Presence = Troops
Stefan Bauschard
Presence means armed forces

Oxford English Dictionary 89 (The Oxford English Dictionary, second
edition, volume XII, 1989, presence, Clarendon press-oxford, p. 394)
The maintenance by a nation of political interests and influence in
another country or region; spec. the maintenance of personnel, esp. armed
forces on the soil of an allied or friendly state; concr., armed forces stationed in
e. Politics.
this way. Also transf., denoting the representation of a nations interests at an event.
Stefan Bauschard
Stefan Bauschard
Bases are the main part of the US

military presence
Lutz 9 professor of International Studies at Brown (Catherine, The Bases of
Empire: The Global Struggle Against U.S. Military Posts, p. 6, google books)
Bases are the literal and symbolic anchors, and the most visible centerpieces, of the
U.S. military presence overseas. To understand where those bases are and how they
are being used is essential for understanding the United States relationship with
the rest of the world, the role of coercion in it, and its political economic
complexion. The United States empire of bases its massive global impact and the
global response to it are the subject of chapters in this book. Unlike the pundits
and the strategic thinkers who corner the market on discussions of the U.S. military,
these authors concentrate on the people around those bases and the impact of living
in their shadow. The authors describe as well the social movements which have
tried to call the worlds attention to the costs those bases impose on them without
their consent. In this introduction, I ask why the bases were established in the first
place, how they are currently configured around the world and how that
configuration is changing, what myths have developed about the functions U.S.
overseas bases serve, and, finally, introduce the global movement to push back or
expel the bases altogether.
Presence requires stationing forces within a country
Harmon 3 US Army Major (William, The Korean Question: Is There a

Future for Forward-Based American Forces in a Unified Korea?,
AD=ADA415880&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf) (All bolding is in the
original)
In American security writings and military doctrine the term forward

presence describes military forces that are stationed, permanently or on a
rotational deployment, in a territory or nation other than the United States.
In American National Security, by Amos A. Jordan, William J. Taylor Jr., and
Michael J. Mazarr, the term is used as follows:
Forward presence, or the forward deployment of forces, can now be
more usefully thought of as one component of a larger strategy one
that acknowledges the global role of the United States and the need
to remain engaged, visible, and with forces deployed outside the
Stefan Bauschard
United States that are prepared to respond to contingencies in all
corners of the globe.9
In this definition the authors have identified key components of forward
presence, namely the flexibility gained by reducing deployment times and
the assurance provided to allies (and potential enemies alike) by the
engagement and visibility of the forces.
Military or police presence refers to stationed personnel within a

place
Compact Oxford English Dictionary, 10
(http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/presence?view=uk)
presence
noun 1 the state or fact of being present. 2 the impressive manner or
appearance of a person. 3 a person or thing that is present but not seen. 4 a group
of soldiers or police stationed in a particular place: the USA would maintain a
presence in the region.
Stefan Bauschard
Presence = Troops
Stefan Bauschard
Presence refers to the stationing

of personnel
American Heritage Dictionary 09
(http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/presence)
presence
1. The state or fact of being present; current existence or occurrence.

2. Immediate proximity in time or space.
3. The area immediately surrounding a great personage, especially a
sovereign.
4. A person who is present.
5. a. A person's bearing, especially when it commands respectful
attention: "He continues to possess the presence, mental as well as
physical, of the young man" (Brendan Gill).
b.The quality of self-assurance and effectiveness that permits a
performer to achieve a rapport with the audience: stage presence.
5. A supernatural influence felt to be nearby.
7. The diplomatic, political, or military influence of a nation in a foreign
country, especially as evidenced by the posting of its diplomats or its troops
there: "The American diplomatic presence in London began in 1785
when John Adams became our first minister" (Nancy Holmes).
Presence refers to official personnel
Encarta 09 (Encarta World English Dictionary,

refid=1861737158)
presence [ przz'nss ] ( plural presences)

noun
Definition:
Stefan Bauschard
1. existence in place: the physical existence or detectability of something
in a place at a particular time
the presence of contaminants in the water supply
2. attendance: somebody's attendance at an event or physical existence in a
place with other people
Our presence is requested at the board meeting.
3. area within sight or earshot: the immediate vicinity of somebody or
something
How dare you use that kind of language in my presence!
4. impressive quality: an impressive appearance or bearing
has a certain presence about her that garners respect
5. invisible supposed supernatural being: a supernatural spirit that is
felt to be nearby
A malevolent presence filled the room.
6. person present: somebody who is notably present
the venerable scholar, a dignified presence in the academic procession
7. group of official personnel: a group of official personnel, especially
police, military forces, or diplomats, present or stationed in a place to
represent their country and maintain its interest
maintained a heavy military presence in the capital
Presence refers to troops
(http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/american/presence)
definition of presence
noun
3. a. a group of people, especially soldiers or the police, who are in a place
for a particular purpose
We intend to maintain a presence in the country until there is peace.
military/police presence:
There is still a large U.S. military presence in the region.
Stefan Bauschard
Presence = Troops
Stefan Bauschard
Military forces are presence

Encarta World English Dictionary 09 (presence, [North American
Edition] & (P) 2009 Microsoft Corporation.
http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861737158/presence.html)
7. group of official personnel: a group of official personnel, especially police,

military forces, or diplomats, present or stationed in a place to represent their
country and maintain its interest
maintained a heavy military presence in the capital
Troops solely define military presence
Booth et al 2000 (Bradford Booth, currently a Principal with ICF

International, located in Fairfax, VA. Dr. Booth has more than 10 years
experience as a member of the social science research community, including
post-doctoral work in military personnel and family issues and evaluation
research. His primary area of specialization is the sociology of the armed
forces, Department of Sociology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD,
William w Falk, David r. Segal, Mady Wechsler Segal, GENDER & SOCIETY,
Vol. 14 No. 2, April 2000 318-332 ? 2000 Sociologists for Women in Society,
http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/190277.pdf)
This article uses Public Use Micro sample (PUMS) data drawn from the 1990 census to explore the
military presence, defined as the percentage of the local

labor force in the active-duty armed forces, and women's employment and earnings
relationship between
across local labor market areas (LMAs) in the United States. Comparisons of local rates of unemployment
military plays a
disproportionate role in the local labor market and those in which military
presence is low
and mean women's earnings are made between those LMAs in which the
Stefan Bauschard
Military presence is the

maintenance of armed forces
United States Army Combined Arms Center 8 (September 17, military
presence, http://usacac.leavenworth.army.mil/cac2/call/thesaurus/toc.asp?
id=20296)
Military presence. Definition/Scope: Maintaining forces in an area to

demonstrate interest and resolve, and enhance the ability to respond quickly
in a crisis.
Stefan Bauschard
1NC Shell Presence = Non-Combat

Activities
Stefan Bauschard
A. Interpretation - Presence
requires regular, non-combat
activities forces engaged in
combat or one-time noncombat
missions arent part of U.S.
presence
Thomason 2 Project Leader, Institute for Defense Analysis (James,
Transforming US Overseas Military Presence: Evidence and Options for
DoD, July, http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?
doi=10.1.1.122.1144&rep=rep1&type=pdf
WHAT IS OVERSEAS MILITARY PRESENCE?

Our working definition of US overseas military presence is that it consists of
all the US military assets in overseas areas that are engaged in relatively
routine, regular, non-combat activities or functions.
By this definition, forces that are located overseas may or may not be
engaging in presence activities. If they are engaging in combat (such as
Operation Enduring Freedom), or are involved in a one-time non-combat
action (such as an unscheduled carrier battle group deployment from the
United States aimed at calming or stabilizing an emerging crisis situation),
then they are not engaging in presence activities. Thus, an asset that is
located (or present) overseas may or may not be engaged in presence
activities, may or may not be doing presence.
We have thus far defined presence activities chiefly in negative terms
what they are not. In more positive terms, what exactly are presence
activities, i.e., what do presence activities actually entail doing?
Overseas military presence activities are generally viewed as a subset of the
overall class of activities that the US government uses in its efforts to
promote important military/security objectives [Dismukes, 1994]. A variety
of recurrent, overseas military activities are normally placed under the
umbrella concept of military presence. These include but are not limited to
US military efforts overseas to train foreign militaries; to improve interoperability of US and friendly forces; to peacefully and visibly demonstrate
US commitment and/or ability to defend US interests; to gain intelligence
and familiarity with a locale; to conduct peacekeeping activities; and to
position relevant, capable US military assets such that they are likely to be
Stefan Bauschard
available sooner rather than later in case an evolving security operation or
contingency should call for them.
B. Violation the aff ends combat missions, not presence missions.
C. Voting issue -
1. limits allowing combat missions allows affs to change specific strategies

in Afghanistan or Iraq, like ending cluster bombing without actually
reducing forces themselves, it explodes the literature base
2. negative ground presence missions are about deterrence and

reassurance including combat missions avoids core negative disads
Stefan Bauschard
Presence = Non-Combat Activities
Stefan Bauschard
Presence only applies to military

forces before combat
Greer 91 - Lieutenant Colonel, US Army (Charles, The Future of Forward

My simplistic definition could be subject to endless scholarly debate. It
includes small unit combat operations of limited scope and duration and
peacetime contingency operations such as Desert Shield in Saudi Arabia, but
it excludes the subsequent combat operation designated Desert Storm. It
includes our military activities in Alaska and Hawaii. It excludes any
diplomatic, economic, social or psychological activities that do not have a
military component.
The term employment in the definition could be criticized as denoting
action or movement which could exclude what some may term passive
measures such as storage of material or unmanned (i.e., automated) sites or
systems. However, there is always some activity associated with these socalled passive measures (e.g., maintenance, data collection, etc), and the
term employment also encompasses emplacement.
The more controversial aspect of my definition lies in the terms deterrent
and visible. Deterrence is the prevention from action by fear of the
consequences. Deterrence is a state of mind brought about by the existence
of a credible threat of unacceptable counteraction. Once major
conventional forces are engaged in protracted combat operations, it is clear
that deterrence, by definition, has failed.
Visibility is inextricably linked to deterrence. Visible to whom? To those we
wish to deter. This is reminiscent of the old philosophical question, If a tree
falls deep in the forest and there is no one there to hear it, does it make a
sound? In the case of forward presence, the answer is no.
Target audience is the key to the concept of visibility. A target audience may
be the world at large, the senior leadership of a specific country or
movement, the control cell of a terrorist organization or countless other
possibilities. Therefore, forward presence, by definition, also includes
Stefan Bauschard
covert activities using military personnel and/or material, as long as the
activity is visible to the targeted audience and deters that group or
individual from taking an undesired action. An invisible presence is both
contradictory and serves no useful deterrent purpose, which goes to the
heart of the issue. Deterrence is the ultimate purpose of forward presence.
Presence missions are anything short of actual combat
Blechman et al 97 President of DFI International, and has held positions

in the Department of Defense, the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament
Agency, and the Office of Management and Budget (Barry, Strategic Review,
Spring, Military Presence Abroad in a New Era: The Role of Airpower, p.
13)
Occupying a continuum of operations short of actual combat, presence

missions have included the permanent basing of troops overseas, routine
military-to-military contacts, military exercises and training with other
nations, participation in multinational peace and humanitarian operations,
the provision of timely intelligence information and other data to leaders of
other nations, military deployments in response to crises, and, when
necessary, the deployment of forces in anticipation of combat.
Stefan Bauschard
Presence = Non-Combat Activities
Stefan Bauschard
Presence excludes the direct

application of military force
Widnall and Fogleman 95 - *Secretary of the Air Force and formerly was
Associate Provost at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology AND **Chief
of Staff, US Air Force (Sheila and Ronald, Joint Forces Quarterly, Global
Presence, Spring, http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/jfq_pubs/jfq2007.pdf)
At the foundation of this approach is power projection. Power projection is a

means to influence actors or affect situations or events in Americas national
interest. It has two components: warfighting and presence. Warfighting is
the direct application of military force to compel an adversary. Presence is
the posturing of military capability, including nonbelligerent applications,
and/or the leveraging of information to deter or compel an actor or affect a
situation. A sound national military strategy depends on coherent
warfighting and presence strategies.
Presence is distinct from crisis response both are highly complex

and should be addressed separately
Dismukes 95 analyst with the Center for Naval Analyses (Bradford, The
U.S. Military Presence Abroad, Strategic Review, Spring, p. 55)
Logically, forward presence has become the most important strategic task of
U.S. conventional forces. With respect to adversaries, if forces abroad are
successful in deterrence, then the requirement to respond to crises (not to
mention war) can be avoided. Presence is the primary mission; crisis
response is the necessary, but less desirable, back up. These conclusions
have far-reaching consequences both for the use of existing U.S. forces and
for the acquisition of forces for the future. Because of their scope and
complexity, these necessarily must be addressed separately. More important
yet are their implications for the way Americans think about why they should
bear the risks and costs of keeping forces abroad. For Americas partners,
particularly other G7 members, there are equally important implications for
why and how they share the political and financial costs of U.S. presence.
Presence is distinct from crisis response US policy experts avoid

double counting forces when they have different roles
Stefan Bauschard
Flournoy 1 - senior advisor for international security at the Center for

Strategic and International Studies and previously served as a distinguished
research professor in the Institute for National Strategic Studies at the
National Defense University and as the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Strategy and Threat Reduction (Michele, QDR 2001: StrategyDriven Choices for Americas Security, Ed: Michele Flournoy
AD=ADA430963&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf) MTWs=Major
Theater Wars, SSCs=Smaller Scale Contingencies
Counting Presence Forces

The role of overseas-presence forces in MTWs and SSCs is also considered
at this stage of the process, and the overall force structure adjusted
accordingly. For example, forward-deployed naval, air, and ground forces
may be part of the initial response to a crisis; indeed, this is an express part
of their purpose. Therefore, care must be taken not to double-count such
forces in both the presence and MTW or SSC building blocks. On the other
hand, some forward-deployed forces may be so vital to deterrence and
stability in a given region that they would not be withdrawn from an
unengaged theater even in the event of MTW execution. For the purposes of
the working groups analysis, assumptions about which forces should be
treated as stay-behind forces were derived from judgments about what
would be required to meet U.S. treaty commitments, maintain deterrence
and regional stability in a given theater, and provide the regional CINC with
minimum essential levels of force protection, support to noncombatant
evacuation operations, and strike capability.
Stefan Bauschard
Presence = Non-Combat
Activities
Stefan Bauschard
Military Presence is all noncombat assets of the military

Thomason et al. 2002 (James S. Thomason, Project Leader,
Michael P. Fischerkeller, Kongdan Oh Hassig, Charles Hawkins, Gene Porter,
Robert J. Atwell, Robert Bovey, William E. Cralley, James Delaney,
DoD Volume I: Main Report July 2002, http://www.bayan.ph/us%20war
%20of%20terror/US%20BASES/US%20Mil%20Presence%20Overseas.pdf)
US overseas military presence consists of all the US military assets in

overseas areas that are engaged in relatively routine non-combat activities
or functions. Collectively, these assets constitute one of a set of very important military instruments
of national power and influence. It is regularly asserted within the Department of
Defense that these overseas military presence activities promote key
security objectives, such as deterrence, assurance of friends and allies, the
provision of timely crisis response capabilities, regional stability and,
generally, security conditions that in turn promote freedom and prosperity.
Military Presence does not include combat forces

Our working definition of US overseas military presence is that it consists of

all the US military assets in overseas areas that are engaged in relatively
routine, regular, non-combat activities or functions.1 By this definition, forces
that are located overseas may or may not be engaging in presence activities.
If they are engaging in combat (such as Operation Enduring Freedom), or
are involved in a one-time non-combat action (such as an unscheduled
carrier battle group deployment from the United States aimed at calming or
stabilizing an emerging crisis situation), then they are not engaging in
presence activities. Thus, an asset that is located (or present) overseas may or may not be
engaged in presence activities, may or may not be doing presence.
Stefan Bauschard
Military Presence is non-combat forces

Overseas military presence activities are generally viewed as a subset of the

overall class of activities that the US government uses in its efforts to promote important
military/security objectives [Dismukes, 1994]. A variety of recurrent, overseas military
activities are normally placed under the umbrella concept of military presence. These include
but are not limited to US military efforts overseas to train foreign militaries;
to improve inter-operability of US and friendly forces; to peacefully and
visibly demonstrate US commitment and/or ability to defend US interests; to
gain intelligence and familiarity with a locale; to conduct peacekeeping
activities; and to position relevant, capable US military assets such that they
are likely to be available sooner rather than later in case an evolving security
operation or contingency should call for them.
Stefan Bauschard
A2 Presence = More Than

Troops
Stefan Bauschard
Their definition of presence is the

broadest possible
Scala 98 - Office of the Secretary of Defense (Mary, Theater Engagement
Planning: An Interagency Opportunity,
During the run-up to the 1997 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), the Joint
Staff and the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy undertook a
comprehensive review of overseas presence requirements and issues. The
intention was to ensure the resources committed to presence were
consistent with national priorities in the regionand to identify overseas
commitments that were potentially excess to the emerging defense strategy.
To make sure everything was considered, the definition of presence was
made as broad as possiblefrom forward-stationed troops, to prepositioned
stocks, to naval deployments, to joint and combined military exercises, to
mil-to-mil contacts. At about the same time, the Joint Staff was working to
create a notional baseline engagement force in order to get a clearer
historical picture of how many U.S. forces worldwide were engaged
routinely in engagement or crisis-response operations. Both the overseas
presence study and the baseline engagement force analysis were intended to
form one point of departure for the formulation of a new defense strategy.
Planners hoped to find relatively painless ways to increase spending on
military readiness and procurement, without undercutting essential
warfighting forces or technology.
Stefan Bauschard
The broad interpretation would

mean everything the military does
is topical
Meyer 7 Lieutenant Commander, US Navy (Richard, Naval Presence with
a Purpose:
Considerations for the Operational Commander,
In 2007, naval presence is no longer enumerated as a stand-alone mission of

U.S. naval forces. However, the concept of presence is inherent in all that we
do. In the Universal Joint Task List (UJTL) there is only one specified task
with presence in the title and it is the strategic-national task 3.1,
Coordinate Forward Presence of Forces in Theaters.7 In the definition of
this task, the UJTL strikes at the heart of the matter by stating that presence
is a crucial element of deterrence and can be a demonstration of resolve
to allies and potential adversaries.8 In addition to this one task, however,
the term presence or forward presence is used in the definition of several
other tasks such as operational task 1.2.4.1, Conduct a Show of Force.9
This gives credence to the belief that presence is an underlying theme in
every mission we undertake as a Navy.
Stefan Bauschard
A2 Your definition says

forward presence
Stefan Bauschard
Forward presence is military

presence
Zakheim et al 96 former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Planning
and Resources (Dov, Political and Economic Implications of Global Naval
Presence, 9/30, http://handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA319811)
The United States has determined that overseas military presence during
peacetime, often termed forward presence or peacetime presence;
should remain an integral part of its force posture in the post-Cold War era.
In 1996, the United States maintains a diminished, yet still significant land
and aviation presence in Europe and in Korea. In addition, it supports a
robust maritime presence, including aircraft carrier battle groups and
Marine Expeditionary Units, in the Mediterranean Sea, the Persian Gulf and
East Asia (see Table 1).
Stefan Bauschard
Presence Definitions (Laundry List)
Stefan Bauschard
Military presence includes

exercises, storage agreements,
military contacts and training
Harmon 3 US Army Major (William, The Korean Question: Is There a
Future for Forward-Based American Forces in a Unified Korea?,
AD=ADA415880&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf) (All bolding is in the
original)
American military doctrine addresses forward presence in Joint Publication

3-07, Joint Doctrine for Military Operations Other Than War. In this doctrine
forward presence is defined as, activities [that] demonstrate our
commitment, lend credibility to our alliances, enhance regional
stability, and provide a crisis response capability while promoting US
influence and access. In addition to forces stationed overseas and afloat,
forward presence activities include periodic and rotational deployments,
access and storage agreements, multinational exercises, port visits, foreign
military training, foreign community support, and military-to-military
contacts.10
(Bold in original)
Presence means visible stationing of forces includes port calls or

offshore stationing, training, and humanitarian missions
PATTERSON 8 US Navy Reserve Captain (Mark, DEFEND THE

APPROACHES!, httpwww.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?
AD=ADA486738&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf, dheidt)
Throughout history, U.S. maritime strategy has evolved in response to the

realities of a changing world. As world geo-political dynamics change, US
national priorities may change and with it the threats, risks and potential
operating environment for the nations armed forces. In response, the Navy
(including the Marine Corps) develops new strategies or modifies existing
ones to support US national strategy and priorities. One constant since the
end of World War II has been the enduring principle of forward presence as
a mainstay of US maritime strategy. The term presence encompasses many
activities from port visits to stationing ships within sight of shore to full
Stefan Bauschard
scale operations.1 For this paper, presence is the visible positioning or
stationing of ships, aircraft and/or personnel for the purpose of influencing,
assuring or engaging other state actors or non-state actors. The scope of
this definition includes the full range of traditional and emerging military
missions, including port visits, training (personnel and forces), Theater
Security Cooperation Programs (TSCP), personnel exchanges, humanitarian
assistance and limited or full scale permissive and non-permissive military
operations.
Presence includes sea basing, periodic deployments, storage

agreements, exercises, security and humanitarian assistance
Johnsen and Young, 92 *Strategic Research Analyst at the Strategic
Studies Institute AND ** was a National Security Affairs Analyst at the
Strategic Studies Institute and is currently an Associate Research Professor.
(William and Thomas-Durrell, DEFINING U.S. FORWARD PRESENCE IN
EUROPE: GETTING PAST THE NUMBERS http://www.dtic.mil/cgibin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA255193&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf
The National Military Strategy of the United States defines forward

presence as "...forces stationed overseas and afloat... periodic and rotational
deployments, access and storage agreements, combined exercises, security
and humanitarian assistance, port visits, and military-to-military contacts. '' 4
Because of this rather all-encompassing description, forward presence

currently has the unavoidable characteristic of being all things to all
people.
Stefan Bauschard
Presence Definitions
List)
(Laundry
Stefan Bauschard
Presence includes force

deployments, training, exercises,
drug interdiction, disaster relief,
and intelligence gathering
Brady 92 - Lieutenant Commander, United States Navy (Patrick,
IMPLICATIONS FOR THE U.S. NAVY OF A 50 PERCENT DECREASE IN
DEFENSE SPENDING, http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?
In this new era of regional threats the need for forward presence has
become more important.2 1 Yet defense budget cuts and the closing of many
overseas bases have prompted the DOD to reevaluate its traditional
definitions of forward presence in order for the nation to continue to fulfill
its many obligations.2 2 The new definition of forward presence emphasizes
the need to "show our commitment, lend credibility to our alliances, enhance
regional stability, and provide crisis response capability while promoting
U.S. influence and access." 23
The planned reduction of forward land-based U.S. forces worldwide could
mean naval forces will be increasingly responsible for fulfilling the
objectives of forward presence. There are six roles for the Navy under
forward presence. The first role is peacetime engagement. This is similar to
the traditional presence role the Navy has historically fulfilled. It is needed
to counter the image of an American global withdrawal as force reductions
occur and fewer forces are forward based. The forward deployment of naval
forces in this role "provides an underpinning for diplomatic activities which,
when combined with other U.S. foreign policy initiatives, are influential in
shaping events. These forward operations are oriented toward diplomacy,
coalition building and the promotion of stability which fosters peace and
cooperation." 2 4
Additionally, this role will also guarantee the freedom of the sea which will
facilitate trade and improve the economic conditions of the United States
and our allies. Typical missions include: Stationed forces; rotational
overseas deployments; access and storage agreements; port visits; militaryto-military relations; and joint and combined training exercises.2 5 This role
does not necessarily have to be fulfilled by aircraft carrier battle groups to
be credible.26
The second role is to enhance crisis response capability. Naval forces
provide the National Command Authority with the ability to react to
Stefan Bauschard
ambiguous warning in the early stages of a crisis. This timely show of force
can stabilize the situation and permit diplomacy to prevail. By complicating
the risk versus gain calculus of potential adversaries, we cause them to
consider carefully the initiation of activity which might be counter to U.S.
interests. Depending upon the crisis, forward deployed naval expeditionary
forces can respond autonomously or become an enabling force about which
a decisive joint/coalition based response can be shaped.2 7
The third role is protecting U.S. citizens. This includes not only responsive
and capable evacuation lift, but the ability to be able to do it in the midst of
conflict. This could also include protection against terrorists by stopping
vessels, suspected of containing terrorists or illegal arms shipments, on the
high seas.
The fourth role is combating drugs. This involves ocean surveillance of
potential drug traffickers, interdiction of drug shipments, and intelligence
collection for counter narcotics agencies.
The fifth role is humanitarian assistance. This requires the ability to respond
rapidly and effectively to disasters. As stated in the National Military
Strategy, "Not only must our forces provide humanitarian aid, but as seen
recently in Northern Iraq, in some cases they must also be prepared to
engage in conflict in order to assist and project those in need.'"2 8
The final role is intelligence collection. This requires the ability to overtly
and covertly collect information, and then transmit real-time information to
the National Command Authorities in time to avert or mitigate crises. This
role is necessary under all four elements of the new defense agenda. Typical
missions include maritime intelligence collection in support of national
requirements; surveillance of air or naval forces that could act hostile
against vital interests of the United States; and detection, tracking, and
reporting vessels involved in terrorist-related activities.
Stefan Bauschard
Presence Definitions
List)
(Laundry
Stefan Bauschard
Presence includes joint exercises,

training, stationing forces,
prepositioned equipment,
intelligence assets, port calls,
military exchanges and foreign
military sales and co-production of
equipment
This is generally consistent, for example, with B. Dismukes formulation:

Overseas presence encompasses a variety of activities. In addition to
permanent and rotational forces forward on the ground, forces deployed at
sea, and prepositioned equipment, overseas presence includes: exercises
and training of US forces with those of friends and allies; unilateral training
by US forces on foreign soil; US C3I systems, especially in their bilateral and
multilateral roles; arrangements for access by US forces to facilities
overseas; stationing and visits abroad by senior US military and defense
officials; visits to port and airfields by US naval and air forces; public shows
by demonstration teams such as Thunderbirds and a host of public affairs
activities, including military musical groups; staff-to-staff talks and studies
with foreign military organizations and analytical groups; exchanges of
military people between the US and friends and allies; military training of
foreign personnel in the US and in their home countries; training of military
officers of former totalitarian and some developing states in the roles of the
military in a civil society; foreign military sales and funding and coproduction of military equipment with other nations. [pp. 1314]
Presence includes forward stationing, military exchanges, and

training
Peay 94 US Army General (Binford, Federal Document Clearing House

Congressional Testimony, 6/16, lexis)
Stefan Bauschard
Overseas presence encompasses a broad range of military actions that

reduce the likelihood of regional crisis. These activities are a blend of
forward stationing, rotational deployments and low-key, high- payoff
temporary duty activities such as military-to-military exchanges, professional
seminars, and disaster preparedness surveys. These operational
requirements seem to be supported best through traditional procedures.
Presence includes deployed forces, exercises, port calls, training and

military to military contacts
Department of Defense 95 (Joint Doctrine for Military Operations Other

Than War, Joint Pub 3-07, http://www.bits.de/NRANEU/others/jpdoctrine/jp3_07.pdf)
b. Forward Presence. Forward presence activities demonstrate our

commitment, lend credibility to our alliances, enhance regional
stability, and provide a crisis response capability while promoting US
influence and access. In addition to forces stationed overseas and afloat,
forward presence activities include periodic and rotational deployments,
access and storage agreements, multinational exercises, port visits, foreign
military training, foreign community support and military-to-military
contacts. Given their location and knowledge of the region, forward
presence forces could be the first which the combatant commander commits
to MOOTW.
Stefan Bauschard
Stefan Bauschard
The US national security strategy

defines presence to include
prepositioned equipment, port
calls, military to military contacts
and exercises
Weeks and Meconis 99 *senior scientist with Science Applications
International Corporation AND ** founder and the Research Director of the
Institute for Global Security Studies (Stanley and Charles, The armed forces
of the USA in the Asia-Pacific region, p. 43)
Concerning US defense strategy and force structure, the 1995 national

security strategy reaffirmed the conclusions reached by the 1993 Bottom-Up
Review. Win two nearly simultaneous major regional contingencies
remained the strategy. With regard to force structure the strategy declared
that:
The President has set forth a defense budget for Fiscal Years 1996-2001 that
funds the force structure recommended by the [Bottom-Up] Review, and he
repeatedly stressed that he will draw the line against further cuts that would
undermine that force structure or erode US military readiness.33
An overseas presence of US military forces was strongly supported, but the
definition of presence was expanded to include permanently stationed
forces and prepositioned equipment, deployments and combined exercises,
port calls and other force visits, as well as military-to-military contacts.
Military presence is bases, exercises, visits, and deployment in

conflict areas
Lutz 09 Professor of Anthropology and International Studies, past

president of the American Ethnological Society, the largest organization of
cultural anthropologists in the U.S (Catherine, February, The bases of
Empire: The Global Struggle against U.S. Military Posts, p. 155,
http://books.google.com/books?
id=nPAgU6lhAT4C&printsec=frontcover&dq=The+Bases+of+Empire+previ
ew&hl=en&ei=2kcdTNC9MIP-
Stefan Bauschard
8Abcwf3IDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCwQ6A
EwAA#v=onepage&q=%22military%20presence%22&f=false)),
It was also established to respond to the new situation of a less visible U.S.
military presence: there are no more U.S. bases, but there are still yearround joint military exercises, U.S. naval ship visits, and deployment of U.S.
Special Operation Forces in conflict areas, taking place under the legal
framework of the Philippine-U.S. Visiting Forces Agreement and the Mutual
Logistics and Support
Military presence includes bases, carriers, facilities, supplies,

equipment, training and exercises, and arrangements
Lutz 09 Research Professor at the Watson Institute for International

Studies and Professor of Anthropology at Brown University. (Catherine,
2009 , US Bases and Empire: Global Perspectives on the Asia Pacific, The
Asia-Pacific Journal, http://www.japanfocus.org/-Catherine_/3086)
Military bases are installations routinely used by military forces (Blaker

1990:4). They represent a confluence of labor (soldiers, paramilitary
workers, and civilians), land, and capital in the form of static facilities,
supplies, and equipment. They should also include the eleven US aircraft
carriers, often used to signal the possibility of US bombing and invasion as
they are brought to trouble spots around the world. They were, for
example, the primary base of US airpower during the invasion of Iraq in
2003. The US Navy refers to each carrier as four and a half acres of
sovereign US territory. These moveable bases and their land-based
counterparts are just the most visible part of the larger picture of US
military presence overseas. This picture of military access includes (1) US
military training of foreign forces, often in conjunction with the provision of
US weaponry, (2) joint exercises meant to enhance US soldiers exposure to
a variety of operating environments from jungle to desert to urban terrain
and interoperability across national militaries, and (3) legal arrangements
made to gain overflight rights and other forms of ad hoc use of others
territory as well as to preposition military equipment there. In all of these
realms, the US is in a class by itself, no adversary or ally maintaining
anything comparable in terms of its scope, depth and global reach.
Stefan Bauschard
Stefan Bauschard
Military presence includes bases,

facilities, warships, planes, subs,
troops, and weaponry
Kirk and Francis 2k Gwyn is a member of the San Francisco Bay Area
Okinawa Peace Network. Carolyn Francis is a member of Okinawa Women
Act Against Military Violence (Gwyn, Carolyn Francis, 15, Redefining
Security: Women Challenge U.S. Military Policy and Practice in East Asia,
Berkeley Women's Law Journal ,
http://www.lexisnexis.com/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?
docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T9583109057&format=GNBFI&sort=BOOLEAN
&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T9583109060&cisb=22_T9583109059&
treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=248074&docNo=16)
The U.S. government supports nearly 2,000 U.S. military bases and facilities
located strategically around the globe. n1 The Pacific Command is part of
this network and comprises an integrated system of bases, warships, planes,
and submarines n2 that link Hawaii, Micronesia, Japan, South Korea, the
Philippines, and Australia. n3 The three countries that are the subject of this
article have hosted U.S. bases for many years. The United States has
positioned bases across the Pacific and in Asia for the purpose of extending
the reach of U.S. troops and weaponry into Asia and, more recently, into the
Middle East. U.S. bases in the Philippines played a key role in U.S.
interventions in the Boxer Rebellion (China) in 1900, and in Siberia during
the Russian Civil War (1918-20). n4 Philippine bases were used "for
clandestine supply drops to U.S.-backed right-wing rebels in Indonesia" (in
1958), and the U.S. naval force from the Philippines was deployed to the Bay
of Bengal during the India-Pakistan-Bangladesh War (1971). n5 Dozens of
U.S. bases in Okinawa, mainland Japan, and the Philippines were used as
forward bases during the Korean War and the Vietnam War. n6 U.S. troops in
East Asia are also deployed outside the region, as was the case in the
Persian Gulf War. n7 According to a U.S. Defense Department report, "Asian
nations provided [*231] access to ports, airfields, and maintenance facilities
for personnel, ships and aircraft en route to the Mideast." n8
Military presence is combat forces, bases, and military facilities
Harkavy 89 (Robert E., Professor of Political Science at Pennsilvania State

University, "Bases Abroad: The Global Foreign Military Presence, Oxford
University Press, 1989, p. 8)
Stefan Bauschard
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 office
buildings in the centre of a host city.
One might prefer the use of a still broader term, "
Stefan Bauschard
Presence = Military
Infrastructure/Assets
Stefan Bauschard
Presence refers to deployed forces

and infrastructure DOD
definition
GAO 1 General Accounting Office (EUROPEAN SECURITY U.S. and
European Contributions to Foster Stability and Security in Europe,
November, http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/testimony/214.pdf
DOD defines overseas presence as the mix of permanently stationed forces,

rotationally deployed forces, temporarily deployed forces, and infrastructure
required to conduct the full range of military operations.
Presence refers to deployed forces and infrastructure
Crawford 3 US Army Colonel, paper for the USAWC STRATEGY

RESEARCH PROJECT (Paul, Army Pre-Positioned Stocks and High-Speed
Sealift,
The National Military Strategy (NMS) defines Overseas Presence as the

strategic placement of permanently stationed, rotationally deployed and
temporarily deployed U.S. military forces overseas, and the infrastructure
and pre-positioned equipment necessary to sustain them in and near key
regions.5 The NMS goes on to state, Strategic mobility requires robust
sealift, airlift, space lift, and ground transportation supported by adequate
and sufficient air refueling assets, mobility infrastructure, material handling
equipment, and pre-positioned stocks of supplies and equipment.6
Strategic mobility is critical to our ability to augment forward-deployed
forces or quickly reinforce a region, and pre-positioned equipment sets are a
critical enabler identified in the NMS.
Presence refers to troops or military material
Stefan Bauschard

Weapons are part of the US military presence
Lutz 9 professor of International Studies at Brown (Catherine, The Bases of

Empire: The Global Struggle Against U.S. Military Posts, p. 6, google books)
Much of the United States' unparalleled weaponry, nuclear and otherwise, is stored
at places like Camp Darby in Italy, Kadena Air Force Base in Okinawa, and the Naval
Magazine on Guam, as well as in nuclear submarines and on the navy's other
floating bases. The weapons, personnel, and fossil fuels involved in this U.S. military
presence cost billions of dollars, most coming from U.S. taxpayers but an increasing
number of billions from the citizens of the countries involved. Elaborate bilateral
negotiations exchange weapons, cash, and trade privileges for overflight and landuse rights. Less explicitly, but no less importantly, rice import levels or immigration
rights to the United States or overlooking human rights abuses have been the
currency of exchange (Cooley, 2008).
Stefan Bauschard
Presence = Military
Infrastructure/Assets
Stefan Bauschard
Military presence is the physical

presence of military assets in an
area
Jones 08 (Major Bud Jones, military analyst, USAF, The Objective is
Influence, not Presence, or its Influence, Air & Space Power Journal Chronicles Online Journal)
http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/cc/influenc.html
Unfortunately, military presence can easily masquerade as the objective and the argument over which
particular service or mix of forces can best attain the desired presence can dominate the debate and
exclude other considerations. Presence and influence are related, but they are not synonymous .
Presence, the mere fact or condition of being present, is much easier to

achieve. It can be achieved in some special circumstances by sending a
carrier battle group or amphibious force, in a greater number of
circumstances by rapidly deploying Army elements, or in the greatest
number of instances by the sudden impact of air power from Air Force warplanes
quickly launched from distant bases--including those in the continental United States. In all
these cases, presence is designed to shrink the time and distance equation
so a potential military response will seem more immediate and visible. Still,
the debate over who can best provide presence while limiting vulnerability and danger to US lives causes
a loss of focus on the more important objective: influence.
Stefan Bauschard
Presence = Temporary
Visits
Stefan Bauschard
Presence includes temporary

deployments
Cliff et al 1 - associate political scientist with RAND and currently is
assigned to the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Strategy (Roger, QDR 2001: Strategy-Driven Choices for Americas Security,
Ed: Michele Flournoy http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?
3 Another method of categorizing overseas presence forcesone used in

recent reports of the Secretary of Defenseis by their degree of
permanence. In this construct, overseas presence forces can be categorized
as (1) permanently stationed, (2) rotationally deployed, and (3) deployed
temporarily for exercises, combined training, or military-to-military
interactions. See Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen, Annual Report to
the President and Congress 2000, 4.
Stefan Bauschard
Presence Icludes Virtual

Presence
Stefan Bauschard
Presence includes virtual presence

Billman 2k - LIEUTENANT COLONEL, USAF, and NATIONAL DEFENSE
FELLOW
GENERAL RIDGWAY CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SECURITY STUDIES
UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH (Gregory, The Space of Aerospace Power
Why and How, http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?
This chapter discusses presence, its relationship to influence, and how

this relationship affects an adversary. This discussion is done from
both general military and specific aerospace perspectives. Websters
dictionary defines presence as the state or act of being present.
Present denotes being alert to circumstances, and readily available .
An entity is present when it is physically close at hand, or even perceived
to be so. Hence, an entity can be present when it is physically so, or merely
notionally so.
This chapter deals with presence in two ways. First, it discusses the
capability of military forces to be present in, near, or over an area of
interest to the US. Second, it discusses two concepts of presence -- real and
virtual -- and how they relate to the space dimension of aerospace power .
Presence allows influence.
Presence activities are distinct from being present it means the

ability to exert influence

In everyday parlance, to be present means that an entity is in a particular

place at a particular time. It is the opposite of absence. Being present in this
sense does not necessarily mean that the entity is exerting a significant
effect upon the immediate surroundings. By contrast, in everyday language,
to have presence or have a presence means that an individual is able to
exert and usually is exerting a significant effect on the immediate
surroundings.
Stefan Bauschard
Presence Includes Virtual

Presence
Stefan Bauschard
Presence includes virtual presence

Widnall and Fogleman, 97 *Institute Professor at MIT and former US
Secretary of the Air Force AND **former Air Force general (Sheila and
Ronald, American Defense Policy, ed: Hays, p. 357-358)
The thrust of forward defense was to deter potential aggressors, and if that
failed, to engage those aggressors forces close to their borders, halting and
repelling the aggression. As such, presence equated to and was ensured by
bipolar alliances, heavy overseas troop commitments, frequent political and
military-to-military interaction with Americas allies, and the continual
courting of on-the-fence nations. In short, Americas Cold War strategy
was being there. It was a strategy most Americans understood.
As the 1980s ended and the Cold War subsided, the basis for the traditional
definition of presence began to dissolve. America moved from the Cold
Wars bipolar arrangement toward what was perceived to be a new, less
threatening political environment. As forward defense lost its rationale,
forward presence and overseas presence emerged. The goal of each was to
assure Americas allies of our nations continued commitment to their
security while responding to the reality of the decreasing threat to
Americas national existence.
Today the global international system has become a more diverse panorama
of political, military, and economic concerns confronting the United States.
Consequently, it is more difficult to achieve consensus on what Americans
consider vital national interests. Despite this, Americas military forces
are involved in more operations of greater duration than at any time in the
past twenty years; and, these operations have been conducted with 25
percent of the total force and 40 percent fewer forward deployed forces than
the services possessed in 1989.
In the face of increasing demands on U.S. military forces, smaller force
structures, and shrinking defense budgets, we can no longer afford to
physically deploy forces in every region of concern. Concurrent with
changes in the international security environment are significant advances
in technology, most notably information technologies. The ability to create,
disseminate, access, and manipulate information for ones own ends and to
control information available to competitors or adversaries produces a
potential for decisive advantage. Much as the introduction of the airplane
moved us into the three-dimensional battlefield, information technologies
lead us to consider the potential of operations in a four-dimensional, virtual
battlespace. This battlespace is not defined in terms of traditional,
centralized, geopolitical boundaries, but in terms of a decentralized, global
web of networks. As a result, we must examine new methods of
Stefan Bauschard
characterizing the threat including the use of technology-based analysis
and determine appropriate responses.
To use an analogy, during the Cold War, America was like a cop permanently
guarding the door of every bank around the globe. Changes in the security
environment coupled with technological improvements and force reductions
altered Americas need to continue in this role. Hence America replaced
the cop on the beat with video monitoring and alarm systems linked to
joint military capabilities that can be brought to bear wherever and
whenever necessary. This monitoring and alarm network consists of spacebased and air-breathing platform sensors and other information-gathering
systems. In most instances, information, combined with the right mix of
capabilities, can achieve U.S. goals. On occasion, information alone may be
enough to attain U.S. objectives. Of course, in some regions of the world a
physical presence is imperative; however, there may be circumstances when
such a presence is counterproductive. In instances where a physical
presence is not preferred, information capabilities provide America the
option to visit the bank as often as it wishes to check the integrity of the
system.
In an environment influenced by so many variables, how should America
best pursue the continuing need for presence? One way is through global
presence.
Global presence expands the definition of presence to include the
advantages of physical and virtual means. Global presence considers the full
range of potential activities from the physical interaction of military forces
to the virtual interaction achieved with Americas information-capabilities.
Stefan Bauschard
Presence Includes Training
Stefan Bauschard
Presence is primarily training

not just troop presence
Lutz 9 - professor at the Watson Institute for International Studies at Brown
University (Catherine, Obamas Empire, New Statesman, August 3, 2009,
lexis)
Moreover, these bases are the anchor - and merely the most visible aspect of the US military's presence overseas. Every year, US forces train 100,000
soldiers in 180 countries, the presumption being that beefed-up local
militaries will help to pursue US interests in local conflicts and save the US
money, casualties and bad publicity when human rights abuses occur (the
blowback effect of such activities has been made clear by the strength of the
Taliban since 9/11). The US military presence also involves jungle, urban,
desert, maritime and polar training exercises across wide swathes of
landscape, which have become the pretext for substantial and permanent
positioning of troops. In recent years, the US has run around 20 exercises
annually on Philippine soil, which have resulted in a near-continuous
presence of US soldiers in a country whose people ejected US bases in 1992
and whose constitution forbids foreign troops to be based on its territory.
Finally, US personnel work every day to shape local legal codes to facilitate
US access: they have lobbied, for example, to change the Philippine and
Japanese constitutions to allow, respectively, foreign troop basing and a
more-than-defensive military.
Stefan Bauschard
Presence = Bilateral
Agreements
Stefan Bauschard
Military presence means bilateral

agreements, NOT permanent
military installations
Lutz 09 Professor of Anthropology and International Studies, past
president of the American Ethnological Society, the largest organization of
cultural anthropologists in the U.S (Catherine, February, The bases of
Empire: The Global Struggle against U.S. Military Posts, p. 80,
http://books.google.com/books?
id=nPAgU6lhAT4C&printsec=frontcover&dq=The+Bases+of+Empire+previ
ew&hl=en&ei=2kcdTNC9MIP8Abcwf3IDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCwQ6A
EwAA#v=onepage&q=%22military%20presence%22&f=false)),
The U.S. militarys presence increasingly takes form not in permanent

installations, but through bilateral agreements for military operations and
maneuvers. The Paraguayan Congresss authorization in May 2005 for 13
U.S. military exercises through December 2006 offers a pointed example of
this phenomenon. The authorization granted diplomatic immunity to the U.S.
troops, as well as exemption from import taxes and inspections. The U.S.
troops operating in Paraguay were centered in a military base and Mariscal
Estigarribia, constructed in the 1980s and with the longest runway in the
country, although it is located in a remote area with a population of just
2,000. The air base sits close to the tri-border area of Paraguay, Argentina,
and Brazil, which holds strategic economic value, particularly for its
hydrological resources and proximity to Bolivias gas reserves. In addition,
the area has a sizable Arabic population, and ever since September, 11,
2001, U.S. officials promoting an anti-terrorist lens for military activity in
Latin America have pointed to the area as a possible focal point for Al Qaeda
activity
Stefan Bauschard
A2 Presence Weapons
Stefan Bauschard
Military presence includes

weapons stationed overseas
Qingchuan 09 (Yang Qingchuan, news writer, 8/14/09, Colombia deal
suggests unchanged U.S. policy to keep mammoth global military presence,
q=cache:TXfW4ttwj44J:www.globalresearch.ca/index.php%3Fcontext%3Dva
%26aid%3D14770+%22military+presence
%22+definition&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=safari)
Although Washington has been readjusting its global military presence since
the Cold War, the global reach of U.S. military presence is still unparalleled.
Excluding huge presence of U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, there are
about 900 U.S. military facilities in 46 countries and territories,
accommodating 190,000 U.S. troops and 115,000 civilian employees,
according to official figures. However, some analysts say the real figures
may be far greater. All together, the Pentagon owns or rents 322,000
hectares of land overseas, with an inventory of weapons worth trillions of
U.S. dollars according to some estimate. U.S. policymakers gave two sets of
reasons for keeping such a vast network of global presence. One is to
enhance security of the world by deterring attacks from "rogue countries"
and preventing unrest, and the other is to provide humanitarian assistance.
Stefan Bauschard
A2 Presence = NonCombat Activities
Stefan Bauschard
Military presence is defined by a

country where there is a military
base, aid, personnel, or soldiers
engaged in combat theatres
Nekoomaram 09 (Ladan Nekoomaram, graduate student at American
University in the journalism masters program, 11/10/09, US military
presence in foreign countries exceeds rest of world,
q=cache:ivAWIWAme0kJ:inews6.americanobserver.net/articles/us-militarypresence-foreign-countries-exceeds-rest-world+%22military+presence+is
U.S. troops today are stationed throughout the Middle East, including Iraq, Afghanistan, Turkey and
Kuwait. While some countries are home to military bases, others require military disaster relief after a
crisis, like a tsunami. Others have become battlefields, resulting in the deaths of U.S. soldiers and foreign
Military presence is defined by any nation where the U.S. has a military
base, where the U.S. is providing military aid, active duty military personnel,
or where U.S. soldiers are engaged in combat theaters. The 2008 Department of
civilians.
Defense Base Structure Report, which details military real estate, indicates that the U.S. military has 761
properties overseas.
Stefan Bauschard
A2 Greers Definition of PResence
Stefan Bauschard
Greers definition isnt rigorous or

well thought out, it only applies to
his paper
The definition may not be scholastically airtight. It is only offered to provide

a conceptual frame of reference for the study. So for the purpose of this
study, let us accept that forward presence is the visible employment of US
military personnel and/or military material as a deterrent outside of the
continental United States (OCONUS) at any point along the operational
continuum short of involving major US conventional forces in combat.
Stefan Bauschard
A2 Presence = Only
Deterrence
Stefan Bauschard
Presence refers to military forces

deployed for the purpose of
influence, reassurance,
deterrence, and initial crisis
response
Terms such as presence and engagement are often used rather loosely.
Following a survey and analysis of existing sources, we developed or
adopted specific definitions for the terms used to describe these strategy
issues.We define overseas presence as military forces permanently stationed
or rotationally or intermittently deployed overseas for the purposes of
influence, engagement, reassurance, deterrence, and initial crisis response.
We define peacetime military engagement as encompassing all U.S.
military activities designed to enhance constructive security relations and
promote broad U.S. security interests, including activities such as combined
training and education, military-to-military interactions, security assistance,
and various other programs. U.S. overseas presence forces are often also
involved in conducting peacetime military engagement activities.
Presence refers to military forces deployed for particular military

goals of influence, reassurance, deterrence and crisis response

Stefan Bauschard
Another key element of any defense strategy is overseas presence, which we

define as the military forces permanently stationed or rotationally or
intermittently deployed overseas for the purposes of influence, engagement,
reassurance, deterrence, and initial crisis response. Because many overseaspresence forces require a substantial rotation base, this element has
potentially profound implications for the size of the associated force.
Presence includes crisis response and security cooperation
Henry 6 served as Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Policy

since February 2003 (Ryan, Reposturing the Force: U.S. Overseas Presence
in the Twenty-first Century, ed: Lords,
http://www.usnwc.edu/Publications/Naval-War-College-Press/NewportPapers/Documents/26-pdf.aspx)
Finally, operational access comprises the presence, global management, and

surging of our forces overseas, all enabled by the political and geographic
access we enjoy with hostnation partners. Presence is defined by the
permanent and rotational forces that conduct military activities (training,
exercises, and operations) worldwide, from security cooperation to crisis
response. That presence consists of both small units working together in a
wide range of capacities and major formations conducting elaborate
exercises to achieve proficiency in multinational operations. Second, our
posture supports our new approach to force management, which seeks both
to relieve stresses on our military forces and their families and to manage
our forces on a global, rather than regional, basis. Combatant commanders
no longer own forces in their theaters; rather, forces are managed
according to global priorities. Third, managing our military forces globally
also allows us to surge a greater percentage of the force wherever and
whenever necessary.
Stefan Bauschard
A2 Definitions of Forward Presence
Stefan Bauschard
Forward presence is broader than

military presence it includes
nonmilitary capabilities
Challis 93 - Lieutenant Colonel (Dan, "GENERAL PURPOSE GROUND
FORCES" WHAT PURPOSE?" 4/6,
JSCP = Joint Strategic Capabilities Plan
JSCP guidance for forward presence operations is similarly broad. It defines

forward presence as the "totality of U.S. instruments of power deployed
overseas (both permanently and temporarily) at any time". A wide-ranging
assortment of 34 specific actions are aligned into six categories:
operational training and deployments
security assistance
peacekeeping operations
protecting U.S. citizens abroad
combatting drugs
humanitarian assistance
It is evident from the JSCP that a wide variety of military and non-military
capabilities are to be integrated into the regional CINCs' plans. The breadth
of military operations envisioned in this document has huge implications for
the number, structure, training and operational tempo (OPTEMPO) of
conventional units, to include general purpose ground forces.
Stefan Bauschard
Stefan Bauschard
Police Presence = civilian

public police forces
Stefan Bauschard
Police refers to civilian public

forces charged with crime control
and maintaining order
Deflem and Sutphin 6 * Associate Professor of Sociology University of
South Carolina AND **grad student in sociology at the University of South
Carolina (Mathieu and Suzanne, "Policing Post-War Iraq: Insurgency, Civilian
Police, and the Reconstruction of Society." Sociological Focus 39(4)265-283.
http://www.cas.sc.edu/socy/faculty/deflem/zpoliraq.html
Our analysis of the police situation in Iraq focuses on developments since an

end to major combat operations was announced in the Spring of 2003.
Unless explicitly noted otherwise, the term police in this paper refers to the
institution and function of civilian public police forces that are formally
legitimated within the context of national states with the tasks of crime
control and order maintenance. Importantly, we make no assertion that the
police in Iraq has acquired a degree of popular legitimacy comparable to
that of law enforcement agencies in other nations, especially those with a
long history of democratization. Relatedly, when we use such terms as
insurgency and terrorism in this paper, we imply no essentialist positions but
instead rely on a constructionist viewpoint and therefore precisely rely on
the terms that are being used, especially on the part of the agents of control,
to refer to acts of violence that are responded to accordingly by police
agencies and other institutions of social control. Considering the rapidly
evolving and changing nature of the Iraqi situation, also, it is important to
note that this article was completed in August 2006, at a time when
discussions on the insurgency in Iraq were for several months already
implying a shift towards civil war.
Stefan Bauschard
Police Presence Definitions

Military or police presence refers to stationed personnel within a
place
Compact Oxford English Dictionary, 10

(http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/presence?view=uk)
presence
noun 1 the state or fact of being present. 2 the impressive manner or
appearance of a person. 3 a person or thing that is present but not seen. 4 a group
of soldiers or police stationed in a particular place: the USA would maintain a
presence in the region.
The Oxford Essential Dictionary of the U.S. Military 2 (by Oxford

University Press, Inc. All rights reserved, republished and cited as US
Military Dictionary at: http://www.answers.com/topic/presence)
US Military Dictionary:
presence
n.a group of people, especially soldiers or police, stationed in a particular
place: maintain a presence in the region.
(http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/american/presence)
definition of presence
noun
3. a. a group of people, especially soldiers or the police, who are in a place
for a particular purpose
We intend to maintain a presence in the country until there is peace.
military/police presence:
There is still a large U.S. military presence in the region.
Stefan Bauschard

Military Presence Topic Paper

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Military Presence Topic Paper

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Stefan Bauschard

*Resolved: The United States should substantially either increase or decrease

I wouldnt exclude at this point, but Im skeptical of the desirability of

Decrease could replace reduce. Some reduce definitions are included.

Similarly, in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, (and Poland), where the US has

In regards to Asia, especially Japan and Korea, there is a substantial of timely

I almost hate to write about critical arguments independently, because there

My favorite resolution is bidirectional, but I it does limit the Affirmative plan

Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania,

Howard Koplowitz, 3-9-15, http://www.ibtimes.com/ukraine-crisis-us-sending3000-troops-latvia-estonia-lithuania-military-exercises-1840934

Operation Atlantic Resolve

U.S. Army troops resumed Operation Atlantic Resolve land-forces training of

West hems in Russia a little -- https://www.stratfor.com/geopoliticaldiary/west-hems-russia-little-little

Ramping up in Europe -http://archive.militarytimes.com/section/SPECIAL15/Ramping-up-in-Europe

Russia danger to Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia -http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-31528981

Peace is over for the Baltic States -http://euromaidanpress.com/2015/04/03/the-baltic-states/

Stop Putin aggression with US forces in Eastern Europe

RT, 3-10-15, http://rt.com/op-edge/239201-us-nato-troops-baltic-states/

President Obama is considering a number of options to reinforce our support

At least 9, 8000 will stay until the end of 2015

More US troops will come as part of Operation Freedom

US troops supposed to be gone by 2017

But US troops will participate as part of NATOs

Post-2014 Afghanistan & the Looming Consequences of Strategic

The fast-moving events of Syria and Iraq in 2014 demonstrated the

Should Increase Military Presence

Short answer: Of course not.

Should establish a security partnership

Should Sustain Military Presence

The US significantly re-engaged in Iraq on Aug. 8, 2014, when airstrikes

Should Increase Military Presence

Iraq military cant retake Mosul

Attack on Mosul will not succeed without US ground troops

Without ground troops, efforts to recapture Mosul will fail

Combat Troops Needed to Prevent Genocide

Ground Troops Generally Needed

ISIS cant be defeated without ground troops

10,000 Troop Proposal

The three key components of McCains approach are these:

Should Not Increase Military

Military Intervention Increases the Threat

Increasing the US presence will infuriate the Sunnis

Iraq war proves ground troops fuel, not arrest insurgencies

Ground war will increase ISIS recruiting

Ground Troops Fail

Foreign ground troops fail to arrest insurgencies

Not Enough Troops

Jim Newell in Salon:

Successful ground campaign would require 30-50,000 American troops

Diplomacy essential to resolve the conflicts that are supporting ISIS

A2: Need US Troops to Free Mosul

Iraq doesnt want US ground forces in the attack on Mosul

The cost of military intervention in Syria

What is going on in the Ukraine

Promises and Pittfalls for the US-Japan alliance

Alliance Good/Should Bolster

Revitalizing the US-Japan alliance

Asia Presence Good

THOMAS.gov, 92 Summary of H.R.4421, the Comprehensive Base

Comprehensive Base Closure Reform and Recovery Act of 1992 - Title I:

Substantial reduction is at least 50%

Pallone, 3 US Congressional Representative (Text of H.R. 3189,

retirement of the covered employee (or, if later, January 6, 2004), in

"substantial reduction" means 50