RE : Now that...

[00gpschnippe@bsuvc.bsu.edu]

ooohhh... couldn't resist...

while maybe not the most original idea on the topic, I felt Sub Seabed
Disposal was a pretty solid case for the topic. It allowed pretty solid
links into pretty big scenarios (Proliferation, environment , yucca mtn.,
and various creative radioactive waste crisis scenarios like korea or
russia )  while still having a fairly limited amount of specific 
literature making it pretty manageable. Possible to cover the majority
of the evidence out on it and perdict most negative strategies against 
it... 

now whether it is true or not as Jared from Whitman suggests... hmmm ... 
seems too simplistic to argue that it's bad because it dumps waste
in the ocean though I suppose on face my knee jerk reaction would 
question the impacts on the environment as well.  Never felt 
that the 'environmental risk' argument ever posed a real threat to the
case though...                                                 

still not as cool as all the dolphin cases though.. gotta give credit 
to these.. always fun to debate and run.. 

hmmm.. maybe if i had the dolphins deliver the waste next time?

	- Schnippel - BSU Debate

---

Follow-Ups:

• Re: RE : Now that...
• From: Jared Phillips <phillijm@whitman.edu>

---

• Prev by Date: SSD is wrong?!!
• Next by Date: Re: SSD is wrong?!!
• Prev by thread: Re: SSD is wrong?!!
• Next by thread: Re: RE : Now that...
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

---

Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page