NationStates Jolt Archive

Heres the deal: I go to an international school that is pretty well known amoung numerous debate groups in the western hemisphere for excelence in debate(You prolly never heard o' it, but the school is called Balboa Academy. It's only started debate for about 3 or 4 years, but we took the most awards at model HACIA in Mexico City this year, and quite a few at places like Harvard, etc), so we train for debate since the sixth grade. Now, last year(sixth grade) we started debate and, for some strange reason, I discovered I have a knack for debating(I've won 2 awards in the 3 major debates i've been in, plus a few smaller ones). The problem is, the teachers(now that they see that I am good at this) have decided to put me in the hardest committee in our conference(which includes other big debate schools in the area, such as the International School of Panama, the other big debate school in the country).

The committee is called (and this is just off the top of my head) "UNDP Committee on Terrorists, Mercenaries, Rebels, Security Firms, the Right to Self-determination, the Support of Fledgling Democracies, and the Link to Blood Diamonds". I know, that's a helluva lotta stuff (Hey, I'm only 13! Cut me some slack, will yas?) Normally, we only do HACIA-style debating(it's like Model United Nations, yet with a few other rules and only with countries that belong to the Organisation of American States), but this is Model U.N. So I have a few rules to learn.

That is not where my plight ends, oh no no no. You see, at first I was given Liberia. I did not like that country, so I thought about stuff. I had heard the teachers talk about Syria, so I inquired "Is Syria available?" I did this because, as a few of you may know(although It is doubtfull), most of my knowledge of political events is centered around North Africa, the Middle East, and South Asia. I felt really lost trying to represent an un-stable country with a temporary government in Africa. One of those areas I stated before? I could do it no sweat. But Africa? Sorry. The teachers said, "Yes it is!" and I replied "May I have it?" and they said, "Are you sure?" and I said "Yup," so they said, "O.K."

Now, here is my dillema. I am un-sure how I am to go about this. I am going to represent a dictatorship, that supports certain terrorist groups, and everyone will be trying to kill me(expecially Israel). Does anyone have any advice?

your sovereignty will never be threatened by any organization up to and beyond the UN. maybe that will impress them.

Might makes right? You have a fairly undefendable position, I'm afraid.

Might makes right? You have a fairly undefendable position, I'm afraid.
only if you're to much of a coward to defend it. debating something you dont beleive in is the essence of having any sort of skill in debate. dont say might makes right. just scream sovereignty sovereignty sovreignty and you'll survive.

Soveirgnity (sp) seems like your best bet.

Soveirgnity (sp) seems like your best bet.
fortunately, debate doesnt require the ability to spell.

Damn, you're too f**king smart. :headbang:

I'm not too knowledge on Syria, but one of my high schools (back when i was in schooling) had an MUN team and I represented Iran. The countries might be similar in their problems, though when I did this there was not much talk about nuclear programs in Iran. Generally, first state your sovereignty first and foremost. It is your best card and the most easily defensible since it is written in the UN charter and a staple of international code. Secondly, if you want to get risky (and many nations have actually walked this line in the past) challenge the idea of democracy itself as a sort of western imposition on other nations. That is, refer to it as a sort of imperial act and challenge the notion of human universality in beliefs so that you can get yourself off on human rights abuses that have been proven. Do not refer to terrorist groups as terrorists but as freedom fighters; since you have a hard stance to defend, giving any ground could be damaging.

Most of those are risky routes to take, nuclear options of sorts. If you pass it off it would be a big win, but if not it would be a big loss. You could also go on the route of writing off dictatorship as necessary for economic advancement, but that is a less risky but weaker argument. Generally though, self-determination and sovereignty is your best bet. Good luck.

If Syria has any sort of economic or military strength, you might try to emphasize the positive aspects of those sorts of things. Also, if someone attacks you on the support of terrorist groups, have some knowledge of conflicts in other countries (such as the American Revolution) where the "terrorists" won, and the conflict spawned positive (if arguably so) results.

Nobody has helped this young ruler yet.

Anyways, to be serious, tell them that as a ruler, you must be able to accomodate the religious beliefs of a majority of your subjects. Since many of them are Muslim, you believe it is proper to wage war on infidels. Also, Israel emerged as a threat not only to the Middle East balance of power, but also insulted Islam by stealing the land of your Muslim brothers. As a result, you feel it is necessary to halt such activities. Maybe criticize Israel and the US as being too hand-in-hand, saying how you do not want Western influence (with the exception of nuclear weapons and other items of mass destruction) in your region.

when they ask you why you are such an oppressive ruler, maybe state that as a sovereign, you have the right to choose how your nation is governed. In other words, mind your own damn business, and change the subject. In regards to terrorism, I don't believe the Syrian government has officially declared itself a supporter of terrorist activies (recently, that is.) Correct me if I'm wrong. If they bring up the past, that's your time to shine. The western world has been guilty of the most heinous crimes in the past, so make sure you bring those up. Ya, anyways, I really can't give you much info past that, since I'm not a fan of Syria. Happy hunting! :sniper:

I'm not too knowledge on Syria, but one of my high schools (back when i was in schooling) had an MUN team and I represented Iran. The countries might be similar in their problems, though when I did this there was not much talk about nuclear programs in Iran. Generally, first state your sovereignty first and foremost. It is your best card and the most easily defensible since it is written in the UN charter and a staple of international code. Secondly, if you want to get risky (and many nations have actually walked this line in the past) challenge the idea of democracy itself as a sort of western imposition on other nations. That is, refer to it as a sort of imperial act and challenge the notion of human universality in beliefs so that you can get yourself off on human rights abuses that have been proven. Do not refer to terrorist groups as terrorists but as freedom fighters; since you have a hard stance to defend, giving any ground could be damaging.

Most of those are risky routes to take, nuclear options of sorts. If you pass it off it would be a big win, but if not it would be a big loss. You could also go on the route of writing off dictatorship as necessary for economic advancement, but that is a less risky but weaker argument. Generally though, self-determination and sovereignty is your best bet. Good luck.
You could even go the Putin route. go as far as challenging the american system of democracy i.e. the 2000 election when bush lost the popular vote but still won. he wasnt even elected he was appointed by the Supreme Court and as such should be considered a dictator himself :eek: . this is going a little extreme but thats the fun in debating. also if they talk about civil/human rights, just rebut (sp?) by mentioning the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. act. dont let it seem like the democracies are lecturing you, make it seem like you could teach America and Britain and the West a thing or two about governing.

only if you're to much of a coward to defend it. debating something you dont beleive in is the essence of having any sort of skill in debate. dont say might makes right. just scream sovereignty sovereignty sovreignty and you'll survive.

Is that what a skillful debate involves?

Yeah, I'd been giving your question a bit more thought and I came to the conclusion that you can just say 'clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right'. Explain how hostile the world is and has been toward you and how that justifies your decisions as a sovereign nation.

Is that what a skillful debate involves?


Generally the best debater is one who can argue both sides of the case and win, regardless of his or her personal beliefs on the matter. If you can overcome your own beliefs and win on an argument you completely disagree with, that is much more skilled simply because it is harder than arguing something you fully agree with.

Try soveriengty... or ligitmate governancy..

(I used those on the neg of a topic concerning the promotion of democratic ideals)

In the worst case scenario... you can always claim that the other nations are being hegemonic and committing cultural genocide (<-- big words that sound cool)

Also you could argue that a democracy is based upon majority rule. Becuase the majority of your people are part of those groups, it would be undemocratic for the UN to enter and therefor that committe is going against its purpose. Instead, turn it to a nation where the majority is NOT ruling.

Generally the best debater is one who can argue both sides of the case and win, regardless of his or her personal beliefs on the matter. If you can overcome your own beliefs and win on an argument you completely disagree with, that is much more skilled simply because it is harder than arguing something you fully agree with.

Even if that argument involves covering your ears and dancing around while shouting "We're sovereign! Just leave us alone!"?

Even if that argument involves covering your ears and dancing around while shouting "We're sovereign! Just leave us alone!"?
If you win, yes.

If you win, yes.

I've found my calling. How can I get paid to do this?

I've found my calling. How can I get paid to do this?

Become a lawyer, a high ranking diplomat, or especially a PR spokesman. They get paid well for this line of work.

Even if that argument involves covering your ears and dancing around while shouting "We're sovereign! Just leave us alone!"?
better than giving up. besides just fill in a few fancy words as noted above and the judges love you. :D besides i added some other stuff. plus hes asking us for additional help so im giving him some back up, im not saying he should debate by simply reading my posts to everyone in the room.

Thank thar heavens!

So, I should play the "My country rules itself, so don't mess with me, biaaaaaaaatch" Card, the "But under our government Syria has prospered" Card, and the "Terrorists? What Terrorists?" Cards. However, I still have to find a solution to the many problems.

Thank thar heavens!

So, I should play the "My country rules itself, so don't mess with me, biaaaaaaaatch" Card, the "But under our government Syria has prospered" Card, and the "Terrorists? What Terrorists?" Cards. However, I still have to find a solution to the many problems.

I agree. To paraphrase the Irish guy on Braveheart, I think that I can get out of this, but you're screwed.

*snip*
Now, here is my dillema. I am un-sure how I am to go about this. I am going to represent a dictatorship, that supports certain terrorist groups, and everyone will be trying to kill me(expecially Israel). Does anyone have any advice?

First, of all, it sounds like congratulations are in order. Congratulations.

I'm not particularly familiar with the type of debate you are paticipating in, although I have limitied familiarity with Model UN. (I'll try looking it up later.)

I'm very experienced in other forms of high school and college and professional debate. So perhaps I can be of some assistance.

Your biggest friend is research. Get to know as much as possible about Syria and its perspective. I'm not 100% clear what the subject matter of your debates will be (perhaps you can be more specific, to the extent you know).

Knowing more about the subject -- including the weaknesses in your own position -- than your opponent is ideal (and often not as hard as it may seem). I'll search for some links for you about Syria and its perspective.

Also, there are many strageties that can be employed regardless of your position. Weaknesses can be used as strengths. You can lay traps for your opponents to eagerly rush into.

Think of Syria as your client and you as its lawyer. (In many ways that is what your role would be as a diplomat.) It does not particularly matter what you think of your client. It could be worse. He could be accused of domestic battery and just explained to you that the [epiteth] deserved it].

Don't prejudge your position. Don't assume your country is wrong. Try to look at things from other points of view. Are there assumptions you and others might make that you can simply deny, etc.

Anyway, I'm tired and babbling a bit. I would be glad to provide some advice. It appears others are as well.

My advice for now boils down to this:

1. Learn as much as you can about Syria -- particularly about it's official positions on things. Try to find independent sources. Also read sources that are friendly to Syria's viewpoint. (Don't rely on these unskeptically, but they can give you ideas.)

2. Get as clear an idea as you can about the subject matter of your debates. Learn about that subject matter.

3. Feel free to ask questions and for advice in this thread/these forums. (Although, is it possible your opponents might also be here? You may not want to discuss strategy too specifically.)

4. Try to think outside the box. Rather than be defensive, consider taking the offense. Rather than wait to be attacked, are there policies you could advocate? Other countries or causes you could rally people against?

GOOD LUCK!!!!

EDIT: Very important bit -- have fun! That is not just a cliche. Not only should you try to have fun because it's more fun that way, but also because you will do much better if you enjoy it. Trust me on this.

First, of all, it sounds like congratulations are in order. Congratulations.

I'm not particularly familiar with the type of debate you are paticipating in, although I have limitied familiarity with Model UN. (I'll try looking it up later.)

I'm very experienced in other forms of high school and college and professional debate. So perhaps I can be of some assistance.

Your biggest friend is research. Get to know as much as possible about Syria and its perspective. I'm not 100% clear what the subject matter of your debates will be (perhaps you can be more specific, to the extent you know).

Knowing more about the subject -- including the weaknesses in your own position -- than your opponent is ideal (and often not as hard as it may seem). I'll search for some links for you about Syria and its perspective.

Also, there are many strageties that can be employed regardless of your position. Weaknesses can be used as strengths. You can lay traps for your opponents to eagerly rush into.

Think of Syria as your client and you as its lawyer. (In many ways that is what your role would be as a diplomat.) It does not particularly matter what you think of your client. It could be worse. He could be accused of domestic battery and just explained to you that the [epiteth] deserved it].

Don't prejudge your position. Don't assume your country is wrong. Try to look at things from other points of view. Are there assumptions you and others might make that you can simply deny, etc.

Anyway, I'm tired and babbling a bit. I would be glad to provide some advice. It appears others are as well.

My advice for now boils down to this:

1. Learn as much as you can about Syria -- particularly about it's official positions on things. Try to find independent sources. Also read sources that are friendly to Syria's viewpoint. (Don't rely on these unskeptically, but they can give you ideas.)

2. Get as clear an idea as you can about the subject matter of your debates. Learn about that subject matter.

3. Feel free to ask questions and for advice in this thread/these forums. (Although, is it possible your opponents might also be here? You may not want to discuss strategy too specifically.)

4. Try to think outside the box. Rather than be defensive, consider taking the offense. Rather than wait to be attacked, are there policies you could advocate? Other countries or causes you could rally people against?

GOOD LUCK!!!!

EDIT: Very important bit -- have fun! That is not just a cliche. Not only should you try to have fun because it's more fun that way, but also because you will do much better if you enjoy it. Trust me on this.


Thanks!

I still have until the 27th to research, so I'd better get crackin.

If you need any help at any point from a person living in the area (no I do not live in Syria! Israel people, I live in Israel!) then send me a TG with your MSN or post it here. I'll be more than glad to impart all my knowledge on Syria, Israel-Syria tensions, whatever you need :)

I agree with The Cat-Tribe about research, it's one of the main things in debate,
unfortunetly I don't know te style you're debating in, but I debated on world schools debating chapionship in Calgary and know some stuff about it.

Another argument to support soveriengty, then add "slipery slope" argument saying if the world allows UN somehow try to control our country, then we will set a precedence (did I spell that right?) that it is OK to go and just mess with any country you (don't) like, hell I don't want some UN controling my country...

Then address other nations saying, today my country tomorrow yours! Makes sense? Then sit back and simle as they go on your side ;)

Greeting

Thanks!

I still have until the 27th to research, so I'd better get crackin.

This may help or hurt, but my obsessive tendencies led me to do some searching.

These links may help:
Library of Congress: A Country Study: Syria (http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/sytoc.html)
CIA World Factbook: Syria (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/sy.html)
BBC News Country Profiles: Syria (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/country_profiles/801669.stm)
Syria-Today (http://www.syria-today.com/)
Syria Times (http://www.teshreen.com/syriatimes/)
National Information Center in Syrian Arab Republic (http://www.nice-online.org/)
Occupied Golan (http://www.golan-syria.org/)
Middle East Studies: Syria (http://www.columbia.edu/cu/lweb/indiv/mideast/cuvlm/Syria.html)
Syria Today (http://www.basharassad.org/home.htm)
Syrian Arab News Agency (http://www.sana.org/index.html)
Syrian Studies Association (http://www.ou.edu/ssa/)
Tharwa Project: Syria (http://www.tharwaproject.com/English/?option=com_keywords&task=bl&id=10)
EU's retationship with Syria (http://europa.eu.int/comm/external_relations/syria/intro/)

Some of these are better than others. Some are good background. The Library of Congress stuff looks like awesome background. Lots of this I would skim (and look around the site -- particularly the pro-Syria sites) for useful info and perspectives.

Here are some individual news articles that may be interesting (note the dates as some are old):
Syria Evolves as Anti-Terror Ally (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A60219-2002Jul24&notFound=true)
US, Syria, and UN Resolutions (http://www.amin.org/eng/uncat/2005/mar/mar91.html)
Syria joins UN treaty against terror funding (http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/568475.html)
Israel's bombing of Syria: U.S.-approved state terrorism (http://socialism.com/currents/syriabombing.html)
Syria Not Immune from Acts of Terror, say Experts (http://www.militaryconnections.com/news_story.cfm?textnewsid=967)
Syria says U.S. sanctions "unfair and illogical" (http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L07668147.htm)
Syria brings in new banking laws to stamp out terror funding (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20050502/wl_mideast_afp/syriausbanking_050502141110)
THE SYRIAN BET (http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?030728fa_fact)
The Obsession with Syria (http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=22&ItemID=7802)
Talking Points Regarding Syria (http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=40&ItemID=3463)

Syria can make a serious argument that it is not responsible for terrorism, it is a significant victim of terrorism, and it has been active in fighting terrorism (including cooperating with both UN and US efforts. It can also point a finger of blame for terrorism at any number of other countries, including Isreal. Then you add to that the number of other issues that appear within the balliwick of your panel that Syria can take the offensive on.

Again, good luck.

[Darn kids today, have the internet to coddle 'em. In my day we had to go to the Library -- walking ... in the snow .... barefoot ... uphill both ways. ;) :D ]