Tournament: UMKC | Round: 6 | Opponent:  | Judge: 

Solvency real quick read flow.

Leadership ADV

Russia and the U.S. have and will retain joint proliferation leadership

Pifer 10 (Resetting ¶ U.S.-Russian ¶ Leadership on ¶ Nuclear Arms ¶ Reductions and ¶ Non-Proliferation, Brookings Institute, Arms Control Series, Steven Pifer¶ Joseph Cirincione¶ Clifford Gaddy, 2010) JD
During their first meeting in London on April 1,   2009, Presidents Obama and
AND
to imagine anything that would pose a greater threat   to American national security.

Recent G8 committee appointments make U.S. the global proliferation leader

Bigongiari 12 (U.S. assumes leadership of G8′s non-proliferation bodies  Published on com/us_bioterror_policy/u-s-assumes-leadership-of-g8s-non-proliferation-bodies/322874/ by com/author/jeffrey_bigongiari/  http://www.bioprepwatch.com/us_bioterror_policy/u-s-assumes-leadership-of-g8s-non-proliferation-bodies/322874/-http://www.bioprepwatch.com/us_bioterror_policy/u-s-assumes-leadership-of-g8s-non-proliferation-bodies/322874/) JD
As the head of the G8 in 2012, the United States has assumed leadership
AND
and radiological security, scientific engagement and U.N. nonproliferation efforts.

===Impact D===

====Prolif doesn’t snowball – their "tipping point" arguments rely on the same discredited assumptions as cold war domino theory.====
Potter and Mukhatzhanova, ’8
(William (Sam Nunn and Richard Lugar Professor of Nonproliferation Studies and Director of the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Monterey Institute of International Studies) and Gaukhar (Research Associate at the James Martin Center. International Security), Vol. 33, No. 1, Summer 2008, pp. 139-169, "Divining Nuclear Intentions", RSR)
Hymans is keenly aware of the deficiency of past proliferation projections, which he attributes
AND
, though not discussed by Hymans, also seems to fit this category.

Heg doesn’t solve war

Conry and Pena 2003 Barbara Conry (former associate policy analyst, was a public relations consultant at Hensley Segal Rentschler and an expert on security issues in the Middle East, Western Europe, and Central Asia at the CATO Institute) and Charles V. Pena (Senior Fellow at the Independent Institute as well as a senior fellow with the Coalition for a Realistic Foreign Policy, and an adviser on the Straus Military Reform Project at the CATO Institute) 2003 "47. US Security Strategy" CATO Handbook for Congress, http://www.cato.org/pubs/handbook/hb108/hb108-47.pdf
Another rationale for attempting to manage global security is that a world without U.
AND
security can save the world from political, economic, or military conflagration.

Expanding nuclear power hurts credibility – safety issues

Walsh 11 (Wednesday, Mar 16, 2011 05:17 PM MST  The nuclear credibility gap  As Japan and U.S. officials differ on risks, the Obama administration pushes ahead with nuclear power expansion  By Joan Walsh, http://www.salon.com/2011/03/17/nuclear_credibility_gap/)
I’m inclined to believe Jaczko, as well as warnings from U.S.
AND
any administration leader is making a full steam ahead commitment to nuclear expansion.

Space ADV

Their USA today 2010 framework, in NO WAY SUGGESTS EXTINCTION. It mentions over use of resources WITH NO TIME FRAME. We are currently overusing, but we’re not dead.

Their focus on getting to space prevents us from solving nuclear war, climate change and environmental catastrophe and actually exacerbates those problems—-There goes leadership

Williams, 10. Lynda has a M.S. in Physics and is a physics faculty member at Santa Rose Junior College in Northern California Peace Review, 22: 1, 4 — 8. 10 February 2010.
 Life on Earth is more urgently threatened by the destruction of the biosphere and
AND
energies on solving and mitigating the problems that create these threats on Earth?  

Prefer our impacts, their space colonization impacts have a five billion year timeframe and extra-planetary threats can be solved without colonization.

Williams, 10. Lynda has a M.S. in Physics and is a physics faculty member at Santa Rose Junior College in Northern California Peace Review, 22: 1, 4 — 8. 10 February 2010.
According to scientific theory, the destruction of Earth is a certainty. About five
AND
not protect us from any of these astronomical threats in the near future.

NUCLEAR POWER IN SPACE IS A GUISE FOR FULL MILITARIZATION OF SPACE—CAUSING NUCLEAR CONFLICT

GROSSMAN 2004
~[Karl, Nuclear Power in space expert, has written many publicationson the matter, Jprof of Journ at NY state university, March-april, Earth First Journal,uwyo-delo~]
There is no "edge" or limit to solar power, says Dr.
AND
all disguised as the noble effort to hunt for the ’origins of life’." 

NUCLEAR POWER FUELS SPACE WEAPONIZATION

Leonard David, journalist, "NASA to Go Nuclear," SPACE.COM, February 5, 2002. Available from the World Wide Web at: html, accessed 8/15/06.

Gagnon said that space-based laser weapons would be powered by nuclear reactors,
AND
of the world aregoing to turn on the space program, Gagnon said.

SPACE WEAPON DEPLOYMENT MAKES WAR INEVITABLE

Gordon R. Mitchell, Associate Professor, Communication, University of Pittsburgh, with Kevin J. Ayotte and David Cram helwich, ISIS BRIEFING PAPER ON BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE n. 6, June 2001, html.

Yale sociologist Charles Perrow has analyzed `complexly interactive, tightly coupled’ industrial systems such
AND
itself inevitable, given the susceptibility of such systems to `normal accidents’.

The lack of international cohesion on space law creates the possibilities for space weaponization and war over resources and anti-satellite technology

Williams, 10. Lynda has a M.S. in Physics and is a physics faculty member at Santa Rose Junior College in Northern California Peace Review, 22: 1, 4 — 8. 10 February 2010.
The technological hurdles prohibiting practical space colonization  of the moon and Mars in the near
AND
trashed  for further launches to take place without a great risk of destruction.

Both private and government development of space risks a new space arms race and speeds up the risk of planetary destruction.

Williams, 10. Lynda has a M.S. in Physics and is a physics faculty member at Santa Rose Junior College in Northern California Peace Review, 22: 1, 4 — 8. 10 February 2010.
The private development of space is growing at a flurried pace.  Competitions such as
AND
can then venture  off the planet into the new frontier of our dreams.

Waste 1NC

====A. Expanding nuclear power requires additional onsite storage  ====
Alvarez 2 (Former Senior Policy Adviser in the Energy Department)
Robert, What About the Spent Fuel, Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, Vol. 58, p. 45, January/February.
Will more gates, guards, and guns be enough? About 40,000
AND
fuel.... This has become a fact of life for nuclear power stations." 

====B. Increasing nuclear power without credible waste storage turns case and undermines nuclear leadership====
Werner 12 (James D., Section Research Manager, Congressional Research Service, ’U.S. Spent Nuclear Fuel Storage," May 24)
Fourth, some have argued that the uncertainty and concerns about nuclear waste management have
AND
State authority, however, is limited under the Atomic Energy Act.54

C. US Nuclear Leadership key to prevent nuclear terrorism

Bowen et al 12 (Wyn Q. Bowen, Professor of Non-Proliferation
AND
idealism,"  International Affairs 88: 2 (2012) 349–368)
Just as the possible threat scenarios vary, so do threat perceptions. During the
AND
’socialization’ with respect to international acceptance of the nuclear security norm.37

D. Terrorism causes extinction

Mohamed Sid-Ahmed 4, political analyst, August 26 – September 1, 2004, Al-Ahram Weekly On-Line, http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2004/705/op5.htm-http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2004/705/op5.htm
We have reached a point in human history where the phenomenon of terrorism has to be completely uprooted, not through persecution and oppression, but by removing the reasons that make particular sections of the world population resort to terrorism. This means that fundamental changes must be brought to the world system itself. The phenomenon of terrorism is even more dangerous than is generally believed. We are in for surprises no less serious than 9/11 and with far more devastating consequences. A nuclear attack by terrorists will be much more critical than Hiroshima and Nagazaki, even if — and this is far from certain — the weapons used are less harmful than those used then, Japan, at the time, with no knowledge of nuclear technology, had no choice but to capitulate. Today, the technology is a secret for nobody. So far, except for the two bombs dropped on Japan, nuclear weapons have been used only to threaten. Now we are at a stage where they can be detonated. This completely changes the rules of the game. We have reached a point where anticipatory measures can determine the course of events. Allegations of a terrorist connection can be used to justify anticipatory measures, including the invasion of a sovereign state like Iraq. As it turned out, these allegations, as well as the allegation that Saddam was harbouring WMD, proved to be unfounded. What would be the consequences of a nuclear attack by terrorists? Even if it fails, it would further exacerbate the negative features of the new and frightening world in which we are now living. Societies would close in on themselves, police measures would be stepped up at the expense of human rights, tensions between civilisations and religions would rise and ethnic conflicts would proliferate. It would also speed up the arms race and develop the awareness that a different type of world order is imperative if humankind is to survive. But the still more critical scenario is if the attack succeeds. This could lead to a third world war, from which no one will emerge victorious. Unlike a conventional war which ends when one side triumphs over another, this war will be without winners and losers. When nuclear pollution infects the whole planet, we will all be losers.

DA 2

A. World dependent upon nuclear power makes proliferation inevitable, regardless of reactor technology.

Feiveson 1 (Secretary-Treasurer of the Federation of American Scientists Council and is a Senior Research Policy Scientist of the Program on Science and Global Security at Princeton University)
Harold, The Search for Proliferation-Resistant Nuclear Power, The Journal of the Federation of American Scientists, Vol. 54, September/October, http://www.fas.org/faspir/2001/v54n5/nuclear.htm
"Proliferation-resistance" refers to the adoption of reactor and fuel cycle concepts
AND
, no fuel cycle with recycling has been convincingly shown to be otherwise.

B. Extinction

Victor A. Utgoff 2, Deputy Director of the Strategy, Forces, and Resources Division of the Institute for Defense Analyses, former head of the Advanced Systems and Concepts Office of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, and former senior member of the National Security Council Staff, 2002 ~["Proliferation, Missile Defence and American Ambitions," Survival, Volume 44, Number 2, Available Online to Subscribing Institutions via Ingenta Connect Routledge, p. 87-90~] 
Those who claim that two states with reliable nuclear capabilities to devastate each other will
AND
a hill to bury the bodies of dead cities or even whole nations.

DA 3

Obama will win – majority of polls, statistical backing

American Political Science Association 9-19, 2012 "8 Of 13 Election Forecasts Predict Obama Wins 2012 Popular Vote" Sacramento Bee, Online
Several forecast models developed by prominent political scientists predict President Obama will win the popular
AND
understanding national electoral processes and the dynamics at work in US presidential elections.

Public Opposes Nuclear Energy

CNN 11 ("CNN Poll: Public says yes to nuclear energy but no to new plants," Online, 3/22/11, http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/03/22/cnn-poll-public-says-yes-to-nuclear-energy-but-no-to-new-plants/ Accessed 9/14/12 ~[TR~])
The survey indicates that 53 percent of the public opposes building more nuclear power plants
AND
S. should rely less on nuclear power for its future energy needs.

Opposition to nuclear assistance – taxpayers don’t want to be responsible, accidents

CSM 11 (Christian Science Monitor, "Nuclear power in US: public support plummets in wake of Fukushima crisis," Online, 3/22/11, http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2011/0322/Nuclear-power-in-US-public-support-plummets-in-wake-of-Fukushima-crisis Accessed 9/14/12 ~[TR~])
Most Americans said they favor kicking away nuclear-industry supports. Even though President
AND
among 104 reactors nationwide – are seeking 20-year operating permit extensions.

Obama loss causes Republican led war with Iran- Oil shocks and middle east war

Curiel 2010 (Jonathan Curiel, respected journalist, taught as Fulbright Scholar at Punjab University in Lahore, Pakistan, researched at Oxford as a Reuters Foundation Fellow, "What just might happen if Obama loses in 2012," Jonathan Curiel’s blog, google)
War in Iran: The Republicans’  ascension marks the return of chickenhawk diplomacy. Instead
AND
historically – become the world’s leading front for insurgency against the United States.

Nuclear war

Preble 2007 (Christopher Preble, director of foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute, June 26, 2007, "Bargaining with Tehran," CATO)
Many Iranian nuclear facilities have been hardened against attack, with some buried under as
AND
the United States itself are unlikely, they cannot be ruled out entirely.