NOTE: This download expired May 31, 2018. See message below.
Summary: The Six-Day War is undoubtedly the most prominent application used in Stoa Lincoln-Douglas debate this year. It shows up nearly every round. This OPP brief addresses this.
Released: Filed Under: Expired
About "Six-day War"
The Six-Day War is undoubtedly the most prominent application used in Stoa Lincoln-Douglas debate this year. It shows up nearly every round. Debaters use this application (usually on the affirmative) as an example of preemptive warfare. With the application pool in this resolution being so limited (as there are very few instances of true preemptive warfare), this application has quickly become the go-to example for new and experienced debaters alike. Before we address responses to this example, we must understand the situation fully.
In 1967, Egypt and Jordan signed a mutual defense pact enforcing unity against their common enemy Israel. For years, Arab states had insisted on denying Israel’s sovereignty—even Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser at one point vowed to destroy Israel’s livelihood. This defense pact created a military coalition that outnumbered the Israeli army, making it seemingly possible for the Arab countries to finally mobilize and attack. At the end of spring in 1967, Arab forces began moving near the edge of the Israeli border. On June 5, 1967, Israel preemptively launched fighter planes and caught the Arab militaries unaware, allowing the planes to almost completely destroy Egypt, Jordan, and Syria’s air forces in a single day.
The argument here, as is most commonly run on the affirmative, is that Israel was able to detect an imminent enemy attack and use a preemptive strike to win the war quickly and with minimal damage (hence the war being six days long).
This is, admittedly, an extremely persuasive argument. It is an instance of supposed preemptive warfare being executed to near perfection. Now all the affirmative has to do is pretend like a majority of preemptive warfare is as clean and effective as Israel’s was.
As persuasive as this example is, it has a few crucial shortcomings.
- Download the document with the button above. Study this release and get to know it well. File and print as necessary to prepare for your upcoming competition.
- This download is exclusively for Monument Members participating in Season 19. Any use outside this membership is a violation of U.S. Copyright Law and violators will be prosecuted.
- As always, double check all claims, warrants, hyperlinks and the current news in case any changes have occurred that will affect your competition.
- Do you have questions about this download? Tap in your comment at the bottom of the page. The author, the site owner, or another member will most likely reply.
Permission & Usage
Click Here for complete information on permissions. All membership content is proprietary intellectual content, so please respect its copyright. Simply put, if you are not a Monument Member, you may not use it or share its content. If one partner of a debate team is a member and the other is not, the one who is a Monument Member must be the controller of the logins, downloads and incorporation of the Monument Membership material. Sharing logins is strictly prohibited.
Would you like to join?
Downloads like these don't grow on trees. They take hard work from experts. But we make it easy and affordable with a membership, and we'd love for you to join us! Fill out the fields below to be included in all that Season 19 has to offer:
Click here for more information.
Micah Chapman is a homeschooler from Keller, TX, who is going into his 7th year of competition. He has participated in all 3 forms of debate, and many various speech events. He has had 1st and 2nd place finishes at various tournaments, and placed 3rd in Parli at NITOC 2016. This last NITOC he received 1st place in Cold Reading.