1. Resolved: United Nations peacekeepers should have the power to engage in offensive operations. JANUARY 10TH PUBLIC FORUM DEBATE RESOLUTION

2. DEFINING THE TOPIC The United Nations United Nations Peacekeepers Should have the power engage in offensive operations

3. History of the United Nations World War I League of Nations World War II The United Nations

4. BRAINSTORMING THE PRO SIDE

5. PRO ARGUMENTS Current system not working - genocide, ethnic conflict, terrorism, wars, etc. Current UN Peacekeepers are too weak. Example: Rwanda (Movie: Hotel Rwanda) Stronger United Nations needed UN Rapid Deployment is best UN Rapid Deployment will prevent conflicts Expanded Peackeeping Solves Genocide Moral Obligation to Solve Genocide Multilateral solution rather than just always depending on the United States

6. BRAINSTORMING THE CON SIDE

7. CON ARGUMENTS Offensive Peacekeeping is not Peacekeeping. Too much power for the United Nations United Nations is not accountable Expanded Peacekeeping increases conflict and chances of war Expanded Peacekeeping hurts UN Credibility and other programs Countries will no longer participate in the United Nations There is no budget in the United Nations for offensive peacekeeping United Nations is too political for effective offensive operations United Nations peacekeepers are not the most trained and effective soldiers

8. Con Arguments Nation States will undermine UN offensive operations Threat of UN army being used for political purposes by the United Nations UN army makes countries’ armies weaker