Questions for the debate

FYI for everyone. John McCain has recanted his offer not to campaign and postpone the debate tonight. In other words, GAME ON! Tonight's debate is going to focus on foreign policy and national security. Will they discuss some of the big issues that never get discussed in the foreign policy debates.

Here are some questions that me and my colleagues at the Federation of American Scientists came up with earlier this year...

The Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty would ban all nuclear explosions for military or civilian purposes. The United States signed the treaty in 1996, but the Senate rejected ratification in 1999. Would you make it a priority of your administration to ratify the treaty?

The United States currently has nuclear-armed missiles deployed on high alert, much as it did during the Cold War. Will you make it a priority of your administration to work with foreign leaders to take all nuclear weapons off alert?

The Bush administration has been accused of undermining the integrity of government scientific findings to suit political agendas. Whether you believe this to be the case or not, what will you do to ensure that political appointees do not manipulate scientific findings or their dissemination for political purposes?

There is now ample evidence of billions of dollars in wasteful spending and fraud at the Defense Department, often through unscrupulous or sloppy contractor practices. What specifically will you do to control such waste?

Congress annually waives the legal requirement that the Defense Department balance its books and provide an accounting of defense spending. This is the only federal agency not required to do so. Will you prioritize ending the practice of waiving this obligation and increase transparency of defense spending?

The United States has reduced its nuclear weapons arsenal since the Cold War but still plans to retain thousands of these weapons indefinitely and is not pursuing the total elimination of nuclear weapons worldwide. Are you committed to total nuclear disarmament, and what goals will your administration set for engaging the other nuclear-weapon states to reduce the number and role of nuclear weapons?

The Bush administration has proposed resuming industrial-scale production of new nuclear weapons under the Reliable Replacement Warhead Program. Will you continue this program?

The United States is ill-prepared for any large public health emergency. What specifically would your administration do to prepare the country for naturally occurring public health emergencies and deliberate biological threats?

The United States, Russia, and China have all tested space weapons designed to shoot down satellites. What specifically will you do to ensure the protection of space assets and prevent the development and deployment of antisatellite weapons?

More broadly, what would you do to prevent an escalation of military competition between the United States and China?

Categories

More like this

Since I recently wrote about nuclear disarmament, I thought a story from this week's issue of Nature would be especially relevant. In a news piece and accompanying editorial, Nature discusses the ongoing question of how the US is going to maintain its nuclear arsenal, considering its voluntary…
We've not said anything about the North Korean nuclear issue before but we are doing so now, joining with Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR) in expressing our concern over the spread of nuclear weapons and the apparent failure of the Bush administration to address it effectively. PSR was…
Japanese artists' depiction of the horrors at Hiroshima.Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum On August 6, 1945 the United States dropped "Little Boy," the first of only two nuclear bombs ever used in warfare, on the Japanese civilians at Hiroshima. In an instant flash of light an estimated 140,000…
...the USA has not gotten all of its highly-enriched uranium back.  As reported in a special report in the Chicago Tribune, the USA had a program in the '50's and 60's called "Atoms for Peace."  Initially, we supplied low-grade uranium fuel to countries that pledged to not develop nuclear weapons…

Do you think it's realistic and possible to pursue total elimination of nuclear weapons worldwide? I would think that an absolute disarmament would put our country in danger, or at least at a powerful disadvantage both politically and militarily, to other countries who would either refuse to give up all of their nuclear weapons or who would seek to make new ones.

I would think that an absolute disarmament would put our country in danger, or at least at a powerful disadvantage both politically and militarily, to other countries who would either refuse to give up all of their nuclear weapons or who would seek to make new ones.

quote : I would think that an absolute disarmament would put our country in danger, or at least at a powerful disadvantage both politically and militarily

how can you think like this. its impossible

I don't know, I think disarmament would set an example. Also, if we'd quit taking sides and just start minding our own business, then it really wouldn't be an issue. Let's make trade, not war.
Dr. Oz