Search Salon

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Recently in Salon News

Who killed Betty Van Patter?
A letter from an old friend stirs up passions from one of the most disturbing, yet little-known, crimes of the New Left era. It happened exactly 25 years ago.
By David Horowitz
[12/13/99]

Revenge of the nerd
Steve Forbes' poll numbers in New Hampshire slowly rise even though the media ignores him.
By Jake Tapper
[12/11/99]

Who were those masked anarchists in Seattle?
The media has blown the story, but there's a growing fringe of activists who believe property destruction isn't "violent," and are bent on convincing the rest of us.
By L.A. Kauffman
[12/10/99]

What the National Guard is doing for New Year's Eve
If the world doesn't end at the turn of the millennium, the FBI warns that militia groups and religious nuts might try to help it along.
By Sam Stanton and Gary Delsohn
[12/10/99]

How victors split their spoils
Trent Lott was all set to funnel yet another military project to his home state of Mississippi until Arkansas Sen. Tim Hutchinson took him on.
By Suzi Parker
[12/09/99]

Complete archives for News

- - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Jessica Mathews, president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace: "Over and over again you verbally hand off questions on foreign policy to advisors you [don't have now but] would have, once elected -- something you don't do on domestic policy issues. Why is that? Do you view foreign policy as less important than other issues? Do you believe that after the Cold War a president need be less informed on these matters? How dependent should a president be on advisors on any major set of issues?"

Michael Lind, senior fellow at the New America Foundation and Washington editor of Harper's: "There's been a great deal of discussion in the past decade about the revolution in military affairs, or 'RMA.' Do you think there is an RMA? If so, would you tell us which aspects of the present military are obsolete, in terms of services and technologies. What major weapons systems or organizational systems would you phase out?"

Tarek Masoud, fellow and executive director of the Presidential Oral History Project at the Miller Center of Public Affairs: "What, if anything, would you have done in Rwanda?"

Jorge Dominguez, director of the Center for International Studies at Harvard University: "When a coup takes place in Pakistan, do you praise the coup leader as improving prospects for stability and for having been a good U.S. ally (as you told reporter Andy Hiller), or do you criticize the coup for breaking the prospects for constitutional consolidation?" And a second question, inspired by last week's World Trade Organization talks in Seattle: "What should be the role of labor and environmental standards in trade negotiations and agreements?"

J. Peter Scoblic, editor of Arms Control Today: "In your Nov. 19 foreign-policy address you said that the key to combating proliferation is 'to constrict the supply of nuclear materials and the means to deliver them -- by making this a priority with Russia and China.' Yet you oppose the test-ban treaty and support national missile defense policies that China and Russia see as absolute barriers to further progress in arms control. How do you propose to gain the cooperation of the Russians and the Chinese in future non-proliferation efforts?"

Charles Lane, editor at large, the New Republic: "How would your policy toward China be different from your father's?"

Mark Strauss, senior editor at Foreign Policy: "You have expressed amazement that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein is still in power. You have said that if you found out he was developing weapons of mass destruction, you'd take them out. That's easily said, but not so easily done. How would your Persian Gulf policy differ from that of Bill Clinton? What specific steps would you take to remove Saddam from power and to prevent him from reconstituting his weapons of mass destruction?"

Thomas L. Friedman, foreign affairs columnist at the New York Times: "People say, Bush, it doesn't matter what he knows. He'll have smart advisors ... And what if your two smartest advisors disagree?"

Michael O'Hanlon, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution: "Gov. Bush, how serious is your commitment to providing adequate resources for the U.S. armed forces in light of your pledge to spend all of the surplus -- and then some -- on a tax cut? And along the same lines, how would you prevent further cuts to a foreign-aid and diplomacy budget that most experts consider already underfunded?"
salon.com | Dec. 13, 1999

- - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - -

  Get a printer-friendly version

  E-mail a friend about this article

  Backflip this article to find it again

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Search Salon