The November issue's lead article: Top Five Threats to National Security in the Coming Decade.
Reading that article suggests, in comparison with the uninspired question arenas for tonight's presidential debate on foreign policy, that National Defense has laid out the basis of a very appropriate question for the debate.
The National Defense Industrial Association has identified five critical national security threats for the coming debts.
- Biological weapons;
- Climate Change; and
- Trans-national Crime
Please explain your perspective on these, highlighting arenas for the American public where your precepts and approaches differ from your opponent.
Here is the tentative (likely) list of question arenas for tonight's debate:
Here is what I commented when first seeing the list
- 4 of the 6 are on the Middle East. Guess we know, clearly, what is "the world". Of BRIC, only China? Nothing on Europe, Japan, Oceania, Africa, South America...
- Nothing here on how the world community works together (or not) on critical issues -- like how does the global community cooperate (or not...) on addressing climate change. Or, for example, what is the role of the UN, international law, and otherwise as related to the United States.
- What about questioning about the varying tools of power? Military, economic, cultural, diplomatic...
- What about trade?
Now, as per this post, I would certainly add a "5":
Why not use National Defense's identified top five threats to national security as the basis for a debate question or for a portion of the debate?
PS: I spent a very interesting day, last week, at the Navy Energy Forum, hosted by NDIA and the U.S. Navy. I plan on writing several pieces from / based on / derived from the discussions yesterday. Hat tip to the NDIA National Defense staffer, who highlighted the "top five threats" article to me when I discussed climate change with him. Kudos to National Defense for an interesting article (which merits reading, discussion and debate) that provides the basis for a meaningful presidential debate item.
PSPS: A recent post re National Defense magazine, Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence ... NDIA edition ...
PSPSPS: There are many who have noted the crickets of climate science in the debates. Some of the excellent discussions of this include:
Follow A. Siegel on Twitter: www.twitter.com/A_Siegel