This story is well-penned, well-sourced, and totally symptomatic of what's wrong with so much written about National Security. In a word, for McMahon (at least in this article) the NS Debate begins somewhere near Tel Aviv and extends to Kabul. It totally leaves out the big picture: the globalist neo-lib approach of the 90s and the neo-conism of the 00s are both over--what should take their place? That's the Debate. Obama and McCain aren't going to answer that question the same way.

This article takes the candidates' campaign talk and turns it into policy. Obama saying he would talk to the bad guys is meaningless except that MCain can use it to brand him naive. McCain adopts a hardass stance because many conservatives like that. Either will likely be guided by other more practical forces when elected. So this article is superficial, but even handed. Not much there.

To qoute this article "some foreign policy anylsis see little difference". Some is a qualifer in number that is not defined but usually means 'a few'. That qualifier limits my opinion of this article.

The point made here is that the three candidates struggle to make distinctions between their policies, yet the policy differences are remarkable minor. The documentation is excellent.

Backup on all significant statements. However, a bit premature in view of the early state of the campaign.

This article was well sourced, clearly written and to me, very informative. However, I have heard for the past year that Senator McCain is supposedly very Knowledgeable about national security. What degrees in expertise does he (like Rudy J) give aside from war service (many, many years ago) to establish this expertise as a truth? Does he advise NSA, CIA FBI as an expert witness. Did he provide expertise to the 911 Commission. If someone says he/she graduated from college, that can be checked. Who granted McCain a degree in mastery of national security? For that matter Obama or Hillary.

Well sourced analysis of the public statements, facts and data behind McCain's and Obama's positions on Iraq and other national security areas, e.g. approaches to dealing with nuclear proliferation. Important source document for voters to understand this issue so many place the highest importance in selecting a President, how each would address critical aspects of national security.