This piece is idiotic. There is no point in these candidates making answers to speculative questions about national security since they won't even know all the facts until they are elected and have full access to all intelligence and actions undertaken by the government. We already know that McCain is a knee-jerk militarist who is still reliving his outrage at having been tortured for 6 years and then having the United States withdraw from Vietnam, making all of his suffering pointless. This is why he would be a horrible President. He is psychologically unfit for duty and would likely send many of our soldiers and civilians as well to unnecessary death. Barack Obama is blessed with a clear head on these issues. His youth is ... More »

These are reasonable questions. The problem is the authors saying McCain and Obama have closely positions about foreign policy. They apparently did not do any work to see each of these candidates position. I am surprised the New York Times published this story it is so poor.

A look of the information they are seeking is already found on the Obama website. I have not check the McCain sight.

I stopped reading at the third paragraph, where the authors describe both candidates as "cautious". A cautious politician would not have asked Sarah Palin to be vice president without vetting her. John McCain is rarely cautious, either in his actions or his speech. Article FAIL.