Editor's note: Each Wednesday, The State News editorial board will address a key issue of the presidential campaign. For a complete schedule of topics, please see the bottom of this editorial. All editorials until Oct. 25 do not reflect a formal endorsement of any candidate.
The Bush and Kerry plans for fighting the war on terror revolve around some similar principles. Both want to spread democracy. Both want a safer America.
For security against terrorism, Bush and Kerry both focus on strengthening the U.S. military. Both focus on better border control. And both want to deal strategically with weapons of mass destruction.
Both candidates have taken the Sept. 11 commission's suggestions to reform intelligence seriously. No matter whom you elect, a new intelligence czar will exist, and the CIA and FBI likely will be reorganized and strengthened.
As far as weapons of mass destruction go, Bush calls for establishing a missile-defense system and promises to force the weapons out of the wrong hands. Kerry wants to actively deplete major stockpiles of nuclear weapons and guard stockpiles in former Soviet countries. Kerry's plan specifically targets Iran and North Korea as problem areas.
Real differences come into the picture on the issues of how the military will be strengthened, the future of the USA Patriot Act and how democracy will be fostered in the Middle East.
The Bush plan champions the use of the Patriot Act, removing American troops from Cold War defensive posts into current trouble areas. It would spend $80 million to propagandize democracy among people living in terrorist-recruiting areas.
Kerry takes a negative stance on the Patriot Act, proposing to secure America from terrorists without "intruding upon personal liberties." He plans to expand active forces by 40,000 troops, increase special forces and refocus parts of the National Guard as a homeland security task force. Kerry plans to redress human rights violations to ensure America's message of democracy is communicated.
Parts of either candidate's plan are unique to that candidate only. Kerry plans to step up security in chemical plants throughout the United States - Bush has no such plan. And Kerry has no equivalent to Bush's WMD-targeting, missile-defense system.
If you're a single-issue voter looking only at terrorism, you might have a tough time deciding which plan is better. Both Kerry and Bush have meticulously detailed what they plan to do. Undecided voters should log on to either georgewbush.com or johnkerry.com and give the details the thought they deserve.
No presidential candidate in a right mind would go into a post-Sept. 11 election without a terrorism plan, and neither candidate has.
Both plans are exact, detailed and thorough. The only question voters have left to ask is which man has the better strategy. Whatever choice you come to, your decision will lie in the details.
