Is the mission’s cost proportionate to the objective we seek.
Source: AlGore2000.com “Briefing Room”: Armed Force Journal speech
May 27, 2000
From day one: Transform to 21st century military strategy
Al Gore will use the Quadrennial Defense Review in the first few months of the new Administration to set a course for military strategy: Defining a Military Strategy for the Future. - America must maintain its nuclear strength.
- We must
be ready to counter and repel cross-border invasions by conventional forces.
- We also must ensure we can defend our cyberspace, and protect the nation against such asymmetrical threats as chemical and biological weapons, [as well as] combating
terrorism.
Develop New Operational Concepts & Organizations for a 21st Century Military Strategy.- Gore will modernize & transform the armed forces into a versatile “information age” force that fully exploits America’s strategic advantages
in people and technology.
Transform the Forces for a Forward Engagement Strategy. - With his long experience in defense matters, Al Gore will set defense priorities from Day One, providing clear strategic and policy guidance.
Source: AlGore2000.com “Briefing Room”
May 27, 2000
Forward Engagement: address problems before crises arise
Al Gore today outlined a New Security Agenda based upon the concept of Forward Engagement that addresses international problems before they become crises.Gore explained that America has entered a new Global Age, where we are not only faced
with “classic” security threats, such as regional instability, ethnic rivalries, nuclear weapons, but also “new” security threats. These new challenges, including terrorism, drug trafficking, weapons proliferation, environmental disruption and disease,
no longer respect national borders.
“At the dawn of the 21st century, we need a foreign policy that addresses the classic security threats - and understands the new ones as well,” Gore said. “We need to pursue a policy of ‘Forward Engagement’ -
addressing problems early in their development before they become crises; addressing them as close to the source of the problem as possible; and having the forces and resources to deal with those threats as soon after their emergence as possible.”
Source: Press Release on speech in Boston
Apr 30, 2000
Sensible increases in defense spending
Background: The US government spends about 16% of its budget on defense, down from about 50% in the early 1960s. The number of active-duty troops has dropped by about one third since the end of the Cold War. Gore’s views::
Wants unspecified “sensible” increase in defense spending. Has helped negotiate arms reduction and nuclear stability arrangements. As senator, voted for SDI and B-2s. Supported military force in Persian Gulf War and the nuclear test ban treaty.
Source: NyTimes.com Politics Library
Feb 3, 2000
Nation-building is part of world leadership
Q: Do you agree with the Governor’s views on nation-building?GORE: I don’t think we agree on that. I would certainly also be judicious in evaluating any potential use of American troops overseas. But the world is changing so rapidly. Like it or not,
the US is now the natural leader of the world. All these other countries are looking to us. Now, just because we cannot be involved everywhere and shouldn’t be doesn’t mean that we should shy away from going in anywhere. But there is a difference [with
Bush] here. This idea of nation building is kind of a pejorative phrase, but think about the great conflict of the past century, World War II. And acting upon the lesson of WWI, in the aftermath of WWII, we laid down the Marshall Plan; we got intimately
involved in building NATO and other structures there. We still have lots of troops in Europe. And what did we do in the late 40’s and 50’s and 60’s? We were nation building.
BUSH: One of the lessons between WWI and WWII is we let our military atrophy.
Source: Presidential Debate at Wake Forest University
Oct 11, 2000
Al Gore on Military Personnel
US military is best in history of the world
I want to make it clear: Our military is the strongest, best-trained, best-equipped, best-led fighting force in the world and in the history of the world. Nobody should have any doubt about that, least of all our adversaries or potential adversaries. I
will do whatever is necessary in order to make sure our offices stay the strongest in the world. In fact, in my 10-year budget proposal, I have set aside more than twice as much for this purpose as Gov. Bush has in his proposal.
Source: Presidential debate, Boston MA
Oct 3, 2000
Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is unfair & hasn’t worked
Q: Do you support the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy on gays in the military? A: The ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy has not worked. Furthermore, I believe that, as a matter of basic fairness, the policy should be changed. It is unacceptable
that patriotic men and women who serve their nation with distinction are not only discharged, but suffer persecution and even violence. They should be allowed to serve their country without discrimination.
Source: Associated Press
Sep 6, 2000
No soldier should have to rely on food stamps
I don’t pretend that my own military experience matches in any way what others here have been through. I didn’t do the most, or run the gravest danger. But I was proud to wear my country’s uniform. And my own experiences gave me strong beliefs about
America’s obligation to keep our national defenses strong. I will make sure that no members of our armed forces ever have to rely on food stamps. Our armed forces should be commemorated on stamps. They shouldn’t have to use them to buy groceries.
Source: Kevin Sack, NY Times
Aug 23, 2000
Personnel: better pay; housing; family services; healthcare
People are the military’s most important investment. To ensure the best continue to serve, Al Gore is committed to:- Reward Men & Women in Uniform with Competitive Pay.Gore supported the 4.8% pay increase [in 1999]. Gore supports another
3.7% across-the-board pay increase this year.
- Reform the Military Housing System. Ensure that all military members and families live in adequate, affordable housing. Gore will put the private sector to work building, owning and managing housing
for the military.
- Improve Family Services. Gore would upgrade childcare facilities, improve educational opportunities for children, and invest in continuing education and employment services for military spouses.
- Invest in Health Care.
Gore would fully fund the military health system and improve the TRICARE managed health program by cutting waiting time and expanding access to and reimbursement of civilian healthcare providers.
- Get Our Soldiers Off Food Stamps Now.
Source: AlGore2000.com “Briefing Room”: Armed Force Journal speech
May 27, 2000
$1.2 billion in new education money for veterans
Al Gore courted veterans yesterday with $1.2 billion in new education money for them, their families, and their survivors. “Those who fight for our security should never have to fight for the education they need to succeed,” Gore said at a VFW post.
Gore’s plan would increase monthly payments to veterans and families by 25%, from $536 to $670. Gore said that would be the largest increase in their education funding since the program began 16 years ago as part of the GI Bill.
Benefits also would be indexed to inflation and veterans could use the money for other types of learning during school breaks. Gore said no new money would be needed to pay for the increased benefits since they would be covered
by the money available from the Veterans Administration. “We don’t give our veterans anything,” Gore concluded. “You have earned what you get with blood, sweat, and tears.”
Source: Associated Press in Boston Globe, p. A36
May 11, 2000
Appointees must ENFORCE allowing gays; not AGREE with policy
Gore stated last week that he would require appointments to the Joint Chiefs of Staff to support a policy of allowing gays to serve openly in the military. Four days ago, Gore backed down from the position, saying he would not apply a “litmus test.”
Today, Gore suggested that he would apply a test of whether an appointee would follow orders. He said he would not demand that an appointee believe in allowing gays to serve openly, but he would ask for a commitment that he or she enforce that policy.
Describing a hypothetical interview with a potential appointee, Gore said that a person would not be disqualified if he or she was uncomfortable with the policy. But he said that after asking the person to explain the reservations,
he would “then ask, ‘Give me the reassurance that of course you’re going to do your best to implement it.’ And of course that goes without saying, because officers do that in our military.”
Source: New York Times, p. A20
Jan 11, 2000
Al Gore on Missile Defense
Full-scale “Star Wars” is unrealistic & too expensive
I favor an effort to develop a limited missile defense system and not a massive “star wars” system because our country will probably face a new threat later in this decade from a small arsenal of relatively unsophisticated ICBMs in the hands of a rogue
state. [Bush’s proposed] much larger, space-based star wars approach is far more difficult to design and build, far more expensive to purchase, less likely to work, and is calculated to destroy existing arms control arrangements with the Russians.
Source: Transcript of Gore interview
Jul 10, 2000
Nuclear unilateralism will hinder arms control
Gore criticized Bush’s support for a national missile defense system along with a possible one-sided reduction in American nuclear warheads. “An approach that combines serious unilateral reductions with an attempt to build a massive defensive system will
create instability and thus undermine our security,” Gore said. “Nuclear unilateralism will hinder, rather than help, arms control.” Again and again, Gore assailed the notion of one-sided arms reductions, a prospect that Bush had raised [last week].
Gore emphasized that reductions should be pursued within negotiations and the framework of existing arms control treaties. Gore said that the Clinton administration was already negotiating for bilateral cuts in nuclear arms and was considering a
limited missile defense, but said the kind of approach recommended by Bush was misguided. “Reductions alone do not guarantee stability,” Gore said. “If you’re not careful, you could have a reduction of missiles and a more dangerous world.”
Source: Katharine Q. Seelye, New York Times
May 28, 2000
Build less powerful SDI; to keep ABM treaty & START III
We believe that it is essential to [build a missile defense system] in a way that does not destroy the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. The ABM Treaty is the cornerstone of strategic stability in our relationship with Russia. It prevents the Russians or
ourselves from deploying defenses powerful enough-assuming anyone can solve the engineering problems-to neutralize the deterrent of either side. The Russians have made clear that their response to a powerful US defensive system would be to halt arms
control and increase the number of their offensive nuclear weapons.The ABM Treaty is a prerequisite for the deeper reductions in nuclear arms that we are seeking in START III, which is under discussion with the Russians as we speak. [Further missile
reductions] are possible only through careful negotiation. [SDI defending against rogue states] can co-exist with the ABM Treaty, if that treaty is adjusted. It can be compatible with further arms reductions.
Source: Speech at West Point Military Academy
May 27, 2000
Focus SDI on rogue states
We need to continue on a course of deeper reductions [in nuclear weapons]. But it is critical that we have the right approach in doing so. We are urging the Russians to tighten cooperation with us to protect nuclear weapons materials and
stop the transfer of ballistic missile and nuclear weapons technology to rogue states. It is these states that represent the emerging threat to our country.The administration has been working on the technology for a national missile defense system
designed to protect all 50 states from a limited attack at the hands of a rogue state. We believe, however, that it is essential to do this in a way that does not destroy the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. The national missile defense system that the
president will review this summer is intended to meet threats from proliferant states like North Korea while preserving strategic stability.
Source: Speech at West Point Military Academy
May 27, 2000
Test Ban Treaty is the tide of history; ratify it
Outraged at the Senate for voting down a treaty banning nuclear weapons testing worldwide, Vice President Gore takes to the airwaves tomorrow to declare “there’s no more important challenge than stopping the spread of nuclear weapons.” “This vote goes
against the tide of history and the advice of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from the Clinton, Bush, Reagan, and Carter administrations,” Gore says in the ad. Gore says he wants a mandate from the voters to send the treaty back to the Senate to be ratified.
Source: Boston Globe, p. A5
Oct 15, 1999
