National security adviser John Bolton, FBI Director Christopher Wray, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats and National Security Agency Director Gen. Paul Nakasone AP The likely Democratic candidates for President so far have distinguished themselves by espousing various Progressive domestic policies, such as taxing the wealthy, improving the provision of health care, and reforming trade policy. Few of these candidates have even addressed, let alone, laid claim to any national security issues. The ones who have addressed national security issues have done so by espousing doctrinaire pProgressive positions of decades ago.
Progressives, generally, are leery of national security issues because, historically, they have considered the military-industrial complex and foreign military entanglements pitted against their values and domestic social spending. The next Progressive President will have to reverse the previous disdain for national security and develop a Progressive national security policy.
There are two reasons why it is urgent for a Progressive agenda to include national security. First, Trump has weakened U.S. national security to such an extent, re-building it will be imperative. The U.S. does have enemies and they are coming for us. The next President cannot make pledges to live and let live and expect them to let us be. The leaders of Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea see their well-being of their countries in the demise of the U.S.
Second, countries like Syria and Afghanistan and regions like Africa and Indonesia will continue to be or become hotbeds of terrorism. Simply ignoring them or providing money to their governments will not be enough to ensure their terrorist activities do not spread to the U.S. And, failed governments like that of Venezuela, will disrupt entire regions. These problems will affront our own [Progressive] values and require some action on our part.
Attacks on our elections and financial systems will effectively preclude the domestic programs Progressives desire. Implementation of a Progressive agenda means, like it or not, the next President had better start becoming versed in national security issues.
Progressives, generally, are leery of national security issues because, historically, they have considered the military-industrial complex and foreign military entanglements pitted against their values and domestic social spending. The next Progressive President will have to reverse the previous disdain for national security and develop a Progressive national security policy.
There are two reasons why it is urgent for a Progressive agenda to include national security. First, Trump has weakened U.S. national security to such an extent, re-building it will be imperative. The U.S. does have enemies and they are coming for us. The next President cannot make pledges to live and let live and expect them to let us be. The leaders of Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea see their well-being of their countries in the demise of the U.S.
Second, countries like Syria and Afghanistan and regions like Africa and Indonesia will continue to be or become hotbeds of terrorism. Simply ignoring them or providing money to their governments will not be enough to ensure their terrorist activities do not spread to the U.S. And, failed governments like that of Venezuela, will disrupt entire regions. These problems will affront our own [Progressive] values and require some action on our part.
Attacks on our elections and financial systems will effectively preclude the domestic programs Progressives desire. Implementation of a Progressive agenda means, like it or not, the next President had better start becoming versed in national security issues.
https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/2019-ATA-SFR---SSCI.pdf
