Dr. Sebastian Gorka, national security editor for Breitbart News, during a recent radio appearance said the GOP needs to figure out ways and take action to fill the vacuum created by Obama’s national security lapses rather than just criticizing the president for them.
Speaking on Secure Freedom Radio with Frank Gaffney, Dr. Gorka said he finds it “quite staggering” that the Republican Party, which he “associated with a strong stance on national security with pro-military attitude” during the Cold War, did not have their “own suggestions” on how to deal with Obama’s national security blunders.
“It’s easy to identify the Obama’s administration approach,” mentioned Dr. Gorka, “the way they are undermining the national interests, but you have to come up with your own suggestions.”
The national security editor pointed out that “it’s one thing to criticize the events of Benghazi, for example, or lack of strategy with regard to al Qaeda or other groups but what are we on the right who call ourselves conservatives actually doing to fill that vacuum?”
Conservatives need to formulate a “strategic response” to that void.
The U.S. Constitution could serve as a metric to gauge national security threats, according to Dr. Gorka.
For example, he said, if a group is doing things to support “Sharia law that are by definition against the requirements of this great nation’s constitution” then that group would be designated a threat and dealt with accordingly.
Dr. Gorka added that conservatives need to work on expanding the small group of lawmakers in Congress who have shown leadership on national security issues. According to Dr. Gorka, that may require looking beyond establishment conservatives.
“There are the Libertarians who I think are finally starting to realize that isolationism doesn’t work,” he said.
Dr. Gorka indicated that the ideology linking the terrorist groups that pose a threat to the United States is global jihad and suggested that attacking the ideology by delegitimizing it is just as important as a military campaign against it.
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.