Congress should support budgets and programs ensuring America maintains the most lethal military on the planet, prepared to defend its national security interests. President Teddy Roosevelt described this policy as, “Speak softly and carry a big stick.”

As someone who was deployed to a region harboring terrorists, I understand and support maintaining bases and troops in and near global “hot spots.” President Biden's failure to leave a contingent of about 1,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan was a mistake, as it would have helped advise and assist the Afghan Government and Military to prevent the Taliban from retaking the country.

Having also deployed on an aircraft carrier, I support building and maintaining aircraft carriers, nuclear submarines, and other deterrents. This deters hostile actions against the U.S. and her allies, making countries like China less likely to become overtly belligerent.

Support for Supplemental Aid Packages

I supported the Israel, Ukraine, and Indo-Pacific Supplemental Aid packages because I am a Reagan Republican who understands that peace is best achieved through strength. These investments in the fight against our shared adversaries help decrease the chances that America would be called upon to send soldiers to fight in the Middle East, Europe, or Asia.

A Personal Connection

I am the brother of a Marine Sniper who earned a Bronze Star in Iraq. Knowing him and the culture of today’s American warrior class, few would blink if called to war. However, Congress and the President owe it to our military personnel and their families to place them in harm’s way only when certain conditions are met. The cost of war is infinite, borne by our military and their families—not the politicians.

The Powell Doctrine

When contemplating military action, the President and Congress must apply the Powell Doctrine, named after General Colin Powell, which states that eight questions must all be answered affirmatively before taking action:

1. Is a vital national security interest threatened?

2. Do we have a clear, attainable objective?

3. Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed?

4. Have all other non-violent policy means been fully exhausted?

5. Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement?

6. Have the consequences of our actions been fully considered?

7. Is the action supported by the American people?

8. Do we have genuine broad international support?

As the world stage has become increasingly alert to potential conflicts, I will never agree to send our men and women in uniform abroad until all eight questions are answered affirmatively.