Is this paragraph sufficient in terms of grammar and style (170 words)

This is part of the series of arguments I used to justify that defense training is useless without security awareness. Hence, ROTC training should also focus on theoretical aspects of national and international security as it does on the practical aspects. I didn't include the rest of the paragraphs to keep my post short.
_____________________________________________________

"National Security Awareness breeds a democratic security culture that Defense Preparedness alone cannot."

This may sound baseless, because a person who specializes in the theoretical aspects of security and politics may not be able to do anything in an actual defense scenario. On the other hand, a person with almost no training in the forms of security threats may be, surprisingly, prepared to defend his country in times of an invasion. Even a person who may seem to have an unfit stature may prove himself to be the fittest in the course of an armed conflict.

This is true when the relationship under consideration is “direct". That is, “those who know, act”. Or, those who have “good security awareness” are “prepared and or compelled to defend X”. But since security awareness may be purely theoretical and the purpose of the ROTC training is practical, the relationship between the two may be far-fetched. But, if the relationship is indirect that is, “those who know, support”, then there is a sensible relationship between Defense preparedness and Security awareness that conforms to one of Clausewitz’s postulations.