Kash Patel Becomes the Focus of Media Analysis They Consistently Get Wrong
How America Has Destroyed Its Democracy, Part Two: The Aristocracy of Merit
Three Congressional Missteps on Healthcare
Today’s Qualifications to Be President of the U.S.
Climate Alarmists Howl After EPA Rescinds ‘Endangerment Finding’
Ukraine's Bureaucrats Are Finishing What China Started
Rising Federal Debt: Why Strategic Planning Matters More Than Ever for High-Net-Worth Fami...
Classroom Political Activism Shifts a Teacher’s Role from Educator to Indoctrinator
As America Celebrates 250, We Must Help Iran Celebrate Another 2,500
Guatemalan Citizen Admits Using Stolen Identity to Obtain Custody of Teen Migrant
Oregon-Based Utility PacifiCorp Settles for $575M Over Six Devastating Wildfires
Armed Man Rammed Substation Near Las Vegas in Apparent Terror Plot Before Committing...
DOJ Moves to Strip U.S. Citizenship From Former North Miami Mayor Over Immigration...
DOJ Probes Three Michigan School Districts That Allegedly Teach Gender Ideology
5th Circuit Vacates Ruling That Blocked Louisiana's Mandate to Display 10 Commandments in...
Tipsheet

Sen. Lindsey Graham on Afghanistan: ‘We’ve Set the Conditions for Another 9/11’

Sen. Lindsey Graham on Afghanistan: ‘We’ve Set the Conditions for Another 9/11’
AP Photo/Susan Walsh, Pool

In an interview on Sunday, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) claimed that the disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan has set the stage for “another 9/11” attack on American soil and called for President Biden’s impeachment for his handling of the crisis.

Advertisement

In the interview on CBS’s ‘Face the Nation,’ Graham touched on how the crisis in Afghanistan is a precursor to another 9/11 terrorist attack, explained what he would have done differently, and reinforced his position on calling for Biden’s impeachment.

When asked point-blank what he would have done differently, Graham’s course of action would have been the polar opposite to Biden’s – he would have kept troops in Afghanistan and continued working with Afghans to keep terrorist groups at bay.

“I wouldn't have withdrawn. I would have kept the counterterrorism forces on the ground,” Graham said in the segment. “When we have people on the ground working with indigenous forces, that’s the best insurance policy against another 9/11.”

Looking forward, Graham’s outlook is grim. He fears another terrorist attack on American soil and impending issues in Afghanistan for presidential administrations to come as a result of our catastrophic withdrawal.

Advertisement

“President Biden said that he wanted to take this – Afghanistan – off the plate for future presidents. He’s done the exact opposite. For the next 20 years, American presidents will be dealing with this catastrophe in Afghanistan. This war has not ended. We’ve entered into a new deadly chapter. Terrorists are now in charge,” Graham claimed in the interview.

“The parade of horribles are about to unfold,” Graham continued. “We’re leaving thousands of Afghan allies behind who fought bravely with us. We’re going to leave hundreds of American citizens behind. The chance of another 9/11 just went through the roof. These drone attacks will not degrade ISIS. The number of ISIS fighters have doubled. We’ve turned our back on our allies – who’s going to help us in the future? And we’ve set the conditions for another 9/11. I’ve never been more worried about an attack on our homeland than I am right now and we did not end this war.”

As we previously reported, Graham is one lawmaker who has explicitly called for Biden’s impeachment over the crisis in Afghanistan. In the interview, Graham reiterated his position.

“I think it’s dereliction of duty to leave hundreds of Americans behind enemy lines, turn them into hostages, to abandon thousands of Afghans who fought honorably along our side, to create conditions for another 9/11 that are now through the roof,” Graham stated in the interview. “I don’t think he got bad advice and took it – I think he ignored sound advice. This is Joe Biden being Joe Biden – he’s been this way for 40 years – but now he’s the Commander-in-Chief, he’s not a Senator, he’s not the vice president. These are Commander-in-Chief decisions, I think, the best you could describe them as dereliction of duty at the highest level.”

Advertisement

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement