Sen. Lindsey Graham: Any Attack on Iran Must Be Full-Scale

For indispensable reporting on the coronavirus crisis, the election, and more, subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter.


Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) laid it on thick at AIPAC’s annual gala banquet on Monday. Referring to the pro-Israel lobby, Graham declared, “The Congress has your back.” (What other lobby would he say that to?) He declared that Israel is “our best friend in the world.” (Does that tick off Canadians?) But Graham went especially far when he endorsed the idea of a military strike against Iran.

The former Navy judge advocate told the thousands of AIPACers that when it comes to dealing with Iran and the possibility it will develop nuclear weapons, “all options must be on the table” and “you know exactly what I’m talking about.” He then made the obligatory comments, saying that war is a “terrible thing” and that he hoped it could be avoided. But added Graham, a member of the Senate armed services committee, “sometimes it is better to go to war than to allow the Holocaust to develop a second time.” And he told the crowd that “time is not on our side” and that this AIPAC conference could be the last of the lobby’s annual get-togethers before Iran possesses nuclear weapons. Military action ought to be taken against Iran, he said, before the country acquires a nuclear bomb.

But Graham noted that any such military strike should not be limited to targeting the country’s nuclear program:

If military force is ever employed, it should be done in a decisive fashion. The Iran government’s ability to wage conventional war against its neighbors and our troops in the region should not exist. They should not have one plane that can fly or one ship that can float.

Graham was talking about a wide-scale attack on Iran—and one that might have take place within the next year. Destroying Iran’s military—which has about 130,000 regular soldiers and 14 air bases throughought the country—would entail a major assault, and it could trigger Iranian attacks  elsewhere in the region. It would be a rather good-sized war. But nothing less will suffice, Graham insisted. And the crowd applauded.

******

The above quote can be found at the 2:20 mark in the video below:

 

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

We Recommend

Latest