Lindsey Graham: Permanent U.S. Presence In Afghanistan Would Be 'Enormously Beneficial'
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
There was, with really no notable exception, an absence of discussion of the Afghanistan war during the course of the 2010 campaign. But that may have been more a product of the electoral landscape (congressional races often don't lend themselves to foreign policy debates) and strategic timelines (the start date for withdrawal begins in July 2011) than anything else. And, indeed, during an interview Sunday morning, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) provided some indication that Republicans would push U.S. permanency in Afghanistan in the years ahead, insisting that it would be "enormously beneficial" to show that type of force "in perpetuity."
"I think it would be enormously beneficial to the region as well as Afghanistan," Graham said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "We have had air bases all over the world and a couple of air bases in Afghanistan would allow the Afghan security forces an edge against the Taliban in perpetuity. It would be a signal to Pakistan that the Taliban are never going to come back. In Afghanistan they could change their behavior. It would be a signal to the whole region that Afghanistan is going to be a different place. "And if the Afghan people want this relationship, they are going to have to earn it.
Kavkaz Center: Robert Gates: 'We're not ever leaving' Afghanistan
AWIP: Poll: 63 Percent of Americans Oppose Afghan War
Yahoo: Senator proposes permanent US bases in Afghanistan