Follow us on social

google cta
When Lindsey Graham's pro-life persona meets Gaza

When Lindsey Graham's pro-life persona meets Gaza

The South Carolina senator has a curious scorched earth approach — at least when it comes to certain children.

Analysis | Middle East
google cta
google cta

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) has an A+ rating from the anti-abortion group Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America. Last year, the Republican introduced a 15-week federal abortion ban in the Senate. Graham has said of his pro-life efforts, “America is at her best when she’s standing up for the least among us.”

According to the health ministry in Hamas-controlled Gaza, more than 10,000 people have now been killed in Israel’s continued strikes.

More than 4,000 of them are said to be children — many of them, no doubt, very young, infants even.

The Washington Post reported of a man in Gaza, whose “three daughters — Malak, 11, Yasmin, 6, and Nour, 3 — and his only son, 10-year-old Malik, were lost beneath the rubble.” There are countless similar stories of the death and despair reining down on Palestine’s youngest. UNICEF spokesperson James Elder said that “Gaza has become a graveyard for children.”

Surely these children, many of whom can’t comprehend or understand the politics of why their world is collapsing all around them, count as “the least among us.”

Not if you’re Lindsey Graham.

“Level the place!” the senator said of Gaza in a Fox News interview in mid-October. He appeared to say it was okay to attack the entire population. Graham justified his apparent preference for total war by adding, “We’re in a religious war here. I am with Israel. Do whatever you have to do to defend yourself.”

That was no one-off. “One thing I want to say for sure,” Graham declared on CNN’s State of the Union on Sunday, “is Israel’s not engaged in genocide.”

Graham then proceeded to make justifications that were at least somewhere in the orbit of genocide.

“Another thing we need to deal with is the whitewashing of the status of people in Gaza,” Graham said. “I’m sure there are plenty of people who would love to be free of Hamas, but the most radicalized people on the planet live in the Gaza Strip.”

“They’ve been taught since birth to kill people and hate the Jews,” the senator continued, seeming to think that even the youngest in Gaza shared a collective guilt that he appears to believe deserves collective punishment.

When asked by the host, “But no pause? No humanitarian pause?” Graham basically said that he was for aid if Israel could offer it, yet added, “After World War II did anybody ask us these questions?”

He was about to assure viewers that he had no qualms about mass bombing civilians.

“You’ve got to realize the United States dropped two atomic bombs on cities in Japan to end the war,” Graham said. “I think this is total war between Israel and Hamas.”

It’s worth noting here that Hamas thinks this too, a total war, that by definition includes civilians, as terrorists demonstrated in Israel in October.

This is not the first time Graham has made the World War II comparison. Earlier this month, the senator told CNN, “If somebody asked us after World War II ‘is there a limit to what you would do to make sure Japan and Germany don’t conquer the world?’ Is there any limit to what Israel should do to the people who are trying to slaughter the Jews?"

"The answer is no,” Graham said, responding to his own question, and seeming to give an enthusiastic green light for Israel to kill as many civilians as it sees fit.

Earlier in the interview, CNN’s Abby Phillip asked Graham, “Is there a threshold for you, and do you think there should be one for the United States government in which the U.S. would say let's hold off for a second in terms of civilian casualties?”

“No,” Graham replied with zero hesitation.

Close to the day Graham gave this interview, international NGO Defense for Children International Palestine estimated that 40 percent of the casualties in Gaza at the time were children.

Those are many, many innocent lives lost — certainly the least among us or at least among the Palestinians and Israelis. It’s one thing to acknowledge that there will be unfortunate casualties in any war, it’s quite another to dismiss them or worse — lust for them.

I am pro-life, and my desire to protect it extends well beyond birth, to all children, everywhere, and logically, even beyond youth. It would seem not only absurd but cruel to support the former position but not the latter.

Lindsey Graham may be anti-abortion. But he is not pro-life.


google cta
Analysis | Middle East
nuclear weapons
Top image credit: rawf8 via shutterstock.com

What will happen when there are no guardrails on nuclear weapons?

Global Crises

The New START Treaty — the last arms control agreement between the U.S. and Russia — is set to expire next week, unless President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin make a last minute decision to renew it. Letting the treaty expire would increase the risk of nuclear conflict and open the door to an accelerated nuclear arms race. A coalition of arms control and disarmament groups is pushing Congress and the president to pledge to continue to observe the New START limits on deployed, strategic nuclear weapons by the US and Russia.

New START matters. The treaty, which entered into force on February 5, 2011 after a successful effort by the Obama administration to win over enough Republican senators to achieve the required two-thirds majority to ratify the deal, capped deployed warheads to 1,550 for each side, and established verification procedures to ensure that both sides abided by the pact. New START was far from perfect, but it did put much needed guardrails on nuclear development that reduced the prospect of an all-out arms race.

keep readingShow less
Trump Hegseth Rubio
Top image credit: President Donald Trump, joined by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Secretary of the Navy John Phelan, announces plans for a “Golden Fleet” of new U.S. Navy battleships, Monday, December 22, 2025, at the Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

Trump's realist defense strategy with interventionist asterisks

Washington Politics

The Trump administration has released its National Defense Strategy, a document that in many ways marks a sharp break from the interventionist orthodoxies of the past 35 years, but possesses clear militaristic impulses in its own right.

Rhetorically quite compatible with realism and restraint, the report envisages a more focused U.S. grand strategy, shedding force posture dominance in all major theaters for a more concentrated role in the Western Hemisphere and Indo-Pacific. At the same time however, it retains a rather status quo Republican view of the Middle East, painting Iran as an intransigent aggressor and Israel as a model ally. Its muscular approach to the Western Hemisphere also may lend itself to the very interventionism that the report ostensibly opposes.

keep readingShow less
Alternative vs. legacy media
Top photo credit: Gemini AI

Ding dong the legacy media and its slavish war reporting is dead

Media

In a major development that must be frustrating to an establishment trying to sell their policies to an increasingly skeptical public, the rising popularity of independent media has made it impossible to create broad consensus for corporate-compliant narratives, and to casually denigrate, or even censor, those who disagree.

It’s been a long road.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.