> i think that is right. even worse, that terrorist actually in charge of security in the capital itself. and very closely"> > i think that is right. even worse, that terrorist actually in charge of security in the capital itself. and very closely" property="og:description"> > i think that is right. even worse, that terrorist actually in charge of security in the capital itself. and very closely">
"the wall street journal" part? >> i think that is right. even worse, that terrorist actually in charge of security in the capital itself. and very closely aligned with the islamic state and islamic state and so this idea of the terrorist aren't going to be it, they are there now. let's not forget the taliban itself is a terrorist group. they are the ones who host to bin laden and the u.s. had turned them over, they refused to do that because he was they were cast on the day he part of the attack that killed nearly 3,000 americans in new york, washington, d.c., and pennsylvania. >> trace: tell us how this works. on the ground isis kate active in afghanistan. you have al qaeda coming back. we know al qaeda and the taliban are very close. what is the alliance situation there? it is a tribal nation. what happens on the ground? are you having terrorist attacks, civil war? what is the dynamic on the ground in your sense? >> unfortunately, it is all of