Monday, June 26, 2006

The Iraqi Amnesty Plan.

Oh where shall I begin? This is definitely a sticky situation. Where is one to stand on this. As I stated in a previous post, if this does work and the country is able to come together in unity to stand self sufficient, well then it is a good thing in the long run. That is for the perspective of the country itself. Now looking at it from the other angle, a prior service American, well this chaps my hide for this means those that have, or if thee is not evidence, could have killed/maimed my brethren in arms, well that just reeks of a skunks arse.

Headline 1:
Insurgent amnesty proposed in Iraq

BAGHDAD - Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki called Sunday for amnesty for some insurgents as part of a national reconciliation plan and said lawmakers should set a timeline for Iraqi forces to take control of security.

Al-Maliki did not mention a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S.-led forces.

Senate Democrats in Washington blasted Republicans after a New York Times
report that the Bush administration plans to sharply reduce U.S. troops by the end of 2007. According to the report, as many as 7,000 of the 127,000 U.S. troops in Iraq would leave by September, two months before the 2006 midterm elections.

Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., said the Times
report raised questions about why Senate Republicans voted last week against Democratic proposals to begin pulling U.S. troops out of Iraq this year. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., and other GOP leaders called such proposals "cutting and running."

Here we see the Senate Demolibs throwing a hissy fit because there is plan to bring some troops home. Well they just can not be pleased with any good news now can they. Before they whined about them not being home, now they whine because some are coming home. Here is a lesson for you losers. The Iraqi forces are doing more and more each day in terms of security and military operations. In fact, if you remember the Zakwad letter confiscated after he was blown to hell and back, it stated that the effectiveness of the Iraqi forces was hampering the terrorists work in invoking harm to the US troops. Also if you had a brain, the more the Iraqis take responsibility and control over their own country, part by part, then this means more of the troops will be coming home. One last thing on this subject... it is only 7,000, that means there will still be 120,000 left. Just another sign that Iraq IS improving and not declining as popular defeatists would wish us to believe.

Sen. Barbie girl, you being a civilian, I understand that you fail to comprehend the way the military works. The Republican side of the isle stated very clearly they were not going to allow civilian intervention in dictating the outcome. Why the hell would a General listen to the civilian that wishes him to lose, on how to fight a battle? Now, we conservatives think this: Do not leave until the job is done. This is a timetable dictated by the progress in Iraq. The sooner they can become self sufficient and stable enough, we will only have a contingent based at the Embassy. This is normal in all countries.

Headline 2:
Senators wary of 'amnesty' in Iraq plan

Iraqi PM's reconciliation strategy draws praise, raises concerns
(CNN) -- U.S. senators on Sunday called

Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's national reconciliation plan a

positive step but expressed concerns about its "amnesty" provision.

Al-Maliki's plan, announced earlier in the day, would extend an

olive branch to some Iraqi militants and grant the phased release of

2,500 detainees from Iraqi prisons.

Part of the strategy spells
out "amnesty for all prisoners who were not involved in any terrorist activity, war crimes or crimes against humanity."

This could leave the door open to freeing someone who might have
killed an American service member in battle. And that possibility was deemed troubling by U.S. lawmakers asked about amnesty in Sunday talk-show interviews.

"No, I don't think granting amnesty to
people who killed Americans is acceptable, and I don't believe that's what the Iraqi government intends to do," said Sen. Mitch McConnell, a
Kentucky Republican, on ABC Sunday.

Sen. John Warner, a Virginia
Republican, said on "Fox News Sunday" that he thinks the plan is a "very positive step forward" by the fledgling government.

Either way you look at this, no one knows exactly what will become of this proposal. As it stands now, there are no certainties stated as to how or what is going to happen except that some prisoners are going to be released. It is known that both governments are in contact with each other and that we are being consulted on this matter in the best way to progress. How everything will turn out, well roll the dice is all I can say. Should we support their decision, Yes by all means we ought to back them up. The question is, what about those proven to have been aggressors against the coalition forces in which resulted deaths. Well depending how this turns out, and our response to this, we may be able to pursue those people in the diplomatic arena to bring them to justice. I will still stand by my earlier statements. If this brings unity and closure to Iraq so we may withdraw our men, then we ought to support them. Now does this diminish the deaths of those fallen, I do not believe this.

The reason is simple for me. We support this process and then go after them in the diplomatic arena. Also chances are, we will have killed many of those already responsible for many of the deaths anyway. One other thing to look at, these men and woman that have given their lives done this so that Iraq could be free. So that it could build itself up. Now is this not what Iraq is doing now? So if we continue to help this government, and in some ways be assured that they will continue to be supportive of us, then this is honoring those that have fallen. I do think there needs to be a clause that states those proven to have caused harm to the coalition forces need to be brought to justice. Nonetheless, this proposal is in its infancy, and much will be done to this yet. Only time will tell.

The real interesting part of this is the different reactions from the two sides of the political spectrum here. Some are very supportive, while others are just having school girl hissy fits about it. We just need to bide our time and not rush to harsh judgment and look at the long run. The Iraqis know that we are opposed to letting the terrorist go free, and in the long they know that this is not conducive to their own wellbeing either, so being optimistic, I think it is fair to say there will be some provisions to deal with this, but I still have this nagging feeling that we are about to get a visit from a large handed proctologist.


Tags: , , , , , , .


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home