Posted on 07/03/2006 1:56:35 PM PDT by raj bhatia
We had two political objectives in going into Iraq: deposing Saddam Hussein and replacing his regime with a democratic government unthreatening to the region and strategically friendly to the United States. The first objective proved far more easy to achieve than anticipated. The second has proved far more difficult than anticipated
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
If they didn't kill Americans then it is the Iraqi Government's decision.
The world is just upside down. Law-abiders have to obey the law, criminals are pandered to and get amnesty --- WHO SAID "CRIME DOES NOT PAY" ?? -- he was not either a Mexican or a Terrorits.
Our objective in any war is not revenge but success. Confederate soldiers who swore allegiance to the United States were pardoned after the Civil War, even those who had killed Union soldiers. We gave amnesty to legions of Japanese and Germans who'd killed thousands of Americans in World War II.
It would not be us granting amnesty this time around but Iraq. While it is well within their sovereign rights to do so it might be considered as a little premature (not to mention discourteous) to do so while the objects of that amnesty are still actively involved in killing our people.
Krauthammer suggests that such a step might help reconcile the Sunnis to a place in the current government instead of permanent, violent opposition. I'm not convinced he's on solid ground there. The very nature of this sort of amnesty allows its beneficiaries to pledge anything they like and continue the covert killing anyway. That isn't amnesty at all, it's giving our enemies an insuperable advantage.
If it were our country then we would get to make the call.
It ain't and we don't.
We will neutralize the insurgents in their own land: Iran. That will calm Iraq down enough for Iraqis to their to get their nation in better (but not perfect) order.
Our efforts in Iraq were never intended to be about perfection. Iraq is a strategic base of operations from which to finish the War on Terror. Iran/Syria are next, and the various closet anti-American, ethnic/religious/Euro identity fantasy mongerers won't change that plan.
In the real world we will never be able to tell who planted a bomb and fired a gun and who didn't. This is the same as any other war. the issue is getting them to surrender.
There's no crime in a local resistance to foriegn forces, any of us would do the same.
"We will neutralize the insurgents in their own land: Iran."
The worst trouble-makers--the Sunni terrorists--are coming over from countries like Jordan and Saudi Arabian, not Iran.
"That will calm Iraq down enough for Iraqis to their to get their nation in better (but not perfect) order."
There are plenty of arguments to be made in favor of war against Iran, but I really doubt doing so would stabilize Iraq.
Didn't a similar thing happen after WW2? Not every German soldier was a war criminal. There does need to be some sort of program to get those on the margin back in to the fold. It's going to be a messy process and not many people will be in full agreement but I think all successful post war transitions have some component of this type of thing.
I was dead set against any type of amnesty until I started to look into previous wars. Now I'm more flexible on this subjet. All Al Queada members should be treated as the SS were in WW2.
While the general says Iran is fueling Iraq's Shiite insurgency, he also says members of the Sunni insurgency - made up largely of former members of the Saddam Hussein regime - are increasing efforts to make peace with the new Iraqi government.
"The Sunni insurgency has been, since the elections, reaching out and looking for ways to reevaluate their options and to come out of the resistance against occupation with honor," noted General Casey. "And we and the Iraqi government have several different strands of contact going on. And there are opportunities in that regard that we just haven't had before."
Amnesty in Iraq? The Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds have been at eachother's throats for centuries. Do we really expect to see them settle down to live together under democracy?
Amnesty in America? From what I've heard about La Raca (?)
the illegal Latinos expect to take over this country. So we, too, may be in an armed dispute for the first time since the Civil War here. (Incidentally, for alot of U.S. citizens, including Freeperes, the Civil War is still going on, on the Internet anyway.)
US forces should stay in Iraq for the next 50+ years.
Iraq has already been democratized faster than Japan and Germany. We have achieved greater political objectives, faster and at lesser cost of life than practically any other military operation in US history, save perhaps Haiti or Panama.
Bopth Japan and Germany were under US miltary rule (or Allied rule) for over 6 years. Both of them took over 6 years before a constitution and democratically elected governments were etsablished.
Iraq has established a Constitutional government faster than the USA. (it took 12 years AFTER the War of Independence to create a Constitution because of the religious and political conflict between the different states).
Nobody today suggests we are imperialistic rulers over Japan or Germany because that is just utter nonsense, the same is true for Iraq.
Radical Muslims must never be allowed to gain power bases within nation states ever again, because they will use that power to wage war and sabotage against non-Muslim states. It is thus essential that we maintain forces in strategic areas such as Iraq, Afghanistan, Kuwait, Turkey, Pakistan...
Why does nobody demand we pull our troops out of Pakistan or Turkey or Kuwait? How about Germany? Japan? etc etc...
It is only the rabid anti-Americans who demand we surrender Iraq to the terrorists and allow the fledgling democracy to fail before it has fully established its military force.
All liberty is won and maintained at the point of a gun. All of it...that has always been true.
No free markets for him
The way our civil war came to an end. Parole for the troops, pardon for confederate leaders with few exceptions. That did not, of course, end the animosity. Ten years of reconstruction ended with the "Bourbon restoration" and eventually injustice for the southern blacks who were supposed to be raised to citizenship.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.