Here's a message from Joe Duran, giving us some perspective on the proposal to provide amnesty to ex-insurgents who may have killed Americans, but not Iraqis.
"Thunderstruck, bewildered, and pissed off."
That was pretty much the words you could use to describe the reaction of my fellow Marines and I as we discussed the latest news this morning.
The news that the freely elected Iraqi government is considering giving amnesty to those who have killed our servicemen and women hit us like a kick in the gut. The fact that they are even considering amnesty dishonors those brave young men and women who have sacrificed their lives to help them secure their freedom and endangers those still standing by emboldening the enemy to strike Americans. That hit a nerve, and hit it hard. You might say we were thunderstruck today, and that is not an easy thing to do to Marines. We are caught in the middle with no help from the Iraqi government we helped establish and protect.
After hearing the news this morning, some Gut Reactions:
"It's a B.S. move"
"It's a bad deal"
"What a bunch of As*&*$%*es"
"Give 'em an inch, they take a mile."
...and these are just for starters. A group that is relatively unmoved by their own government's decisions got fired up by a supposed ally on this Global War on Terror... Global unless you happen to kill an American in Iraq. Then you are a free man.
A majority of Iraqis believe it is justified to kill Americans. This amnesty would make it legal.
With friends like these, who needs enemies?
As the day progressed, the gut reactions developed into serious questions and nightmare scenarios.
One example: "So, we find these guys who made the IED that blew up my buddy. We take them prisoner and hold them. They are granted amnesty and are free to fight again as an insurgent in the streets, or infiltrate the Iraqi Security Forces and detonate a bomb in the very building that held them, killing more Americans and Iraqis."
Are they trying to piss us off? Or worse?
There can be no defense of this amnesty. To defend this would be to admit that this Global War on Terror is neither global, nor a war. To defend the Iraqis for suggesting this is to place their freedom to release terrorist over the welfare of our troops. And don't tell me that mission accomplishment has anything to do with releasing convicted terrorists. Isn't the reason we are told we are there is to fight those responsible for killing Americans on 9/11? What sense does it make, then, to release those very combatants for committing the very same act of murder on their soil? We disregarded the sovereignty of one regime unconnected to the events of 9/11 to avenge those deaths. Why are we stopping now?
So they can "reconcile"?
The word "reconcile" has been used by our leaders recently to put this outrage into a rosy and unrealistic light.
If we let them out to "reconcile," fine. Just get us out first. Then they "reconcile" each other to death. Leave us out of it, we did our part.
We want peace in Iraq. We want a standing government there. We want an ally in the Middle East. Let us say for a moment that granting amnesty would be a huge step towards those goals.
The men and women who fought bravely and died in Iraq should of course by remembered and honored. They were American soldiers wearing the flag on their uniforms. You simply do not get to attack American soldiers without repercussions. But If forgiving their murderers increases the chance of peace in Iraq, than certainly their deaths are not in vain. If the purpose of the U.S. Military in Iraq is currently to create and sustain peace in the region, then relinguishing the memories of the fallen signifies the final sacrifice for the cause.
Posted by: Myles Aion at June 20, 2006 09:14 AMI would have to agree with Joe in one respect, in that its not entirely bright to let those that may harm you and have done so in the past and show the propensity to do farther harm have the opportunity to do the same in the futher. So with that we should not support amnesty of those who kill us. But let me just finish with this, Its their Government and we are there to help but not make policy so if they wanna make the mistake of letting insurgents run wild then what else can we do. You can lead a horse to freedom and let him go but if he doesnt wanna change then how can he change! I am out!
Food for thought: they want to give amnesty to these type of guys.
Look at what they did. Imagine what they'll do next.
_____________________________
BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- The bodies of two U.S. soldiers found in Iraq Monday night were mutilated and booby-trapped, military sources said Tuesday.
Pfc. Kristian Menchaca and Pfc. Thomas L. Tucker went missing after a Friday attack on a traffic control checkpoint in Yusufiya, 12 miles (20 km) south of Baghdad.
The sources said the two men had suffered severe trauma.
The bodies also had been desecrated, and a visual identification was impossible -- part of the reason DNA testing was being conducted to verify their identities, the sources said.
A tip from Iraqi civilians led officials to the bodies, military sources told CNN. The discovery was made about 7:30 p.m. Monday.
Not only were the bodies booby-trapped, but improvised explosives devices also lined the road leading to the victims, an apparent effort to complicate recovery efforts and target recovery teams, the sources said.
It took troops 12 hours to clear the area of IEDs. One of the bombs exploded, but there were no injuries.
The bodies were found in the Yusufiya area, Maj. Gen. William Caldwell said, adding he believes the soldiers were mortally wounded, then moved.
It was unclear whether he meant the wounds were suffered in the initial attack on a checkpoint or afterward. "Where we found them was not based on their own movements," he said.
The soldiers' families have been notified of the developments, he said.
The bodies were transferred to a coalition base and were to be taken to the United States for DNA testing.
Caldwell said he had not heard whether a note was placed on the bodies.
A high-ranking official with the Iraqi defense ministry had earlier offered a conflicting account, telling CNN Tuesday that the soldiers' bodies were found on Saturday in Jurf al-Sakhar town about 80 km (50 miles) south of Baghdad.
Group claims killings
Meanwhile, a claim posted on a Web site Tuesday said the soldiers were "slaughtered" in accordance with God's will.
"We announce the good news to our Islamic nation that we executed God's will and slaughtered the two crusader animals we had in captivity," says the claim, reportedly from the Mujahedeen Shura Council, a group linked to al Qaeda. "And God has given our Emir, Abu Hamza al-Muhajer, the good fortune of carrying out the legitimate court's command in person."
CNN cannot independently verify the claim, but it was posted on a Web site which frequently has carried such messages from insurgent groups.
Asked whether he gives credibility to a Monday claim by the same group that it had abducted the soldiers, Caldwell responded, "Absolutely not."
Earlier, military spokesman Maj. William Wilhoite told CNN he did not know whether the bodies showed signs of torture. "I haven't heard anything through our official channels," he said.
The U.S. military said Spc. David J. Babineau, 25, of Springfield, Massachusetts, was killed in the Friday attack, after which Menchaca and Tucker went missing.
Asked to provide more information about the attack, Caldwell said the military would provide details -- possibly as soon as Tuesday night -- after making sure the soldiers' families were fully apprised about the incident. (Watch for the witnesses' description of the suspected abduction -- 2:54)
Menchaca's aunt told CNN the family had been notified of his death.
Menchaca's uncle, Mario Vasquez, said family members were distraught, and were waiting to receive the body before making any arrangements. Earlier, some family members heard of the possible discovery through the media, before being notified by the military, Vasquez said.
"I wish they'd punish the people that do these kinds of things right away, instead of taking forever and spending millions of dollars," Vasquez said. "I think, you capture them, make them pay for what they did. Don't think that it's just two more soldiers. Don't negotiate anything. They [the killers] didn't. They didn't negotiate it with my nephew. They didn't negotiate it with Tucker."
Another of Menchaca's uncles, Ken MacKenzie, lashed out at the government Tuesday on NBC's "Today Show," saying it didn't do enough to bring the men home safe, The Associated Press reported. (Full story)
A force of more than 8,000 Iraqi and U.S. troops has been searching for the two soldiers. Searchers initially found a body that was thought to be one of the service members', Caldwell said, but turned out not to be.
Caldwell said troops used unmanned aerial vehicles, helicopters, boats and dive teams in the search. (Watch how search uses land, air, water resources -- 2:59)
One coalition soldier was killed and 8 were wounded during the search operations, he said. Two "anti-Iraqi elements" were killed and another 78 suspected insurgents have been detained, he added.
The three soldiers involved in Friday's attack were assigned to the 1st Battalion, 502nd Infantry Regiment, 2nd Brigade, 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) out of Fort Campbell, Kentucky, the military said.
Posted by: BJG at June 20, 2006 01:55 PMI guess it is finally "full circle"
last night while Larry King was conducting "the first interview with Angelinao Jolie after Shilo's birth" two American Soldiers were being tortured and killed in Iraq.
Amnesty?
Do what you think is right.
I'll do mine.
Respectfully finished with the dialogue.
too much of it.
evolo
Posted by: evolo at June 20, 2006 09:06 PMI agree wholeheartedly with Joe's thoughts. The rule of law is an important institution; one that forms the foundation of our American democracy. By providing these killers with amnesty for perpetrating the most heinous of crimes, murder, would violate one of the purported tenets of our mission in Iraq; namely the establishment of a representational democracy based on the rule of law. This would be an even greater insult to our troops. It would provide a severe body blow to the morale of those currently serving, and would dishonor those who have given the ultimate sacrifice to achieve the freedom of the Iraqi people.
While the fledgling nation of Iraq is a sovereign nation, and providing amnesty is well within their leaders’ prerogative, our nation has also has the right to end its financial support of this fledgling nation. The “power of the purse” is strong power indeed. Unfortunately, I don’t believe that the gutless wonders that currently lead our Congress or inhabit the Office of the President, would be willing to take this step. But then again, what would you expect from the Republicans that refuse to provide the necessary supplies to troops in the field and slashing funding for prosthetics research and counseling services for veterans?
Regarding Joe Duran's comments on the minimum wage:
How true those words ring for those of us who are struggling in this mad economy. Where will those former soldiers go for work, health care, and housing? Civilians know that the situation gets worse daily with higher prices at the market and at the pump. Fix the minimum wage situation, and you fix the nation. The troops will be brought home after the next election. Then what?
Let them have their amnesty--just not until every last american serviceman and woman is back on our home soil. Otherwise, like Joe says, this just makes our guys even more vulnerable to attacks.
Posted by: lulu at June 21, 2006 03:08 PMOn the topic of amnesty for those Iraqis:
They are definitely sending the wrong message with this one. Basically they are saying it is going to be open season on American service members. This is unacceptable behavior from a government we are trying to help build.
About damn time someone says it like it should be said. Semper fi and keep it up!!!!!!!
Posted by: Stephen Roche at June 21, 2006 04:45 PM