New Iraqi Government Proposes Amnesty (by BigBadJohnny)

From the washington bureau:

This:

(06-21) 04:00 PDT Washington -- On the day after the tortured bodies of two U.S. soldiers were found in Iraq, the Senate voted overwhelmingly to condemn the idea that Iraq's new government might ever grant amnesty to insurgents who have killed or wounded American military personnel.

Iraqis New Government, which is clearly in touch with the situation in Iraq and clearly has the best interests of the Iraqi people at heart,has proposed a plan that would include amnesty for terrorists.
Some Washington bureaucrats, who have the best interests of this or that party at heart, have rejected it.
It is interesting to see the new Iraqi government doing something, in earnest, in their own behalf, that neither came from Washington, nor is in-step with Washington thinking.
Now, we'll see how far our support goes.
For your edification, I have made some divisions of the waring factions in Iraq.

We have terrorists. Terrorists, by definition, are waring factions opposing the coalition forces, most of whom have traveled to Iraq, or Baghdad from elsewhere. They are trained militia, involved in a daily ongoing war.
We have also, the Insurgency. The Insurgency, you recall, having been loosely defined as "a civilian, with a rifle, in a pickup truck."
We might further divide these local citizens into two sub-groups:
group one, those who currently are enforcing violence, against the coalition, or who have in the past taken violent actions, against the coalition, and group two, those who aggressively, philosophically support violent actions, but have taken no action in that direction. Young people, or older persons cheering on the sidelines.
A third group in Iraq would include those who Identify themselves as Sheits, Sunnis, Kurds.., who are waring with one another, not particularly, for our purposes, targeting coalition forces.
Having suggested those divisions (consider the chaos in some Iraqi cities) it goes without saying, the terrorists probably deserve no amnesty. Likely, they will have to leave, or be arrested, and charged. And if, having left, they are subsequently captured, they should likely be tried.
My gut feeling on this matter is that the new Iraqi government might feel that some insurgents, protecting as I have written, their homes, and families, might be reasonably awarded amnesty. They can disarm, rest, begin to accept the new order that bush has imposed.
The sideline cheerers, in group two, above, have been targeted by Allied forces. They were the ones allegedly massacred by marines, they were amoung those whose homes and neighborhoods have been bombed, and invaded. Some of this group may still be in the Guantanamo Bay Detention enter. If they havn't been charged, perhaps they should be released, free to go, returned to the status of good Iraqi citizens.

As to the civil war, amnesty isn't an issue.

Saddam Hussein is being tried as a result of that ongoing civil war. But, that's a separate issue.

From the News:
The reconciliation plan announced by Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has outraged many Americans, including senior congressional Democrats who believe the plan involves offering an amnesty to insurgents responsible for killing US troops.
This is despite the fact that it is far from clear that Mr Maliki's plan, announced on Sunday, would offer such an amnesty to insurgents or, as some have claimed, distinguish between those who had killed US "occupying forces" and those who had killed Iraqi troops and police.

From Forbes:
Lawmakers are still trying to ascertain the details of the reconciliation plan that Nouri al-Maliki released on Sunday. It came out after a week of intense debate in Washington over the deployment of U.S. forces and political posturing on the war months before November's elections.