comsc US Politics | AMERICAblog News: Make no mistake: Iraqi government does NOT support the U.S. troops
Join Email List | About us | AMERICAblog Gay
Elections | Economic Crisis | Jobs | TSA | Limbaugh | Fun Stuff

Make no mistake: Iraqi government does NOT support the U.S. troops

| Reddit | Tumblr | Digg | FARK

It's a fraud for the GOP to claim that they support the troops when they support Iraqi governments that take the lives of our troops for granted.

Yesterday, the Washington Post reported that Iraq's new government was planning to grant amnesty to terrorists who had killed U.S. soldiers.

Republican Senators defended this policy. The Iraqi official who made this statement had to quit, but stood by his words:

The Maliki aide who resigned, Adnan Ali al-Kadhimi, stood by his account of amnesty considerations, reported Thursday by The Washington Post. Kadhimi said Maliki had indicated the same position less directly in public. "The prime minister himself has said that he is ready to give amnesty to the so-called resistance, provided they have not been involved in killing Iraqis," Kadhimi said Thursday.
This should not be a surprise. The Iraqis have been on record since last November saying they didn't have a problem with killing U.S. soldiers. And, the Bush administration condoned their policy.

Last November, Iraqi officials held a meeting in Egypt where they agreed that terrorism did not include attacks on U.S. soldiers.:
"Though resistance is a legitimate right for all people, terrorism does not represent resistance. Therefore, we condemn terrorism and acts of violence, killing and kidnapping targeting Iraqi citizens and humanitarian, civil, government institutions, national resources and houses of worships," the document said.

The attempt to define terrorism omitted any reference to attacks against U.S. or Iraqi forces. Delegates from across the political and religious spectrum said the omission was intentional. They spoke anonymously, saying they feared retribution.
By "resistance," they meant resistance against the occupying force -- that meant the U.S. In Iraq, attacks on U.S. soldiers is not considered terrorism. That was okay with the Bush administration then. Our Secretary of State basically said "whatever:"
QUESTION: The Iraqi factions, who don't always get along, have been meeting with the Arab League and others as they prepare for next month's elections. A statement they did agree on says that they recognize the legitimate right of Iraqi citizens to resist the occupation forces. How do you explain that to the parent or the spouse of an American serviceman or woman on the ground in Iraq, getting shot at every day, that the people they're fighting for, the people they're trying to protect to bring these elections and this democracy about, say that the people who are shooting at them have a legitimate right to do so?

SECRETARY RICE: Well, that's not how I read the statement, John. I do think there were many, many voices at this conference -- and by the way, the Iraqi Government was there, but so were many, many people who were not -- and the purpose is to try to give all Iraqis a sense of stake in their future. But the line about resistance was very quickly followed by, but of course we condemn terrorism and of course violence should not be sanctioned. I think what they were trying to do was to get a sense of political inclusion while recognizing that violence and terrorism should not be a part of resistance. After all, do Iraqis really want to -- any Iraqi, sitting around that table, want to suggest that killing an innocent Iraqi child standing at a bus stop is legitimate? Or that killing Iraqi soldiers who are lining up at recruitment centers is legitimate? Or even that multinational forces -- who by the way are there under a UN mandate -- are somehow legitimate targets?

I don't think that that was what was being communicated. But I would just remind people that this was a really broad range of voices, and the Iraqis who have governed themselves by violence and coercion are now trying to do it by compromise and politics.
Bush and Rice are so desperate for any sign of progress in Iraq, that they continue to let the Iraqi leadership endanger the lives of U.S. soldiers.

That's beyond outrageous. Meanwhile, Bush and the Republicans on the Hill pound their chests and act tough. They claim to support the troops. Instead, the GOP has propped up Iraqi governments that take their lives for granted. Disgusting.

blog comments powered by Disqus