what do yall think about the amnesty offered by Iraq Prime Minister Al-Malaki. I feel it is a huge step towards peace in Iraq and really hope itll work. Im all for it except in the cases of certain groups who target civilians specifically
Can you post a link to a news article or something? I'm unable to catch the news very often and have yet to hear about this
EDIT : I'd do it, but its 4:15 AM and well, I'm just lazy, so I guess time has nothing to do with it.
EDIT : I'd do it, but its 4:15 AM and well, I'm just lazy, so I guess time has nothing to do with it.
Last edited by TehSeraphim (2006-06-27 01:11:21)
although i was witness to that whole amnesty thing before fallujah and hundreds of fallujahns turned in their weapons. problem was most of the weapons that were turned in were non-operational or reeeeeeally shitty quality. they kept the good weapons
Seems like a good idea to me. We can either grant them amnesty now and try to work out our differences, or continue to lose more American soldiers. It's only going to continue to get worse, so why not stop it before it does?
"The goodwill gesture, part of the prime minister's twenty-four-point program, aims to bring about national reconciliation and lure disaffected Sunnis into the political fold. But some U.S. politicians decry any attempt by Baghdad to make amends with insurgents who have American blood on their hands"
I can understand US being disaffected by the gesture, because it effectively grants death row pardons to insurgents who've killed US troops, but what is the alternative? Unless we kill all of them AND their ideology, which would be impossible, then the only alternative we have is to not grant them amnesty and keep fighting. We'd just lose more troops, which would make us even farther from wanting to grant them amnesty. It's a vicious cycle better ended sooner than later, but that's just my opinion
"The goodwill gesture, part of the prime minister's twenty-four-point program, aims to bring about national reconciliation and lure disaffected Sunnis into the political fold. But some U.S. politicians decry any attempt by Baghdad to make amends with insurgents who have American blood on their hands"
I can understand US being disaffected by the gesture, because it effectively grants death row pardons to insurgents who've killed US troops, but what is the alternative? Unless we kill all of them AND their ideology, which would be impossible, then the only alternative we have is to not grant them amnesty and keep fighting. We'd just lose more troops, which would make us even farther from wanting to grant them amnesty. It's a vicious cycle better ended sooner than later, but that's just my opinion
They have tried the stick, so lets see if the carrot will work, anything that stops the killing has to be a good thing
+1 carrots
I don't see what good an amnesty will do to influence religious idealogues/extremists. It would seem like a lose-lose situation from their perspective - 'You mean I can give up my guns AND get to compromise everything I stand for...brilliant!'.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2006-06-27 05:19:56)
As much as it pains me..... I'm gonna have to agree with Poe.CameronPoe wrote:
I don't see what good an amnesty will do to influence religious idealogues/extremists. It would seem like a lose-lose situation from their perspective - 'You mean I can give up my guns AND get to compromise everything I stand for...brilliant!'.
They aren't going to give up to be given amnesty, when they really don't care if they die. How do you stop people who are truly not afraid to die?
Either they win or we do. Kill or be killed. Strength is the only thing that gets people into shape over thurr.
Might makes right, live by the sword, etc...
the amnesty is for insurgents who haven't committed terrorist actions........ that being said i have to belive that the extremests who are killing civilians aren't going to stop, how-ever i can see the amnesty being the "weapon" the coilition needs to destroy the cause needed to rally more "troops".