Repugs That Support Amnesty For GI Killers

First here is the amendment's wording:

SEC. 1209. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON THE GRANTING OF AMNESTY TO PERSONS KNOWN TO HAVE KILLED MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES IN IRAQ.

(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:

(1) The Armed Forces of the United States and coalition military forces are serving heroically in Iraq to provide all the people of Iraq a better future.

(2) The Armed Forces of the United States and coalition military forces have served bravely in Iraq since the beginning of military operations in March of 2003.

(3) More than 2,500 members of the Armed Forces of the United States and members of coalition military forces have been killed and more than 18,000 injured in operations to bring peace and stability to all the people of Iraq.

(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--

(1) the Government of Iraq should not grant amnesty to persons known to have attacked, killed, or wounded members of the Armed Forces of the United States; and

(2) the President should immediately notify the Government of Iraq that the Government of the United States strongly opposes granting amnesty to persons who have attacked members of the Armed Forces of the United States.

Now the roll call. Note the Senators who voted Nay. It's like a roll call of the craziest of the Repuke Crazies.



A big hat tip to AmericaBlog. Here is the post on there. http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/06/19-republican-senators-think.html

hAS HE LOST HIS DAMN MIND???????

bringing back flashbacks and messing him up real bad....this guy is not stable...he is desperate for power...

Heck even Frist, Kay Bailey, Coleman, Hatch, Roberts, Santorum and a couple of other KoolAid drinkers had enough sense to vote for the resolution. It's particularly newsworthy today after the execution of the US POWs.

1) American military personnel are occupying Iraq in contravention of international law-- their presence is a war crime; 2) Iraqis have not only the right, but the duty to defend themselves against foreign invasion and occupation; 3) the preamble suggests that U.S. personnel are "serving heroically" and that they have "served bravely," but I don't see any heroism in service to a crime against humanity. There is no heroism in serving fascism and neocolonialism. Personal bravery, yes, and in spades no doubt, but there is no honor in the cause they serve. Finally, 4) Iraq is a sovereign nation-- it is not the U.S. congress's business to meddle in their decisions about wartime amnesty-- unless the U.S. seeks a puppet regime under its control. But of course, we've disavowed that over and over, haven't we?

I don't think that is the reason why the 19 Senators voted Nay.

When you put it that way, I'd have voted Nay also! :)

They were attacking those who invaded their country and murdered their kinsmen. Of course they should get amnesty.

WTF? Wake me when it's over.

government business if they are truly a free nation. And if the shoe were on the other foot, what would we be saying? This is war, damn it!! That's what the Bushbots keep telling us when our soldiers massacre innocents. Just think, if we were not in Iraq, they couldn't attack our soldiers.

and they should have the right to run their own country but the point of the post was the hypocrisy of the Nay voters. Do you really think they voted Nay for the same reasons you state?

You ARE right that the Iraqis had their country occupied and blown all to hell. I've said it before that if someone did that here, it'd be Red Dawn all over again. We'd fight for our country especially if the other side was torturing our countrymen, arresting and holding innocent people as POWs for years in places like in Gitmo and Abu Ghraib, hiring mercs that kill innocent civilians for fun and videotape it, Haditha, etc.

Two American soldiers were captured and perhaps tortured before they died/were killed. When I heard that I was angry but my anger was misdirected. It should be directed towards an administration that condones torture, suspension of basic civil rights and trashing of the Constitution in the name of greed.

Dialogue is a wonderful thing. Thanks Again.

while they are still on the ground in Iraq!!!

Not just NO, but HELL NO!!!!

people thinking?!?!

I feel pretty confident in saying that they don't have a loved one in the military in Iraq!

If the Iraqi government wants to give amnesty to people after all of our troops are out of there, then that will be their business, but you NEVER say you will give amnesty to anyone who kills American troops while they are actually still there on the ground! Truly unbelievable!

and we're the occupying force. I'd do my best to fight invaders in my country if it ever happened here. I'd also welcome anyone that wanted to help in the fight. Yes two American troops were killed yesterday. I'm angry about it and you're angry about it as we all should be. I still think the anger should be directed towards the administration that sent them into this illegal war and then mishandled it to the point where we and all of our troops are in more danger than ever before.

in harms way on the ground in Iraq, you do not support a country giving amnesty to anyone who wants to kill them while they are still on the ground over there. That's horrible.

I'm just as against this war as you are...believe me. I had to send my husband over there to risk his life for this bullshit, but I can't believe that anyone would say that is ok to kill our troops on the ground over there. That is exactly the message if you say to people that if they kill American troops they will receive amnesty.

It is understandable after a "war" (or whatever you want to call this stupid cluster fuck) that to end it and try to bring everyone to the table for a clean start that you would offer amnesty at that point, but you do not say to people that you are giving them a license to kill your troops that you sent there while they are still trying to survive and do the "mission" that you sent them there to do. Most of the guys and girls are just trying to survive and get back home to their loved ones and their own country, people, and government are saying we don't really care about you.

I am completely outraged!

On edit:

As far as who the anger regarding the deaths of the two soldiers should be aimed at, it lies with both this administration and the people that actually tortured and killed them. The enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend. These are the same people that killed Tom Fox, the peace activist and missionary, who was there to help the people of Iraq. Why the hell did they kill him? He wasn't an occupying force. The * administration are one side of evil and these people are the other. The rest of us are stuck somewhere in the middle. These 2 young men, 23 & 25, were probably just typical guys and they were brutally tortured and killed. We have no idea what got them into the service and over there or how they felt about the "war." I wonder if they would have become members of Iraq War Veterans group that speaks out against the war? I guess we'll never know now. While we should absolutely hold * and his minions responsible, we should also hold the people that brutally tortured and murdered them responsible as well.