The amnesty for terrorists problem

Are Iraqi insurgents who blend into civilian populations to target United States military personnel 1.) soldiers in a war or are they 2.) terrorists?

That is meant as a rhetorical question.

Will the GOP take a side on the amnesty issue for Iraqis that have killed U.S. troops, or do they want to cover their cut-and-run like retreat?

That one can be answered.

The Hartford Courant:

WASHINGTON -- U.S. Rep. John B. Larson's proposal has the comfortable feel of a plan everyone can rally around - put Congress on the record in opposition to Iraqi amnesty for insurgents who have killed, wounded, kidnapped or attacked Americans.

But the 1st District Connecticut Democrat has garnered virtually no Republican support, and his resolution is languishing in the House.

U.S. Rep. Christopher Shays, R-4th District, and others say that while they certainly want insurgents and terrorists who killed Americans brought to justice, Iraq should make its own judgments about amnesty.

"This resolution would be a big mistake," Shays said.

A political furor was triggered last month when it was reported that Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki was considering amnesty for Iraqi insurgents or terrorists, including those who had harmed Americans.

We live in an era of extreme and desperate political posturing, where every issue that can be of advantage is seized by either a political party or a faction. The GOP does not want this question to get even close to day light. However, they forced the Democrats to address an immediate withdrawal resolution.

If the GOP majority of the United States Congress is not willing to take a stand on the issue of amnesty, can we expect them to protect U.S. forces from prosecution by Iraqis?