So Bush Refuses To Accept Study Recommendations. Now What?

Now that the Iraq Study Group has made its findings and its recommendations known, BushCo says James Baker III "can return to his day job."

So stuck on the horns of a dilemma, what do we do now?

There seems to be uncertainty as to the proper course of action if Bush cannot be persuaded to change his mind as to the present course of conduct.

Impeachment does not seem likely. Democrats cutting off funding of the war is even less likely.
In the meantime, death and violence is escalating, and threatening to drag other Middle Eastern countries into the conflict.

Put on your fortune-telling hat, and tell us -- "WHat's Next???"

Unfortunately, many more American soldiers will die because of his failed policy.

even if you take politics out of it, If you have a president who irresponsibly lies us into war, has no plan for an exit, and does not address the lack of progress, even in light of public and congressional intervention, I'm afraid there is not way to stop him short of impeachment.

and he should be stopped.

and he needs to take the Dickster with him.

We'll have to make him, pure and simple.

complain a little and go on about our business. Let's us hope a Dem congress will put an end to the whimpering reaction.

Iraq is now at the same point as Yugoslavia and Rwanda were in 1991 and 1994. Iraq is at the gates of hell. We're real close to the absolute point of no-return.

The ISG is all about framing the debate...in Big Oil's favor.

See:

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/12/07/1452236

His rejection of the study's recommendations is just one more item that shows HOW UTTERLY DETACHED FROM REALITY HE IS!!!

The man is NUTS!! CRAZY!!!

HE IS UNFIT FOR OFFICE!!!

Someone must have the SPINE to declare what is OBVIOUS to everyone -- he (and Cheney, too) MUST be removed because they are CLEARLY COMPLETELY, TOTALLY, and UTTERLY DETACHED FROM REALITY!!!!

Impeach Bush and Cheney on 32 Felony violations of the FISA Law. No investigation required. Bring it on in Jan. '07!!!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2858984&mesg_id=2865666">Don't "request that they investigate" -- Demand Impeachment!

. . .their rationalizations for inaction -- e.g. investigations will magically lead to impeachment, Can't win, so don't fight, the backlash beast will get us, the nation wants bipartisanship in Bush World (not!!).

We have our work (i.e., challenging those rationalizations whenever we can) cut out for us.

If you know anyone looking for ammo, they may find something useful in http://journals.democraticunderground.com/pat_k">My Journal

After all, this was his father's lifeline that he's refusing to grab. He seems hell bent to continue on his own path of destruction, however.

The media is touting the ISG report as if it were made of gold. So, the way I see it, we take control next month. The more he looks foolish and pigheaded before then, the better for us.

Poppy's friends did Junior's homework for him but the ungrateful little brat won't even say thankyou.

It's enough to make a grown man cry.

:wtf:

Cutting off funds leaves Dems open to "they don't support the troops" which maybe Dems could survive (retain Congress, win the Presidency)... but it's unlikely. Then think about Bush leaving the troops in Iraq anyway, only without more ammo, enough food, enough armour and fuel and stuff. Could he do it? Yes, not only could he (legally) do it, but I think he would. It would be a calculated game of "chicken" with the Dems, with a potential horrible disaster looming for the troops if executed.

If the Dems cut funding, every loss of troops would be placed squarely at their feet by the Repukes. Just as today we place every lost soldier at the feet of GWB (which is fair and correct, but fairness and correctness are not paramount).

If Bush doesn't at least start to wind down the war in the next few weeks, it's time to put impeachment back on the table.

There will be hearings and hearings on contractor fraud. There will be no more blank checks. There will be no more playing football with wads of cash, no fantastic embassies, no funds will go without a full audit of where things are going.

And when the contractors profits start to fall and they can no longer milk the system, there will be no more reason to stay there.

And then they will leave.

Yesterday I heard Pelosi say that the hearings and the power of the purse are tied together.

So there is no way in hell that pulling funding is off the table.

You do it slowly....You don't fund additional troops. You put limits on what the money can be used for. You fund departure of troops from the theatre.

lifts off and our former "allies" are left holding the bag. They call that peace with honor.

my draft number was 15 and I was about to get my ass shot off for nothing.

Its better to admit a mistake and correct it than to continue to fool yourself or keep killing people just to save face. That's the sign of a sociopath

I am NOT in support of staying the course, but for immediate withdrawal. My reference to Vietnam was meant to underscore the futility of prolonging a bad situation for the sake of saving face and then finding that it was all in vain anyway. Just wanted to clarify my meaning.

Otherwise we are going to have a dead horse.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2876925&mesg_id=2876925 :thumbsup:

They forgot the fact that one of the biggest obstacles to a solution in Iraq is Bush's own mental imbalance. Bush's ego, his small-minded stubborness, and his delusions of grandeur are as big an impediment as the war itself. I would have hoped that several psychiatrists could have come up with a more well-defined diagnosis than mine and perhaps an extensive course of psychotherapy that Bush could follow.

The normal rules of the universe do not apply to this man.

Hekate

one like what Kucinich has proposed.

I just do not see that happening, unless the congressional investigations nail Bush.

We are looking at a problem with no good solution.

I think the sooner we get out and deal with the mess left behind, the more likely it is that we will avoid an even bigger mess later when we leave later.

The wildcards in all this is that Bush is making 'rational' decisions based upon facts.
If he is medicated, drinking, or mentally impaired, then that assumption can be tossed.

If you think about it, who has the most to lose in the next two years? Bush? hell, he can't run again and he likes being the spoiler and screwing things up. He's done it his whole life.

Republicans in congress have the most to lose. How are the gonna explain that their dimwitted leader has just told James Baker, the family consigliore to "go back to his day job" after the country waits for him to listen to someone tell him to get us the fork out of Iraq...after the disasterous elections for the republicans..

If anyone should want him impeached, it should be the republicans.

And we've spent another $250 billion, and lost another 2,000 dead and another 15,000 wounded, and another, oh, 100,000 Iraqis or so are dead, and the craters in the sand are more and bigger, and Bush's approval rating is around 22% - hell yeah, they'll cut him loose.

I'm sure that in the hypothetical outlined above, there would be the perfunctory attempt to strap Visionary Wings (TM) to Bush's shoulders for the big GOP Convention by the party establishment, but the bottom line is that son et lumiere notwithstanding, the Pukes who face reelection (that is, most of them) will happily gnaw their own paws off to get out of that trap.

until January 22nd 2009.

He stole his two elections and now there's nothing we can do about Bush finishing out his two years and to stop his wars for profits.

George is the decider!

Did you really expect otherwise?