December 10, 2006 Democratic Underground re: Iraq Study Group Report
Democratic Underground re Iraq Study Group Report

okay, i'm on page 42
i.e. 42 pages further than the president
and i am ready to comment.the report makes
me nuts, so much destruction have we wrought.
but the steps suggested thus far i haven't
much quibble with, other than that they so
far seem to be dictated from a position, or
point of view if you will, of an invited and
welcomed overpowering force, when this dreadful
war simply has not, realistically speaking,
meant that to the people who call that country home.

i've said it before but i am uncomfortable
with the term "insurgents" –

insurgent
function: noun
Etymology: Latin insurgent-, insurgens, present
participle of insurgere to rise up, from in- + surgere to rise --
more at SURGE
1 : a person who revolts against civil authority or an
established government; especially : a rebel not
recognized as a belligerent
2 : one who acts contrary to the policies and
decisions of one's own political party

but i'm working my way through this report and fuck people !
we ought to just face it:

it's spitting in the wind. ain't gonna happen,
at least not anytime soon. and why might that be? here's why:

RECOMMENDATION 19: The President and the
leadership of his national security team should
remain in close and frequent contact with the
Iraqi leadership. These contacts must convey a
clear message: there must be action by the
Iraqi government to make substantial progress
toward the achievement of milestones. In public
diplomacy, the President should convey as much
detail as possible about the substance of these
exchanges in order to keep the American people,
the Iraqi people, and the countries in the region
well informed.

then there's this

RECOMMENDATION 22: The President should state that
the United States does not seekpermanent military
bases in Iraq. If the Iraqi government were to
request a temporary base or bases, then the U.S.
government could consider that request as it would
in the case of any other government.

RECOMMENDATION 23: The President should restate that
the United States does not seek to control Iraq’s oil.

isn't it kind of fucking late? is this group - am i
so out of it?! - really on board with the bushies'
old tried and true just lie when it suits ya? i mean,
even if someone could make gw say those things ...
after all that has been said and done, who -
+WHO?! would believe him?!

so personally i really do believe with all my heart
that the only way to take even the first step as outlined
in this report is going to absolutely require the removal
of gw bush from office. and in terms of diplomacy
the USA is going to have to practice some honesty.
i don't think the world will require that we bow
in shame, but certainly i have already apologized
to the world after the 2004 election - remember the webpage, "sorry everybody"? i'd go there and cry, seriously.

so it's like the report speaks with some authority
and sounds so very reasonable, but then starts
suggesting diplomatic, humble, work, on the part
of the gw administration! that has got to be a laugh.

i'm also extremely, exceedingly cynical on more than a
couple of points. which may be explained to my
satisfaction with like another 24 straight hours of
web surfing. in a nutshell, daddy-o's buddy swoops in
to save the day? i am so over trusting any fucking body
associated with the bushies. halfway through and not
a word about torture or detention and i don't see any
goodwill accruing to the US military otherwise. Haven't
yet observed a specific plan for restoring the infrastructure
WE took out, let alone a single hint that WE HAD NO RIGHT,
and no reason but the hubris greed and warmongering of a
rogue administration run by two sick puppies.

the scope, the immensity of the tragedy that has
been visited upon iraq...it is hard, for me to read.
and the words so carefully chosen - the better to save face with -
are so, so weak, when you consider: almost 3000 americans,
up to 650,000 iraqis , $10 million bat mjitzvahs and
cheney's company's "no bid contracts," which our
great-grandchildren will be paying for, it's like -
like the emperor has no clothes, or why is everybody
ignoring the elephant in the living room, you know?

Iraqi amnesty proposals must not be undercut in
Washington by either the executive or the
legislative branch. from the "war is peace" decider?

i like - very much - involving the rest of
the civilized world (at this point in time
perceived pretty far and wide as more civilized
than the US i'll bet)in the demilitarization -
but the whole business of war is so stupid when
you get down to it isnt it. so stupid, so sad.
HATE the part about sending more of our precious
young over there.

Even after the United States has moved all combat
brigades out of Iraq, we would maintain a considerable
military presence in the region....

okay, so if you ask me nothing will change if this
the approach. i agree that if congress passes it,
it might put gw in a bad light politically, but he
doesn't care! he is delusional, mentally ill, and a
lame duck for whom every utterance is a campaign. neither
sense nor sentiment moves him.

remember when the gas prices were skyrocketing? and the
press and supposedly the people were kind of hounding
the man to - ummmmm......LEAD!, yeah that's the ticket.
so he mumbles into a microphone, "Don't drive so much."
and the thing is people are dying like flies. every death
is one death too many. i know i won't get my way, but i
will still weigh in with what it is: the bush administration
out of power, the US out of the war in Iraq.
- posted by barbara @ 12/10/2006 10:44:00 AM