What Is Plan B?

[domer]

Fearing that I'm witnessing a presidency dissolve before my very eyes, I note with a particular feeling of regret and foreboding that, as most observers predict either openly or privately, President Bush's surge will not work as planned, indeed, will not work at all. Yet we are locked into his faulty conception of the problem (and the solution) for he wields the exclusive power as commander-in-chief to deploy our troops and to assign them missions. The Congressional purse-strings power is NOT an effective counterbalance for a number of salient reasons, among the primary ones being the fact that our soldiers could be caught in a killing field between withdrawal based on financial dictates and stubborn foot-dragging regarding the exact timing of their return out of Iraq. In that interval, confusion might reign but more importantly essential resupply might dry up. No one wants to leave our troops in that position.

The Plan B of which I speak must be a comprehensive plan cutting across many governmental functions, from military to diplomatic with many innovative plans in between. This simply will not emerge from this White House, for reasons too well known to reiterate. But can it come from the opposition Democrats? For the level of planning and detail that would be needed, it is too early in the cycle to expect Democratic presidential hopefuls to devise a program full-born. And for Congress itself, as noted, aside from its collective bully pulpit, it strongest card -- funding -- is an option that can't really be used. Or can it? I invite comment.

[Amianthus]

it strongest card -- funding -- is an option that can't really be used. Or can it? I invite comment.

They can always repeal Public law 107-243, 116 Stat. 1497-1502.

[BT]

They can always repeal Public law 107-243, 116 Stat. 1497-1502.

That would require more than symbolic action, correct?

[domer]

P.L. 107-243, in essence, has repealed itself given that virtually all factual bases for its enactment, and certainly all salient bases, have dissolved over time. Also, repealing that provision presents the amusing question of whether Congress can close the barn door after the horses have fled.

[BT]

Option two is to invoke the war powers act of 1973 , let the courts decide constitutionality , and go from there.

[Amianthus]

P.L. 107-243, in essence, has repealed itself given that virtually all factual bases for its enactment, and certainly all salient bases, have dissolved over time. Also, repealing that provision presents the amusing question of whether Congress can close the barn door after the horses have fled.

And yet, it still exists and allows the President to maintain troops in Iraq. If it were repealed, the troops would have to be pulled out.

[BT]

BTW,  you never did explain why you think the "surge" will not work.

[sirs]

BTW,  you never did explain why you think the "surge" will not work.

Personally, IMHO it'll only work IF the troops are not severely restricted in their use of force.  As the current post Saddam era is largely a police action, the constraints put upon our military are likely one of the main reasons the insurgency has contined to fester like a painful boil

Note (for Tee primarily), that does not translate into allowing the military cart blanche to shoot any and everyone that moves.  It simply allows them the means and tools to go after suspected insurgents & terrorists, as if they were still in war mode, which they should still be in.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Personally, IMHO it'll only work IF the troops are not severely restricted in their use of force.  As the current post Saddam era is largely a police action, the constraints put upon our military are likely one of the main reasons the insurgency has contined to fester like a painful boil

Note (for Tee primarily), that does not translate into allowing the military cart blanche to shoot any and everyone that moves.  It simply allows them the means and tools to go after suspected insurgents & terrorists, as if they were still in war mode, which they should still be in.
==================================================================================
So the main difference between the orderly, professional mayhem that you advocate and and the Shoot-Everything-That -Moves conception that you believe that Tee has of it is that in your mind, the Marines would kick down doors, pitch in tear gas and then not shoot women, children under 15 and pets?

Please tell me if I am wrong.

And by the way,

What obviously happened during the Long Dark Night of the Soul that Juniorbush experienced over the Xmas holidays is that he decided that he wanted to avoid being called the worst thing a Bush can be called (wimp!) and decided to side with McCains's more violent plan.

The generals told him the number of troops he needed, and then the much smaller number that he had. Because Juniorbush is always such a cocky optimist, he has chosen to combine the lesser, inadequate number of troops with prayer. Perhaps he should consult with a greater optimist: I suggest R. Kelly, who has professed a belief that he can fly...

These conversations with the generals are sure to be classified and we won't see them until all the post-Juniorbush disaster books are written, as the massive War of Pointing Fingers in books selling for $29.95 (a Richard Nixon favored price) begins.
 

[Plane]

I think plan B shall be simple .

Just remove ourselves from the area and alllow things to sort themselves out.

To deal with the possibility that the result will be unpleasant , eyes should be averted.