VIDEO: Oliver North Says Nearly All U.S. Troops In Iraq Oppose Escalation
VIDEO: Oliver North Says Nearly All U.S. Troops In Iraq Oppose Escalation
Last night on the O’Reilly Factor, former Col. Oliver North — now a conservative military analyst for Fox News — said that on his recent trip to Baghdad he learned that “nearly all” U.S. troops opposed escalating the war in Iraq. They told North, “We don’t need more American troops; we need more Iraqi troops.”
North added that Bush’s proposal “sounds eerily like Lyndon Johnson’s plan to save Vietnam in the 60s by gradual escalation as a way not to lose.” Watch it:
Greg Sargent has more.
Transcript:
NORTH: No, I don’t. None of the soldiers, sailors, airmen, guardsmen and marines that I interviewed in my eighth trip told me they wanted more US boots on the ground. Nearly all expressed just the opposite. ‘We don’t need more American troops; we need more Iraqi troops’ was a common refrain. My concern is that incremental increase in US troop strength…as first suggested last summer during the congressional campaign sounds eerily like Lyndon Johnson’s plan to save Vietnam in the 60s by gradual escalation as a way not to lose.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
77 Responses to “VIDEO: Oliver North Says Nearly All U.S. Troops In Iraq Oppose Escalation”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Bush always takes the advice of his military commanders. Unless they're retired. Or still in uniform. Or dead.
January 9th, 2007 at 10:34 amLORD! BUSH LOST OLLIE?
Lord, Lord, Lord..........
January 9th, 2007 at 10:38 amDAMN!
Now I'm having an internal struggle...
...with the inner defense mechanism that I've been conditioned to install...
...to protect against the right wing propaganda machine...
...Simply put...
...I know the criminal Bushite Ollie North has discovered the truth...
...but I can't bring myself to BELIEVE him!
January 9th, 2007 at 10:41 amI forget- Is North a war criminal?
January 9th, 2007 at 10:41 amOh....my....god!
January 9th, 2007 at 10:42 amIt certainly is encouraging to see North against escalation. The question now becomes, when will a senior Republican such as John Warner take that long walk to the White House in order to persuade Bush and Cheney to resign for the good of the country?
January 9th, 2007 at 10:42 amI don't have the chance to watch the video, I am at work, but did O'Reilly tell him to shut and turn of his mic?
January 9th, 2007 at 10:44 amWow. Ollie disagrees with GW Bush?
This is big news...
January 9th, 2007 at 10:46 amOliver North is a wise man.
He knows that Iraqis and Fish can coexist peacefully without interference of Chimps in Chiefs....
January 9th, 2007 at 10:48 am#1 Badmoodman
Or they don't agree with him.
January 9th, 2007 at 10:50 amYou know it's the wrong move when even Oliver North is siding with the Democrats.
January 9th, 2007 at 10:50 amOllie, you are going to be on Hannity's "Enemy of the State" show next Sunday!
January 9th, 2007 at 10:52 amso, what was o'lielly's reaction to this?...
btw, remember when, oh 2+ years ago, when kerry offered the plan of training the iraqi's out of country so that they wouldn't be killed before even finishing the training? ... sure would've been a help...
planned chaos...
January 9th, 2007 at 10:53 amsend in the swiftboats!!!
January 9th, 2007 at 10:53 am20,000 more troops..!! why can't Iraq recruit 20,000 young Iraqis?. They are paid around $60.00-$100.00 a month,with unemployment is so high in IRAQ....I can't see why sending troops from US to IRAQ[some are going for 3rd time to Iraq]..Unless we are building many US run and operated facilities and may be contractors benefiting from all of this surge...,that is the only reason. But since we are entering soon the fifth year of this war...it is time to scale down. Bush said whe Iraqis stand up..we begin to leave...now When are the Iraqis are going to stand up? These are the questions needed that deserve answers?. After all..it is their country.
January 9th, 2007 at 10:55 amok this is just goign to make my head explode...WTF
January 9th, 2007 at 10:56 amInteresting that nearly all troops in Iraq oppose escalation, since this where the extra troops for escalation will be coming from...from shell games of decreasing leave and increasing tour lengths, played on our existing troops.
What's the current figure for troops AWOL since the commencement of this unlawful occupation? I had heard that is was around 40,000. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see that number double if Chimpy goes through with his 'surge', and the Dems are too cowardly to stand up to him and cut the purse strings.
January 9th, 2007 at 10:58 amLooks like Sean Hannity has a new "Enemy of the State" nominee in Ollie North.
Defy The Decider, become an enemy of the official US propaganda arm, Fox News.
-GSD
January 9th, 2007 at 10:59 amThe biggest difference between Vietnam and Iraq is that you can pretty much hang all of the Iraq fiasco on one guy. There were lots of accomplices, active and passive, but the "loser" sign is reserved for herr Bush.
January 9th, 2007 at 11:01 amEtTu, Ollie?
January 9th, 2007 at 11:02 amjeff - this, from wik!:
North was tried in 1988 in relation to his activities while at the National Security Council. He was indicted on sixteen felony counts and on May 4, 1989, he was convicted of three: accepting an illegal gratuity, aiding and abetting in the obstruction of a congressional inquiry, and destruction of documents (by his secretary, Fawn Hall, on his instructions).
He was sentenced by U.S. District Judge Gerhard A. Gesell on July 5, 1989, to a three-year suspended prison term, two years probation, $150,000 in fines, and 1,200 hours community service.
However, on July 20, 1990, with the help of the ACLU (see [3]), North's conviction was overturned by a three-judge appeals panel in advance of further proceedings on the grounds that his public testimony may have prejudiced his right to a fair trial ([4]).
"with the help of the ACLU" !!! - the bain of the righties, not?
January 9th, 2007 at 11:04 amexcept when they serve a purpose to rush, ollie, etc...
Why does Oliver North hate our freedom? Why does he want to surrender? Why does he want the terrorists to win?
They'll have a tough time throwing him under the bus. I can't wait to hear Phony McSnowjob explaining how Oliver North didn't say what he said and how it wasn't the least bit inconsistent with the president's plan.
January 9th, 2007 at 11:05 amSo Bush's "plan" doesn't even make sense to an Iran-Contra criminal.
January 9th, 2007 at 11:06 amOllie - Negroponte's on the phone, he wants to talk to you!
January 9th, 2007 at 11:11 amBush might finally listen to someone with experience...not.
January 9th, 2007 at 11:18 amNorth just went south on Bush and my head is spinning trying to process the concept.
January 9th, 2007 at 11:19 amSomeone soon on FOX will call Oliver North a leftist .
January 9th, 2007 at 11:20 amOf course they oppose this insanity. There are no additional troops in the numbers that the shrub wants. It means that those already in Iraq won't be leaving as scheduled, and who the hell wants to stay in that quagmire.
January 9th, 2007 at 11:21 ammaybe b/c they are "otherwise engaged"
http://www.juancole.com/2007/01/sunnis-in-parliament-criticize-al.html
January 9th, 2007 at 11:40 am
Robert Parry, in "Bush's Rush to Armageddon"
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/010807R.shtml
writes:
"... one source familiar with high-level thinking in Washington and Tel Aviv said an unstated reason for Bush's troop "surge" is to bolster the defenses of Baghdad's Green Zone if a possible Israeli attack on Iran prompts an uprising among Iraqi Shiites."
The surge makes no military sense when only considering Iraq. Bush's commanders have already told him that.
But put this "surge" in the context of a desire to escalate the war to make the Middle East safe for Israel and U.S. corporate interests, and you have a rationale that is rational, consistent, and fits the facts.
You've got to look at the big picture to grasp what all this is about. I don't see anybody in Congress doing that.
Just limiting appropriations supporting the additional troops in Iraq will not stop the overall plan. After all, while the lack of those protective troops in and around the Green Zone will be important after the attack on Iran, the troops that are there could still protect it, since there are 150,000 of them. It just makes it harder.
My point is that going after limiting the surge does not stop the Bush, neocon, and Israeli plan to expand the war to Iran and Syria.
How to do so? 1) Repeal the initial resolution by which Bush will justify attacking Iran and Syria; 2) Pass a resolution that only funds Middle Eastern withdrawal; 3) Begin impeachment proceedings.
Blair will be out of office by June and some or all of these previous points will be in the works by then. So Bush's window of opportunity is sometime in the next five months. After that, an expansion of the war becomes increasingly less likely.
January 9th, 2007 at 11:42 am"Lord, Bush has lost Ollie" good one!!!
January 9th, 2007 at 11:46 am*
Here are three toll-free numbers you can use to call your own members of Congress right now, 800-828-0498, 800-459-1887 or 800-614-2803, and tell them NO ESCALATION.
Or you can get their direct dial numbers and fax numbers right down to the district level by clicking on "Lookup Phones" in the instant lookup form to the right. All new members of Congress have been fully updated.
January 9th, 2007 at 12:06 pmhttp://www.peaceteam.net/no_escalation.php
*
When Even Oliver North has turned against his plan, it's in trouble. The problem with training Iraqis is that not as many are willing to be targeted as collaboraters with an occupying force or to be thrown in with Shia deathsquads. What a mess!
January 9th, 2007 at 12:09 pmThey’ll have a tough time throwing him under the bus. I can’t wait to hear Phony McSnowjob explaining how Oliver North didn’t say what he said and how it wasn’t the least bit inconsistent with the president’s plan.
Comment by chimpeach
Tony has a higher BS factor then SecofShoes Rice has credit at Bloomies!!
Can't wait to hear how this spin cycle comes out!
January 9th, 2007 at 12:11 pmYou just earned yourself a spot on the "No Fly List" buddy!
January 9th, 2007 at 12:16 pmDid Fox News Promote Oliver North? His rank was Lieutenant Colonel, which is abbreviated LTC not COL. COL is the abbreviated form for Colonel, a rank higher than Oliver North attained.
January 9th, 2007 at 12:22 pm#36 Like an honorary Colonel, i.e. Col. Tom Parker, Col. Sanders maybe?
January 9th, 2007 at 12:28 pmWhy isn't there a paranthesis after his name on the ribbon at the bottom of the screen like all other networks do
Lt. Col Oliver North
January 9th, 2007 at 12:32 pm(USMC-Ret. because he was convicted of telling lies to Congress)
LV Louie, here's a little help with logic. The Dems' position is the same w/r to Bush and Iraq; Oliver North's has now apparently changed, based on his most recent conversations with our soldiers; so there is no change in Dem opinion on the issue at hand, only a (surprised) reaction to the fact that a former adversary (on other issues) has changed his opinion so that he now shares the Dem position. Dem credibility has therefore not been damaged, since credibility has to do with consistency of reasoned positions on issues, rather than the consistent composition of the group that happens to share those positions at any given time.
January 9th, 2007 at 12:38 pmWhere will you stand tomorrow ?
Comment by Las Vegas Louie
Well it's a sure thing Louie won't be standing with the troops in Iraq, today, or tomorrow. North was a decorated veteran, before he was revealed as a constitution-hating henchman. How hard is that to grasp, Lou? He's still the same, and his word is sh*t. But even a blind hog will find it's way to slop.
January 9th, 2007 at 12:43 pmDemocrats were for Ollie North before the Iran Contra hot potato. Comment by Las Vegas Louie — January 9, 2007 @ 12:25 pm
Hmm, can you explain this one? LVL or anyone? I don't remember even being aware of Oliver North before Iran-Contra. Oh, and LVL, what you jokingly brush off as a “hot potato†was, in fact, an impeachable offense committed by your dearly beloved President Reagan. Reagan said under oath that what was commonly known as “Iran Contra†was an operation taken “at my behestâ€. This operation was in direct violation of, and a deliberate attempt to circumvent, the laws Congress passed to prevent it.
January 9th, 2007 at 12:51 pmGreg,
you are incorrect, Andrew Johnson was also impeached, but acquitted by a single vote.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Johnson
good link about his life.
January 9th, 2007 at 12:54 pmYou know, this actually pretty much defines cognitive dissonance. Where is the real Ollie North, and what did those damn liberals do with him?
January 9th, 2007 at 12:55 pmDammit, it would be necessary to improve the heroin production in Afghanistan even more to finance the Scalation!
/Sarcasm (?) off
January 9th, 2007 at 1:06 pmThings are pretty wacked when Ollie's against escalation, while the new Dems from Kansas are ready to cow-tow to the president.
January 9th, 2007 at 1:11 pm#37 Las Vegas Louie
Democrats were for Ollie North before the Iran Contra hot potato . Democrats were then against him .
Which Democrats were for Ollie North before Iran Contra? You just made that one up, didn't you.
Democrats are now FOR Ollie North again because of his curent view and opinion .
Nope, still against him. But, it's interesting that even people who are way over on the right end of the spectrum are against the surge, too. Dontcha think?
January 9th, 2007 at 1:35 pmLVL is starting to sound an awful lot like joeslogic, who took a very hard beating here yesterday.
January 9th, 2007 at 1:40 pmFor those of you who didn't see it on the other thread, LVL thinks that global warming is a "craze", and "unproven", prima facie evidence we are dealing with a complete idiot.
January 9th, 2007 at 1:43 pm#49 - Spot on, perhaps Joe Slogic has now morphed into the
January 9th, 2007 at 2:00 pmClark County Coward...
#50
LVL is in Vegas, for Christ's sake! To him, it's hot all the time. I think it's affected his brain . . .
January 9th, 2007 at 2:03 pm[...] And Human Events is a publication I do not recommend to you if you are interested in facts or in moral sensibility. But when the guy is right on such an important issue even when he has to oppose the President and his neo-cons - and even if Human Events is the place where he published his remarks - then it’s worth noting. [Thanks to SusanG at kos, and ThinkProgress.org for the links.] [...]
January 9th, 2007 at 2:06 pm"...incremental increase in US troop strength…
...sounds eerily like Lyndon Johnson’s plan to save Vietnam in the 60s by gradual escalation as a way not to lose."
Well, DUUUUUUUUHHHHHHHH!!!!
Wow - Ollie is no longer a good little soldier? Wonder why? Pointlessly repeating talkingpoints doesn't pay the bills anymore, Ollie-boy? Whatta shocker you two-faced, opportunistic, ideological turd.
I love these idiots that run towards a metaphorical cliff - you tell them to stop - they mock and ridicule you just before running off said metaphoical cliff - then turn around and either blame you for their stupidity or begin to tell others about the cliff and take credit for it...
THEY EAT THEIR OWN.
January 9th, 2007 at 2:18 pm#37 Comment by Las Vegas Louie — January 9, 2007 @ 12:25 pm
Way to generalise you narrow-minded, short-sighted, fool.
Name a democrat that has been FOR Ollie... and if you cannot understand the difference between the man as a whole and the words a man speaks then you will always be a narrow-minded, short-sighted, fool.
/NEVER 'for' Ollie
January 9th, 2007 at 2:22 pmNow, Now, Las Vegas Louie is not a fool, some very smart people gamble away their life savings, and destroy their lives, trying to hit the big one.
January 9th, 2007 at 2:30 pmSay isn't Las Vegas the new Sin City? Why Las Vegas Louie, you are a liberal!
January 9th, 2007 at 2:32 pmNorth added that Bush’s proposal “sounds eerily like Lyndon Johnson’s plan to save Vietnam in the 60s by gradual escalation as a way not to lose.â€
***************************
No...REALLY? Gee...YA THINK? Not exactly quick on the uptake, are ya Ollie? Some of us who've actually been paying attention could have told you at least a year ago if not before -- perhaps before the War In Iraq even started -- that Iraq is Vietnam revisited.
January 9th, 2007 at 2:37 pmOh, come on. Even ollie north has to speak the truth once in a while. Is there a Blue Moon in the offing? /me goes to check lunar phase sites
January 9th, 2007 at 3:04 pmMaybe what is thought in Las Vegas should stay in Las Vegas.
January 9th, 2007 at 3:28 pmPoor LVL drew the short straw and had to try to bug us on this thread - not another troll in sight. They're all over Ted Kennedy! Oops, I said the K word, now they will be all over this comment too - let's see how long it takes:
January 9th, 2007 at 4:16 pmWhat do they say - even a broken clock is right twice.
January 9th, 2007 at 4:38 pmI despise Ollie North, the Iran-Contra war criminal and felon; I don't understand why he is given any legitimacy on TV -- oh yeah, it's Fox; they aren't legitimate -- but even he sees that this is wrong. Even he sees that Bush is committing our military to a lost cause .
But, he has just lost his audience in Bush because Georgie listens only to those who agree with him.
"Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it"-Santayana.
January 9th, 2007 at 6:30 pm
I can't believe he told the truth.
January 9th, 2007 at 6:52 pmhey louie - check this out:
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/g/georgesant101521.html
do you think maybe kennedy was quoting santayana? ...hmmmm...
January 9th, 2007 at 7:34 pmyou might ought to bookmark that site...
Las Vegas Louie; check out Katy's post @ #66, Nyah, nyah.
January 9th, 2007 at 7:43 pm[...] North, like Kennedy earlier today in his Iraq speech at the National Press Club, compared President Bush’s escalation plan to Lyndon Johnson’s disastrous Vietnam escalation four decades ago. Said North: “My concern is that incremental increase in US troop strength…sounds eerily like Lyndon Johnson’s plan to save Vietnam in the 60s by gradual escalation as a way not to lose.” [...]
January 9th, 2007 at 8:27 pmOh my God!!!!!!! I can't believe the Ollie actually told the truth about something. Apparently he didn't get a fresh glass of that "Kool Aid" most Republicans have been drinking. Come on Ollie, where the lies and destortion, where's the twisting of facts, where the guy that I'm use to seeing on TV. This must be a fake Ollie, the one that came out of the alien pod that only looks like the real Ollie North.
There is no way Ollie North disagrees with the standard Republican talking points, he must have been drunk. The thing I really can't believe is that Faux News didn't fire him for speaking the truth.
January 9th, 2007 at 9:45 pm[...] UPDATE: Don’t listen to me. Maybe there are some who have a more educated opinion? [...]
January 10th, 2007 at 12:31 amSounded like he was reading from a teleprompter....
January 10th, 2007 at 1:08 amOllie, where's Fawn?
January 10th, 2007 at 2:15 amWhat proof do you have that FOX news is not legite?
The 3 things North was convicted of hardly makes him a "war criminal".
He was not even convicted of purgery. I will agree with you that he was convicted of certain things but that is why he lost his job and his rep for a very long time.
I see a ton of criticism here of North ,Bush, and his administration. But were you also critical of Clinton, Murtha, Kennedy for the convictions they have.
WHy should we listen to any of them.
January 10th, 2007 at 1:03 pm"What proof do you have that FOX news is not legite?"
"He was not even convicted of purgery..."
"I see a ton of criticism here of North ,Bush, and his administration. But were you also critical of Clinton, Murtha, Kennedy for the convictions they have."
Comment by Caelb #74
Caelb,
don't tell me...
...lemme guess...
...home-fooled er' schooled...
...Right?
January 10th, 2007 at 1:46 pmYou would be wrong on your assumption of my education.
And your attitude is very typical. I make one post asking if your criticism goes both ways and agree that North was convicted of crimes and you begin with the personal attacks.
January 10th, 2007 at 1:55 pmThe rats abandoning the ship
January 10th, 2007 at 2:38 pm[...] One. [...]
January 10th, 2007 at 7:29 pmHe (North) was not even convicted of purgery(SIC).
comment by Caelb/Caleb
Of course, he wasn't convicted of "purgery," because there is no such crime nor such word in the English language to the best of my knowledge. Ever heard of "perjury?"
January 11th, 2007 at 12:59 amWell, "we've lost Cronkite." Unfortunately, Vietnam dragged on another five years after that...
February 17th, 2007 at 2:07 pmLas Vegas Plane Crash
I would visualize things coming to me. It would just make me feel better. Visualization works if you work hard. That's the thing. You can't just visualize and go eat a sandwich. Jim Carrey.
April 14th, 2008 at 2:19 am