Even neo-con's Oliver North and George Will are saying NO to a "surge."

[RiverStone]

Add to that all 7 'NYT' columnists, Gen. George Casey, U.S. commander in Baghdad, and 88% of folks on a recent CBS News Poll (1/1-1/3/07) who do NOT support increasing troop levels!

http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

It seems the only voices Shrub wants to hear are those in his head. When so many, for so long have expressed pessimism around a possible surge; it is both tragic and incomprehensible that more young men and women will be placed in harm's way simply to try and salvage the President's fragile ego. He will do anything to try and win a war that has already been lost! :grr:

* * * * *

NYT
1/08/07

NEW YORK With Paul Krugman today hitting President Bush's plan to dramatically increase U.S. troop levels in Iraq -- which he labels a "surge" but others call an escalation-- this completes perhaps a first: All seven regular opinion columnists at the paper (Krugman, David Brooks, Thomas Friedman, Maureen Dowd, Nicholas Kristof, Bob Herbert and Frank Rich) are in agreement on a vital issue.

Brooks, in a bit of a surprise, had come out against the "surge" on Sunday, joining his colleagues on this. Friedman, a firm supporter of the war until recently, also attacked the idea last week. "Iraq has become a quagmire of the vanities," Krugman, an opponent of the war from the beginning, declared today.

Among the many newspaper columnists questioning President Bush's plan to send 20,000 or more fresh troops to Iraq are quite a few conservatives breaking with the White House on this.

Oliver North, for example, attacked the idea in his syndicated column on Friday and on Sunday, in the Washington Post, George Will commented that the "surge" idea is basically too little and too late, and will only lead to a "protracted" U.S. struggle. The column is titled, "Surge, or Power Failure?"

more:

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003528647




on edit: fixed link to poll

[ShortnFiery]

1. Oliver North should still be in jail for his crimes during Iran-Contra.

Only on FAUX would, IMO, treasonous criminals, such as Oliver North thrive.

He's an embarrassment to the Marine Corps. Semper Fi means nothing to this corrupt man. :(

[Benhurst]

3. I agree. But even he is against the "surge." NT

[ShortnFiery]

6. Just another rat jumping ship. I don't know who I detest more,

Dear Leader and Darth Cheney OR the minions who are now distancing themselves from the stench. :shrug:

[Benhurst]

10. The former because they are actively continuing policies which

will further the death and destruction. All for their damn oil profits.

[LeftishBrit]

11. I agree!

I wouldn't trust Ollie North further than I could throw him, which isn't very far; but the world needs as much opposition to Bush's mad policies as possible, from wherever it comes.

[wtmusic]

2. "Friedman, a firm supporter of the war until recently"

"Recently" as in: before, or after half a million people had died unnecessarily?

Thanks for nothin', Tom.

[Benhurst]

5. As always, Tom proves himself to be little more than a mustache in search of a brain. NT

[Phredicles]

4. Technically, are Ollie and George Swill neo-cons or just plain cons?

They suck either way, and they usually have their lips firmly clamped to the Dear Leader's derriere, so this is noteworthy. I'm just asking.

[whistle]

7. The correct term is escalation....troop escalation

[helderheid]

8. Even UTAH is saying no to a surge!!

[TheCowsCameHome]

9. Oliver (Alfred E. Newman) North should be in the brig.

Piece of human debris that he is.