Olbermann: Are they escalating the escalation? David Edwards and Muriel Kane

Published: Wednesday May 23, 2007 Print This Email This MSNBC's Countdown with Keith Olbermann examined reports of White House plans for a "second surge" that could nearly double the number of combat troops in Iraq by the end of the year. Olbermann speaks with Paul Reickhoff, director of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America. Reickhoff agrees that just sending in more troops is unlikely to have a positive effect without diplomatic and other efforts. He says that continually extending tours of duty is unsustainable and that the expectations being placed on the troops are "ridiculous." However, Reickhoff's sharpest criticism is saved for the Democrats in Congress. He believes the president has been able to frame the funding issue successfully and the troops are just glad the money will be coming. And he says, "I don't really think that this is really the beginning of the end. I think it shows that there's a lot of integrity problems within the Democrat Party. ... They're in this middle ground and I think they're really losing the political battle, even among their own constituents."

TRANSCRIPT: # OLBERMANN: And while Congress inches ever closer to not getting troops out of Iraq, it appears the administration is planning to stealthily use even more of them, Hearst Newspapers, analyzing the Pentagon departdeployment papers, concluding that the White House is quietly planning to nearly double the amount of combat troops in Iraq by the end of this year, from 52,500 in January to 98,000 by December. Current troop increase plans call for 20 brigades in Iraq, but through a combination of extended tours and additional deployments, there could be an overlap of troops going in and coming out of Iraq, so that, at least temporarily, there could be as many as 28 brigades there, more than 200,000 troops in Iraq, later this year. Cue the denials. The Pentagon says the newspapers analysis is, quote, fuzzy math, and when the White House was asked (INAUDIBLE) the story about a, quote, second surge was correct, press secretary Tony Snow said no, at least about the surge part. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) SNOW: Its, its justwe, weright now, we are (INAUDIBLE) -- the question is a second surge to Iraq. No. We, were in the middle of the Iraq plan that General Petraeus put together. (END VIDEO CLIP) OLBERMANN: Joining us now, the executive director, founder of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, author of Chasing Ghosts, Paul Rieckhoff. Paul, thanks for some of your time tonight. PAUL RIECKHOFF, IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN VETERANS OF AMERICA: Good to be with you, Keith. OLBERMANN: Well get to the bit about the Democratic collapse in a moment. But if this is not a surge, a second surge, what is it? RIECKHOFF: Well, it could be an overlap. It definitely looks like its going to be an increase in troop numbers, from around 160,000 to about 200,000 if this Hearst story checks out to be true. And you do have a degree of overlap, when one units coming in and another ones going out. You can have elements of a brigade remaining behind. But during the surge, we went up to 20 brigades, and at this point, it looks like later this year will be as high as 28 brigades, elements of 28 brigades. So it may be a transitional overlap. But theres no guarantee that the Department of Defense wont keep them there longer. Thats the key issue here. They have the discrepancy and the flexibility to be able to keep people there as long as they want. OLBERMANN: You have told us before, others have said before, the U.S. never really had enough troops or equipment or anything else there to actually succeed in Iraq. Would 28 brigades somehow be better? Could that kind of increase, on some short-term basis, actually help? RIECKHOFF: Its possible. But I think the problem with that is, it falls into this idea that troops are the answer. Its not some kind of geopolitical cup of soup or where you just add troops and things are going to get better. We need to complement troops with diplomatic options, economic options, some kind of international support. And at this point, it may not work anyway. So 28 brigades is not the solution, in my opinion. But also, its unsustainable. Our military is so dramatically overextended, the 28 brigades will really break an already breaking military. Youve got about four brigades from the National Guard whove just been called up for a second time. By the end of the year, youll probably have nine. And we have to think about the long-term damage this is going to have on our military that will extend far beyond Iraq and may ultimately jeopardize our national security in other places. OLBERMANN: All right, weve gone from 12-month tours to 15-month tours. Are we getting close to the premise of the Joseph Heller novel Catch-22, that just as soon as the flying men from the Second World War in that fictional account reach the number of missions required to fly, you simply raise the number of missions required to fly? Are we doing that with the troops now? Weareas soon as they get close to the number of months served required before they can go home, we just raise the number of months served required? RIECKHOFF: Absolutely. I mean, the expectations that weve put on our troops have, quite honestly, been ridiculous. And its hard to keep retention numbers, its hard to recruit new people, when you dont stand by your word. And the military is starting to lose confidence and starting to lose its faith in our civilian leadership. Its hard to work toward a goal line that keeps moving back every time. And its really having a tremendous impact on the families, where divorce rates are skyrocketing and people coming home are already facing wounds and post-traumatic stress disorder. Were just running this military so hard. And the people are really showing tremendous signs of wear. OLBERMANN: And finally, Paul, speaking of betraying words, whats the reaction youre getting? What are you expecting from troops about the fact that the Democrats have dropped out of the timeline business, and the president can waive any benchmarks in that Iraq funding bill? RIECKHOFF: Well, beyond the political posturing, I think theyre happy the moneys coming. I think the president was effective in structuring this or framing this so it looked like if the veto went through, troops wouldnt be getting the money. Whether thats true or not is debatable. But I think the troops, at the end of the day, are happy the moneys coming so they can get the funding that theyll need throughout the summer. And they expect another round of partisan bickering and political cheap when the fall comes back and the politicians get back at it again while our guys are on their third and fourth tour. OLBERMANN: Do you have any sense of this being a disaster, in terms of ending, or beginning the end of this conflict? RIECKHOFF: No, I dont really think that this is the beginning of the end. I think it shows that theres a lot of integrity problems within the Democratic Party. And they still, as a party, havent figured out what their position is and what their tactics are going to be in taking on this president, and how theyre going to go back to their districts and explain that they did take the position of defunding the war. If theyre going to do it, theyve got to do it, but theyre in this middle ground, and I think theyre really losing the political battle, even among their own constituents. OLBERMANN: Paul Rieckhoff, Iraq War veteran, now executive director of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America. As always, Paul, great thanks. RIECKHOFF: Thank you, Keith.



