I’ve been reading Maureen Dowd, who SimonTemplar quotes here. It’s an article worth reading.
I’ve held the opinion that the Bush administration (hereafter referred to as ‘BushCo’) was a bunch of evil people who are pretty good at chess, who could never get elected to hold the kind of power they needed to rule the world, so they got Bush to be their figurehead. And by chess, I refer of course to hatching schemes that display competence in the realm of geopolitics.
Now, the main problem for me, trying to figure out if I’m right or not, is that they might be better at chess than I am. That is, what kind of strange and brilliant plans might they have that I’m simply ill-equipped to understand?
When I look at all that’s happened in Iraq and the so-called war on terror, I see what looks like total incompetence. BushCo has dropped every ball. They didn’t take terrorism seriously, and 9/11 ended up happening. They got bad intel and invaded Iraq over false pretenses, and then they fucked up the occupation. If the new sovereign state of Iraq ends up being Islamist (and I predict it will), then Osama Bin Laden will say, ‘Thank you, BushCo, you predictable motherfuckers!’
Every US piece on the chessboard is pinned or blocked. We’re not in check, but there’s simply very little we can do to move forward. This looks like a middlegame played by an amateur.
But consider: If you’re going to be pinned down in a war on terror, you might as well be pinned down with your military over the second largest oil reserve on the planet. That’s why the Texas Oil Mafia has been hot to invade Iraq since the 90s. And I think the real reason for the invasion can be boiled down to this: If we invade, we’ll likely end up controlling the petro-economy there.
This is also where the partisan game comes into play. BushCo knows it can’t win this game before November, so we’re stuck in a holding pattern. Anything BushCo does to make the situation better overall helps KerryCo win the game next time. And if KerryCo doesn’t win, then BushCo just goes ahead and does what it was going to do anyway.
So from every angle, it’s in BushCo’s best interest to let things deteriorate to some degree. That way there’s a crisis to be solved by the ‘known known’ BushCo, there’s a reason to keep US military forces there to ‘keep the peace’ (which will happen, despite the dual-use nature of that military), and partisans can continue to argue over who supports the troops more, rather than discussing important issues like whether or not Bush is competent to be President.
This isn’t some conspiracy theory mumbo-jumbo, this is simply what the pieces look like on the board. It also assumes that BushCo really is competent at chess, which, as stated earlier, is more and more in question with every passing day. If anyone in the BushCo sphere is paying attention to what’s going on, then someone up there sees that this is the case.