Karl Rove's announcement that he was leaving his position in this administration is almost 2 months old and I get the feeling that the administration doesn't miss him one bit. I wonder why that is? In this entry I speculate that the reason why this administration pushed so hard for the "War in Iraq" is because it was part of Karl Rove's political strategy to get George W. Bush elected for a second term and the administration has been dealing with the aftermath of Rove's strategy for the past 3 years.
A majority of Americans are now thinking "Why did President George W. Bush's Administration push so hard to get us into the war in Iraq ?". Some speculate that it was based on a personal vendetta to get Saddam Hussein because of the assassination attempt on the president's father. Others speculate that the Bush / Cheny orientation toward big oil made them think that having Iraq in our back pocket after Saddam was removed would provide a stable / secure supply of oil to the US . Others would say that the intelligence about Iraq and weapons of mass destruction (WMD) was so warped that Bush honestly believed that Saddam was a threat to the US . I don't think that this is possible because the Bush administration warped the intelligence in the first place by sending the CIA away until they came up with the answers the administration wanted. But why then did the G. W. Bush Administration sell the American public so hard on this war? My answer to this question takes into consideration that Karl Rove's position in the administration as chief political advisor never existed before George W. Bush's Administration and his unprecedented access to the President?
Boy, wouldn't it have been nice to be a fly on the wall in the meetings / conferences held by White House staff during the lead up to the war. I would have liked to listen to all the conversations Karl Rove had about the war because I think that is where the truth would be found. Why do I say this? It is not because I think that Karl Rove is "Truly Evil". It is because Rove is a student of history, especially political history, and as an understudy of Lee Attwater he is willing to do just about anything to win in politics. I believe that those two characteristics contributed substantially to this administration's push to go to war with Iraq . If my speculation is true, the aftermath of the political strategy Karl Rove sponsored in George W. Bush's Administration has cost the lives of over 3800 American Solders, resulted in over 27,000 American Solders wounded and/or disabled, and cost over $500 Billion dollars.
Since Rove is a student of political history lets first review president H. W. Bush's (a.k.a. Bush One) time in office. He first ran for president in 1980 and lost the republican primary to Ronald Regan. He was selected to be president Regan's Vice Presidential (VP) running mate during the Republican convention in 1980 and became president Regan's attack dog during the 1980 presidential campaign. We all know that Regan won that election and that he was re-elected in 1984 and retained H. W. Bush as his VP. After 8 years of being VP under Regan Bush One ran for president. Lee Attwater was a major contributor to his campaign. Lee's "Win at all costs" approach to politics was notorious for character assassination, torpedoing opponents with misinformation, and personal smear tactics. A good example of Mr. Attwater's tactics was using the viciously racist Willie Horton political commercials to propagate the belief that the Democrats were soft on crime. Lee Attwater died after Bush One was elected president. The reason I mention Lee Attwater here is because Karl Rove admired Lee Attwater and believed in his political strategy to "Win at all costs". President H.W. Bush (Bush One) soundly defeated Governor Michael Dukakis in 1988. Bush One had inherited a relatively good economy but he discovered that the policies of the Regan Administration had left the federal government is a state that was fiscally unsound. The financial markets pounded the Bush One Administration for the Regan Administration’s poor fiscal policies by raising interest rates which slowed the US economy. The Bush One Administration passed a tax increase to establish a sound fiscal basis for the federal government which should have lowered interest rates and increased the growth rate of the US economy. However, the changes in fiscal policy made by the Bush One Administration took too long to accelerate the growth in the US economy to effect the outcome of the 1992 presidential election. The Bush One Administration responded to Iraq's aggression against Kuwait in the Persian Gulf by working to establish an international response to Iraq, providing US resources to participate in and facilitate the response, and working with the UN and participating international partners to expel Iraq (Saddam Hussein) from Kuwait and forcing Iraq to sign and comply with an agreement to end the conflict. The first Gulf War conflict was started in in August, 1990 by Iraq invading Kuwait . The international armed intervention began in January 1991 and resulted in a decisive victory for the coalition forces, which drove Iraqi forces out of Kuwait with minimal coalition deaths in February, 1991. This was an overwhelming victory for the US and the Bush One Administration and was ~20 months before the presidential election of 1992 took place. Bush One lost the 1992 election to President Clinton. The 1992 presidential campaign was hard fought between the major 2 parties as well as the independent candidacy of Ross Perot. Three things seemed to effect the election's outcome; the first was that Bush One seemed to be out of touch with the American public's perception of a lackluster US economy, the second was Ross Perot's 3rd party campaign calling the republican party on the "Dirty Tricks" they were playing to slime him and his family, and the third was the Clinton Campaign's ability to respond instantly to any political tactic tried by Bush One's Campaign. One of the outstanding questions I have about this election is "Why didn't the decisive victory the Bush One Administration had in the First Gulf War have a greater effect on the 1992 presidential election?".
Now lets look at the history of the current administration. President George W. Bush (Bush Two) was elected president in 2000 in a contested election in which Al Gore actually won the popular vote while George W. Bush won the Electoral Collage tally because he was declared the winner in the state of Florida in which his brother, Jeb Bush, was governor. This whole fiasco was the ultimate end game of Attwater's "Win at all costs" strategy and it was orchestrated by, guess who, Karl Rove. The Bush Two Administration gets into office and for nine months they flounder trying to take over the rains of power. Then the 9/11 terrorist attack happens and the American psyche goes into war mode to respond to the attack on the motherland. The war in Afghanistan began in October, 2001. The Tali Ban based Afghan government was over thrown by December, 2001. High levels of US troop activity continued through 2002 to try to track down the leaders of the Al Qaeda terrorist organization. The Bush Two Administration started to establish a foreign policy based on unilateral preemptive action to support the US "War on Terrorism" and prevent the occurrence of another terrorist attack on the US homeland. How did this new policy result in the conflict in Iraq. The Iraqi government had no ties to the Al Qaeda terrorist organization. The international sanctions imposed and reinforced because of Iraqi violations of agreement ot end the war had decimated the Iraqi economy and UN inspectors were verifying (albeit slowly) that Iraq military capabilities to manufacture and deploy WMD's no longer existed. However, even with all this information something changed in 2002 within the Bush Two Administration which oriented it toward developing a compelling case to go to war with Iraq. It is my opinion that in 2002 Karl Rove realized that the Bush Two Administration was in a much worse position politically than the Bush One Administration was in its first term to win a second term in office. This statement is based on the fact that US economy was in a deep recession and the Bush Two Administration had decisively won a major battle in the "War-on-Terrorism" with more than 2 years to go to the next presidential election.
Now, according to history, the stage is set for George W. Bush to loose his bid for a second term as his father did. Just think about it. Bush One was elected to office with a decisive majority in 1988, he raised taxes to restore fiscal responsibility which was unpopular with his conservative base, he won a war decisively ~20 months before the 1992 presidential election, the US economy grew slowly during his term in office, and he lost his bid for a second term in office. Now lets look at the state of the Bush Two Administration at the end of 2002. The Bush Two was put into office by the US Supreme Court decision in 2000, the US response to the 9/11 terrorist attack was an overwhelming success and appeared victorious more than 2 years before the 2004 presidential election, two tax cuts were passed in which the top %5 of income in the US received 50% of the tax cuts, and the US economy was in a deep recession throughout 2001 and 2002. What would you have done if you were the top Republican political strategist to keep the Bush Two Administration in power through a second term, keep in mind the mantra of "Win at all costs"? The answer is to keep the American Psyche in war mode and use the patriotism and loyalty associated with this psyche to get the American public to vote for George W. Bush and get him elected for the second term. Now the only thing you need is a war! Yes, my explanation for why the Bush Two Administration pushed so hard for the war in Iraq is that it was part of Karl Rove's political strategy to get George W. Bush elected for a second term.
If my speculation is correct and the Iraq War was part of the political strategy to get George W. Bush elected for a second term then one can see just how warped Karl Rove is. Now, what do you think about that "Win at all costs" strategy considering that more than 3800 soldiers have lost their lives, more than 27000 soldiers have been wounded, and the cost in US treasure is over $500 Billion.