Bush’s Poker Game

By Chuck Connell

George Bush is playing a poker game with Iraq and is caught in a pattern familiar to all gamblers. He wants to win big, and the payoff for winning big would be real and valuable, but he is losing and does not see it.

Gamblers who have lost large sums during betting sprees always have a solid reason for continuing to play – the next hand (or horse) might be the one that turns everything around. If that next card fills the inside straight, or the trifecta comes through, all the effort will be worth it. Same in Iraq. The goals are worthy; victory would be sweet. But gambling is a legitimate occupation only when done right. Good card players know when to fold a deal, and do so often, so they can save their resources for the winning hands. Gambling becomes an addiction, and a tragic character flaw, when the gambler does not recognize a losing situation. George Bush is losing in Iraq.

From GamblersAnonymous.org, some of the signs of gambling addiction are:

• Unwillingness to accept reality.

• Emotionally comfortable only when "in action".

• A lot of time spent creating images of the wonderful things that are going to happen when they make the big win.

• A personal reputation that is harmed by gambling.

• A desire to return to the table right after a loss, to win back the losses.

• Borrowing to pay for the gambling.

• Becoming careless of the welfare of self or family.

• Gambling longer than planned.

Substitute “at war” for “in action”, “democracy in the Middle East” for “wonderful things”, “troop surge” for “return to the table”, and “country” for “family”. The result is an eerily accurate description of President Bush’s approach to the war in Iraq.

George Bush is correct that the next security plan for Baghdad might work; the next puppet leader of Iraq might end religious hatred there; and the next U.S. general put in charge of the war effort might succeed where others have failed. Yes, it is all possible. It is just possible enough to seemingly justify another attempt. But like the gambler who has lost his house and marriage at the racetrack, and wants to bet on just one more horse, it is a long shot – a very long shot. A gambler who keeps taking that long shot is a loser.

President Bush does have one huge advantage over most gamblers: He is playing with house money. He is not searching roads in Baghdad for IEDs, and neither are his children. There is little personal consequence to him for continuing to bet this war will turn around and become a winning strategy. If Bush withdraws now, he will certainly be branded a loser and judged harshly by historians. He knows this. If he continues the war, he might win, and that slim chance keeps him going. In this case, however, the chips he is tossing into the pot are American lives.

Chuck Connell is a writer and consultant in Woburn, MA. He can be reached at www.chc-3.com.