Bush a Lousy Poker Player

When George W. Bush was in the oil business, he kept gambling with other people's money. Curiously, Bush walked away with a million dollars despite the fact that his investors had a net loss of some $4 million. As a poker player, Bush lost big but when you're the son of a president it's possible to walk away with a piece of change. But now the stakes are much higher. And soon, Iran may be in the mix. Here's an excellent article about Bush the lousy poker player by John Memory, writing in the Asheville Citizen-Times:

Many American presidents have been excellent (military) poker players. Lincoln, with giant advantages in cards (troops and weapons) and chips (ability to sustain losses without being defeated), played power poker in the Civil War and won. General Eisenhower, with great ability to read his opponent (having broken the German codes), used a brilliant and elaborate bluff (suggesting the main D-Day invasion would not be at Normandy), which allowed the Allies to win that hand. Kennedy, in the Cuban Missile Crisis, correctly read the Russian opponent and went “all in.” The Russians “folded.”

Those presidents could see, understand and read their opponents (with military intelligence).

(snip)

In the present Iraq War, President Bush has, with disastrous results, failed to play with these elementary aspects of (military) poker skill. Also, in this game, Bush cannot “go all in” or win a hand by bluffing.

In early 2003, President Bush learned he could win a poker hand without combat when Hans Blix announced that weapons inspections could be completed in two years. Bush should have won that big pot. Instead, he decided to play poker in Iraq against an opponent he could not see (with intelligence), did not understand and could not read or predict. Expert (military) poker players told him it was a mistake. Bush won the invasion hand of poker when the Iraqi military folded. He claimed to have won a giant pot. Bush lost the next hand, the post-invasion disorder and looting hand, a very costly loss.

Over about three years, the opponents (insurgents and al Qaida) played thousands of hands and won many “small” pots with suicide bombers and IEDs (improvised explosive devices). Because of the low cost and inexhaustible supply of cards (troops and weapons) and chips (ability to sustain losses without losing) for the opponents, Bush cannot make them “go bust.”

Extra cards (weapons and troops) and chips (troops and equipment that can be destroyed or damaged) cost the U.S. much more than the opponents, so Bush cannot “win” a final hand without using the Iraqi military and police cards, which do not have assured continuing value. Even if he wins a last hand, he will not “win” the poker game. He has already lost far too much.

The whole article is worth reading. One thing is clear: not only is Bush still gambling with other people's money, he's now gambling with other people's lives. And this lousy poker player, not very competent and not very credible, is thinking of switching to another game and rolling the dice on Iran: double or nothing.