The Manchurian Vice President

The notion that the Bush gang is running some kind of Manchurian White House, intentionally undermining the United States on our enemies’ behalf, is not entirely new. In 2004, Doonesbury had an amusing item, explaining that Bush’s presidency had united the Muslim world against the United States, inspired a new generation of future terrorists with an unnecessary war in Iraq, and squandered our moral authority around the world. The strip concluded that bin Laden can only pray that Bush continues on this path.

Shortly thereafter, Paul Krugman wrote a classic, imagining what a president would look like if fundamentalist terrorists chose “as their puppet president a demagogue who poses as the nation’s defender against terrorist evildoers.” Sure enough, America’s enemies would create an agenda that looks a lot like Bush’s agenda.

Today, however, the NYT’s Nicholas Kristof takes the thought experiment one step further, suggesting that Dick Cheney’s allegiances are open to question as well. (thanks to SKNM for the tip)

If an 18-year-old American soldier were caught slipping obscure military paperwork to Iranian spies, he would be arrested, pilloried in the news media and tossed into prison for years.

But in fact there’s an American who has provided services of incalculably greater value to Iran in recent years. So you have to wonder: Is Dick Cheney an Iranian mole?

Consider that the Bush administration’s first major military intervention was to overthrow Afghanistan’s Taliban regime, Iran’s bitter foe to the east. Then the administration toppled Iran’s even worse enemy to the west, the Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq.
You really think that’s just a coincidence? That of all 193 nations in the world, we just happen to topple the two neighboring regimes that Iran despises?

Moreover, consider how our invasion of Iraq went down. The U.S. dismantled Iraq’s army, broke the Baath Party and helped install a pro-Iranian government in Baghdad. If Iran’s ayatollahs had written the script, they couldn’t have done better — so maybe they did write the script …

We fought Iraq, and Iran won. And that’s just another coincidence?

Well, probably.

To be sure, Kristof’s tongue is firmly in his cheek and he doesn’t seriously believe the Vice President is undermining our interests so as to benefit Iran. That said, Kristof does offer several additional examples.

* Cheney backed a diplomatic policy that shied away from engaging the Israeli-Palestinian conflict seriously, thus making matters worse in the Middle East.

* Cheney advocated a foreign policy that has systematically antagonized our former allies in Europe and Asia, undermining chances of a united front to block Iranian development of nuclear weapons.

* Cheney condoned torture and extralegal detentions in Guantanamo, undermining our moral standing in the world.

* Cheney’s hard-line rhetoric has inflamed Iranian nationalism and given cover to the hard-line president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

* Cheney’s preferred policy towards North Korea has resulted in that country’s quadrupling its nuclear arsenal.

What’s more, Kristof neglects to mention it, but I’d add that it was Cheney’s office that thought it wise to expose the identity of an undercover CIA agent who specialized in monitoring weapons of mass destruction.

Is that really just one more coincidence? Or could it be another case of Mr. Cheney’s following instructions from his Iranian bosses to damage America?

Again, Kristof’s kidding. Cheney “harmed American interests not out of malice but out of ineptitude,” he concludes.

I think that’s almost certainly right, but there sure are a lot of examples of Cheney’s work undermining the country, aren’t there?

Sorry, but ineptitude doesn’t cut it. He’s got a pretty reasonable resume, unlike many of those he hires (such as G.W. Bush).

But he’s not a mole for Iran, who he’s planning to invade, he’s a mole for Halliburton.

I feel it would be intstructive to take a look at how his “apparently inept” actions have affected Halliburton since he’s been in office.

I think we might find he was a very efficient mole, if we perform that study.

  • …And Halliburton just moved its headquarters to Dubai…

    …And The price of Oil was $25 a barrel before we invaded Iraq…

    …And Halliburton sells Oil…

    …And there’s an Oil tanker out there somewhere which used to be called the “Condoleeza Rice”…

    …Coincidence?

  • Seems like destroying America’s ability to project power on the ground would be Job One for a Manchurian VP.

    Mission Accomplished.

  • …Oh, yeah, and (in case anyone missed it, which I expect not) Cheney used to run Halliburton…

  • Do we really know the relationship between Dick and his mommy? On the other hand, do we really want to know?

  • Doesn’t Halliburton have an office in Teheran? Hasn’t Halliburton been selling equipment to Iraq by routing it through dummy corportions? Hasn’t Dick Cheney personally lobbied on behalf of relaxing trade restrictions with Iran?

  • This just in — the White House is going to “allow” Rove and Harriet Miers to testify to Congress, but not under oath. The AP NewsAlert didn’t say if they would be allowed to keep fingers crossed behind their backs.

  • This reminds me a lot of the classic Tom Tomorrow cartoon in which Bush, Cheney and Rove are actually hippies who, in 1968, decide to “go undercover” as conservatives, get elected, and then institute crazed right-wing policies that will thoroughly discredit the GOP and the conservative movement. Years later, to their astonishment, they find that all their ultra-right-wing policies have actually strengthened the Republican power base.

  • now let’s see how that “not under oath” thing stands up under pat leahy’s scrutiny. he made it clear on sunday he isn’t interested in any of that.

  • All that was needed to run Cheney was to tie a long stick with an oil dripping carrot to his neck and watch him chase it. One thing you can always depend on with Cheney is his GREED and that applies to the idea of power also. The only ones who agree with him are those just like him and they are run the same way. We know he lied about everything and hate being duped by him and his, those without conscience.

  • Just Bill- It actually doesn’t matter whether people testify under oath in front of Congress. Lying to Congress, under oath or not, carries a 10 year/ $10K possible penalty. The only difference about being under oath is which statute they charge you under. (Basically, putting people under oath is only a P.R. thing)

  • He’s not an Iranian mole, he’s a mole for the wealthy parasites who have turned this country into their personal money mine.

    Too bad he’s not an Iranian mole – we could then stick his ass in front of a wall, which is where he richly deserves to be.

  • The thought of Cheney as a traitor isn’t hard at all. How this man managed to cultivate an image of “uber-competence” over the past 33 years, when in fact everything he ever touched turned to shit is beyond me.

  • So, Kristof concludes that Cheney harmed American interests not out of malice but out of ineptitude?

    Let’s apply Cheney’s “One Percent Doctrine” to this: if there’s a one percent chance of the unimaginable coming due, act as if it is a certainty. By his own doctrine, wouldn’t Cheney then have acted out of malice and deserve to be hung for treason? (No trial would be needed if we could establish a one percent chance he was guilty.)

    To the NSA: I figure there’s more than a one percent chance I just got flagged, but it’s just a rhetorical exercise, guys. Heck, I catch crickets in the basement and set them free outside rather than squish ’em.

  • Unlike the old saying about General Motors, what’s good for the military/industrial complex is decidedly NOT what’s good for the country.

    Putting the nation back on a “cold war” or even “third world war” footing is all Cheney cares about. These were just the pieces he put in play…

  • “The only difference about being under oath is which statute they charge you under. (Basically, putting people under oath is only a P.R. thing)” – Castor Troy

    But proving someone lied to Congress is a hard case to make when it’s informal (small) with no transcript or notes.

  • “Sorry for tooting my own horn:” – Racerx

    Predicting that is equivalent to predicting rain during a hurricane. There were about zero people thinking Rove was going to in front of Congress.

  • Maybe I can save you some speculation – Dick Cheney’s stock options in Halliburton increased in value, not by double or even triple, by a factor of 32 since the war in Iraq began. I believe I read it in Counterpunch. Dick Cheney will (quite literally, since his evil heart would more accurately be said to be squelching along in its wicked brew than actually beating) never live long enough to spend all the wealth the Iraqi Adventure has earned him and his family through his….ahem….prudent investment.

  • …[Kristof] doesn’t seriously believe the Vice President is undermining our interests so as to benefit Iran.

    I think you mean Kristof doesn’t believe Cheney is intentionally undermining our interests so as to benefit Iran. But that is clearly the result of his actions. As to whether that means anything as a practical matter, well… hell is paved with good intentions and even if Cheney’s intentions are not to help Iran, I still have a hard time categorizing them as “good”.

  • Cheney is indeed a mole. Not an Iranian mole, but a
    Halliburton/Exxon-Mobil/Carlyle Group/etc. mole. That is all Cheney has
    ever been. Kristoff has always struck me as unbelievably naive. That a
    person could exhibit a keen intellect as Kristoff does, but nevertheless
    fail to recognize what our federal “government” has become under the
    bu$h-cheney junta, is puzzling. Come on, Nick! Get a f’in’ clue! Cheney
    and his junta are not interested in public service, public policy, or
    “foreign policy.” The junta has no “foreign policy” other than this: to
    use U.S. military power and all other U.S. assets to amass wealth and
    power for the junta’s cronies (eg, Halliburton, Blackwater, The Carlyle
    Group, the Republican Party, etc.). Cheney’s primary objective throughout
    his political career has been to consolidate all economic and political
    power in the hands of the military-industrial-media-corporate elite that
    has dominated America since WWII. No, Cheney is not an Iranian mole. That
    is absurd because Cheney would never lend his services to anyone except
    corporate elites. But the way in which the hapless, naive Kristoff frames
    his argument leads him to conclude that Cheney is not a mole at all. This
    is equally false. Ignorance and incompetence cannot possibly account for
    what the bu$h-cheney junta have done to the U.S. and to the world. Cheney
    is a Halliburton/Blackwater/Carlyle mole, and all of his actions as VP are
    clear evidence of this. The junta has transformed the federal government
    into nothing more than a vast, intricate system of transferring wealth
    from the commons – from the federal treasury, from federal lands, from
    military force, etc. – to the bank accounts of giant anti-American
    corporations. That is the junta’s sole objective and sole mode of
    operation. Bu$h Republicanism is something different from traditional
    conservatism and something different from big-government liberalism; it is
    a new kind of politics that transforms the state into a huge,
    ever-expanding instrument for converting public treasure and private
    savings into corporate profit. Does Kristoff truly not see this? Or is he
    just being artfully propogandistic?

  • Comments are closed.