Things are not going as well as desired in George W. Bush's Terror War Against Terror, a campaign designed to establish his historical legacy by placing the United States in the role of International Overlord. The latest reversal concerns Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf warning that U.S. troops would be regarded as invaders if they crossed Pakistan's border with Afghanistan while chasing militants.

Considering that Pervez-i-poot is a sour old coot with a "nukyular" arsenal, it's no wonder that the worn-out distraction policy is being pulled out of the neo-confidence playbook once again. There are some things going on that the PNAC resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue doesn't want us in America to notice, and with no new war pending, the Bush administration has to actually work at reaching this goal.

The best way to begin is to pretend that an ongoing fiasco is actually achieving something positive. For instance, Bush said that the United States would have a long-term presence in Iraq, but that "it would be at the invitation of the Iraqi government."

Yeah, right! Once you finish restoring Saddam's government to national power under your control, will not the Iraqi people do what they are told lest you unleash Blackwater on them? I'm sure they would have some staff positions for veterans of Saddam's Mukhabarat!

Such practices are a given in recent historical US foreign policy. Nazi administrators were restored to power in Germany during the Occupation because (it was claimed) they were the only ones who could make Germany function. Similar moves intended to establish a "stable" - and docile - civilian control structure were made in Japan, and in Korea, and in Vietnam, ....

Speaking of that abomination, former CIA veteran Ray McGovern wonders: "How can our president speak so glibly about 10 more years of a U.S. armed presence in Iraq? He must not remember Vietnam." How could he, Ray? Just like that famous observation concerning the Sixties, he couldn't remember it if he WAS there - which he made damn sure he wasn't. But from McGovern's observation that "the only thing that has prevented Bush and Cheney from attacking Iran so far has been the strong opposition of ... the Joint Chiefs", it's clear that someone has remembered Vietnam.

I believe that the leaders of the Persian Gulf also remember Vietnam, and I also believe that they understand why it's absolutely necessary to avoid war until all other options have been exhausted. One would think that with the latest revelations that the recent incident involving Iranian speedboats and US Navy warships in the Gulf wasn't exactly as advertised (even though a commenter of Jon Stewart's take of the incident indicates that the voices of those on the Iranian video are interested in determining the identity of the Navy ship), George would be a little less brazen in his public assertions. It's clear to better poker players than Bush will ever be that he's telling a bluff.