Thoughts from Otrova Gomas
Are presidents stupid or are they just pawns in the chess game of the American system?
The nominal democracy in America pretends to imply the allowance of political parties into the game of politics; but in reality the various “parties,” with the exception of two, are merely the dream of a handful of “thinking enthusiasts” who know that they don't have a chance against the powerful two main parties which, although with diametrical names, practically follow the same political agendas merging at one point in the chess game of politics.  Both mainstream parties have the same basic philosophical components and the same behind-the-scene forces that control the political careers of the players.  Therefore, can we honestly say that we are a democratic society?  Even if some sociopolitical guru told us that we are not, we wouldn't believe it because our minds have been conditioned to believe otherwise by the system-supporting media, the damage-control spinners and the eternal charismatic leaders of the “civil religion” who have converted us into “true believers.”   It has been commonplace for Americans to use adjectives to describe the mentality of the presidents and qualify them as inept, idiots, morons, stupid, fundamentalists or Nazis, such in the case of our present one.  In this universe of qualifiers, “Nazi”, “stupid,” “moron,” “genocidal,” and others, take precedence over any analysis of the American power where the economy, the military establishment and the political game come together into a synergetic relationship which works toward the same goal: The military conquest of markets and strategic resources that are vital for the survival of American capitalism.  
Mark LeVine, professor of modern Middle Eastern history, culture and Islamic studies at the University of California and author of various books on international politics, in his The Nation Institute web article “Whose Chaos Is This Anyway,?” presents a theory suggesting that behind the screen of violence, the battles and the atrocities in Iraq, the transnational corporations engaged in the “reconstruction of Iraq” obtain gigantic profits in the business facilitated by the military conquest.  The San Francisco Chronicle also announced that the multinational Bechtel had gained a record profit level after three consecutive years of loses thanks to the reconstruction contracts in Iraq.  LeVine suggests also that the chaos in Iraq at the same time that it can create problems for businesses, it offers unparalleled opportunities, and he asks himself if the chaos (and insecurity) in Iraq is due to the incompetence of the Bush administration or if this chaos is advantageous for some and therefore they tend to plan it and implement it.  According to LeVine, the chaos (essentially utilized by transnational corporations) is articulated in three circles.  The first is formed by Bush and some of his highest civilian and military collaborators to which the most important planning errors and the wrong perception of various factors such as political, human, cultural and religious of the occupied country are attributed and which the media (including some denouncing books recently published in the US) have commented on and judged the various levels of government incompetence.  And the other two, to which are more difficult to attribute incompetence, are the White House and The Pentagon along with its associate powerful corporations.  To LeVine, both circles are personified by vice-president Dick Cheney, former Secretary of Defense and former Halliburton CEO, supported by other high officials who never thought that the occupation of Iraq would be a military picnic and didn't care about the obvious consequential atrocities as long as they would serve in the reconfiguration of the political map of the region. But it is the third circle, LeVine says, where the war, the violence, the chaos of occupation and the lack of law coexist in harmony with the essence of the free market.  He adds that the main reason for the invasion of Iraq was the hundreds of millions of dollars the US would invest in Iraq by the end of 2005 (of which no one will know how much will end in Halliburton's and Bechtel's accounts) added to the fraud, bribes and waste (already included as “special clauses”) added to billions of dollars in military expenses.  According to professor LeVine, all this only proves that the chaos, for the most part, is planned and implemented by economic interests that transcend the administration in power.
We have to go beyond that universe of qualifiers and consider the complexity of the system whose dynamism defines the military policies that the executive branch and its behind-the-scene forces implement and execute for the benefit of the military establishment and the big corporations of Wall Street.  When the president is demonized and the atrocities of his imperial presidency are personalized, the focus is taken from the synergetic power system of which every president in history has been the Chief Executive Officer and whose duties and responsibilities transcend his mental capacities, such in the case of our current one.