Damn, you're both right!! Of course, the US will try to 'influence' the election. It does not take a conspiracy theorist to see this. I mean, merely by appointing a provisional gov't they have already given these guys a huge leg up by putting them in a prominent, publicly visible position. If the US can improve conditions between now and January, they will of course let the provisional leaders take the credit, and voila, electoral influence. If you want to see a conspiracy in this, every announcement any government makes about positive news is an attempt to 'fix' the election b/c the announcement is clearly intended to influence voters.
OTOH, it is nuts to think that a position paper from the Pentagon 'proves' anything. There are people who are paid to think up plans, strategies, etc. around basically every contigency. In fact, if you dug deep enough, I bet you would find a paper somewhere in the Pentagon archives outlining what to do in the event the Iraq invasion resulted in a lot a political instability and Iraqi anger.
Would this 'prove' that Bush adequately planned for the aftermath?
