Like Richard, you're trying to think like Oswald in order to validate your theory.
I really don't have a theory to which I am anything like irrevocably wedded. In my opinion, the evidence and reasonable inferences overwhelmingly point oward Oswald as being directly involved in the JFKA. This is true regardless of whether he was a lone assassin or involved in a conspiracy. The popular notion that he was entirely innocent, in my opinion, is completely untenable. Hence, I do indeed try to make sense of his actions and statements on the basis of his direct involvement and what may have been going on inside his head,
You also seem to be incorrectly assuming that a conspiracy has to be "elaborate". Have you considered to possibility that nobody with "the government" was involved? That it wasn't an "inside job"?
I don't assume that at all. See the thread I just started, "Is this a plausible conspiracy?" The fact is, the JFKA conspiracy community is, to a large extent, addicted to preposterously elaborate and untenable theories from
Harvey & Lee on down. These theories, without exception, require the reinvention of Oswald into someone bearing no resemblance to the real man. These theories are driven, not by a wish to explain the JFKA, but by a wish to validate a particular political perspective to which the JFKA is only marginally related.
If I observe Oswald's behaviour (without trying to say what he's actually thinking), he look perplexed, confused. Rather than looking like he has triumphed by getting back at others, "sticking a finger up", he looks stunned - denying that he shot anyone and shouting "I'm the patsy!!". Then comes the hopeless LNer argument: "he was nuts". 
If any of us had had the three hours I believe Oswald had from noon to 3 PM on 11-22, I think we'd be looking a bit stunned, perplexed and confused. The fact is, he was by all accounts astonishingly composed, arrogant, hostile and spouting preposterous lies during intense interrogation. His patsy comment had nothing to do with any conspiracy and was in furtherance of his Marxist theme (the DPD only picked me up because I went to Russia).
I don't believe he was "nuts" at all. Psychologically disturbed, yes. I believe he realized his life had reached a dead-end and all his dreams were going nowhere. He was no more "nuts" than any other suicide or assassin. He committed a desperate act, was astonished to find he had survived it, and now the wheels were turning as to how this might be played out as Marxist theater. It's always surprising to me, given Oswald's demonstrated propensity to lie and lie and lie, from job applications to personal relationships, that so many CTers are willing to believe his claims of innocense were truthful.
