This morning I was surprised to read the assertion (written in 1994) that many students who were too young to remember Vietnam are confused by the protests against that war. I am among those too young to remember Vietnam but I’ve never felt confused about the protests – it was a war we were fighting poorly and without decent justification.
As I learned some more details about the war my perspective changed. In 2004 I was unimpressed to learn that John Kerry would volunteer to serve in Vietnam and then be a vocal activist against the war after returning home. As I learned a few more details about what was happening in that war I am no longer surprised. (Not that it changes my opinion of his presidential potential.) In fact, I wonder that anyone could serve there and not protest the war when they got home.
My conclusion here is that while I did not feel confused about the protests before I did not really understand them. Considering how recent this history is it is a sad statement that students would have such a poor understanding of what took place at a time when half of our current voting population was already old enough to recognize what was happening all around them.
It was not Kerry’s protest of the war that bothered me. It was the blatant lies he wove through his protests and the disrespectful manner in which he carried out his charade.
Why do I call it a charade? Because he was only doing what he figured would improve his political chances. He volunteered to serve for the same reason, but then public sentiment turned against the war, particularly in MA. So he did too. Then when national security was a key issue in 2004, he tried to remake himself as a war hero, conveniently burying his deceitful protests of the past. In short, Kerry proved himself to be … a POLITICIAN.
The main reason for the strident protests of the Vietnam War in general was not the basic nature of the war or how the war was being waged. Rather it was the fact that all this was happening chiefly with drafted soldiers.
Historically, we are much less careless about our soldiers’ lives when we are using an all-volunteer force than when we are using draftees. When people sense that they or their loved ones are being forced to sacrifice themselves due to incompetency, they get upset. Most of the protesters came from the age group that was most impacted by the draft.
When we were fighting incompetently in Iraq, there were a handful of protests, but these were mostly staffed by the same crew that protested the Vietnam War. People were unhappy about the incompetence, but people didn’t resort to mob activity because we were using an all-volunteer force. Unlike Vietnam, most Americans don’t even know anyone serving in Iraq.
I agree that the political expediency of all of John Kerry’s actions diminishes any positive value of his choices. I’m confident that the use of drafted soldiers made the protesters more angry, but considering some of our actions in that war I think I would have been even more opposed to that war than I have been to the foolish war in Iraq.
Even before high school graduation in ’66, my male classmates were all working on how to get a deferment and avoid getting drafted. There were some volunteers, of course, but most thought the war was insane, was not our war, and did not want to give their lives there. Six BOYS from my class of ’66 did die there. I never want to forget how wrong that was. Many more were catastophically wounded. My first child was born on Christmas Eve at Fitzsimmons Army Hospital where amputees from the war were taken for long-term care. I remember helicopters landing on the roof above me thoughout the night there and I would awaken thinking I was in Vietnam. That war left a lasting wound on my generation.
ReachUpward, you think Kerry volunteered just to improve his political chances? You’re crazy. It’s awfully easy to say that sitting in your comfortable house rather than in a hot, humid, disease and enemy-ridden jungle where getting shot at is just part of the daily routine. Shot at! Think about it. There are much easier ways of achieving political goals. Decades after it happened, political enemies twisted events to change a hero’s actions into scum.
David,do you honestly believe it was political expediency that made Kerry put his life in danger? I respect your opinions and apologize for hijacking your post here, but I have to strongly disagree on this point.
I’m not qualified to guess why Kerry made that choice – you’ll notice that I did not suggest that it was a matter of political expediency. I only said that any political expediency of his choices diminishes the positive value associated with such choices.
According to Wikipedia he joined because the draft board would not give him permission to study in Paris for a year. It looks like a case of joining before he could be drafted.
The real point of my post was that I have a better understanding of why someone would protest that war after fighting in it.
I misunderstood, David. But as in the comment prior to yours, Kerry continues to be attacked unfairly–when he served on the front lines of that miserable war, and deserves our thanks not criticism. I do think the Wikipedia statement gives the wrong impression. The exact same statement is found in numerous anti-Kerry sites as well, and it makes it sound as if that was an unusual way of deciding to enlist.
The fact is, every guy I knew was trying to get a deferment. Student deferments were most common. Each Mormon ward was allowed deferments to send two missionaries per year. Once all options for deferment failed, then guys started shopping around the services trying to get into anything but the army. The army meant six weeks of basic training, and then straight to Vietnam. That’s just the way it worked. If you were really lucky, you got into the reserves or national guard like Bush, as those services weren’t activated during Vietnam. But you had to be a “senator’s son”, like they said in the song, to get those plum spots.
The truth is, Kerry served with honor and then his record was shamefully demeaned by the politics of the presidential race. I thought we had finally put all the swift boat lies to rest.
I did not mean to suggest that “enlist before you get drafted” was an uncommon or dishonorable practice. I do think that listing that service as volunteering to serve (as Kerry does on his own site) whitewashes the truth. Either he volunteered (and why would anyone do that – as you say) or else he ran out of options and was coerced to make the best of it. There’s nothing wrong with that, but lets call it what it is. Essentially you are arguing exactly the opposite thing that Kerry is presenting on his own site.
This doesn’t take anything away from his service (which I have never said one thing about).
Let’s not forget he volunteered for a second tour of duty and for Swift Boat duty. That’s in every way the spirit of volunteering. And very rare at the time.
True, a second tour of duty was definitely volunteering.