28 Comments

1. jedrury:

“the bizarre spectacle of a man parading his war bravery when he allegedly opposed that war.”

Well put ! And touching tribute to your father. Thanks.

Jul 30, 2004 - 8:03 am 2. dougf:

“Well put ! And touching tribute to your father. Thanks”—

Can’t improve on that.Ditto for me.

Jul 30, 2004 - 8:16 am 3. DSmith:

I protested the war in Vietnam in the late ’60s.

I was wrong. Pol Pot was the proof. The way the Communists conducted themselves in the late 70s in Vietnam was further proof.

What astounded me most about Pol Pot was how the Dems/Left ignored it and still do. As if it never happened. As if the Republicans hadn’t been proved resoundingly right.

Jul 30, 2004 - 8:24 am 4. Sissy Willis:

You are your father’s son, and you have made the tears well up with your evocative portrait of a great man.

Jul 30, 2004 - 8:24 am 5. Stephen_M:

Roger, A shining example of introspection. And so evocative of the time when fathers and sons seemed to inhabit different worlds. The soul of the country was truly tested back then. And despite the Time/Life Books verdict that the Boomers won the judgement of history, the jury is in fact still out.

Jul 30, 2004 - 8:58 am 6. Michael_B:

A great post.

Offered in much the same spirit of being constructively involved, the latest updates from Spirit of America with some dedicatory photos from Iraq.

Pharmaceutical supplies, dedicating a sewing center and supplies, contributing tradesman tools, etc., etc., etc.

Jul 30, 2004 - 9:07 am 7. Hepzi:

FWIW, I doubt any apology would be expected, Roger.

The longer I live, the more I think every war is in fact like the VietNam War–even WWII. The “easy” ones like Gulf War I are probably mere skirmishes within a larger confrontation–or white-washed history.

And God bless—and maintain—the yin/yang debate you have described that existed between your father and you; it keeps our great democracy focused.

Pray God also maintains our grit to honestly assess our threats and our resolve to take necessary action….

Jul 30, 2004 - 9:40 am 8. John Moore ( Useful Fools ):

A nice tribute. If he was like most fathers, he would be plenty proud of your achievements, not seeking an apology for behavior of 35 years ago. Many of us were sure that we knew more than our fathers back then (”don’t trust anyone over thirty”), regardless of which side of the great debate we were on.

Likewise, I think it was difficult for young people not already aware of the dangers of Communism to know about the evil of the SE Asian communists, especially after the news media switched sides in 1968. There was a lot of bad information going around and some bad people pushing it. The containment concept was hard to sell, and when the government said we were there to maintain democracy, everyone knew that was nonsense ( although the government of the South was greatly preferred to the communists, a fact denied by that great SE Asian expert and General, John Kerry.

A better question is how you or others reacted to the massacres after Vietnam fell, but even there, rationalizations were available to true believers: the reports of killings and concentration camps were capitalist propaganda, Pol Pot was a result of the Cambodians driven mad by US bombing (I hope you didn’t buy that one), the boat people were the former ruling class of Vietnam leaving because they lost their privileges.

In that sense, I was lucky to have a cold warrior scientist as a father. He took us to East Berlin ( after waiting the mandatory 10 years on his security clearance). It was a shocking experience to go through Checkpoint Charlie in 1966 and suddenly be in 1946. It was stunning to go to a spot where you could look over the wall, and look up the barrels of VOPO machine guns mounted in the ruins of Nazi buildings. He also took me to a CIA run propaganda station in West Berlin (I was a radio broadcast engineer at the time(. When Cuba fell, I was home sick for months and watched with horror Castro’s firing squad. During the Cuban missile crisis, my father showed us where to “duck” if Albuquerque ( which had and may still have the biggest stockpile of nukes in the country ) was attacked.

But my father disapproved of my choice, too, which was to join the Army in 1966. There were plans – get an EE degree, get an MD, become a biomedical researcher. Instead, I was volunteering to get killed. Fortunately he found an alternative – Naval Air Reserve – and since it involved aircraft, I joined that – ending up with at least a more comfortable military job ( when I was a Boy Scout, I was always the last one up the hill – imagining participating in what I now know of the army, it would not have been pleasant ).

Jul 30, 2004 - 10:12 am 9. Hovig:

Whether he wins or loses the presidency, let’s all thank God for John Kerry, and his statement last night that he “defended this country.”

It beggars belief that after thirty years of damning Vietnam vets and their leaderhip from all sides and angles, the enlightened view has suddenly become that Vietnam was a “defensive” war (not to mention the now-universal pride [as opposed to reluctant acceptance] in electing a Vietnam War participant to office). Whether he wins or loses the presidency, let’s all thank God for John Kerry, because the Left will never be able to make their 1970s claims again without embarrassment.

As for comparisons with the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, it’s not clear to me how these were any less “defensive” than Senator Kerry’s Vietnam was, but then, ideologues always live in a bit of a historical and logical bubble, don’t they. Perhaps the best thing we can hope for is that 30 years from now, an Iraq or Afghanistan War veteran will run for office as a Democrat, and attempt the same revision.

Jul 30, 2004 - 10:43 am 10. Sun-Tzu:

Hovig:

Have to disagree here. The Left has been rewriting its view of Vietnam (only the relevant portions) for the longest time.

If I were a foreigner with no knowledge of American history, and relied on their version, I would conclude that the United States invaded the poor nation of Vietnam under Richard Nixon, committing massive atrocities, slaughtering millions through brutal massacres such as My Lai, which occurred on a regular basis. Nixon (and some guy named Johnson, apparently) went further, and invaded the nations of Cambodia and Laos illegally, and culminated his war criminal period by the brutal bombing of North Vietnam.

Only the poor served there, while the rich stayed away. (Evidently with the exception of John Kerry.) When they came home, however, they were embraced by their countrymen, especially the protestors, who only wanted them back safe and sound (and any claims of spitting on veterans is entirely urban legend, as I recently read).

Fortunately, the US lost the Tet Offensive, and then the war ended and POOF that was it.

Little about the Ho Chi Minh trail and where that was located (hint: it might have something to do w/ Nixon’s invading Cambodia); nothing about whether it was mostly whites, blacks, poor, middle class, educated or uneducated who served; nothing about LBJ directing the war from the WHite House, or Westmoreland’s focus on search-and-destroy operations.

Tet? Creighton Abrams? The conventional North Vietnamese offensive that actually toppled the South? The revisionism about spitting on troops, I’ll leave to those who have served.

And the aftermath? I find it interesting how few Southeast Asian states, from Thailand to Singapore, felt it was the wrong war at the wrong time, that it was an imperialist war, that it was unnecessary.

So, I fully expect the Left to have no embarrassment, because they’ve been busily rewriting so that they were right all the time.

Jul 30, 2004 - 11:31 am 11. penwil:

My husband, a Marine lieutenant, was spat on and called “baby killer” in the San Francisco airport when he came home from Viet Nam in 1969. A part of him has never forgiven the country for having turned on their men and women in uniform during that era. His opinion of John F. Kerry was at the time and still is not fit for politie company,

Jul 30, 2004 - 12:18 pm 12. Roberts:

You would think that the Airmen, Soldiers, Sailors and Marines who served one or more tours of 12 or 13 months would have something to say about someone who spent 12 whole weeks in Vietnam and now makes it the centerpiece of his campaign.

Jul 30, 2004 - 12:21 pm 13. Catherine:

Hovig

It beggars belief that after thirty years of damning Vietnam vets and their leaderhip from all sides and angles, the enlightened view has suddenly become that Vietnam was a “defensive” war (not to mention the now-universal pride [as opposed to reluctant acceptance] in electing a Vietnam War participant to office).

Thank you!

I’m having trouble figuring out what it is I’m trying to say about John Kerry, and why I find his promoting of his service-to-his-country so offensive. Your post is a big help.

All of a sudden, in the John Kerry narrative, Vietnam is a defensive war.

How did that happen?

I think this is why the liberals I’ve seen so far found the Kerry-at-War movie so off-putting.

A liberal who still believes Vietnam was–what did Hitchens call it? a “filthy and immoral war”? something along those lines?–doesn’t then see Kerry as a hero for having “served.”

And it seems to me that liberals who’ve changed their views over time may be reacting negatively for much the same reason, though this is the thing I’m having trouble either understanding or expressing.

I think liberals everywhere, both pro- and con-, are having an “I didn’t get the memo” moment.

The sudden redefinition of Vietnam hasn’t gone completely unnoticed by liberal writers. Michael Wolff had a piece in the last VANITY FAIR that would aggravate everyone here no end (it was pretty hard to take), but that is probably worth reading because he grapples with the fact that, as he says, Vietnam is now becoming “our war”–”our” meaning liberals. Thanks to the Kerry campaign, Vietnam is becoming (or is being restored to) the liberal’s war.

I think Hovig is right, here: we’re experiencing an unintended consequence that is all to the good. Vietnam is being redefined as a good war.

That’s going to leave its mark.

A decent example of a (pro-Iraq-war) liberal reacting negatively to Kerry’s “I served in Vietnam” stance is this:

Apocalypse Kerry by Lawrence F. Kaplan

In some ways Kaplan’s essay is as confused as I feel, but he makes some good individual points:

There were, in fact, three Vietnams haunting the convention hall last night. One was on the stage, which, with its “band of brothers” and “greatest generation” tributes, somehow attached World War II nostalgia to our national tragedy in Vietnam. The second was in the audience, where nine out of ten delegates view the war in Iraq through the prism of their views of that earlier conflict–that is, they would just as soon bolt–and where Kerry’s Vietnam service seems to be regarded as some sort of anthropological (and heaven-sent) oddity. The final Vietnam was in John Kerry’s words, which blended the stage and audience versions into some approximation of the candidate’s own views about the war. None of it furthered the cause of rational discourse.

Jul 30, 2004 - 1:10 pm 14. Catherine:

Hmm, sorry. The link worked in preview.

Here’s the URL:

http://www.tnr.com/docprint.mhtml?i=express&s=kaplan073004

Jul 30, 2004 - 1:11 pm 15. Fausta:

Lovely tribute, Roger. Your Dad was a great guy, who was willing to understand.

Jul 30, 2004 - 1:27 pm 16. PeterUK:

Roger,

The realisation that one has turned into ones parents is always somewhat of a surprise,we spend so much of our lives trying not to.Looking back it is amazing how tolerant of us they were.

Having been there I don’t trust anybody “under” thirty!

Jul 30, 2004 - 1:48 pm 17. M. Simon:

Roger,

I was totally on your side in 1974.

Today I must say your father was correct. Totally. Because the Shadow Knows.

In those days we were saddled with a totally corrupt regime left over from the French (such lovely people).

Bad a it was it would have been 100X better than what the Comunists did. We were innocent then and believed in the potential of a morally pure man. After all wasn’t racism on the run because of our morality? We were fooled by our own goodness. Such fools. Such lovely fools.

Jul 30, 2004 - 2:06 pm 18. Hovig:

Catherine – Thanks for the kind words.

Sun-Tzu – Great comments. When you asked why any rich folk like John Kerry went to Vietnam, perhaps the answer is obvious now that we’ve seen Senator Kerry’s presentation last night: In order to film self-serving documentary clips for their eventual presidential campaigns.

I wonder if it isn’t to Al Gore’s unending regret that he only took occasional snapshots here and there. Perhaps that senator’s son, still embarrassed by the previous year’s Creedence Clearwater Revival song, refused to request of his father the Super 8 movie camera and amount of film a proper documentary would have required. Proper planning and the lack of a Super 8 camera may well have cost Mr Gore the election. This might be the real story of the 2000 controversy after all. Political advisers, take note.

My advice to all budding ideologues — uh, I mean — political aspirants would be: Don’t skimp or feel sheepish when it comes to documenting your heroic or charitable acts; start as early as possible; make sure you enlist in the military, carefully selecting the branch whose uniforms best complement your physical characteristics; and finally, engage in activities more likely to be regarded favorably by “the other side,” both to neutralize any possible advantage they may claim on the issue, and also to show “your side can do it too,” the implication being, of course, that someone of your side — the superior side, of course — can do it in a superior fashion.

Jul 30, 2004 - 3:00 pm 19. LYNNDH:

Good post. I agree that the Democrats have become isolationist. It is frighting that Kerry will respond AFTER something has happened, in this day and age of bio/chem/nuke weapons.

Jul 30, 2004 - 3:07 pm 20. Robert Schwartz:

Roger:

Beautiful post. May your father’s memory be for a blessing.

Jul 30, 2004 - 3:22 pm 21. thedragonflies:

The Viet Nam war made me a hard leftie during the war. Then I had to rethink everything when I saw the boat poeple and Pol Pot’s hell. So, I went through the pain of changing my politics with Reagan’s presidency, and saw through the propaganda to see the tyranny of the communists. I became a cold warrior and am proud to have supported Reagan’s victorious war.

The hardest thing was dealing with the image change and dealing with no longer being one of the cool liberals. Peer pressure is the biggest glue of the left.

The joke of this election is that the post-Viet Nam era ended on 9/11/01. Half the country hasn’t gotten it yet. The post-Viet Nam days where American power was seen as bad and not to be trusted are over. We can’t indulge in the adolescent self-indulgences of hyrper-criticism. In order to survive we have to know that we are good and worth defending.

And we are. The Michael Moores are having their last hurrah as they fade into oblivion. This election has the opportunity for the country to make a choice – for American goodness, strength, and noble mission. Kerry doesn’t have a mission other than have people like us (peer pressure).

Bush has a mission to defend Western Civilization by spreading freedom around the world. I am glad to support Bush in America’s eventual triumph.

Jul 30, 2004 - 3:44 pm 22. RogerA:

Penwil–I returned as a Captain and had the same experience as your husband–The Viet Nam “experience” has yet to be fully sorted out. Good intentions poorly executed; political expediency; individual bravery and heroism; barbarism. I did admire the true COs who served as medics or chaplain assistants; I even admire Al Gore for serving and I grudgingly respect John Kerry’s service (not knowing the motives). The one thing that is certain is the result of our political ineptitude was the sacrifice of millions of people to the Khymer Rouge and North Vietnamese. How the protestors of the war can sleep knowing that outcome totally escapes me.

Jul 30, 2004 - 4:03 pm 23. RogerA:

And Roger–thank you for honoring your father.

Jul 30, 2004 - 4:05 pm 24. John Moore ( Useful Fools ):

One common myth is that Vietnam was a poor man’s war. The demographics of the soldiers were a very close match to that of the country. Many well off people (and I don’t think Kerry was “rich” then) went to war – it was part of one’s duty.

Kerry’s motives are, I think, fairly easy to divine.

His draft board was after him and refused his request to spend a year in France. He joined the Navy, one of the safest services in that war, unless you were an aviator. His first cruise gave him Vietnam credentials (Vietnam Service Ribbon) but no combat and no in-country ribbon (a Green and White thing which I have lost). He heard about the SWIFT boats and operation market time – which was coastal patrol ( we lost a couple of P-3s during that – one to a Mig that snuck out, and one to a wing fire from AAA ). Market time was a combat assignment, one of the few where a JG could command his own vessel, and was pretty safe. It looked like a great deal to Kerry, so he signed up. He returned to Cam Rahn Bay in Dec 1968 and was ready to start Market Time when Adm. Elmo Zumwalt decided to use the Swift boats in aggressive riverine patrol – much more hazardous. By then, it was too late for Kerry to get out of this, so he did the next best thing: he needed 3 purple hearts to get out. He got one on a boston whaler at Cam Rahn, with no enemy around. It was bogus and not awarded until later. When he got into the river world, he ended up in some hot areas, and got a second purple heart from a mine explosion – another slight wound. The third purple heart was also self inflicted (per today’s word from the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth). At that point he left.

It is my understanding that he was in Vietnam a little over four months but on a Swift boat a little over one month.

Jul 30, 2004 - 4:26 pm 25. Rick Ballard:

Kaddish for Norman

Yisgadal v’yiskadash sh’mei rabbaw

B’allmaw dee v’raw chir’usei

v’uv’chayei d’chol beis yisroel,

yamlich malchusei,b’chayeichon, uv’yomeichon,

ba’agawlaw u’vizman kawriv, v’imru: Amein.

Amein. Y’hei sh’mei rabbaw m’vawrach l’allam u’l'allmei allmayaw

Y’hei sh’mei rabbaw m’vawrach l’allam u’l'allmei allmayaw.

Yis’bawrach, v’yishtabach, v’yispaw’ar, v’yisromam, v’yis’nasei,

v’yis’hadar, v’yis’aleh, v’yis’halawl sh’mei d’kudshaw b’rich hu

b’rich hu

L’aylaw min kol birchawsaw v’shirawsaw,

tush’b'chawsaw v’nechemawsaw, da’ami’rawn b’all’maw, v’imru: Amein

Amein

Oseh shawlom bim’ro’mawv, hu ya’aseh shawlom,

awleinu v’al kol yisroel v’imru: Amein

Amein

Jul 30, 2004 - 4:45 pm 26. Ric Locke:

Heh. I didn’t know your Dad, of course, but from looking at the picture I think I’d have enjoyed knowing him.

The converse isn’t necessarily the case, of course…

Regards,

Ric Locke

Jul 30, 2004 - 5:26 pm 27. G M Roper:

Roger, a terrific rememberance. Thanks for bringing home to all of us that the Older our Dads got, the Smarter they seemed to get.

Jul 31, 2004 - 11:03 am 28. asher813@aol.com:

Roger,

Thanks for a very moving tribute to your father.

My sentiments are similar to many of the early commenters’. I was born in 1963, on the cusp of the baby-boom generation. My parents were old-school, sane liberals who supported civil rights, women’s rights, gay rights, and our right to a secular public education. They both opposed Vietnam.

I didn’t have a perfect relationship with my parents, but we almost never disagreed about politics. Dad didn’t live to see 9/11, but Mom – who had become increasingly disenchanted with the Democrats under Clinton – came around to the same views you and I share about Iraq and Afghanistan. She died around the time of the liberation of Baghdad, but if she were alive today I’m sure she would break with tradition and vote Republican in the upcoming election.

Vietnam? The whole thing was over by the time I got to high school, so I was too young to form an independent opinion on it. Today, I don’t know. I do know that my parents were intelligent people of good conscience and judgment, and I am certain they made the best decision they could on the information that was available to them. But knowing what I now know of the Left, I must question how much of that information was distorted or simply false.

Among his personal papers, my father left behind a very moving poem he composed during the Vietnam era, describing his feelings at hearing an unnamed “young man” telling of atrocities committed by American troops in Vietnam. I have little doubt that that young man was John Kerry.

Aug 1, 2004 - 3:07 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: