Kerry embraces band of brothers when "convenient"

[dude1394]

Kerry embraces ‘band of brothers’ when convenient

kerry's feint
By Philip Terzian

The American version of “Rashomon,” the classic Japanese film, seems now to be playing in the theater of presidential politics.

The original “Rashomon” was first produced in 1950, and told the story of one horrific event from four separate, and equally credible, points of view. The current rendition is set in South Vietnam, in the late 1960s, and involves the service of Sen. John Kerry on naval patrol boats. Which version is more accurate? Take your pick.

As any observer of the Democratic National Convention can attest, Sen. Kerry has made his military service during the Vietnam War the centerpiece of his campaign. He introduced himself to his adoring audience in Boston as “reporting for duty,” and now routinely salutes supporters. The giant screens at the Fleet Center were filled with images of Kerry in uniform, dress whites and khakis, with particular emphasis on his decorations. An emotional high point was reached when the nominee was joined onstage by a group of swift-boat comrades, his “band of brothers,” all of whom swore fealty to their old Lt. Kerry.

By any measure, it is a discordant image: The Democratic Party has not been famous, in recent decades, for celebrating the virtues of military service – especially in the Vietnam War. It is also at odds with standard practice. It is customary for candidates to be mildly self-deprecating about wartime service, not self-congratulatory. When asked how he became a hero in World War II, John F. Kennedy responded, “It was involuntary. They sank my boat.”

But the tactic is part of an obvious strategy. President Bush spent the Vietnam years in the Texas Air National Guard and Vice President Cheney never wore a uniform. Bush’s military record, and Cheney’s lack of service, barely registered as issues in 2000 – or, for that matter, when Cheney was defense secretary during the Persian Gulf war. But all that is changed.

Because Kerry is a decorated veteran, and Bush is not, the contrast has become a pillar of the Democratic platform. Referring to Bush and Cheney’s military records, or lack thereof, retired Air Force Gen. Merrill McPeak, a Kerry supporter, angrily asks: “Do the president and vice president really want to have a debate about who is more suited to fight the war in Iraq and the war on terror?”

On the face of it, it is an absurd question. The presidents who led America to victory in two world wars, Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt, never served in the armed forces; and the presidents who presided over the Vietnam catastrophe – Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon – were decorated veterans of World War II. So why does Kerry emphasize his service, as a very junior officer, in a conflict he famously despised and opposed? To distract from details about his public career since leaving the Navy.

Kerry’s credentials for commander-in-chief are better judged on the basis of his 20 years in the Senate than his four months in the Mekong Delta.

In that sense, the emergence of swift-boat veterans who dissent from Kerry’s heroic self-portrait was inevitable. Was Kerry an inspirational officer who risked his life to serve his country, or an opportunist more interested in accumulating medals and gaming the system to get home early? I don’t know. Both sides marshal facts and make plausible arguments, and the truth is no doubt obscured in the fog of war.

Two points, however, are relevant. The first is that, for whatever reason, the Kerry campaign is remarkably sensitive about close examination of Kerry’s military record: Instead of refuting the assertions of the Swift-Boat Veterans for Truth, it has chosen to attack them personally and relate the obvious fact that they are subsidized by supporters of George W. Bush.

Well, of course they are – just as organizations devoted to trashing Bush are bankrolled by wealthy Kerry supporters. It’s called campaign finance reform.

The other point is more oblique. While their attacks on Kerry are no help to Bush, in my view, the anger the Swift-Boat Veterans express is genuine. Kerry calls his friendly comrades the “band of brothers,” but the allusion to Shakespeare’s Henry V is ironic. Speaking to his fellow warriors before Agincourt, Prince Hal exclaims that “gentlemen in England now abed / Shall think themselves accursed they were not here, / And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks / That fought with us upon Saint Crispin’s day.”

Returning from Vietnam three decades ago, Kerry turned Shakespeare on his head: Not only did he deride and condemn the war, which was his right, but he publicly accused his band of brothers of routine war crimes and atrocities, which was something else. Of course, as another great Elizabethan poet wrote, that was a long time ago and in another country. But now, in pursuit of power, Sen. Kerry embraces the band of brothers at his convenience.