Bush and Military Service

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2003
Bush and Military Service
134
Tue, 02-10-2004 - 12:53pm
By Richard Cohen

Tuesday, February 10, 2004; Page A23


During the Vietnam War, I was what filmmaker Michael Moore would call a "deserter." Along with President Bush and countless other young men, I joined the National Guard, did my six months of active duty (basic training, etc.) and then returned to my home unit, where I eventually dropped from sight. In the end, just like President Bush, I got an honorable discharge. But unlike President Bush, I have just told the truth about my service. He hasn't.





At least I don't think so. Nothing about Bush during that period -- not his drinking, not his partying -- suggests that he was a consistently conscientious member of the Texas or Alabama Air National Guard. As it happens, there are no records to show that Bush reported for duty during the summer and fall of 1972. Nonetheless, Bush insists he was where he was supposed to be -- "Otherwise I wouldn't have been honorably discharged," Bush told Tim Russert. Please, sir, don't make me laugh.

It is sort of amazing that every four or eight years, Vietnam -- that long-ago war -- rears up from seemingly nowhere and comes to figure in the national political debate. In 1988 Dan Quayle had to answer for his National Guard service. In 1992 Bill Clinton had to grapple with the question of how he avoided the Vietnam-era draft. Now George Bush, who faced this question the last time out, has to face it again. The reason is that this time he is likely to compete against a genuine war hero. John Kerry did not duck the war.

But George Bush did. He did so by joining the National Guard. Bush now wants to drape the Vietnam-era Guard with the bloodied flag of today's Iraq-serving Guard -- "I wouldn't denigrate service to the Guard," Bush warned during his interview with Russert -- but the fact remained that back then the Guard was where you went if you did not want to fight. That was the case with me. I opposed the war in Vietnam and had no desire to fight it. Bush, on the other hand, says he supported the war -- as long, it seems, as someone else fought it.

It hardly matters what Bush did or did not do back in 1972. He is not the man now he was then -- that by his own admission. In the same way, it did not matter that Clinton ducked the draft, because, really, just about everyone I knew at the time was doing something similar. All that really matters is how one accounts for what one did. Do you tell the truth (which Clinton did not)? Or do you do what I think Bush has been doing, which is making his National Guard service into something it was not? In his case, it was a rich kid's way around the draft.

In my case, it was something similar -- although (darn!) I was not rich. I was, though, lucky enough to get into a National Guard unit in the nick of time, about a day before I was drafted. I did my basic and advanced training (combat engineer) and returned to my unit. I was supposed to attend weekly drills and summer camp, but I found them inconvenient. I "moved" to California and then "moved" back to New York, establishing a confusing paper trail that led, really, nowhere. For two years or so, I played a perfectly legal form of hooky. To show you what a mess the Guard was at the time, I even got paid for all the meetings I missed.

In the end, I wound up in the Army Reserve. I was assigned to units for which I had no training -- tank repairman, for instance. In some units, we sat around with nothing to do and in one we took turns delivering antiwar lectures. The National Guard and the Reserves were something of a joke. Everyone knew it. Books have been written about it. Maybe things changed dramatically by 1972, two years after I got my discharge, but I kind of doubt it.

I have no shame about my service, but I know it for what it was -- hardly the Charge of the Light Brigade. When Bush attempts to drape the flag of today's Guard over the one he was in so long ago, when he warns his critics to remember that "there are a lot of really fine people who have served in the National Guard and who are serving in the National Guard today in Iraq," then he is doing now what he was doing then: hiding behind the ones who were really doing the fighting. It's about time he grew up.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A27178-2004Feb9.html

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2003
Sat, 02-21-2004 - 10:22am
<>

Don't think so. Time we put this issue to bed and discussed importmant matters like the environment, economy and what to do about Iraq. But, alas we shall dally with Vietnam and same-sex marriage because they are more emotional, and appeal to GWB's base.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-17-2003
Sat, 02-21-2004 - 1:27pm
And Bush is so good at telling the truth! ;) ...Especially about the WMDs in Iraq prior to the war, and about the pre-9/11 intelligence that the Commission is demanding. As one who lost a loved one in 9/11, I have a stake in that one.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Sat, 02-21-2004 - 1:35pm

((JFM))

 


Photobucket&nbs

Avatar for independentgrrrl
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Sat, 02-21-2004 - 2:51pm
<>

Kerry tried to run on his *Vietnam hero* status and has his post war record become a liability--oops, it's Bush's fault. The gays in SF break the law--oops, it's Bush's fault.

OMG! Nader's gonna run! It's *got* to be Bush's fault.

BTW, the lib/leftist agenda is what's energizing the moderates to join Nader's camp. Your side is doing a great job of alienating them.

Avatar for independentgrrrl
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Sat, 02-21-2004 - 2:58pm
<>

I'm sorry you lost a loved one on 9/11. My cousin was in the second plane that hit the second tower. I, too have a vested interest in this war on terror. And the verdict is that President Bush is doing a very good job of keeping the war on the terrorists' side of the world and not ours. Also, our military has captured many on their most wanted terrorists list so I know that their fight is truly yeilding excellent results.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Sat, 02-21-2004 - 4:58pm
Please buy a clue! The Shrub is the one who doesn't know how to tell the truth! Those documents that The Shrub released raised more questions. The Shrub didn't show up for a physical, which mean he couldn't fly. Why bring up Clinton deserting. John Kerry went to Vietnam and served. Kerry is a decorated veteran. President Clinton is a former president! The Shrub moved to Alabama without the permission of the Guard. The Shrub has always managed the manipulate the truth to his advantage. Where are those WMD, the kept talking about before his illegal and immoral war? I just love to hear conservatives attempt to support the Shrub. Keep talking! If you tell a lie enough, then it could become the truth. Anybody but Bush in 2004!!!
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2003
Sat, 02-21-2004 - 5:00pm
n/t
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-27-2003
Sun, 02-22-2004 - 2:02am
Of what?? Envy LOL
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-27-2003
Sun, 02-22-2004 - 2:06am
Exellent results; the body of a 19 year old girl was returned to her family in my community today. She was there for two weeks when her convoy was attacked.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-31-2003
Sun, 02-22-2004 - 8:25am
Who the heck said that Nader running was Bush's fault?

<>

I don't think there are any moderates joining Nader's camp. In fact, it remains to be seen if even half his old base returns. There is much, much more at stake in this election and Nader supporters saw how they helped hand the Presidency to Bush in 2000 just to prove a point about third parties. No one will be happy with just proving a point this year. Dems, both liberal and moderate, want the White House back.

Pages