Amazon.com Widgets

Thursday, February 5, 2004

The Boston Globe becomes the latest news outfit to investigate George Bush's military record. They conclude that it is most likely that Bush did not show up for most of the last year of his service - which is not to say that he was a deserter, or even necessarily AWOL, merely that there is a hole in the record there.

Boston.com / News / Politics / Presidential candidates / Bush's Guard service: What the record shows

...Most Democrats consider Moore's accusation of desertion unsupportable.

Still, according to the records and interviews in 2000, Bush's attendance record in the Guard was highly unusual:

o Although he was trained as a fighter pilot, Bush ceased flying in April 1972, little more than two years after he finished flight school and two years before his six-year enlistment was to end, when he was allowed to transfer to an Alabama Air Guard unit. The records contain no evidence that Bush performed any military duty in Alabama. His Alabama unit commander, in an interview, said Bush never appeared for duty.

o In August 1972, Bush was suspended from flight status for failing to take his annual flight physical.

o In May 1973, Bush's two superior officers in Houston wrote that they could not perform his annual evaluation, because he had "not been observed at this unit" during the preceding 12 months. The two officers, one of them a friend of Bush and both now dead, wrote that they believed Bush had been fulfilling his commitment at the Alabama unit.

Two other officers, in interviews, offered a similar account of Bush's absence, saying they had assumed Bush completed his service in Alabama.

o Bush's official record of service, which is supposed to contain an account of his duty attendance for each year of service, shows no such attendance after May 1972. In unit records, however, there are documents showing that Bush was ordered to a flurry of drills -- over 36 days -- in the late spring and summer of 1973. He was discharged Oct. 1, 1973, eight months before his six-year commitment ended.

Through Bartlett, Bush insisted in 2000 that he had indeed attended military drills while he was in Alabama during 1972 and in 1973 after returning to his Houston base. At the time, Bartlett said Bush did not recall what duties he performed during that period...

Bill Hobbs has been all over this issue, so it will be interesting to see if he has any comment on this story.

A shot in the dark after giving this issue some thought and reading the article today at this still very early day in the campaign: I believe the question of "Vietnam" and other related issues will end up having a null effect on the final results. Although the media likes to play it up as a hook to write articles, I think the American public, by and large, is anxious to put the Vietnam era behind them. They understand that there are still deeply divergent views and experiences regarding that era, and that it does little good to open old wounds. Both men (Kerry and Bush) have lengthy life-records since those days, and it's in the record of those years that campaigns will rise and fall in the end.

I think John Kerry himself said it best. Opinion Journal today reprints a speech given by Senator Kerry on the floor of the Senate during the 1992 Presidential campaign a day after "Sen. Bob Kerrey, a Vietnam veteran and candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, spoke in Atlanta, where he criticized fellow candidate Bill Clinton for his lack of military service during Vietnam." And we all know how that race turned out...

...The race for the White House should be about leadership, and leadership requires that one help heal the wounds of Vietnam, not reopen them; that one help identify the positive things that we learned about ourselves and about our nation, not play to the divisions and differences of that crucible of our generation.

We do not need to divide America over who served and how. I have personally always believed that many served in many different ways. Someone who was deeply against the war in 1969 or 1970 may well have served their country with equal passion and patriotism by opposing the war as by fighting in it. Are wenow, 20 years or 30 years later, to forget the difficulties of that time, of families that were literally torn apart, of brothers who ceased to talk to brothers, of fathers who disowned their sons, of people who felt compelled to leave the country and forget their own future and turn against the will of their own aspirations?[...]

Update: Lots of discussion on Kerry and Vietnam here at Roger L. Simon's.

Also, John Hawkins has much to say on the issue.

[an error occurred while processing this directive]

[an error occurred while processing this directive]

Search


Archives
[an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive]