The Vietnam War WAS immoral - Democratic Underground

GarySeven

(898 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Aug-20-04 10:18 PM
Original message

The Vietnam War WAS immoral

Many criticisms of John Kerry's military record seem essentially rooted in the fact that, despite his meritorious service, he nevertheless "betrayed" his fellow soldiers by criticizing the war when he returned.

While people focus on the back and forth between vets on Kerry's decorations, few seem willing to debate an issue that I believed had been resolved long ago. The Vietnam War WAS immoral -- and John Kerry was correct to criticize it AND the nation's actions in prosecuting that war.

One has only to briefly review the history of the Vietnam conflict to come to this conclusion. Vietnam, as a French colony, was an ally during WWII; when Communists began agitating, annoying and finally militarily defeating the French, the U.S. took it upon itself to make Vietnam a proxy in its larger "war" with the U.S.S.R. and China. To do so, the U.S. had to surrender the moral high ground on any number of points, three of which are sufficient to cite:
1. The interference in the affairs of sovereign nations without the justification of supporting vital US interests. There was no trade or military value in Vietnam as a buffer to Soviet or Chinese aggression; indeed the interference in Vietnam could be argued as making the "domino theory" a fait accompli, more suited to Communist strategic interest than American.
2. The South Vietnamese government was riddled with corruption, with an officer corps at least as vile and degenerate as the NVA and steadfastly incompetent in logistical and tactical capability - despite nearly 20 years of active support by the US. The quick collapse of the South Vietnamese following US evacuation is proof of its military ineptitude. The summary execution of a suspected NVA soldier on the streets of Saigon after the Tet Offensive is eloquent testimony to the contempt for human life held by SV officials.
3. Two US administrations used deception and subterfuge to escalate the conflict in direct contradiction to both the Democratic idea we were allegedly fostering abroad and to subvert and compromise the legislative process enshrined by the Constitution. There was no attack on US vessels in the Gulf of Tonkin, whose presence there in any case were in support of active military operations making them legitimate targets. Expansions into Laos and Cambodia did not only violate Item ONE of the above, but were also done without the knowledge of the Electorate and violated the Constitutional oversight responsibilities of the Congress.

It is never popular to criticize actions of the U.S. government, especially actions taken to suppress a foe as villainous as the Communist "Evil Empire." Nevertheless, this nation stands for the rule of law and Democracy. If we play the game of fostering such beliefs abroad, we should and must play by the rules printed on the cover of the box. It is the duty of every American to hold his government to account. People who witness firsthand the excesses of government have an especial duty to do so.

Mr. Kerry is unjustly lumped with other war critics who, often benignly, played into the hands of aggressors. Many may be unwilling to impose a clear line of demarcation between critics, but it is necessary to do so -- if only to make equally distinct the line over which the government must not step.

All wars produce atrocities; war itself is by definition the failure of civilization to resolve disputes. It is no treason to point out that the corrosive nature of the war fostered the native brutality in US soldiery that is common to all soldiers in all conflicts. In fact, in the case of Vietnam, the immorality of the conflict may have worsened such behavior. The duties of war are grim and weigh heavily on the conscience of ordinarily peaceful men. It is easier for soldiers to accept these duties and behave professionally if they are led by others who stand on firm moral principles.

Mr. Kerry did his country a service when he criticized the war. It was important and necessary that he speak out. It is equally important that all who lived through those times report that he WAS right and that the war WAS wrong. Many who read this board are too young to know the facts of Vietnam; many of the electorate are too easily persuaded that the US is always right, despite clear evidence that it has, on occasion, been very wrong. Pointing out the rare excesses of government make them even rarer and create a more perfect union.

The individual actions of a single day that resulted in decorations to several soldiers may be in dispute. Memories do fade. Facts, however, do not. Vietnam was an immoral war, as shameful to American history as this manufactured war in Iraq, and for many of the same reasons. Mr. Kerry, at least, sees this fact while many other political leaders do not. That alone, in my view, justifies his eventual election.