August 22, 2004

Post Swift Boat Investigation

MSNBC - Swift boat accounts incomplete and flawed

The Washington Post completed an investigation into the swift boat accounts. Frustratingly, they use an even-handed tone in saying that both parties are withholding information, but the facts in the article disprove several SBVT allegations and don't disprove anything that the Kerry campaign holds to be true.

But here's the other thing that bothers me. What this really comes down to is the SBVT saying that Kerry misrepresented Vietnam veterans after the war - distorted the truth, etc. I just don't get that. What is their theory of his motivation for doing so? Why would he just make up things like that? I think that's where this falls apart; the argument about how many Vietnam veterans and commanders took part in war crimes. These SBVT are protesting against that allegation still because it is such an ugly truth, and so difficult to hear. The problem is that it doesn't mean it's not true, and they haven't offered forward a convincing motivation for Kerry to risk what he risked back then, just to make up stories. I think their problem is more that they believe that it was an abomination that he told the truth.

There's this whole stupid subdynamic about how Kerry's allegations back in 1971 dishonored every veteran; that if he mentioned that some soldiers or commanders were participating in war crimes, that it brought dishonor on every soldier (even though Kerry was clear that he wasn't speaking on behalf of all veterans or making accusations against all veterans). I understand that when you're in the active forces, you need to adopt the attitude that what is true for one is true for all, because it saves lives. But you'd think that they'd take a broader view after going home. Any time these men still make this argument that Kerry somehow dishonored any soldier that has ever put on a uniform, they do nothing except to undermine their own point and expose their own biases.

Posted by Curt at August 22, 2004 01:19 AM

Comments

It all comes down to the usual narrow-minded thinking that surrounds the campaign and the characterization of war. The SBVT and neocons in general paint their worldviews in strictly black and white. “Kill or be killed.” “My country, right or wrong.” “It’s us or them.” What strikes me is that these people have thrown another black-and-white axiom that doesn’t suit their purposes: “Death before dishonor.” If the SBVT case is based on lies, old grudges, and politics, they can hardly claim that honor is on their side, can they?

Posted by: Joe Medina at August 22, 2004 11:02 PM