From Seattle writer and consultant Matt Rosenberg...: Kerry The Appeaser

� A Bush Convert Speaks | Main | Virgin Nails It �

Kerry The Appeaser

October 12, 2004

Rosenblog reader Howard Wolf - a retired Seattle school teacher - sends along some thoughts about John Kerry, Vietnam, Iraq, and the "insurgency." Feel free to add your comments, whether you agree or disagree.

By Howard Wolf

I read where someone said recently that "character is destiny." As I don't think that in the case of John Kerry that there was any sort of epiphany over the past thirty odd years, in his case character remains destiny. In 1971, I was as bitterly angry at his testimony before Senator Fulbright's committee as I am today, and as the Swift Boat Vets and POWs are. I believe that his entire present campaign is a tortured attempt to conceal his real ambition in this War on Terror. And the only candid moment was his statement in the primaries to Howard Dean, in which he said, "I am the anti-war candidate." To that extent, Senator Kerry has not altered his world view since 1971.
I don't believe that Howard Dean would stump for him so fervently, if he did not think that was true too. Howard Dean is a dyed in the wool advocate of withdrawal from Iraq. He has no interest whatsoever in pursuing the destruction of the insurgency in Iraq.

How well it may be recalled that during the Vietnam conflict, a common criticism by members of the anti-war movement was that "hawks" were stuck in perceiving the world in the fashion of the World War II era, which was by then dated, or so it was said. No less a criticism can be made of John Kerry's mindset or that of the veterans of the "peace movement" today. They still fancy themselves heroic for having protested that war.

They ignore the statements of General Giap, who attributes his success to them. Indeed, he says that he had lost the Tet Offensive in 1968, and was making ready to instruct his staff to tell the North Vietnamese Paris delegation to conclude negotiations for the withdrawal of his badly mauled forces. It was only when an aide came to him to say that Eric Severeid and Walter Cronkite were telling the American people that it was they who had lost the Tet, that he changed his thinking.

So Kerry's agenda is once again to counsel ignominious withdrawal, but in this case it's in Iraq. That was the purpose behind his Senate testimony in 1971; that and the goal of one day achieving political power for himself. He did this by libeling the vast majority of American combatants in the conflict. That is, thanks to the reminding testimony of Swift Boat Veterans and POWs for Truth, an established fact.

I believe it is an interesting aside to note that no antiwar movement in American History has ever worked to the advantage of the nation state; whether it was General McClellan's candidacy (and Copperhead Riots) against Abraham Lincoln in 1864, or the Vietnam protests. I know that statement would infuriate many a Vietnam era peacenik, but it is the truth. For even in our defeat at the hands of the peace movement, the Vietnam War proved a major factor in eventually bringing about the collapse of the Soviet Union, though admittedly, that would have been hard to see at the time.

The Soviets, with an economy about a fourth that of the United States (the CIA mistakenly said at the time it was half the size) was spending as much money to bring down US aircraft as the USA was spending to put them there. Remember they fired off an average of 200 SAMs and thousands of timed anti-aircraft shells (each one valued at hundreds of dollars) per plane shot down, not to mention the loss of their badly-battered air force. They were starving many areas of Soviet society to accomplish that, and for all their efforts they couldn't even approximate the growth in personal wealth in the west.

But Kerry's point of view is virtually identical to the one he had in 1971. I am convinced that in his heart of hearts, he feels that the best military approach is the least military approach. But he would never honestly say that, as he did in the Vietnam era. He thinks that if we withdrew our forces from Iraq and reduced this war to a sort of international police investigation, we would succeed in reducing the terrorism threat to a "nuisance." Can anyone imagine FDR saying in World War II, we will reduce Fascism to a nuisance level that we can live with?

Again, comments on Howard Wolf's thoughts are welcome, even if you're a DNC troll. Let it fly.