by Joel Woodman
“And so when thirty years from now our brothers go down the street without a leg, without an arm, or a face, and small boys ask why, we will be able to say “Vietnam” and not mean a desert, not a filthy obscene memory, but mean instead where America finally turned and where soldiers like us helped it in the turning.”
(John Kerry- Senate Foreign Relations Committee Hearing, 1971.)
“This is a fact: The final lesson of Vietnam is that no great nation can long afford to be sundered by a memory.”
(George H.W. Bush- Inaugural Address, 1989.)
The 41st President of the United States, George HW Bush became the first US president to refer to the war in Vietnam during his Inaugural Address. The message was clear that day: the American War in Vietnam was a distant memory too disparaging and divisive to acknowledge any longer. Almost 17 years later, Bush’s announcement has largely come true.
So this past Veteran’s Day, as our nation organized its efforts in favor our most current conflict, it was no surprise to read in the Boston Globe that several members of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW) had been removed from the parade following their protest. A week later I picked up a copy of the Santa Barbara Independent to find an article written by Steve Crandall, President, Central Coast Chapter of VVAW. He described how, groups like the Vietnam Veterans Against the War and the Veterans for Peace were asked to provide military or veteran identification should they want to join in the parade. They were not, however, permitted to display “politics,” symbols, banners, or other clothing identifying pacifist groups.” He went on to describe the parade further by saying, “So who were the people marching in the Veteran’s Day Parades throughout the country? They were the groups that believe they are the only ones who hold patriotism at the highest level. They do not question the atrocities of war and they do not insist on oversight of veteran’s rights. They march to the beat of the Commander in Chief because to do anything else would be unpatriotic.”
Our relationship to the American War in Vietnam now appears distant behind the government purview, through the lenses of Hollywood reenactments, at backyard barbecues with family members who were “in the war but don’t like to talk about it”, and by a homeless man outside the drug store with a sign that reads, “Vietnam Vet . . . Served my country for you, now help me.” Vietnam veterans, “stand as isolated from history today as they were from their contemporaries back home when they were in Vietnam . . .their absence from the historical stage made room for a stunning rewriting of history. The very real image of angry vets marching together to oppose the war in which they fought was replaced by a make-believe image of the solitary, forgotten vet being spat on by peace activists.“[1]
Few people realize the scope and nature of the protest that went on inside the military during the American War in Vietnam. In fact a 1975 survey showed that, “75 % of Vietnam vets opposed the war.”[2] Some men returned home wanting to go back, others sought to restore some semblance of a previous life, but for many, their experience in Vietnam had changed them in a profound way. As the “search and destroy” missions increased and “body counts” continued to drive military policy, a real sense of disillusioment within the military began to swell.
In 1971 the government reported that, “15,000 young men refused induction, 100,000 failed to appear for physicals, and local draft officers had sustained 190 attacks. For every 100 GI’s, 17 had gone AWOL and 7 had deserted: one- quarter of the military had walked off the job, the highest rate ever.”[3]
While Pentagon insider Daniel Ellsberg and partner Anthony Russo began leaking information to the public about the true nature of the war, soldiers still on the ground understood all too well the policies set forth by Washington. Entire platoons refused orders and in drastic cases threw fragment grenades, better known as “fragging”, into the tents of their commanding officers. “Since the army did not start collecting data on fragging until 1967, and an unknown number occurred in battle, it is difficult to estimate how widespread such attempts were. By war’s end, however, between 800 and 1,000 fragging attempts were made using explosive devices alone…And the Defense Department speculated that more officers were killed by their troops’ rifle fire than grenades.”[4]
While the mainstream press fixated on the policy of the war-makers in Washington, GI’s returning home established their own underground press service focusing instead on the “life of the grunt”. Hundreds of these publications were circulated stateside on military bases and GI coffee houses. Still other publications such as Vietnam GI, sought a larger influence, and began sending copies overseas shipped in inconspicuous brown paper bags. Articles were often adapted from diary entries and cartoons spoke volumes about the inner contention between the “grunt” and the “brass”.[5]
The tone throughout the press movement was filled with complex emotions, often pragmatic and grappling with issues of race and class that seemed to follow them overseas from the farms, steel mills and the inner city. Reading through these pages you understand that a multitude of these men suffered from a deep sense of betrayal. The reality of witnessing or taking part in acts of rape, torture and murder of Vietnamese civilians as a part of military policy, caused scores of GI’s to not only dispute their role in the military, but challenge the very system they sought to protect. A pure and sacred part of them was removed by their experience in Vietnam. They were raised with a sense of moral righteousness and love for one’s country only to leave that identity behind in the ravaged countryside.
As one tours our nation’s memorials in Washington D.C., it becomes obvious how the United States would like to remember the American War in Vietnam. Its memorial takes on the most somber of tones, appearing close to the ground, echoing the silent loss of life. It acts as the antithesis to the recently constructed salute to the “good war” just down the reflecting pool. As you read through the 58,195 names on the black marble wall, the letters begin to muddle and a clear reflection peers back at you. The site of oneself in that context can be too much to bear and for many Americans who lived through the experience, perhaps the memorial represents a time they would just as soon forget.
Is this why we forget Vietnam? Is it the sense of loss that holds our memory in a historical asylum? I would like to think it’s that simple and for some people maybe it is. But this is not why Presidents have since shunned the word Vietnam. The pain is not why 1 in 4 homeless is a Veteran[6], why Vietnamese babies are still born without arms or legs or why more bombs were dropped on Vietnam than on Axis targets in all of WWII.
Perhaps it is what many GI’s coming home then knew all too well. I believe the root cause of our abandonment of the Vietnam legacy is the overwhelming sense of betrayal left by that war. The American War in Vietnam represented a violation of trust so great that the very essence of what the country represented was called into question. If we were to truly grapple with this idea, it would pressure us to frame it within a contemporary context. A concession on this matter would then highlight the fact that we did not learn much from our experience in Southeast Asia- that a foul torrent still flows through the White House and that our national virtuosity and grace can still be overshadowed by hubris, fear and aggression.
* This essay is adapted from my upcoming book, The Paradox of Grace. Several more adaptations from the book will appear on this blog highlighting past conflicts carried out by the United States and how those events have shaped the contemporary view of ourselves, and the role of the U.S. in the world.
______________________________________________________
1,3,5. Ostertag-Peoples Press, p.158-59
2. Lembcke, Spitting Image, p. 106.
4. Moser, The New Winter Soldiers, p. 48
6. USA Today- Veterans make up 1 in 4 homeless. 11/07/07
