| You
might expect the UN correspondent for The
Nation to pen yet another indictment of
George Bush's disastrous foreign policy
and its manifold consequences for the
world at large. But in his latest book,
Ian Williams decided to take on George
Bush himself, connecting the dots between
the president's National Guard record
during Vietnam to his present-day
posturing as a man in uniform. Deserter:
George W. Bush's War on Military
Families, Veterans, and His Past draws on
extensive research on the President's
still mysterious military career to
reveal the real man inside the flight
suit. Why look at
George Bush's military record now?
We all
know that the President has been less
than forthcoming about his Vietnam-era
service in the Texas Guard, but then much
the same can be said of pretty much every
aspect of his administration. Since
George W. Bush was a chickenhawk from the
get-go, I thought his experiences in the
National Guard -- or lack thereof --
would be instructive. This is a president
who, after all, invokes sacrifice but
never actually made one himself. What's
more, there's probably only Fidel and
Saddam who have worn military uniforms as
often and with as much relish as George
W. And while individual reporters have
done wonderful work on different parts of
Bush's "Missing in Inaction"
saga, on the whole, the media have
dropped the ball. Besides, I wanted to
put the whole issue in its context. There
are national guardsmen who have been sent
to brutal war and occupation, and have
been charged with desertion for refusing
to return. He went AWOL and was sent to
Harvard Business School! You mention
psychological motivations for Bush
Junior's obsession with all things
military in the book -- his desire to
emulate his father in form, if not in
substance.
Could
you elaborate on that theory?
Bush the
Elder was a genuine war hero, who
actually used his family influence to
leave high school and become the Navy's
youngest pilot. That was when the old
East Coast establishment had a sense of
noblesse oblige. With the transplantation
of the Bush clan to Texas, any sense of
obligation has clearly been replaced by a
double sense of entitlement. Dubya
combines the toxic effects of both, the
dynastic East Coast sense of entitlement
and the Texas notion that you're rich and
prosperous because God Loves You -- a
Cowboy Capitalist cocktail that seems to
dull noblesse oblige. The result is that
Bush the Younger wanted to be a pilot
like his father, but not to risk his life
in the process -- which is why he wangled
a place in the Texas Air National Guard
and ticked the box saying "no"
to overseas service. As you note in the
book, thanks to Bush's posturing, many
Americans actually believe that he served
in the military.
What are
his -- or more accurately, Karl Rove's --
political motivations in trying so hard
to create that impression?
The
Republican appropriation of the military
has a strange and tangled -- but quite
recent -- history. The real point is the
GOP's appropriation of the prestige of
the military in order to target all those
in the electorate who think that the
military is somewhere there between apple
pie and motherhood, and just as
sacrosanct. The reality, of course, is
that those in the military are not
necessarily Republican themselves. The
few studies that exist out there show
that while the officer corps tends to the
GOP, junior ranks tend to be at least as
Democratic as you'd expect from a body
that is over 40 percent minority.
You
obviously think it is accurate to
describe George Bush as deserter, but is
what he did any different than say Dan
Quayle or those who fled to Canada during
Vietnam?
Those
who went to Canada disagreed with the
war. Quayle entered the Guard to dodge
Vietnam, but served his term. His deal
was six years in the Guard at home,
against two in the field if drafted. That
makes Quayle an evader, as Bush was, and
equally hypocritical since they both
supported the Vietnam war -- as long as
it was not their plutocratic butts on the
line. Even by Quayle standards, Bush went
a step further. He went missing in
Alabama and defied orders to report for
duty. Moreover, he missed his medical
which as a pilot ensured that he was
grounded. He was no different than those
who let a shotgun off next to their ear
so they would be deaf and medically unfit
to serve. Others at that time were sent
off on active service for failing to
attend to their National Guard duties.
But they were not in the Texas Air
National Guard and their fathers were not
Congressmen.
How do
you think his faux war hero persona will
play out now that he is going up against
a real veteran? Do you think John Kerry
will be able to expose him for what he is
when the campaign gets truly underway?
The real
problem here is the media. Journalists
who often think of themselves as liberal
feel it would be unbalanced to actually
howl the rafters down every time the Bush
Administration lets loose one of its
shocking lies. It is why the GOP was able
to attack paraplegic war veteran Senator
Max Cleland for his lack of patriotism,
and even Kerry about the degree of his
wounds. This president has been given an
easy ride -- by most of the media and
most of the Democrats. So yes, Kerry can
expose Bush, if he goes at him with the
same assiduity that they have gone after
him, not least because he is on firmer
ground. A lot of people are wondering
where the ex-officer's killer instinct
has disappeared, and hope it comes out
soon! Lakshmi Chaudhry is senior editor
of Alternet. EXTRACT Soldier of Fortune
By Ian Williams, AlterNet. Posted June
28, 2004. A third of George Bush's public
speeches have been in a military venue,
often in uniform. There is nothing this
draft-dodging, Ivy League jock loves as
much as playing commander-in-chief.
|
