| 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has clearly been replaced by a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.
|
