Richard Holbrooke has a column on Vietnam in yesterday's WaPo, and how it shaped his (and Kerry's) generation's world view. Greg Djerejian has some comments on it (and more importantly, on the potential implications of Kerry's Senate testimony in 1971--one more reason that he would be a dangerous CinC), but I noticed that he has (at least) one disingenuous sentence in it:

His personal saga embodies the American experience in Vietnam. First he was a good hero in a bad war -- a man who volunteered for duty in the Navy and then asked for an assignment on the boats that were to ply the dangerous rivers of Vietnam...

Yes, he volunteered for Swift Boats, and yes, they were (eventually) to ply the dangerous rivers of Vietnam, but my understanding is that at the time he volunteered, he didn't know that--they were only plying the much less dangerous coastal waters at the time. This is a point that many (all?) Kerry defenders somehow conveniently leave out (just as they ignore the fact that the National Guard in which George Bush enlisted actually was doing duty in Vietnam at the time he signed up).

I was under the impression that Kerry had volunteered for the Naval Reserve, rather than the Navy proper. Is that incorrect?

Yes, my understanding is that Kerry signed up for the Naval Reserves. And he requested duty on a destroyer (if my recollection is correct), but took swift boats as a sort of consolation prize. In any event, by his own words, Kerry pushed for the assignment so he'd be as far from the action as possible.

BTW, not only did Bush voluntarily sign up for a unit that was seeing action in 'Nam (at least at the time he signed up), but his unit was also a highly decorated unit in our nation's defense against Soviet bombers. (One might therefore argue that Bush is therefore far more intimately acquainted with homeland defense than many folks.) Finally, for those that buy into the myth of Bush sitting "safe" at home, remember that flying fighters is NEVER safe, even in peacetime. If Bush was truly dodging, would he have volunteered for something that was KNOWABLY dangerous?

- Eric.

just as they ignore the fact that the National Guard in which George Bush enlisted actually was doing duty in Vietnam at the time he signed up.

And the fact that when he signed up he ticked the box marked I DO NOT VOLUNTEER when asked if he wanted overseas service.

And the fact that, while his unit was highly decorated, that didn't happen while he was in it, but after he was discharged. My unit won battle honours in North Africa against Rommel, but that doesn't mean I have to shake sand out the bottom of my kit bag.

And the fact that, er, no Soviet bombers actually attacked. If they had done, it's uncertain whether W would have turned up to fly - when his unit staged a 24-hour readiness exercise to train for that very contingency, he didn't bother.
Or they might have attacked after he'd blown off that compulsory flight medical and gone off to work for a paper unit because he thought that building his own political career through working on the Blount campaign was more important than defending his country against the Soviet Union, despite his country spending over $1 million training him to do so.
Or he might have taken off in his F-102 (after a 7-minute delay while he wondered what to do) and flown hell for leather for the safety of Offutt AFB, Nebraska, leaving his wingman to make the real decisions, just like he did the only time his nation was actually under air attack.
(Onward Christian soldiers/Marching without fear/With our bold commander/Safely in the rear...)

Ajay is yet another America hating person who would love to see a true leader like Bush replaced by the UN bootlicker Kerry. Come on Ajay, level with us, you are out to get Bush, along with the whole Communist inspired Left wing rabble. Why are you people so VIOLENTLY in opposition to Bush? What, is it because he actually has taken a new approach Vs the typical globalist utopian intellectual BS which has held sway, in various forms, since 1945? Oh, how dare anyone think Clausewitzian thoughts - it's so, well, unsophisticated, right? Well I'll tell you what. I actually blame liberalism and intellectual utopianism for all the horrors of the 20th century. Your kind tried to work with the Communists. Your kind tried to appease the Nazis. And your kind has increasingly crippled Western Civilization from defending itself. The anti Western fiends want us to fall, no matter whether we are nice or brutal to them. They hate us, and none of us can make them like us. There is no room for negotiation, only force will determine the outcome. Mark these words, a more martial way of thinking is on the rise. And thank God it is.