It’s Time to Move Beyond Vietnam

As a noncombatant in Vietnam, I may have little standing when it comes to talking about the war that never seems to go away. But surely I can’t be the only voter wondering how a discredited war that ended 30 years ago can possibly bear on this year’s presidential election.

Yet here we are, with a drumbeat echoing all the way from the Mekong Delta of the 1960s to the presidential campaign trail of 2004.

Any wonder why people tune out to politics? Who could blame them for feeling detached from reality as they’re told to consider that John Kerry is unfit to be president because he protested the war as a returning veteran in 1971? Or that George W. Bush should be penalized because he got a cushy post with the Texas Air National Guard in the early 1970s and then blew off some of his duties? And, the icing on this crazy cake: that Kerry’s heroics in Vietnam are overblown and that he didn’t deserve the medals he got.

I have strong opinions on each issue, but here’s my point: Even if the absolute worst about either man is true, I don’t care. To my mind, nothing their critics are saying about the candidates from 30-plus years ago -- with the implication that it says something about their character today -- is relevant.

If you want to call Bush a hypocrite for being a war president but taking an easy assignment during Vietnam, isn’t there a statute of limitations? Call Kerry an opportunist and say that reflects his character, but how about a more current example than when he skippered patrol boats in enemy territory, knowing that snipers and the fates held his life in their hands?

Bush, understandably, has avoided bringing up his Vietnam-era record. Kerry has made a point of his war record and, in so doing, brought out the wolves. I understand why he thinks he needs to do it, but I wish his advisors would tell him to please stop doing it.

If it’s appalling to hear Kerry’s critics attack his war record, it’s getting a bit unseemly to continually hear him say, “To those of us who know what it’s like to be in combat....”

Why does this Vietnam talk rankle?

Why not let it go in one ear and out the other?

To those of us for whom the Vietnam War dominated our lives for several years, these are echoes we’d like to drown out. We’d like to forget the graceless bashing of returning vets. We’d like to forget the families and communities that were split wide open by opinions on the war. We’d like to forget the horrible things that happened during the war and the lingering effects on so many participants’ lives.

For a war that we learned, belatedly, was cynically waged by the men running it, about the only thing worth remembering is the valor that servicemen no doubt showed and the national lessons we learned.

Thirty years after the war ended, that strikes me as all that matters. Kerry’s heroism is to be applauded, but I don’t link it to presidential capabilities. Bush’s safe port during the war is worth raising an eyebrow over, but not even close to being a significant consideration of someone’s presidential mettle.

Anyone old enough to remember the Vietnam era well probably thinks of it as something from a previous lifetime. As a 1971 college graduate who missed being drafted only because of a midrange lottery number, I recall it that way.

The current Vietnam redux is a total turnoff. If the masterminds behind it are trying to disengage the voters, they may be succeeding brilliantly.

If, on the other hand, people actually want an honest campaign decided on important issues, there’s still time.

They used to say that the “real” presidential campaign begins on Labor Day. If that’s still true, let’s crank up the 2004 campaign this weekend with no more talk about Vietnam.

Dana Parsons’ column can be reached at (714) 966-7821 or at [email protected]. An archive of his recent columns is at www.latimes.com/parsons.