Which war is it?

Or is it just one war in different places?

The Vietnam War was, and is, many things to many people. America was torn apart by the war and the wounds of separation have not entirely healed. There will always be a national scar from that war. Someday it's redness may fade to pink, just as the scar of the Civil War has faded. But the scar will always be there, and the disagreements about the war will always exist in the historical memory of our country.

Some will try to influence that historical memory to suit their own political agenda or personal needs. Some of us will try to emphasize one aspect of the war or another for the same reasons. Some will want the historical memory to reflect their own experience, and others will want it to reflect just the facts.

But what are the facts? There are as many facts about the war as there are points of view. But certain facts are incontrovertible: The United States won all the battles, but lost the war. The US lost over 58,000 American lives. The Vietnamese lost over a million lives. Billions of dollars were spent. Millions of tons of bombs were dropped. There were countless mental and physical injuries to the American and Vietnamese people. And there were countless deaths and injuries to animal and plant life. The North Vietnamese won the war, and the government that exists in Vietnam today is one of their own creation. The United States has survived the loss of the Vietnam War, and Communism did not take over the world.

...The United States has taken on a new war in Iraq. In November the American People will choose a President. In the American media an argument has been engaged that pits those veterans of the Vietnam War who spoke against the war when they came home against those who resent them for it. Most of those who spoke against the war support John Kerry. Most of those who resent them support George Bush. Those who support Kerry play up his war record and play down his protest. Those who support Bush play down his National Guard record and play up his war against terrorism.

Personally, I don't begrudge John Kerry for protesting the war -- I did it too. And I don't begrudge George Bush for joining the National Guard -- I found a way of avoiding combat in Vietnam also. What I do begrudge them both for is their unwillingness to fully admit to why they did what they did. And even more, I resent their unwillingness to discuss, honestly, what's happening in Iraq.

More...


Which brings us back to AWOL's war record.

Former Texas Lt. Governor Barnes' recent taped admission isn't exactly news. Back in 1999, the Washington Post had this article:

The speaker, Ben Barnes, intervened on Bush's behalf sometime in late 1967 or early 1968 at the request of a good friend of Bush's father, then a Republican congressman from Houston, the sources said. The friend, Sidney A. Adger, was a prominent Houston business executive who died in 1996. The Guard official contacted at his behest, Brig. Gen. James M. Rose, died in 1993.

Both Bush, now governor of Texas and front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination, and his father, the former president, say they did not ask for any help with Guard officials and have no knowledge of any assistance from Adger or anyone else.

"Gov. Bush did not need and did not ask anybody for help," said a Bush campaign spokesman, Scott McClellan. "President Bush has said he did not seek any help for his son in getting into the National Guard."

Jean Becker, a spokeswoman for former president Bush, confirmed that the senior Bush and Adger were good friends, but she said Bush firmly denies talking to Adger about helping his son get into the Guard.

I would think someone in the former president's position wouldn't have to actually ask. I imagine there are some unwritten rules of engagement when it comes to these matters - political favors might not require an actual verbal or written request.

The question of how George W. Bush got into the Texas Guard as a pilot trainee less than two weeks before his graduation from Yale has been a recurring issue in his political campaigns and has now been raised in a contentious lawsuit in which Barnes, who retired from politics after serving as House speaker and then lieutenant governor, is scheduled to give a deposition in Austin Sept. 27.

Barnes said in an interview this summer that when he was speaker he sometimes received requests for help in obtaining Guard slots, but never received such a call from then-Rep. Bush or anyone in the Bush family. But he declined to comment when asked if an intermediary or friend of the Bush family had ever asked him to intercede on George W. Bush's behalf.

I believe the maxim is "silence gives consent".

Barnes has refused to make any further statement. However, he has told associates in Texas that Adger once called him seeking his help for George W. Bush.

...The suit involving Barnes was brought by former Texas lottery director Lawrence Littwin, who was fired by the state lottery commission, headed by Bush appointee Harriet Miers, in October 1997 after five months on the job. It contends that Gtech Corp., which runs the state lottery and until February 1997 employed Barnes as a lobbyist for more than $3 million a year, was responsible for Littwin's dismissal.

Littwin's lawyers have suggested in court filings that Gtech was allowed to keep the lottery contract, which Littwin wanted to open up to competitive bidding, in return for Barnes's silence about Bush's entry into the Guard.

Barnes and his lawyers have denounced this "favor-repaid" theory in court pleadings as "preposterous . . . fantastic [and] fanciful."

...But while the Barnes camp has scoffed at the assertions of a payback for a 30-year-old favor, they have been more circumspect about the "favor" itself. In a motion seeking to block the deposition, Barnes's lawyer, Charles R. Burton, simply contended that whatever Barnes did in recommending "qualified candidates for service in the Guard" was irrelevant, private and privileged.

U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks of Austin rejected the argument, saying he was "unpersuaded" by what amounted to a last-minute pleading that Barnes could have submitted weeks earlier.

You know, you think 30 years is enough time to bury whatever little indiscretions you might have committed.

But, at least it's sometimes enough to make the indiscretion heat for somebody other than yourself, eh Barnes?

And Greg Palast has some background information on the affair.

Just after Bush's election, Barnes' client GTech Corp., due to allegations of corruption, was about to lose its license to print money: its contract to run the Texas state lottery. Barnes, says the Justice Department document, made a call to the newly elected governor's office and saved GTech's state contract.

The letter said, "Governor Bush ... made a deal with Ben Barnes not to rebid [the GTech lottery contract] because Barnes could confirm that Bush had lied during the '94 campaign."

In that close race, Bush denied the fix was in to keep him out of 'Nam, and the US media stopped asking questions. What did the victorious Governor Bush's office do for Barnes? According to the tipster, "Barnes agreed never to confirm the story [of the draft dodging] and the governor talked to the chair of the lottery two days later and she then agreed to support letting GTech keep the contract without a bid."

And so it came to pass that the governor's commission reversed itself and gave GTech the billion dollar deal without a bid.

The happy client paid Barnes, the keeper of Governor Bush's secret, a fee of over $23 million. Barnes, not surprisingly, denies that Bush took care of his client in return for Barnes' silence. However, confronted with the evidence, the former Lt. Governor now admits to helping the young George stay out of Vietnam.

Take a look at the letter yourself - with information we confirmed with other sources.

The letter is unreadable unless you move your cursor over it (it should change to a magnifying glass icon) and click. It's still difficult to read, but it's doable.

....but hey, do what you want....you will anyway.