Skip to comments.John Kerry's Anti-U.S. Foreign Policy in 1966 Yale Oration
Posted on 02/09/2004 12:00:45 PM PST by mass55th
The 1970 article claims that Kerry spoke out again American foreign policy as class orator at the 1966 Yale graduation exercises. Does anyone know where a copy of this oration can be viewed or obtained?
Here is a paragraph from this article:
"Mr. Kerry, who criticized the fundamentals of American foreign policy as class orator at the 1966 Yale graduation exercises, said he joined the Navy and went to Vietnam because he wanted to study that policy first hand."
If Kerry was speaking out against American foreign policy in '66, was he also speaking out against the Vietnam War at that time? If so, it's fair to say that his subsequent tour of duty in Vietnam wasn't because of any feelings of patriotism toward his country. Instead, Mr. Kerry admits that he went to Vietnam as a student, with the goal in mind of studying the government's policy there. That being said, did he go to Vietnam in order to prove his anti-U.S. foreign policy/anti-war theory? After four months in Vietnam, he was able to have studied the war enough to procure three purple hearts, a silver star and a bronze star.
Personnaly, people can applaude John Kerry's Vietnam service all they want, but I have the distinct feeling that his enlistment and short-term service in 'Nam was a strategy he planned well in advance of going over there. If he indeed planned on studying the U.S. policy in Vietnam, he managed to stay there for about the same length of time as a college semester.
This article wasn't obtained directly through the New York Times website. It was found during a library database search, therefore, the URL associated with the New York Times listed above will not take the reader to the article. I had to include a URL or the system would not accept my posting.
Hmmm, could give credence to my earlier speculation here tha Kerry-Heinz's "war wounds" might have been self-inflcited.
I suspect that it was indeed rare for a brown-river sailor to earn three PH's after being in-country for only four months AND having all three incidents resulting in injuries very minor but sufficient under the regs then in place to have his candy-ass sent back to CONUS.
To be a butt-boy for an admiral -- immediately prior to receiving an early-out to run for Congress, spit on his medals, and lying under oath before Congress about the "atrocities" committed by his ersatz comrades-in-arms who fought and died in his place.
Wake up, my fellow Americans. Show us on the FR that you're all not as stupid as the Dumbs believe you are -- your two-term election of the Klingons notwthstanding.....
I've questioned this as well, especially in light of the fact that my brother was in 'Nam from '66-'67 as a grunt and point man among other things. He came home without a scratch. He did earn the Army Commendation medal with bronze star, but I have no idea what that was for, and he would never talk about it.
It may be too much of a jump to assume that criticism of American foreign policy in 1966 necessarily meant the kind of antiwar or anti-American rhetoric one heard a few years later. The Ugly American, a popular book of the era was highly critical of US foreign policy, but hardly pro-communist. It's hard to say anything until we actually see the speech, but if anti-war or anti-American sentiment had been Kerry's main motive there were other, more direct ways he could have acted on those feelings.
Kerry was very definitely the kind of person to harangue his schoolmates about what "we" should and shouldn't and must do. His hectoring, public-speakerish mentality was evident even in his prep school days. And he did embrace radical antiwar camp when he returned from Vietnam. But Richard Pershing, grandson of the general and one of the few Yalies killed in Vietnam, was said to have been a close friend of Kerry's.
It seems very likely that establishing his "political viability" was an important reason Kerry went to war, but I don't think one can prove that he ran the risks he did so that he could later turn against the war. "Proving a theory" may have been in his mind, but other factors probably came first, and his theories about foreign policy would have been different in 1966 than in 1971.
This text, made available by the Sixties Project, is copyright (c) 1993 by the Author or by Viet Nam Generation, Inc., all rights reserved. This text may be used, printed, and archived in accordance with the Fair Use provisions of U.S. Copyright law. This text may not be archived, printed, or redistributed in any form for a fee, without the consent of the copyright holder. This notice must accompany any redistribution of the text. The Sixties Project, sponsored by Viet Nam Generation Inc. and the Institute of Advanced Technology in the Humanities at the University of Virginia at Charlottesville, is a collective of humanities scholars working together on the Internet to use electronic resources to provide routes of collaboration and make available primary and secondary sources for researchers, students, teachers, writers and librarians interested in the 1960s.
Vietnam Veterans Against the War Statement by John Kerry to the Senate Committee of Foreign Relations
April 23, 1971
I would like to talk on behalf of all those veterans and say that several months ago in Detroit we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged, and many very highly decorated, veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia. These were not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command. It is impossible to describe to you exactly what did happen in Detroit - the emotions in the room and the feelings of the men who were reliving their experiences in Vietnam. They relived the absolute horror of what this country, in a sense, made them do.
They told stories that at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Ghengis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country.
We call this investigation the Winter Soldier Investigation. The term Winter Soldier is a play on words of Thomas Paine's in 1776 when he spoke of the Sunshine Patriots and summertime soldiers who deserted at Valley Forge because the going was rough.
We who have come here to Washington have come here because we feel we have to be winter soldiers now. We could come back to this country, we could be quiet, we could hold our silence, we could not tell what went on in Vietnam, but we feel because of what threatens this country, not the reds, but the crimes which we are committing that threaten it, that we have to speak out....
In our opinion and from our experience, there is nothing in South Vietnam which could happen that realistically threatens the United States of America. And to attempt to justify the loss of one American life in Vietnam, Cambodia or Laos by linking such loss to the preservation of freedom, which those misfits supposedly abuse, is to us the height of criminal hypocrisy, and it is that kind of hypocrisy which we feel has torn this country apart.
We found that not only was it a civil war, an effort by a people who had for years been seeking their liberation from any colonial influence whatsoever, but also we found that the Vietnamese whom we had enthusiastically molded after our own image were hard put to take up the fight against the threat we were supposedly saving them from.
We found most people didn't even know the difference between communism and democracy. They only wanted to work in rice paddies without helicopters strafing them and bombs with napalm burning their villages and tearing their country apart. They wanted everything to do with the war, particularly with this foreign presence of the United States of America, to leave them alone in peace, and they practiced the art of survival by siding with whichever military force was present at a particular time, be it Viet Cong, North Vietnamese or American.
We found also that all too often American men were dying in those rice paddies for want of support from their allies. We saw first hand how monies from American taxes were used for a corrupt dictatorial regime. We saw that many people in this country had a one-sided idea of who was kept free by the flag, and blacks provided the highest percentage of casualties. We saw Vietnam ravaged equally by American bombs and search and destroy missions, as well as by Viet Cong terrorism - and yet we listened while this country tried to blame all of the havoc on the Viet Cong.
We rationalized destroying villages in order to save them. We saw America lose her sense of morality as she accepted very coolly a My Lai and refused to give up the image of American soldiers who hand out chocolate bars and chewing gum.
We learned the meaning of free fire zones, shooting anything that moves, and we watched while America placed a cheapness on the lives of orientals.
We watched the United States falsification of body counts, in fact the glorification of body counts. We listened while month after month we were told the back of the enemy was about to break. We fought using weapons against "oriental human beings." We fought using weapons against those people which I do not believe this country would dream of using were we fighting in the European theater. We watched while men charged up hills because a general said that hill has to be taken, and after losing one platoon or two platoons they marched away to leave the hill for reoccupation by the North Vietnamese. We watched pride allow the most unimportant battles to be blown into extravaganzas, because we couldn't lose, and we couldn't retreat, and because it didn't matter how many American bodies were lost to prove that point, and so there were Hamburger Hills and Khe Sanhs and Hill 81s and Fire Base 6s, and so many others.
Now we are told that the men who fought there must watch quietly while American lives are lost so that we can exercise the incredible arrogance of Vietnamizing the Vietnamese.
Each day to facilitate the process by which the United States washes her hands of Vietnam someone has to give up his life so that the United States doesn't have to admit something that the entire world already knows, so that we can't say that we have made a mistake. Someone has to die so that President Nixon won't be, and these are his words, "the first President to lose a war."
We are asking Americans to think about that because how do you ask a man to be the last man to die in Vietnam? How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?....We are here in Washington to say that the problem of this war is not just a question of war and diplomacy. It is part and parcel of everything that we are trying as human beings to communicate to people in this country - the question of racism which is rampant in the military, and so many other questions such as the use of weapons; the hypocrisy in our taking umbrage at the Geneva Conventions and using that as justification for a continuation of this war when we are more guilty than any other body of violations of those Geneva Conventions; in the use of free fire zones, harassment interdiction fire, search and destroy missions, the bombings, the torture of prisoners, all accepted policy by many units in South Vietnam. That is what we are trying to say. It is part and parcel of everything.
An American Indian friend of mine who lives in the Indian Nation of Alcatraz put it to me very succinctly. He told me how as a boy on an Indian reservation he had watched television and he used to cheer the cowboys when they came in and shot the Indians, and then suddenly one day he stopped in Vietnam and he said, "my God, I am doing to these people the very same thing that was done to my people," and he stopped. And that is what we are trying to say, that we think this thing has to end.
We are here to ask, and we are here to ask vehemently, where are the leaders of our country? Where is the leadership? We're here to ask where are McNamara, Rostow, Bundy, Gilpatrick, and so many others? Where are they now that we, the men they sent off to war, have returned? These are the commanders who have deserted their troops. And there is no more serious crime in the laws of war. The Army says they never leave their wounded. The marines say they never even leave their dead. These men have left all the casualties and retreated behind a pious shield of public rectitude. They've left the real stuff of their reputations bleaching behind them in the sun in this country....
We wish that a merciful God could wipe away our own memories of that service as easily as this administration has wiped away their memories of us. But all that they have done and all that they can do by this denial is to make more clear than ever our own determination to undertake one last mission - to search out and destroy the last vestige of this barbaric war, to pacify our own hearts, to conquer the hate and fear that have driven this country these last ten years and more. And more. And so when thirty years from now our brothers go down the street without a leg, without an arm, or a face, and small boys ask why, we will be able to say "Vietnam" and not mean a desert, not a filthy obscene memory, but mean instead where America finally turned and where soldiers like us helped it in the turning.
And I heard one guest on Fox News report that it was Pershing's medals Kerry threw over the wall.
Real heroes are like that. My dad had been dead for several years before I again came across a frame which contained some of his medals and ribbons from WWII, which included a Silver Star and Bronze Star medals, along with two Purple Hearts for the grievous wounds he suffered in the South Pacific.
I also noticed a ribbon that I had not identified before and found it corresponed to be none other than the Navy Cross.
The old former Marine long ago told me that many of his medals were stolen while he was a patient aboard a hospital ship, but he never elaborated beyond that.
And then along came LTjg Kerry-Heinz, "war hero"par excellence.....
Is this racist or what. Does he still fell the same way about the Iraqi's. With one exception..."They only wanted to be gassed and murdered by the dictator Saddam Hussein" This guy is really sick and dangerous to our freedoms.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.