February 20, 2004
Leadership?
Phil Carter has a post (and op-ed) about why he thinks President Bush's National Guard service record matters.
"Leadership by example is a principle that's hammered into every newly minted American military officer. ... Above all else, it means never asking your soldiers, sailors, airmen or Marines to do something that you wouldn't do yourself."
Armed Liberal at Winds of Change replies:
"It's well written, serious, accurate, and amazingly wrong.
I have to agree with Armed Liberal. Is Phil really saying that you can't be the civilian commander-in-chief if you weren't in the military, and you can't go to war as the CinC if you weren't in combat yourself? That sure seems to the be the logical conclusion of his statements. I guess Phil won't be able to vote for Edwards since John won't be able to provide leadership to the Armed Forces as his role of President requires.
In an earlier post Phil said "Was he really the kind of junior officer that we now want to be Commander-in-Chief?" And I also have to agree with Jeff Medcalf when he says:
Would it not be better to ask, "Has he been the kind of Commander-in-Chief that we would want to be Commander-in-Chief?" It's not like he's Kerry - with no record as CinC to run on. You can actually judge the President by how he's actually performed his duties. Why do you need or even want to look at his record as a junior officer in performing such an evaluation?"
Bush has amassed a pretty clear record as CinC, and as far as I can tell, people are not having a hard time making up their minds about how he's doing -- love it or hate it.
Assuming Kerry is the Democratic Nominee, how should I judge how he'll do? By then man he was thirty years ago, or the man of today?
John Kerry won his Silver Star for conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity in action while in charge of a three-boat mission. As the force approached the target area, all units came under intense automatic weapons and small arms fire from an entrenched enemy force less than fifty-feet away. Unhesitatingly, Lieutenant Kerry ordered his boat to attack as all units opened fire and beached directly in front of the enemy ambushers. The daring and courageous tactic surprised the enemy and succeeded in routing a score of enemy soldiers. Later, the boats again were taken under fire from a heavily foliated area and B-40 rocket exploded close aboard PCF-94; with utter disregard for his own safety and the enemy rockets, he again ordered a charge on the enemy, beached his boat only ten feet from the VC rocket position, and personally led a landing party ashore in pursuit of the enemy. Upon sweeping the area an immediate search uncovered an enemy rest and supply area which was destroyed.
The John Kerry of then took swift and decisive action. Does that sound like the John Kerry of today who seems to be on both sides of every issue?
Would the John Kerry of today have earned that Silver Star? The John Kerry of today when comming under fire would keep on going without returning fire so that nobody else would have a cause to attack Kerry's boat, and leave it up to the Justice Department to bring his attacker to justice. He would carefully review his actions to determine why they hate his boat, and ultimately conclude it is because the French aren't on board. Then he would denounce his men as war criminals.
Posted by Kevin Murphy at February 20, 2004 12:50 PM | National Politics
