A comment offered last week by a reader addressed the shameful homecoming encountered by Viet Nam veterans returning from an unpopular war that split the country during the turbulent 1960s. The observation was spot-on.
Soldiers returning home through San Francisco International Airport could not change into civilian clothes fast enough to avoid sneers and worse, being spat upon. Americans disgusted with the war expressed themselves in displays of unconscionable behavior.
The soldiers took the brunt of criticism that would have been more appropriately aimed at the highest-ranking policymakers in the White House and the Defense Department, including Presidents Johnson and Nixon and Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara.
McNamara later apologized for his rosy predictions of victory when he knew better and opted for deceit. Johnson too knew that American forces faced little prospect of success in a conflict where the North Vietnamese Army and Viet Cong guerrilla fighters turned U.S. opinion against the war with the Tet Offensive. The South Vietnamese government was corrupt.
We lost 58,000 lives by backing the wrong horse and believing we could intervene successfully in a civil war. Then, unfortunately, the My Lai Massacre so enraged the American public that provocative charges of “baby killers” dominated public discourse.
Our soldiers (used generically to describe all military personnel) deserved far better treatment and respect than came their way. They should not have felt compelled to hide their service on behalf of an unappreciative public.
They fought amid horrible conditions, confronting an enemy who knew the terrain better than they, who often were invisible and, either through coercion or shrewdness, garnered the support of villagers and townspeople.
Many veterans suffered from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) before it was understood, and before the military accepted it as an acceptable response to combat, not a sign of emotional weakness. I also suggest that the disgraceful receptions that greeted our returning veterans exacerbated the already fragile states of many veterans.
I served in the Maryland Army National Guard with a non-commissioned officer who had served as an infantry soldier in both Korea and Vietnam. He was my first sergeant in a small public affairs unit that I commanded and led in a 15-day training exercise in Panama and Honduras. When in Honduras, we stayed in an encampment that reminded my first sergeant of Da Nang in Vietnam.
Shortly after returning stateside, this terrific NCO, whom I grew to like and admire, began to suffer from PTSD. The encampment triggered disabling memories. He was helpless in fighting past demons. He experienced guilt that he survived fierce combat, in one case in Korea the only person to do so. He no longer could function in a military environment. He would wander away. It was tragic.
Fortunately, he received sensitive and humane treatment from a Veterans Administration psychiatrist. He also gained a substantial disability status. To gain that disability, I had to certify as his commanding officer that he was unfit for duty. At his wife’s behest, I did so. I regretted that his outstanding career ended on a low note.
I often think about him. He was a good person and great soldier.
Our returning veterans deserve our gratitude and admiration. They served bravely and loyally. They risked their lives. They lost close buddies. They witnessed human destruction. They were young and unequipped, naturally so, to handle constant death.
The reader’s comment in response to last week’s column about my conversation with three Viet Nam veterans was right. He struck a nerve.
Columnist Howard Freedlander retired in 2011 as Deputy State Treasurer of the State of Maryland. Previously, he was the executive officer of the Maryland National Guard. He also served as community editor for Chesapeake Publishing, lastly at the Queen Anne’s Record-Observer. In retirement, Howard serves on the boards of several non-profits on the Eastern Shore, Annapolis and Philadelphia.
CDR Jim Moses, USN (Ret.) says
Thank you, Colonel Friedlander.
John Fischer says
Nice article by Howard here. I imagine, on reflection, he might clarify the thought behind his comment of “backing the wrong horse,” but other than that nit pick, I can testify he is pretty much spot on.
Howard Freedlander says
Thank you, Jack. The spin back in the 60s, if I recall correctly, was that we chose to support the South Vietnamese against the forces in the north to contain communism as propagated by China. We backed a corrupt government that seemed to lack the depth of support enjoyed by the NVA.
Howard Freedlander says
Thank you, Jim. Our country learned a lesson, I believe, in how to pay homage to our returning veterans, properly and respectfully.
Jim Moses says
I saw it first hand stationed in Newport. I was in civvies, but a bunch of locals were taunting a guy in uniform entering the local McD’s. Yes, “baby killer.” Except – he was Medical Corps.
Jim
Paul Callahan says
Wonderful article. I can’t help to see the dichotomy of your writings. In this article you rightly defend Americans who were caught up in a whirlwind of events through no fault of their own. The vast majority did their duty as was expected of them and they paid a horrible price – not the least of which was being dishonored by their fellow citizens.
Yet for young Americans living in the South in 1861 who served their homeland from what they saw as a foreign invasion and who believed they were defending their right to self government as defined by the Founders in their Declaration of Independence- you have vilified repeatedly in the past.
You can not stand in judgement of one without being just as ugly as those who vilified our Vietnam vets.
As an former military Officer, and as we learned by the treatment of out Vietnam vets, you should know not to blame and vilify the young men and woman who did their duty. We do not blame our fighting men and woman for the failed policies and decisions of our civilian leaders.
Without young Americans willing to sacrifice when called, willing to volunteer to serve a cause, we all would have nothing.
Howard Freedlander says
Thank you, Paul. Your comparison between our American soldiers serving the United States in the Viet Nam War and those who fought for the Confederate and secessionist South is dumbfounding.
Paul Callahan says
I’m a bit dumbfounded that you missed the point entirely Howard.
I was pointing out the hypocrisy of those who believe they have a moral superiority to attack and de-humanize our American fighting men (and woman), particularly when they are obviously doing such to support their personal political views while simultaneously being totally oblivious to any sort of understanding of the circumstances which these Americans were subjected too.
Howard Freedlander says
Actually I got your point, which I thought was totally irrelevant and “dunbfounding.” I never attacked the Confederate soldiers. I found the monument offensive in representing the “Lost Cause”and the disgraceful institution of slavery. Do you get the point, Paul?
Paul Callahan says
You mean that monument of which I wrote a LTE to the Spy in July of 2020 calling for the removal of it’s confederate flag because that flag was offensive to so many?
The same monument that myself and others committed hundreds of hours of research finding that there was absolutely zero evidence that it was established for any other reason than as a local war memorial to our local American citizens?
You mean the monument that gives some basic remembrance to Talbot citizens that, again by local research, found that they were responding to an unfathomable Constitutional crisis as they witnessed for themselves by the events within Maryland and right here in Talbot?
You may see the “lost cause” many others see a war memorial to local Americans that stood against what they believed to be the end of democracy as they knew it.
I can care less about the bronze statue, it is only a flourish on top of a marker to remember local Americans.
As a former military leader why not show some basic leadership for the American fighting men and call for the base to be preserved alongside our other war memorials? Then we can move on to recognizing our Union and USCT as well.