Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (May 28, 2001)
ay 28,2001 al er iharte-Tur :onditionat lospital. the second :er in Harris i less than 16 riffs deputy was gunned arrest Jesus f s northwest e for damage ar. sted after a hunt and il murder. ; for Demi: ay with those inhering hiir. ; man and Monday, May 28, 2(X)1 o PINION Page 5 THE BATTALION A criminal action? Controversy surrounds Kerrey's admittance of possible war crimes oh Kerrey, a former De mocratic senator from Nebraska, has admitted in several interviews, includ ing one on national television, to killing women and children in Vietnam. However, there has been not so much as a whisper f my brothe: .1 use it even s said of hi; ds funeral, h er, askedtk :e not only re- , but alsok 7ur. nily too,” sh - lost one. V : another. JASON BENNYHOFF al seems tok ite of the Vie: anorial. Tk ith its gloss about a trial, investigation or any other form of reprimand of him. Kerrey said in his interview that he does not aelieve that he should be charged with war rimes. However, by his own admission, during a raid on the night of Feb. 25, 1969, the SEAL team he commanded in Vietnam killed at least 13 unarmed women and children in the village if Thanh Phong in Vietnam’s Mekong Delta. Accounts of the night’s events vary. Kerrey aid that his team was fired upon and then re- urned fire into a group of hooches (a kind of hack in which the villagers lived), to be sur- irised to find just women and children inside. Te made this statement after a passing mention if killing at least two other unarmed civilians in n outlying hooch. “The thing that I w r ill remember until the day \ Jl die is walking in and finding, I don’t know, 14 f ir so, I don’t even know what the number was, vomen and children who were dead,” Kerrey aid in a 1998 interview, according to The New J 11 Vork Times. I Given this admission alone, even without any • 1 Hither evidence, how can anyone say that Kerrey jlhould go untried? Even if his account is correct, L .A. tlllnd the team was fired on, he still admitted to ■lurdering at least two unarmed people w r hen has lefttk lh e team was not being fired on. I But there is other evidence — the statements of a Vietnamese woman, Pham Tri Lanh, who Recounted not a firefight, but an execution in a $ew York Times interview. She said she was hid ing in the woods near the village and saw Kerrey endless naiK anc ^ h' s men execute an elderly man, a woman ed in white three children. , , . , 0 pause andcct While Lanh’s statements might be doubted ection eveiw iy Americans,, there is also testimony contra- m apology', dieting Kerrey’s account from some of the men Var II memor. under Kerrey’s command at Thanh Phong. )f gleamingw ' Gerhard Klann, the most experienced SEAL ering stars. > n Kerrey’s team, tells a very different story he existingRar from Kerrey’s. He said in his interview with 60 : mall, itistobc Minutes II that in the initial encounter with a ater that extent group of people in an outlying hooch, Kerry . On either side helped him slash an elderly man’s throat and ttallconcretetrr kill three children under the age of 12 and a one represenoi; woman before the team reached the main vil- 2 Atlantic theatt lage, where the SEALs lined up the inhabitants acific. and shot them. circle are 56pil- Klann described in an interview with the New ery state andtetm> r £ Times how the elderly man died. “I stabbed le. At the heartoB m twice,” Klann said. “He wouldn’t die. He fountains spriBB.pt moving and fighting hack.” clear water. V Klann then described how Kerrey helped him gleaming golw putting his knee on the old man’s chest while W2ry l ,000 Air.- Klann slit his throat. vho died, sta®H-j na 1998 interview, Michael Ambrose, also a -a ter falls. member of Kerrey’s SEAL team, agreed with ■^^Klann’s telling of the outlying hooch incident, ■eluding Kerrey helping kill the old man. I Kerrey’s memory was vague about this inci dent when he was asked about it in the 60 Min utes II interview. m Under American rules of war, it makes no dif ference that Kerrey might not have taken direct part in the killings. Consider the case of Joachim feiper, commander of the S.S. Panzer forces during the Battle of the Bulge in World War II. ||en under Peiper’s command were directly re sponsible for the Malmedy Massacre, in which mnost 80 American prisoners were gunned down. Though Peiper was not at Malmedy and anite pillars no evidence could ever be produced that he or- 3, territories and District dared the killings or even that he knew or them ilumbia during /ar. Each is ned With ils until after the fact, he was still convicted of war crimes by an American tribunal. Peiper was sen tenced to death simply because men under his command were guilty. By that precedent, laid down by an American tribunal, Kerrey would be guilty of far more than Peiper, since he was at the place of the inci dent and had ample opportunity to stop the killing, even if he did not take part in it. Flow then, since Americans made the rules that deter mine a commander’s guilt in war crimes cases, can Americans sit by while their own admitted war criminals draw government pensions? T here is no evidence that the SEAL team was ever fired upon. Klann outright denies that there was ever any gunfire from the Vietnamese villagers and even Kerrey said he is unsure. Giv en the overwhelming evidence that Kerrey may have committed some crime, it is ridiculous that no charges have been brought against him. Jason Bennyhoffis a senior journalism major. O n April 26, former Ne braska Sen. Bob Kerrey held a press conference in New York to admit that-he and a platoon of U.S. Navy SEALs had killed 21 Vietnamese civil ians during a mission in Viet nam’s Mekong Delta on Feb. 25,'1969. Since his confession, members of the media and old protesters of the Vietnam conflict have taken advantage of this tragic circumstance. After more than 30 years, there are still some in this na tion that feel the urge to puff up their chest and spit in the faces of their countrymen because they did what they felt was their duty. What is even worse is that there are people that wish for Kerrey to be tried for war crimes. What happened on that night in Vietnam is truly tragic, but is it a war crime? Not even close. According to the former Senator and six other members of his platoon, “Kerrey’s raiders” were in what was called a “Free-fire zone.” According Monument at a cost ol arly 2004, when an 3 alive. irehes represent the ic and Pacific victories. !. bronze columns )rt eagles holding a y laurel.The WWII y medal is embedded e floor. to their account, which does not vary, the platoon was ambushed by a unit of Viet Cong. “When we fired,” Kerrey said, “we fired because we were fired upon. In short, we did not go out on a mis sion with the intent to kill innocent people.” Af ter the skirmish, Kerrey and his men found the bodies and reported it to their superiors. There is controversy surrounding the raid. A single member of the platoon claims that the civil ians were rounded up and executed. Kerrey also received a Bronze Star for the raid, supposedly for killing 21 “members of the Viet Cong.” Kerrey has yet to return the commendation for a raid that he has supposedly “struggled with.” Evidence suggests that Kerrey and his men are telling the truth, even if the truth may never be known. The Vietnamese government never com plained about the raid during or after the war un til Kerrey broke his silence last month. This is not to say, however, that Kerrey is in nocent. He is guilty, at the very least, of being hyp ocritical by “baring his soul” about the raid while keeping the Bronze Star. There are also questions as to why Kerrey waited 3 2 years to come clean about the incident. This does not make him a war criminal or the demands that he be tried as one any less repulsive. War is a very dirty business; Vietnam was about as dirty as war gets. Kerrey himself said “In Vietnam, the civilians were often the combatants. A 12-year- old kid could walk up to a cafe, and did, and lobbed a grenade into that cafe and blew up people.” As a commanding officer, Kerrey’s primary re sponsibility was for the welfare of himself and the members of his platoon. If the Viet Cong did fire on Kerrey’s patrol, what was he supposed to do? Get up and ask who out there was the enemy, and then shoot them? The Viet Cong were a potent foe because they were difficult to track down. They did not wear uni- forms and did not fight in a conventional manner. It was difficult for members of the American military to fight “by the rules” when their ene my took advantage of these limitations. Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass), who also served in Viet nam at the same time Kerry did, said in a speech on April 27 that “there were older citizens, women, children and others who were often used as a matter of strategy by the Viet Cong, drawn into the line of fire and put in positions of danger without regard.” There were instances where snipers on convoys shot Vietnamese children as young as four years of age. They did so because their parents shoved the child out in front of the convoy wearing chunks of C-4 plastic explosive. Such instances are horrific and have doubtless taken a toll up on the men that pulled the trigger. But what else were they to do? When someone fires on a soldier, that soldier , must fire back in order to save himself and those around him. If an innocent is caught in the cross fire, that is too bad. Regular human instincts must be put aside for the most basic of instincts: survival. “Every person who has gone to war has strug gled with the question of, ‘Did he do it right?’ ” Kerry said at his press conference. If he is indeed telling the truth, he should know that he did the best he could under trying cir cumstances that millions of soldiers before and af ter him have faced. Those that want to see Kerrey tried as a crimi nal seem to think that there was some way he should have known better. They do not under stand war. It is not black and white, clean and pret ty. War is truly hell. Kerrey has been through that hell, and should not be sent back for doing his duty. He continues to live with the reparations of his actions every day. Mark Passwaters is a senior electrical engineering major. iiie pillars I) evidence could ever be produced that he or- jf' Mark Passwaters is a j arritoriesandDistw dered the killings or even that he knew of them ruben deluna/The Battalion mgt nbia during d With ft' '|l : ^Jptricter open container law will not stop drunk driv £ A recent bill to lowed in trunks or behind the last up- However, a sip of beer alone will Alcohol consumption is perfectly though the authors of the bill may /% pass in the right seat of vehicles without trunks, not intoxicate a person of legal drink- legal for people of age; added limita- have meant well, there is no guaran- wpAJLTexas house Hp ~ according to The Dallas Morning ing age. The issue is not the drink that tions are unnecessary. Assuming that tee it will be used in a manner fair to constitution a t nc | senate b an s all My ^ News. The bill is meant to combat a person might consume while driving because a driver’s passengers are everyone involved. Jessica Crutcher is a junior journalism major. ssenting the lultural might- strength of Jnited 3S. recent bill to pass in the .Texas house senate bans all open alcohol con- la i tiers in moving Vehicles. Gov. Per ry has said he will sign the bill; it Emily Bra'll reached him last Thursday. The cur- lent law allows passengers to have . , i open containers of alcohol in vehi- help the police s- 1 i i , • i_ • fru • r cles, and the driver cannot be urn their lives. (. , , , . . i i • t , , ; charged unless he is observed drink- \ the numbers 01 . i v i t i band then dosofl ^ Under tl J. n f w la ^’ a ^ ne > even f , , a passenger, drinking alcohol in an -ttiiig oi ici - | ut:omo kji e j-jg guilty of a Class C who we catch dri . , , ° £ , j , , misdemeanor and could be fined up ie drunk yet, but , m i - nn r re the alcohol F , , , o Open containers would still be ai- them do some® lowed in trunks or behind die last up right seat of vehicles without trunks, according to The Dallas Morning News. The bill is meant to combat drinking and driving, because police say their hands are often tied under the current system — the driver can just pass the beer to a passenger to keep from being ticketed. The new bill has good intentions. However, it -will not be any easier to enforce than the numerous other anti-drinking and driving laws, and does little to address the real prob lem. It is possible that having one’s passengers drinking alcohol could be a distraction to safe driving. A per son is probably also more likely to take a sip of beer while driving if his or her passengers make it available. However, a sip of beer alone will not intoxicate a person of legal drink ing age. The issue is not the drink that a person might consume while driving Assuming that because a driver's passengers are drinking that the driver has also been drinking is faulty. down the road. The problem lies in the several drinks he or she may have had before ever climbing behind the wheel. Recent legislation does nothing to alleviate this problem. The new bill may also generate unfair ticketing. Alcohol consumption is perfectly legal for people of age; added limita tions are unnecessary. Assuming that because a driver’s passengers are drinking that the driver has also been drinking is faulty. It is more likely that the person driving is the (alcohol-free) designat ed driver. Unless the driver appears to be intoxicated, the group should not be bothered, regardless of whether the other group members are drinking. If drinking and driving remains such a problem, current methods of enforcement should be made more efficient before new regulations are added. However, since it appears this new law is unavoidable, it can only be hoped that it will be used fairly. Al- The Battalion encourages letters to the editor. Letters must be 300 words or less and include the author’s name, class and phone number. The opinion editor reserves the right to edit letters for length, style and accuracy. Letters may be submitted in person at 014 Reed McDonald with a valid student ID. Letters may also be mailed to: The Battalion - Mall Call 014 Reed McDonald Texas A&M University College Station, TX 77843-1111 Campus Mall: 1111 Fax: (979) 845-2647 E-mail: battletters@hotmall.com