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