Argh. I can’t believe I’m jumping into this, as I think this whole Vietnam thing has been a pointless distraction and the biggest mistake of the Kerry campaign. However, I don’t see a thing in that report that reads any different from the description that has been on John Kerry’s web site all along:

“28 FEB 1969 Bay Hap River
Three PCFs were traveling up the Bay Hap River with 70 South Vietnamese Militia investigating an area where the boats were ambushed the previous night. During the patrol, the boats came under heavy fire from the shore. Kerry, serving as the Officer in Tactical Command of the mission, ordered the units to turn toward the fire and beach. As the boats approached shore, more than 20 Viet Cong troops stood up and ran. They were quickly overrun when the Marines troops reached the shore. While the Militia searched the area, PCFs 23 and 94 left to investigate another site where an Army advisor reported gunshots. Returning from the site, a B-40 rocket exploded close to PCF94, blowing out one of the windows. Kerry again ordered the units to turn into the fire and charge the ambush site. PCF 94 landed in the center of ambush and a man jumped up holding a B-40 rocket launcher and started to run. The forward M-60 gunner on PCF94 wounded him in the leg as Kerry jumped off the boat and chased him inland behind a hooch and shot him. Marines swept the area, and received fire from snipers and small arms that was suppressed with the assistance of mortars and gunfire from the swiftboats. The landing parties found vast stores of rice, ammunition and clothing. The boats were fired on one additional time as they were heading back down the river. The site of the second ambush was believed to be a major Viet Cong supply point. Kerry received the Silver Star for this operation.”

I don’t know if that qualifies for a Silver Star, but I don’t see where it contradicts the after action report, either.

Posted by: Solonor at September 14, 2004 07:58 AM

Solonor:
Let’s have a look at the number of enemy troops. (I got it wrong originally, I said ‘3 confirmed’ when there were 7). Where did the figure of “more than 20 Viet Cong troops” come from? Still, it’s not an unreasonable estimate. 3 VC KIA, 5 dropped Rifles, the VC RPG Gunner Kerry accounted for, 3 VC running, and still they were taking sniper fire, so I think it’s as good a count as you’d ever get under the circumstances. I doubt there’d be many fewer, and there could well have been a lot more. Let’s double the ‘20+’ to ‘50’, shall we? Facing… 95 Ruff-Puffs and the crews of 3 boats armed with multiple HMGs.

To quote the JohnKerry site (Versions 1 & 2):

The extraordinary daring and personal courage of Lieutenant (junior grade) Kerry in attacking a numerically superior force…

Numerically superior? A pardonable bit of poetic license perhaps, an all too common thing when writing up a citation.
As for Kerry’s omission to mention that the VC he’d shot had been wounded, so what? All this proves is that the SwiftVets accounts are accurate (at least over this incident), even though they’ve been labelled smear-merchants. The quote you gave from Kerry’s site is the literal truth, though I don’t know for how long it’s been saying that.
I’m sure a number of rabid Republican partisans will say that Kerry moved ‘behind a hooch’, shot an unarmed wounded man, then searched for a loaded B-40 while out of sight (and left the empty one behind). To which I’d say “BS”, there’s zero evidence of that, and they’re spouting the same sort of Drivel as DU, just for the other team.

Personally I agree totally with the last line of the citations (versions 1 and 2) :

By his brave action, bold initiative, and unwavering devotion to duty, Lieutenant (jg) Kerry reflected great credit upon himself and upheld the highest traditions of the United States Naval Service.

The Captain Kirk bit of personally beaming-down was less than wise: as OIC (Officer in Command) of his patrol craft, that wasn’t a smooth move. But in the heat of the moment, not just understandable, but commendable if you get away with it. As OTC - Officer in Tactical Command - of the Swift Boats he did an excellent job ordering a counterattack like that, really outstanding. (Though that makes his charge ashore extremely foolish, had he been shot, the whole squadron would have lost its commander, not just one boat. See the criticisms of ‘H’ Jones during the Falklands war, who did something not nearly as silly but got unlucky).

Of course as OTC, Kerry would be the one to write up this after-action report, all other things being equal.

It’s so easy being an armchair quarterback. Analysing things cooly, with no-one with a bloody great grenade launcher pointed at my boat, and with whizz-bangs going off around me. Trouble is, I’m a sometime professional naval analyst, so I have to call em how I sees em.

I’ve never questioned John Kerry’s bravery or patriotism (and have said so repeatedly on TCP). I do question his judgement. This action proves that he can make “swift” decisions that are really, unusually right under pressure, something I hadn’t appreciated till now. But they also show he can also be a loose cannon, doing really, really dumb things when the pressure is on.

It’s drawing a really long bow, but my feeling is that he’s at his best when things are going haywire, but likely to fall into a trap as soon as the tide is turned, and keep on doing it in a desperate effort to succeed. See Marshal Ney for another example. Retreat from Moscow - performance fantastic. Sent to capture Napoleon, he flip-flopped and joined him. Then committed canine intercourse at Waterloo, throwing away the French cavalry in a series of futile charges just because he thought the Brits were on the run (and having several horses shot out from under him).

Posted by: aebrain at September 14, 2004 10:01 AM

Given that these documents support (or at least don’t contradict) what Kerry’s been saying, you’d think he’d want to release all of the military and medical records so that the press can come to his defense armed with something besides Kerry’s website and their obvious desire to support their candidate of choice.

Posted by: TL at September 14, 2004 11:23 AM

Aebrain:

Excellent post and very professional assessment. I do detect more than a cursory knowledge of military operations and anlysis expertise here.

As a former Marine ops officer and one who has written more than a few AARs in my time, I too see what you have correctly noticed. Kerry did just fine in this situation up until he jumped ashore to chase down the lone VC wounded but still lethal for all intents and purposes.

Had I been his squadron Ops O at the time, I would definitely had put him in for a commendation, but more so refelcting his job as OITC and boat commander. I do not think it rises to the level of a Silver Star, but definitely appropriate for a equally commnedable but lesser award. After acknowledging his excellent response as OITC, I would then had pretty good a— chewing on his total lack of regard for his mission, leadership role and crew to beach the boat and personally lead the charge ashore. I would remind him that the best defense in this case would be the Marines or shore party specifically trained and equipped to do this. I would have then told him good job on this patrol but don’t ever pull this “Horatio Hornblower” crap again.

I too never doubted his tour of duty in-country and can see both sides of the Swiftees and his clearly. It is the post tour activities with the Vets against the war that convinces me that he is not qualified to lead this nation. His subsequent congressional activities and “nuances” on the war on terriorism only serve to firm up that opinion.

Posted by: steve at September 14, 2004 01:26 PM