SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: PROLIFE who wrote (673516)2/27/2005 2:05:31 AM
From: Hope Praytochange  Respond to of 769670
 
Flyboys of Vietnam, Gray and Grounded in Iraq
By KIRK SEMPLE

ORWARD OPERATING BASE DANGER, Iraq, Feb. 20 - The seasoned pilot was recalling a different war in a different place. "Every time we went in, we went in hot," he remembered. "You were fighting your way in and fighting your way out."

The pilot, Chief Warrant Officer James G. Freeman, was 23 when he began flying Huey helicopters in the Vietnam War in 1970. His missions with the 116th Assault Helicopter Company often involved dropping into a battleground to unload soldiers after helicopter gunships had "prepped" the zone with a torrent of rockets and machine-gun fire.

"There were a lot of bullets flying down there," Mr. Freeman recounted dryly during an interview. He was seated in a trailer on the airfield at Forward Operating Base Speicher, an American military base near here and his home for the next year while he is deployed with the 42nd Infantry Division of the New York National Guard, based in Troy, N.Y.

Mr. Freeman is now 58, with wry creases spraying from the corners of his eyes and a penchant for menthol cigarettes. As a member of the Guard, he has been deployed for events including the 1980 Winter Olympics in Lake Placid, N.Y., and relief and recovery missions after the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the crash of T.W.A. Flight 800 in 1996 and the attack of Sept. 11, 2001.

Now, 34 years after his yearlong tour of duty in Vietnam, Mr. Freeman is back in another war.

He is one of five helicopter pilots from the New York National Guard who flew Hueys in the Vietnam War and who have been deployed as Black Hawk pilots in northern Iraq with the 42nd Infantry Division. The five pilots, all together, flew thousands of combat hours in Vietnam and survived being shot down several times. In this war, however, they say their responsibilities have kept them largely earthbound, as younger pilots rack up the flight hours. And they are not very happy about it.

"I'd rather be flying," grumbled Chief Warrant Officer Thomas McGurn, 57, one of the pilots who is at Base Danger helping to coordinate daily aviation schedules for the brigade. "This is kind of a bummer."

Only two of the five veteran pilots have flown since the bulk of the brigade arrived in Iraq last month.

Mr. Freeman, a retired Suffolk County police officer who lives in Stony Brook, N.Y., has flown once. Chief Warrant Officer Steven M. Derry, 53, a New York State correction officer in Wilton, N.Y., has flown twice. The others have not yet been tapped, but expect to fly sometime this year.

All five are members of a headquarters unit for the division's aviation brigade, which includes four aviation units from around the country and a maintenance battalion from Brooklyn.

For now, the five men spend their days at desk jobs or hanging out in their khaki flight suits, like caged, graying lions. Their command and control responsibilities, rather than their comparatively advanced ages, are the reason they are not flying as much as other pilots, the men say.

Mr. Freeman has taken to calling himself "a staff weenie." And Chief Warrant Officer Herbert A. Dargue, 57, of Brookhaven, N.Y., who is serving as a liaison between the division headquarters and the aviation brigade, said, "I'd rather get in the action than sit behind a desk."

About 5,570 American troops who are 50 or older have been deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, nearly all of them members of the Guard and the Reserves. Although there are mandatory retirement regulations in the military that can apply anywhere from 55 to 62, depending on a soldier's length of service and other circumstances, there are no age limits on the battlefield.

This war is qualitatively different from the war these men experienced in Vietnam. For one, there is far less combat. The Black Hawk's primary mission is to ferry personnel and supplies from one base to another - battlefield circulation, in military parlance - and the helicopters only rarely face enemy fire.

And the military they once knew is just a distant memory. There are women flying helicopters now, there is no alcohol, and there is a deluge of unfamiliar acronyms and new, unyielding rules.

"The rule used to be: take off in the morning, come back at night, get drunk, and do it again the next day," Mr. Freeman said. He remembers flying Hueys full of alcohol to bases in Vietnam. By comparison, the bases in Iraq are completely alcohol-free.

Chief Warrant Officer Ronald P. Serafinowicz, 56, who is also a liaison between the division headquarters and the aviation brigade, said the experience of being back in combat had resurrected his past.

"You live your life, and memories fade. But when you're back in it, suddenly the memories come back, and you remember all your missions," said Mr. Serafinowicz, a longtime Long Island resident who moved to Arizona a decade ago.

But for all the war stories the men can share, they do not romanticize the experience. For all their desire to fly here, they do not feel the need to relive the trials of their first war.

"I lost more friends there - young guys who never got to live a life," said Mr. McGurn, a Yonkers native who is a Westchester County police officer in civilian life.

There are other Vietnam veterans in the military here and throughout Iraq. Still, looking at these men standing among soldiers who could be their grandchildren in a war that, like Vietnam, does not have overwhelming public support, the question practically leaps from this reporter's mouth: What the heck are they doing here?

They each give a variant of a remarkably simple answer: obligation.

They signed up for the National Guard, so when they were called up they had to go, even if they did not want to.

"I'd rather be at home cutting the grass and playing with the grandkids," said Mr. Dargue, who flew in Vietnam in 1968 and has racked up 20,000 piloting hours in his career.

All five pilots say they have remained in the National Guard for the camaraderie, the pension and, above all, the love of flying.

"They let you fly an $8 million machine," Mr. McGurn said. "I always wanted to fly as a kid."



To: PROLIFE who wrote (673516)2/27/2005 9:49:06 AM
From: Hope Praytochange  Respond to of 769670
 
What Dean Means
By MATT BAI

wo weeks ago, on the eve of Howard Dean's election as chairman of the Democratic National Committee, his old rival John Kerry -- the same John Kerry who had once been caught hissing ''Dean, Dean, Dean, Dean'' into an open microphone, in what sounded like an imitation of Jan Brady's ''Marcia, Marcia, Marcia'' -- sent an e-mail message to his supporters. ''Let's welcome Howard Dean and give him the groundswell of grass-roots support he needs,'' Kerry wrote enthusiastically, urging his followers to contribute to the party. The turnabout here, if anyone really stopped to think about it, was mind-bending. It was Dean, after all, who pioneered the Internet campaign, and it was Dean who had to urge his supporters, the most motivated in the Democratic universe, to accept Kerry as their nominee. And although Kerry emerged as the safer, consensus choice for president, it was Dean, alone among Democrats, who retained the personal loyalty of street-level activists and millionaire donors. Kerry urging his fans to give it up for Dean was like the leader of a warm-up band begging the audience to wait around for U2.

Somehow, at the end of the day, Dean managed to triumph over his rivals after all. Lashing out at Washington Democrats as timid and feckless during the primaries, he vowed to ''take back our party,'' and he did exactly that. The party's Congressional leaders could talk all they wanted about how Dean would be a mere functionary -- ''I think Dean knows his job is not to set the message,'' Harry Reid lectured -- but, like Kerry's welcoming e-mail message, such statements had the ring of self-delusion. The moment the votes for chairman were counted, Howard Dean became the de facto voice of the Democratic Party.

Dean would seem to be better suited to the chairman's office than he was to the White House. Up close, there was always something a little disconcerting about Dean's presidential campaign; he seemed to derive too much enjoyment from his followers' rage and idolatry. Dean's work after his campaign imploded, however, was more ennobling and, arguably, more important. Under the guise of his political action committee, Democracy for America, Dean ventured deep into Republican states where national Democrats rarely trod, raising money and campaigning not just for Senate hopefuls but also for candidates seeking offices as lowly as soil-and-water commissioner. Rural Democrats fear, perhaps with good reason, that Dean is the wrong messenger for the party in much of America, and yet not one of them has spent the time and capital Dean has on reviving the party in those sparsely populated states and counties where Democrats are fast disappearing.

Inevitably, Dean's ascension has been seen in the familiar Democratic context of center versus left, New Democrat versus old. Dean, it has been said, is too far left to lead a party that suffers from an image of extremism. But what Dean's selection actually makes clear is that these distinctions have less meaning in today's party than ever before. While Dean was a leftist, antiwar presidential candidate, he was also, as he never tired of reminding people, a defiantly centrist governor of Vermont. (Early in the presidential race, Dean told me, ''I was a triangulator before Clinton was a triangulator.'') Dean opposed the invasion of Iraq, but his rhetoric about winning the peace and fighting terrorists at home hardly contrasts with anything that supposedly moderate Democrats espouse. Dean likes to be described as ''pro-gun,'' but his actual positions are indistinguishable in every way from those of Democrats who favor stricter gun control.

In this way, Dean perfectly embodies the modern Democratic Party, whose ideology feels so muddled and incohesive that labels of ''left'' and ''center,'' at least in terms of governing philosophy, are almost irrelevant. So-called centrists, with precious few exceptions, have lined up with their party's base against the idea of partly privatizing Social Security, even though those same Democrats used to argue that the program was gravely ill; so-called leftists, meanwhile, have embraced the gospel of budget restraint. The only real arguments among Democrats now are entirely tactical in nature. Should Democrats make an impassioned, populist argument against Bush's war and his tax cuts? Or should they try to sound more reasoned and Clintonian, arguing that some wars are good (but not this one) and that some tax cuts are fine (but not these)? Should they talk more about God, or increase their turnout among black voters? What was once the purview of pollsters and admen has become the central dialogue of the Democratic Party itself.

Democrats mistake this vacuum of substantive conflict for a kind of hard-won unity on the issues. But intellectual obliqueness and facility are cheap fabrics from which to stitch together unity, and they unravel too easily. Real debates between competing visions of the future -- debates of the kind that pitted Hubert Humphrey against Strom Thurmond on civil rights, or Robert Kennedy against Lyndon Johnson on Vietnam -- are what sharpen arguments and energize parties, even when they lead to defeat. The modern Republican Party has been split by disagreements among social warriors and anti-tax zealots, and the resulting tensions, carried out in campaigns and policy papers for decades, have helped hone an agenda that now dominates the national discourse.

Dean, by his own admission, can occasionally be ruled by whatever mysterious furies haunt a Park Avenue-reared physician rather than by the rules of political decorum, and this is what worries people. He has promised to be more diplomatic and more deferential in his new role; the insider needs different skills, presumably, than the outsider he used to be. But should Dean turn out to be more like the impulsive and impolitic chairman that some of the party's leaders fear him to be -- the same guy who excoriated his rivals as spineless and then yowled through gritted teeth on national television -- then he might actually be something closer to what his party desperately needs.

Matt Bai is a contributing writer for the magazine.