YES, THE LEFT QUESTIONED BOB DOLE'S MEDALS IN 1996

Let's not hear any more talk about how high-minded the left was about Bob Dole and his medals eight years ago. The Nation argued that Bob Dole got his first Purple Heart for a self-inflicted wound. Robert Ellis, who, like Dole 10th Mountain Division in World War II, sought to debunk the "myth" of Dole's heroism:

The truth about Dole's war record is considerably less than awe-inspiring. Yet the myth endures, and with the candidate running on the contrast between his and Clinton's military record, his campaign isn't eager to give a more accurate account. Dole, at the behest of his handlers, is less reticent about his service than in the past, but he mainly speaks about his wound and rehabilitation. He has passed up several opportunities to correct the exaggerated versions in biographies, and in the case of his self-wounding has even approved a sanitized account in which his maladroitly hurled grenade goes unnoted. Journalists continue to portray him as a hero, winner of two Bronze Stars. Joe Klein, for example, writes in Newsweek that Dole knows "what guns do. He also knows what politicians do, which is rarely anything quite so dramatic as leading an army into battle." Such attempts to make political capital out of Dole's war service go beyond the respect due him for the role he played as a soldier with the 10th Mountain Division.

A presidential candidate's fellow veteran makes claims, charging the candidate wasn't the hero his party says he was? Unprecedented!

I am curious. How did Max Cleland get wounded? I cannot seem to recall the facts.

My understanding is that he was on a day off and stumbled over a grenade. He thought he must have dropped it and picked it up. It went off.

Not a combat injury so I think he didn't get the purple heart. So Kerry could get a purple heart for a pinprick grenade shrapnel in the butt from firing too close at a pile of rice left by villagers for the VC but Cleland can't get one for having entire limbs blown off because he wasn't in combat at the moment.

BTW, some Dims and media try to portray Cleland as a war hero. Cleland doesn't do it himself and is pretty humble about it all. Personally, I don't think it's appropriate to get so nosy about a man's honorable service in-country. What's next, launch investigations into the combat performance of every single soldier and sailor who served?

There's also some reporting on Dole's first purple heart. Apparently it was something like Kerry's, a grenade mishap from his own grenade. He was leading his unit in combat two days later. Naturally, of Dole's later injuries in combat and three years in a hospital, there can be no doubt.

You might also want to read up on former senator Bob Kerrey and his remarks on the character of the fighting he saw as a SEAL before he lost a leg in combat.

It's not really all so simple as some medals awarded or injuries received. I think there is something unseemly about this debate. It seems disrespectful of a lot of vets who died there and a lot of others who won't be getting a public podium to speak because they don't have an election year accusation to make. No doubt, there were veterans against the war and others who resent them. But the Vietnam experience for our sailors and soldiers was a lot larger than the events of a few Swift boats. I also never liked the attacks on McCain by Rove in 2000 or his attacks on Cleland. There is a definite pattern here of assassinating the character of vets and their military record.

Here is a description from Cleland, and from someone who served with him........

"Grenade Explosion Accident. In his own words, [10]

On April 8, 1968, I volunteered for one last mission. The helicopter moved in low. The troops jumped out with M16 rifles in hand as we crouched low to the ground to avoid the helicopter blades. Then I saw the grenade. It was where the chopper had lifted off. It must be mine, I thought. Grenades had fallen off my web gear before. Shifting the M16 to my left hand and holding it behind me, I bent down to pick up the grenade. A blinding explosion threw me backwards."

"The 2nd of the 12th Cavalry was engaged in a combat operation at the time of this incident. Max Cleland was with the Battalion Forward Command Post in heavy combat involving the attack of the 1st Cavalry Division up the valley to relieve the Marines who were besieged and surrounded at the Khe Shan Firebase. The whole surrounding area was an active combat zone (some might call the entire country of Vietnam a combat zone). (Is Iraq a combat zone?) Max, the Battalion Signal Officer, was engaged in a combat mission I personally ordered to increase the effectiveness of communications between the battalion combat forward and rear support elements: e.g. Erect a radio relay antenna on a mountain top. By the way, at one point the battalion rear elements came under enemy artillery fire so everyone was in harms way.

As they were getting off the helicopter, Max saw the grenade on the ground and he instinctively went for it. Soldiers in combat don't leave grenades lying around on the ground. Later, in the hospital, he said he thought it was his own but I doubt the concept of "ownership" went through his mind in the split seconds involved in reaching for the grenade. Nearly two decades later another soldier came forward and admitted it was actually his grenade. Does ownership of the grenade really matter? It does not.

Maury Cralle'
Battalion Executive Officer
2d/12th Cavalry Battalion
1st Air Cavalry Division
During the assault on Khe Shan"

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.