May 4, 1970: How Kent State Could Happen Again

[Bob Geiger]

Tin soldiers and Nixon comin',
We're finally on our own.
This summer I hear the drummin',
Four dead in Ohio.

~ Ohio, Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young

Had he not been gunned down by National Guard troops on the Kent State University campus on May 4, 1970, Jeffrey Miller would be 56 years old this year. Instead, Miller's life ended at age 19 and the thing for which he will forever be remembered is being the body over which young Mary Ann Vecchio cried in despair in a Pulitzer Prize-winning photo that quickly came to symbolize a deeply-divided nation.

It was 36 years ago today that Miller, Allison Krause, Sandra Scheuer and William Schroeder, were massacred by Army National Guardsmen at a Vietnam war protest on the Kent State campus. It was a watershed event that touched off a nationwide student strike that forced hundreds of colleges and universities to close and signaled the zenith of American opposition to that war.

Miller and Krause had been involved in the demonstration while Scheuer and Schroeder were simply walking across campus between classes when the shooting started. Nine other students were wounded in the shooting, in which the soldiers fired 67 shots at the unarmed youths in a strong-arm effort to disperse the crowd before yet another day of protests could begin on the unsettled campus.

While the National Guard made a claim -- that has never been substantiated -- that a sniper had fired on the Guardsmen and some later testified that they were in fear for their lives, the closest of the four students killed (Miller) was almost 100 yards away and most of the wounded were not much closer.

The shootings chilled the nation, galvanized a generation and left millions asking how something like that could have happened in America.

Could the same thing happen in our country today? Without a shadow of a doubt. Indeed, I would argue that only one thing keeps the same kind of event from happening many times over in George W. Bush's America -- the absence of a military draft.

The shootings at Kent State were the culmination of four days of loud and large demonstrations by students, who were protesting the American invasion of Cambodia which President Richard Nixon had launched on April 25. The invasion further inflamed students as they had already seen educational deferments become more difficult to achieve and believed that the expansion of the war into another country increased their risk of being drafted.

I believe this sad occasion is a fitting day to think about the similarities between the Iraq war and Vietnam and the comparable effects it may soon have on a new generation. With Vietnam, our government misled the nation into war, gave an unrealistic estimate of how long and difficult the conflict would be and promised to liberate a struggling people from oppressors. And, with television truly coming into its own, the bloody fighting was beamed into living rooms on a nightly basis.

Sound like what's happening right now?

For even scarier similarity, read the words of former Kent State student Dean Kahler, now 57, who was shot in the lower back and left paralyzed on May 4, 1970. Kahler talked in 2000 about his thoughts immediately after Nixon's announcement of the Cambodia invasion.

"When he made the announcement, a very defiant announcement that we were invading Cambodia, he didn’t care what people thought about it -- that's the impression I got and that many of my fellow students got at the same time too. To me, it didn’t make sense. Why were we expanding the war when he was talking about ending the war and bringing our troops home and getting out of there?

"We were invading another country. I thoroughly agreed with the history and political science department at Kent who, the next day, on May 1st, buried a copy of the Constitution because they felt that he had overstepped his powers as Commander-in-Chief by sending troops into another country. The mood kind of changed on campus at that point in time."

The draft ended 33 years ago and the ambivalence today's students seem to feel toward an Iraq war so remarkably similar to Vietnam can undoubtedly be traced to a lack of personal connection to the war and any risk that it will disrupt -- or end -- their lives. But what if a draft became their reality today? With our military perhaps more stretched than it was with Vietnam and with the looming specter of our fatigued military being overwhelmed with a new war with Iran, you can bet a new spirit of activism would suddenly emerge on campuses nationwide.

Nothing would personalize a war to America's youth and their parents like the prospect of being forced to trade in the frat house for a rifle and an unarmored Humvee. I bet it would even make some of the Young Republicans on college campuses take a hard look at the rationale for war if there was even a smidgen of a chance they would actually have to fight.

And it may not be far away.

Congressman Charles Rangel (D-NY) has proposed restoring the draft, but more as an antiwar tactic to shock Republicans into reality -- that calling us a "nation at war" would have a huge public-relations cost if it ever went beyond simply being a White House buzz phrase and they actually had to start taking young people against their will.

Republican Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska has flat-out said that mandatory military service is going to have to be considered in light of what he described as a “generational war against terrorism.” Two years ago, when things were actually going better in Iraq, Hagel commented that "deteriorating security in Iraq may force the United States to reintroduce the military draft."

And, of course, there's Congressman Jack Murtha (D-PA), who has said that “the only way to increase the size of the armed services fairly is with a draft.”

Indeed, Murtha expressly addressed the need for conscription in his controversial House resolution in November, 2005, calling for a phased withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, saying "Whereas additional stabilization in Iraq by U, S. military forces cannot be achieved without the deployment of hundreds of thousands of additional U S. troops, which in turn cannot be achieved without a military draft."

Even people like Representative Jim Turner (D-TX), a member of the House Armed Services Committee, who realizes what a political firestorm a draft would create, admits that it could easily happen. “We need to be prepared to have one,” said Turner, when asked recently about the possibility if there is another major conflict in the world.

And does anyone really doubt that we could end up fighting somewhere else with Bush and a Republican Congress in charge? In addition, we have troop casualties reaching levels unseen since Vietnam, tours of duty being extended and many battle-weary troops returning to Iraq for second and third deployments. How low does the supply of trained, willing troops need to get before the draft is brought back and aren't we staring at that nearby horizon right now?

With Team Bush, we also have an administration that lied us into a war, outs covert CIA agents, performs illegal spying on American citizens and is riddled with corruption. As we deplete the U.S. military in Iraq and posture more aggressively with Iran -- and possibly North Korea -- a renewed military draft begins to look almost inevitable. And, when it comes to the notion of pulling out all the stops to stifle dissent at home, George W. Bush will make Richard Nixon look like Ghandi.

So as we commemorate the 36th anniversary of the Kent State shootings, we should look at that terrible day when four young college students quit getting older and a bad war truly came home and ask how far we are from that happening all over again.

Perhaps the fear of being drafted to fight in one of Bush's wars would actually make today's college students awaken from their collective slumber and begin protesting the state of their world. If that happens, they will soon see the tin soldiers coming once again -- except this time, they'll have bigger guns and, undoubtedly, an even more profound mandate for making the voices of dissent speak no more.

To learn more about the Kent State Shootings, visit May4Archive.org and Reese's May 4, 1970 page.

You can reach Bob Geiger at [e-mail] and read more from him at Democrats.com.

[FarLeftRage]

1. If history is any indication

Then I look for a repeat of this...

[Selatius]

2. The big difference is that we don't see "bloody fighting" on television

The deaths of soldiers have been rendered as little more than scrolling notices at the bottom of the screen on corporate news broadcasts.

Perhaps if the American people were retaught a lesson on the brutality of war through images and sound, maybe they would remember once more why they hate war and why they hated the Viet Nam War.

[acmejack]

3. I look for the draft to return soon.

Probably shortly after the elections. They will have no choice, they are dying in the recruiting world. One out of six recruits receives aa waiver as it is now in order to be accepted. If they get caught up in any sort of two theater operation they will have to have a draft. A draft will enable them to go back to low pay and save all that money too.

[sinkingfeeling]

4. Chillingly, yes it will probably happen again. Did you ever notice the

similarity of the pictures of Jeff Miller waving the black flag in the face of NG and one of the young student standing in the path of a tank on Tiananmen Square?

[kainah]

7. not Jeff with the black flag

It's not Jeff Miller waving that black flag; it's Alan Canfora. Alan, too, was shot, however. When he heard the shooting start, he jumped behind a tree and the last thing he pulled in was his arm. The bullet went through his wrist.

[Coexist]

5. Great stuff - knr

[happyslug]

6. Kent State, Vietnam and Iraq have one thing in Common

All three occurred because someone did NOT want to make the hard and UNPOPULAR military decision to withdraw.

In Kent State the unit that did the Shooting had Marched BEYOND the area of its flanking units. Thus it was "outflanked" by the students. In a Military sense this could mean the Students could attack the unit not only from the front by the sides (in a Riot Control sense it meant all the students had to do was to leave the unit walk by and then return to where they had been).

How do you resolve the problem YOU WITHDRAW TO A POSITION WHERE YOUR FLANKS ARE PROTECTED, but such a move meant a "retreat" and the officers in charge did not want to look like they were afraid of the the Students (Retreat implies "Weakness"). Thus the unit was hanging out there, its flanks exposed but the leadership did not want to show "weakness" by retreating. Added to this stupidity was the decision to issue ammo to the Troops (This was stupid for the front line troops are TO CLOSE to properly judge the need to open fire, that needs to be done by someone in the rear directing the unit). In proper Riot Control the Troops are issued Rifles with Bayonets (Bayonets tend to convince people that they have a very important meeting someplace else) and a "Sniper" following the unit under the command of the unit's Captain (Or whoever is in charge of the unit). The Sniper is to take any any real threat to the Troops and then only under the Order of his Officer. Anyway, in a situation like Kent State the Front line troops should NOT have had ammunition (and if issued NOT in their rifles unless ordered to load by their Captain).

Now I have NEVER read how the troops were issued Ammunition, I suspect it had occurred during the Trucker Strike when they were guarding Bridges and over passes at Squad or smaller units (In such situations the concern to NOT to drive people away as in Kent State, but to provide firepower if needed to people who were committing acts of violence during the Trucker Strike). The unit had just moved from the Trucker Strike to Kent State so either they still had their old ammunition OR was re-issued since the issuing ammunition had become second nature to the unit during the Trucker Strike (even through the tactical situation has changed, i.e. no longer guarding against violent acts in small groups, but now acting as a Company size unit to contain a riot).

Anyway, at Kent State the unit could NOT advance, did not want to retreat and really could not stay where they were. The Solution was to retreat but no one wanted to do that, thus the unit stood they as the situation from a military point of view deteriorated. It was a disaster ready to happen and something triggered someone to open fire and then other soldiers joined in. What did the unit do next? It retreated back to where its flanks were protected.....

Vietnam was the same situation, the US could NOT Keep pouring troops and resources into Vietnam, but did not want to pull out for such a pull out would be a sign of weakness. Sooner or later the US would have to make a choice of keep pouring money in Vietnam OR using that money someplace else. No President ever wanted to pull out, finally CONGRESS made the decision over President Ford's Veto of an act forbidding US support for Vietnam that lead to the Fall of South Vietnam in 1975 (In 1974 Congress, as a whole, made a decision that the its first priority would be to reduce Inflation by NOT expanding the deficits more than necessary, It second priority was to reduce US domestic Unemployment AND its third priority was to re-supply Israeli after the 1973 Yom Kipper War, once those three priority items were done they was no money left for Vietnam and Vietnam was funded at a bare minimal level till it fell to North Vietnam). I always joked that the US lost Vietnam on the banks of the Suzi Canal, for it was the Egyptian breach of those banks that lead to the US re-supplying Israel and leaving Vietnam fall.

The same with Iraq today, the US should pull out, we are doing more harm than good. Sooner or later we will leave do to a crisis someplace else, lets do it when it can be a true choice not a decision forced down our throats do to circumstances at the time of the Withdraw.



The same with IRaq, w