European Stars and Stripes (Newspaper) - January 10, 1992, Darmstadt, Hesse Friday january 10, 1992 the stars and stripes a Page 13 commentary Leslie gel Stone s film plays fast Loose with Vietnam if on oct. 11, 1963, president Kennedy issued top secret National Security action memorandum 263. In it he called for a stepped up training for South vietnamese forces so they could take Over the duties of . Forces thus permitting the bulk of americans to withdraw by 1965. Based mainly on that document Oliver stones film Juk asks us to believe one of the great historical a a ifs of the Century that if the Young president had survived through a second term the United states would have been spared the ordeal of full scale War in Vietnam. It is fair for Stone or anyone to take up that historical sword. But on a matter that remains so raw for so Many americans it is Gross of him to distort the record and foolish to be so confident of decisions Kennedy might have made in circumstances he never had to face. Stone makes swaggering assertions about mighty unknowns. First he maintains that Kennedy was going to abandon South Vietnam to a communist takeover. Second he tells us that right wingers from the Fri and Cia to the mafia believed this and killed the president to put Lyndon Johnson in the White House and ensure that the United states would stay the course in Vietnam. I am competent Only to address the first Point. To begin with Sam 263 was grounded in one of the few periods of genuine optimism about the War. So Kennedy had some basis for believing that the War might be won soon and that . Forces could be withdrawn without a communist Victory. Put another Way Kennedy might never have issued the directive if he thought it would mean losing the War. While some officials took the directive at face value most saw it As a Kennedy bureaucratic scheme to regain control of the leaping american presence in South Vietnam a up from about 700 in 1961 to almost 17,000 in late 1963. The idea was to keep Force Levels from going up order them to go Down. Most officials also viewed the withdrawal memo As part of a White House ploy to scare South vietnamese president Ngo Dinh diem into making political reforms. Without such reforms Many officials believed the War they thought so vital would be lost. That is precisely How the state department instructed the . Embassy in Saigon to understand Sam 263. The clarifying event was of course the coup against diem and his powerful brother Ngo Dinh Nhu on nov. 1. The coup was fully supported if not inspired by the United states in Good part because of the fear that Nhu was conspiring with North Vietnam to a a neutralize South Vietnam. In other words the Kennedy team Felt that diem and Nhu might be Selling out to the communists. Whatever Kennedy a precise intentions the removal and assassination of diem profoundly increased americans political responsibility for the War. As for Kennedy a underlying thinking about the War that is a murky matter. In the last weeks of his life he gave sharply diverse signals As befits a president trying to keep his options open especially before an election. To the lbs network he said a in the final analysis it is the South vietnamese who have to win or lose this then he added a but i done to agree with those who say we should withdraw. That would be a great mistake. A to the Abc network he said that he believed a the Domino theory a whereby the fall of Saigon to communism would Lead to the collapse of americans position throughout Asia. Brushing aside these complications some have argued that Kennedy had gained self Confidence from successes such As the cuban missile crisis and would not have Felt the need to prove himself in Vietnam a As did Johnson. Soon after the assassination Ted Sorensen painted a More tortured picture of Kennedy a thinking. A the struggle could Well be he thought this nations severest test of endurance and patience a the Kennedy intimate wrote. Quot he was simply going to weather it out a Nasty untidy mess to which there was no other acceptable these words carry great weight. They echoed the private soul searching of president Dwight Eisenhower and foreshadowed almost precisely the documented dilemmas of presidents Johnson and Richard Nixon. These torments Are not to be trifled with by Oliver Stone or anyone however Many men shot Kennedy for whatever Lunatic reasons on that tragic november Day. C the now York to Moa Ellen Goodman Juk controversy More than a fuss Over facts i went to see what the fuss was about. Controversy does wonders for the Box office. Add my $6 to the $5.2 million that Juk realized in one week. I was neither a fan nor a detractor of Oliver Stone. Liked Wall Street. Never saw platoon. Never saw the doors or the doors for that matter. But i was curious about a movie that the critics liked and the commentators hated. Here was a film that had people passionately fighting about american history. Here was a filmmaker with enough guts and egotism to take up the Central event of an entire generation a the assassination of president John f. Kennedy. But when i left this didactic lesson on a fkr a assassination with Kevin Costner a interminable preposterous speech ringing in my ears i had Learned More about the controversy than about the conspiracy. The fuss Over Juk is not Only about the Warren commission and the Garrison report. Nor is it Only about a alone nuts theories and a Ocla Fri cuban Mih tary Industrial Complex theories. Its about Washington and Hollywood Docu and drama. Its a fuss made by a generation that reads and writes for the minds of a generation that watches and rewinds. Those who protest this film Are almost All older than 40. They Are not As Oliver Stone believes a upset when Art gets that a the Good news about Juk in an Era when most Peoples politics could fit on a bumper sticker this is a movie that cares. What they we Are upset about is the sense that Stone has a claim on a exclusive rights to a fkr a death. He May now in Hollyw Odese own this after Juk i know what it must be like to have a storyteller in the family. A novelist a memoirist who takes the Central events of a shared life and makes them his own. More to the Point a Man who hands these Down to the children As their memories. Stone regards the Warren commission report As the official version of the Kennedy assassination. It was designed to close debate. He says his own film is meant to open debate. A it is not a True Story per see he said last summer. A it is not the Jim Garrison Story. It is a film called indeed Stone seems ambivalent about whether Juk is an assassination Story or a careful investigation of whodunit and Why. He defends the film As truth one moment and As Art the next. So too his cinematic search winds Down every beaten path from Docu to drama. There Are real life film clips Grainy re enactments Black and White imitations dramatizations. Every trick in the bag of a reality based Quot programming is employed tricks we have seen on television and in propaganda. A the real Issue a Stone writes a is trusting the people with their real he sees himself attacking a vast cover up. But he is also putting out his version of history As he Isnit just opening debate. He a out to win the debate. I have no problem with stones questions. Ask away. One gunmen or three. Oswald As nuts or double agent or both. We exhumed Zachary Taylor a body last sum Mer on one murder theory. We can exhume the Juk files on another. What i find offensive Are stones answers. His Lens creates and indicts an entire Shadow government. His Tunnel vision sees everything through the Lens of Vietnam. His baby Boomers perspective dates nov. 22, 1963, As the moment a a it All went awry in America. None of this would rate much More than a footnote if in fact i Hadnot seen it in a theater full of Young people. Indeed the juror Over a film a its just a movie a be so intense if it did no to take place against a particular backdrop. Those of us who Are print people a writers and readers a Are losing ground to the visual people a producers and viewers. The younger generation gets its information and infotainment from television and movies. Less information. More infotainment. The franchise Over reality is passing hands. A newspaper column is one of five or six voices on a Page. A $40 million movie is not seen on a split screen with another $40 million movie. For those in my Cine Lex Oliver stones theory May become the Only version and Lee Harvey Oswald May forever look like actor Gary Oldman. So the fuss Over Juk is about facts yes but also about mediums and messages the past and the future. Call it a conspiracy theory if you must but the confusion of fact and fiction Docu and drama is Oliver stones own attempted coup of american history. C the Boston Globo
