I’m off again
This time to Lamington National Park
I don’t and can’t climb mountains anymore but I can run base camps for college excursions so I give some of my time to manage the logistics of feeding and accommodating mobs of young men (about 15yr old) for the local college that is the Alma Mater of my two sons.
It’s always good to see these young men in action as the undertake, for the first time for most of them, fairly arduous walks through the rain forests. One walk they do is 18 km and it is over very mountainous country. They literally develop and even mature a little in front of my eyes. It was ever thus; force a group of young men to do something arduous together and there is always at least a hint of teamwork at the end of it. They are full of stories of blisters, sore backs and feet and as they sit around the camp fire at night and talk the day through the blisters multiply in the telling as does the severity of the sore feet or backs.
A beer for the teachers and parents at night (I don’t work for nothing!) makes for a pleasant couple of days and I trust that by the time I get back the media have stopped talking about that bloody worm.
If you haven’t been to Lamington put it on your must-do list. It’s worth it
Facebook
Twitter
Kev
Enjoy Lamington. I haven’t been back that way since Canungra in 1969. In fact, Canungra and what followed has left me with an aversion to muddy hillsides and rain forest since. Besides, I don’t think my knees would appreciate it – too many kilometers on them.
Obviously, you’re a glutton for punishment or made of sterner stuff – or both. Working with boys of that age is both inspirational and totally wearing.
Off topic – I’ve got a copy of Paul Ham’s “Vietnam – The Australian War”. I’ve found it hard to put down, and have already read about a a third. From what I’ve read, it’s impeccably researched, and unbiased – pretty rare in books on the subject in my experience, and I’ve read most of them.
I’ll give you a proper review at the end of next week after I’ve dragged the book out to Thallon, Dirranbandi, Cunnamulla, Quilpie, Augathella, Mitchell etc. It should make good motel room reading in the evening.
I too have an aversion as I later served as an Instructor at Canungra but I might have mentioned I only run the base camp for these boys with the odd bit of gratuitous advice thrown in.
When Paul Ham was researching this book he phoned me looking for contacts. I told him I would want some sort of assurance that he wasn’t some sort of Left wing nut with a anti-digger grudge before I did anything. We spoke at some length and I was reassured, in fact, impressed.
I sent emails and they contacted him.
I thought the book was to be released on 1 Nov so have set aside a book gift voucher from one of my kids for the purpose.
Kev
It’s in bookstores (in Toowoomba – at least) now. Expensive though – $55. Ham’s strength is his research through contacts. One listed (in acknowledgements xii) is a Mr Hiep, a Chinese/Vietnamese whom I met in SVN in 2006. This bloke has probably the best historical knowledge of Australian involvement of any Vietnamese, and will go out of his way to help returning Australians. He was able to locate a room in a hotel in Cholon that I stayed in for a week when I was on Saigon guard. All I gave him was an old photo – took him about 24 hours to find the building and I was able to go back and look at it. He lost most of his siblings when they were machine gunned at Long Phuoc Hai trying to escape to Australia, so he carries his own wounds. He stayed because he’s married to a Vietnamese.
Paul Ham has taken the time to dig down to locate and talk to people like Hiep, so the narrative is both respectful and accurate.
Kev
As threatened/promised, here s my review of Paul Ham’s “Vietnam – the Australian War”.
This is an absorbing read – whether you’re a veteran or not, but I would expect that most Vietnam Vets would enjoy it.
Few authors on the subject have been as comprehensive in their research. One of Ham’s strengths is that he interviewed an enormous range of people from all aspects of the conflict. He publishes their comments providing a brief context, and generally lets the reader draw his or her own conclusions.
He is even-handed, in the sense that he shows no unwarranted respect for any traditional sacred cows. What seems to outrage him above all else is hypocrisy. He shows no mercy to many of the American commanders, and some of the Australian brass. He shows great respect and compassion for the fighting soldiers, especially the diggers. He is less complementary about the GIs.
Ham takes the time to present an historical context. This is often neglected by other writers on the subject, and without it, particularly in reference to Vietnamese history; much of the narrative of the “American” war is meaningless.
The book displays great scope and span. There isn’t much he neglects. He covers the Australian, American and Vietnamese perspectives, compares reactions to the war and its aftermath by Nashos and regular soldiers, gets behind the scenes into the political machinations of the day, and pulls all of this material together in a way that is very punchy and readable.
Some extracts – On Nashos returning – “..a unique aspect of the Vietnam War is the collective cruelty of a nation that ordered, with the threat of a two-year jail term, a 20-year-old lad to go to war – then damned him for going”.
– On what some commanders thought of the war – “They saw Australia’s involvement for what it was: a diplomatic gesture rather than a military necessity. In essence, the troops were being asked to risk their lives to fulfil a diplomatic courtesy to America.”
– On Agent Orange – “After forty years, one might think a politician would feel, at the very least, a responsibility to acknowledge past mistakes in relation to the chemical poisoning of soldiers. None has done so in Australia”.
This book will probably offend past members of the ant-war movement, politicians of the time on both sides, the American military and some Australian commanders. It won’t offend the troops.
I’ve read over 250 (at last count) monographs on this war, and this is the first one that for me introduces new facts about the conflict. One of these is that the Task Force commanders weren’t given any orders as to the conduct of the war after about 1968. They were given to understand that casualties had to be kept to an absolute minimum, but generally were allowed to make operational decisions as they went along.
This unveiling of new information is probably a result both of recent release of information and Ham’s meticulous research. It’s also a product of chronological distance. In one sense, this distance is needed to develop objectivity.
As far as I’m concerned, it’s the best work on the subject I’ve read. I’d classify it as a “must-read”. If you can’t afford the (steep) $55 hard back version, wait for it to come out in paperback, or to arrive in your local library.