
Presidents at War: how battle has shaped American leaders
In his new book, Presidents at War, Steven M Gillon considers how the second world war shaped a generation of presidents, a span that takes in eight men – but not all of them served in uniform between 1941 and 1945.
Gillon likes to 'ask people, 'There are seven men who served in uniform in world war two and who went on to be president: who are they?' And most people think Jimmy Carter did, and they forget Ronald Reagan.'
Carter was born in 1924 and came of age in wartime. But the submariner turned peanut farmer turned politician, who died aged 100 in December, graduated the US Naval Academy in 1946, the year after the war. Reagan, meanwhile, joined the Army Reserve in the 1930s and spent the war years enlisted – but stayed at home in Hollywood, where he made his name as an actor, narrating films and joining fundraising drives.
'Reagan was the most fascinating for me,' says Gillon, emeritus professor of history at the University of Oklahoma and scholar-in-residence at the History Channel. 'I once bought the story about: 'Oh, he wanted to go and fight but his eyes were too bad.' In fact, there's all these machinations going on behind the scenes that keep him from going overseas, to make sure he stays in California so he can make movies, while at the same time creating this public image of a guy who has been off to war, and he comes home to his wife [Jane Wyman], and there's a picture of him in his uniform, kissing his wife – who in fact he slept with every night during the war.'
Gillon focuses on how the war affected men who led their country through the cold war with Russia, into the quagmire of Vietnam, and eventually into the first Iraq war. To Gillon, 'those presidents who came closest to combat were the ones who were most restrained in their use of force afterwards,' meaning Dwight Eisenhower, who commanded Allied forces in Europe, and John F Kennedy and George HW Bush, who flirted with death in the Pacific, JFK as a torpedo boat captain, Bush as a navy flier.
'Reagan is the exception of so many of these things,' Gillon says. 'Reagan never sees war. He thinks he saw the Holocaust camps, but he didn't. He just makes stuff up, and he thinks it's true. But what I did not know was how he came out of the war with the real fear of nuclear weapons, and he belonged to an organization for international control of atomic weapons, largely a liberal organization, as he was involved in other liberal organizations like Americans for Democratic Action.
'While he shed all the other liberal ties, he never shed that fear of nuclear weapons. And despite all his bombastic language, he was very restrained in the use of force. I mean, the only thing he did was create a phony war in Grenada [in which 19 Americans died] and see 241 Americans killed in Lebanon [both in 1983], and that was a peacekeeping mission.'
In response to the Beirut embassy bombing, Reagan launched limited strikes. He also bombed Libya, in 1986, and funded and fueled conflicts elsewhere, his efforts in Nicaragua creating the Iran-Contra scandal. But on the global scene, Gillon 'was surprised at how restrained Reagan was. And then his fear of nuclear weapons made him open to [Mikhail] Gorbachev's overtures' for detente and arms control 'during his second term … this was where Reagan followed his own instincts and in this case his instincts were right, and he was the right person to do it because he had such strong anti-communist credentials. So that was a twist I had not appreciated before.'
Gillon's book contains more twists. Many involve Lyndon Baines Johnson, like Reagan no stranger to distorting facts for political gain. A congressman when the US entered the war, LBJ got himself into uniform for a Pacific fact-finding tour. Hitching a ride on a bomber, he survived an attack by Japanese fighters.
'There's controversy over whether that took place the way he described it,' Gillon says. 'There was an article written by some aviation historians who said it never could have happened. And then, years later, the Japanese pilot who had actually led the attack against the American planes said he remembered Johnson's plane. He remembered crippling it, and he said the plane was so wounded that he knew it wasn't going to do any damage, so he broke off and went back into the main attack.'
Johnson's plane made it back to base, leaving him alive to tell tales of his own bravery on the campaign trail. Gillon shows how those tales grew more shameless but thinks the basic story 'is definitely true', including how a bathroom break meant Johnson lost a spot on a plane which was shot down, killing all onboard.
'Yeah, Johnson was just cool as a cucumber. And I'm sure he was thrilled when he landed.'
Gillon was born in working class Philadelphia in 1956, in the shadow of the war. Too young for the Vietnam draft, fascinated by the presidency, he graduated from Widener and Brown and then taught at Yale and Oxford. Recent books include America's Reluctant Prince, about his late friend John F Kennedy Jr, and The Pact, about Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich, a Democratic president and a Republican House speaker whose relationship resonates loudly today.
With his latest book, Gillon focuses on the major lessons of the second world war, particularly the cost of appeasement, Hitler's triumph at Munich in 1938 a constant ghost at the feast. Such lessons, he says, 'some forgot, like Lyndon Johnson in Vietnam, while others, like Kennedy and Bush, those who really saw battle and the horrors of war, you see them thinking about world war two all the time when they're making big decisions, whether it's the Cuban Missile Crisis for Kennedy or it's the invasion of Iraq with George Bush'.
Looking to Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford, Gillon describes how both served but did not see battle. Both were in the navy. Ford's closest brush with action involved a fire aboard his ship during a Pacific typhoon. Nixon was posted to tropical islands, working logistics and supply, failing to reach the front line.
Vietnam dominates Gillon's book. US involvement began under Eisenhower, accelerated under Kennedy, swirled into nightmare under Johnson and finally ended under Nixon – though he had lengthened the horror by thwarting peace talks for his own political gain. Gillon retells the extraordinary Anna Chennault affair, in which a Washington socialite acted as a go-between with the government of South Vietnam, relaying Nixon's urge to boycott talks till the 1968 election was done. When Johnson learned of it, he told a senior Republican: 'This is treason.' The senator agreed. Johnson called Nixon, who denied it. Gillon writes: 'According to some reports, after hanging up, Nixon collapsed with laughter.'
In 1968, Nixon beat Hubert Humphrey. The war did not end until 1973. Reading Presidents at War, it is striking to realize that no future president who was of an age to serve in Vietnam did so.
Bill Clinton opposed the war, studied abroad and denied accusations of dodging the draft. Joe Biden secured student deferments then was exempted on account of teenage asthma. George W Bush, the son of a war hero, went into the Texas Air national guard, which, Gillon notes, 'is a place notoriously where rich, powerful people put their kids during war'. Al Gore, John Kerry and John McCain did go to Vietnam – but lost presidential elections.
As so often, Donald Trump is a whole other matter. He obtained student draft deferments but also found a doctor to say 'bone spurs' in his heels rendered him unfit for service. He has also said avoiding sexually transmitted diseases while dating in New York was his 'personal Vietnam', making him feel like 'a great and very brave soldier'. It's not a line to endear him to Gillon, who says he cast his first vote for a Republican president, Ford, but whose epilogue to Presidents at War makes clear his distaste for Trump, his view of military matters and his reported negative comments about those who serve.
'I have my political point of view but when I write history, I try to be really fair-minded,' Gillon says. 'And I can't be fair-minded toward Trump. I just dislike him so much that I don't think I could write a book about him. I wrote a book about Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich, and what made me happy was that both Clinton and Gingrich liked it. I take great pride in being fair of mind towards someone like Newt Gingrich, who I have no political affinity for, but I just can't get to that point mentally with Trump. I can't write a book that I feel I can't be fair.'
Presidents at War is out now
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

The National
an hour ago
- The National
The left needs to act more boldly or we are all doomed
According to immigration lawyers, agents arrested people – including families with small children – and held them in a stuffy office basement for days without sufficient food and water. Given the brutal nature of these raids, and the failure to uphold basic human rights (such as the right to due process and the right to legal representation), it is no wonder that protests have taken place. However, unlike the 1992 LA riots, the protests sparked by the actions of ICE have been overwhelmingly peaceful, and have been confined to a six-block stretch of downtown LA. READ MORE: Israel launches second wave of major strikes on Iran Yet, despite this, Donald Trump ordered the National Guard to be deployed against the California governor's wishes – the first time since 1965 that a president had deployed National Guard troops to a state without a governor's request. Although it is heartening to see ordinary Americans beginning to make a stand against the inhumane, illegal, and downright cruel actions of the Trump administration, we cannot forget the path that led the United States here – corruption, obscene inequality, and the deliberate fanning of the flames of racism and bigotry. I find myself grateful on a daily basis that I do not live in America, only to be reminded that these issues are much closer to home than many of us care to admit. Over the last several nights, Ballymena in Northern Ireland has been rocked by racist riots. They began after a vigil held for a teenage girl who was allegedly sexually assaulted by two 14-year-olds. (Image: Brian Lawless/PA Wire) When rumours spread that a Romanian interpreter was in the court, it was enough to ignite the racism that has long been simmering away. Police said the unrest escalated into racially motivated violence, with mobs targeting foreign residents by breaking their windows, and setting fire to their homes. The justification given for these racist riots is that residents feel their community is being 'overrun' by foreigners, and that it has happened very quickly. For context, 3.4% of Northern Ireland's population are from ethnic minority backgrounds compared to 12.9% in Scotland and 18.3% in England and Wales. Northern Ireland is the least diverse part of the United Kingdom. The rioters claim immigrants are 'freeloading' off taxpayer-funded resources, and are committing crimes. Again, this is an age-old claim which barely masks the racism motivating it. But when a young, white, Irish or British person moves to somewhere like Australia or Spain to start a new life, we encourage them and wish them the best. We do not assume they are scroungers looking to suck resources away from native Australians, so why is it different when people come to the UK for a better life? Equally, the vast majority of sexual assaults in the UK are committed by white men born in the UK – where are the riots then? The anger and despair that people feel when they see their communities decline, their opportunities disappear and their national institutions disintegrate is completely understandable and justified. The problem comes when that righteous anger is manipulated and aimed at entirely the wrong people. While standards of living in the UK continue to decline, while social security is dismantled piece by piece – no matter which party is in government – when the waiting lists for NHS appointments and decent housing seem to only ever grow, it is fair to feel angry and attacked. However, when the richest people in society are getting richer while ordinary people are simultaneously told that they must, again, tighten their belts, it seems obvious to me where that anger should be directed. And it certainly is not at immigrants just trying to live their lives. This same manipulation of that anger and despair that we have seen in the US, and in Northern Ireland, can also be seen much closer to home in Scotland. Nigel Farage's Reform UK came third in the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election. It was once unthinkable that Farage would ever enjoy even close to that level of success in politics, never mind in Scottish politics. As I have said previously, something is going to eventually give way. People are desperate for change from the status quo, and they will vote for whoever they perceive to be deviating the most from it, no matter how false that perception is. Given that the status quo has been moving increasingly further to the right, it is the perfect time for left-leaning political parties to think and act boldly. If they don't, then we are all doomed.


NBC News
6 hours ago
- NBC News
Who benefits from Republicans' 'big beautiful' bill depends largely on income. Children are no exception
House reconciliation legislation, also known as the One, Big, Beautiful Bill, includes changes aimed at helping to boost family's finances. Those proposals — including $1,000 investment 'Trump Accounts' for newborns and an enhanced maximum $2,500 child tax credit — would help support eligible parents. Proposed tax cuts in the bill may also provide up to $13,300 more in take-home pay for the average family with two children, House Republicans estimate. 'What we're trying to do is help hardworking Americans who are trying to provide for their families and make ends meet,' House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said during a June 8 interview with ABC News' 'This Week.' Yet the proposed changes, which emphasize work requirements, may reduce aid for children in low-income families when it comes to certain tax credits, health coverage and food assistance. Households in the lowest decile of the income distribution would lose about $1,600 per year, or about 3.9% of their income, from 2026 through 2034, according to a June 12 letter from the Congressional Budget Office. That loss is mainly due to 'reductions in in-kind transfers,' it notes — particularly Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, formerly known as food stamps. 20 million children won't get full $2,500 child tax credit House Republicans have proposed increasing the maximum child tax credit to $2,500 per child, up from $2,000, a change that would go into effect starting with tax year 2025 and expire after 2028. The change would increase the number of low-income children who are locked out of the child tax credit because their parents' income is too low, according to Adam Ruben, director of advocacy organization Economic Security Project Action. The tax credit is not refundable, meaning filers can't claim it if they don't have a tax obligation. Today, there are 17 million children who either receive no credit or a partial credit because their family's income is too low, Ruben said. Under the House Republicans' plan, that would increase by 3 million children. Consequently, 20 million children would be left out of the full child tax credit because their families earn too little, he said. 'It is raising the credit for wealthier families while excluding those vulnerable families from the credit,' Ruben said. 'And that's not a pro-family policy.' A single parent with two children would have to earn at least $40,000 per year to access the full child tax credit under the Republicans' plan, he said. For families earning the minimum wage, it may be difficult to meet that threshold, according to Ruben. In contrast, an enhanced child tax credit put in place under President Joe Biden made it fully refundable, which means very low-income families were eligible for the maximum benefit, according to Elaine Maag, senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. In 2021, the maximum child tax credit was $3,600 for children under six and $3,000 for children ages 6 to 17. That enhanced credit cut child poverty in half, Maag said. However, immediately following the expiration, child poverty increased, she said. The current House proposal would also make about 4.5 million children who are citizens ineligible for the child tax credit because they have at least one undocumented parent who files taxes with an individual tax identification number, Ruben said. Those children are currently eligible for the child tax credit based on 2017 tax legislation but would be excluded based on the new proposal, he said. New red tape for a low-income tax credit House Republicans also want to change the earned income tax credit, or EITC, which targets low- to middle-income individuals and families, to require precertification to qualify. When a similar requirement was tried about 20 years ago, it resulted in some eligible families not getting the benefit, Maag said. The new prospective administrative barrier may have the same result, she said. More than 2 million children's food assistance at risk House Republican lawmakers' plan includes almost $300 billion in proposed cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, through 2034. SNAP currently helps more than 42 million people in low-income families afford groceries, according to Katie Bergh, senior policy analyst at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Children represent roughly 40% of SNAP participants, she said. More than 7 million people may see their food assistance either substantially reduced or ended entirely due to the proposed cuts in the House reconciliation bill, estimates CBPP. Notably, that total includes more than 2 million children. 'We're talking about the deepest cut to food assistance ever, potentially, if this bill becomes law,' Bergh said. Under the House proposal, work requirements would apply to households with children for the first time, Bergh said. Parents with children over the age of 6 would be subject to those rules, which limit people to receiving food assistance for just three months in a three-year period unless they work a minimum 20 hours per week. Additionally, the House plan calls for states to fund 5% to 25% of SNAP food benefits — a departure from the 100% federal funding for those benefits for the first time in the program's history, Bergh said. States, which already pay to help administer SNAP, may face tough choices in the face of those higher costs. That may include cutting food assistance or other state benefits or even doing away with SNAP altogether, Bergh said. While the bill does not directly propose cuts to school meal programs, it does put children's eligibility for them at risk, according to Bergh. Children who are eligible for SNAP typically automatically qualify for free or reduced school meals. If a family loses SNAP benefits, their children may also miss out on those benefits, Bergh said. Health coverage losses would adversely impact families Families with children may face higher health care costs and reduced access to health care depending on how states react to federal spending cuts proposed by House Republicans, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. The House Republican bill seeks to slash approximately $1 trillion in spending from Medicaid, the Children's Health Insurance Program and Affordable Care Act marketplaces. Medicaid work requirements may make low-income individuals vulnerable to losing health coverage if they are part of the expansion group and are unable to document they meet the requirements or qualify for an exemption, according to CBPP. Parents and pregnant women, who are on the list of exemptions, could be susceptible to losing coverage without proper documentation, according to the non-partisan research and policy institute. Eligible children may face barriers to access Medicaid and CHIP coverage if the legislation blocks a rule that simplifies enrollment in those programs, according to CBPP. In addition, an estimated 4.2 million individuals may be uninsured in 2034 if enhanced premium tax credits that help individuals and families afford health insurance are not extended, according to CBO estimates. Meanwhile, those who are covered by marketplace plans would have to pay higher premiums, according to CBPP. Without the premium tax credits, a family of four with $65,000 in income would pay $2,400 more per year for marketplace coverage.


The Herald Scotland
12 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Holocaust denier who fled to Scotland back on trial
The 56-year-old was arrested in November 2022 following a two-year search for his whereabouts led by France's Central Office for the Fight against Crimes against Humanity and Hate Crimes, which began after the memorial of Oradour-sur-Glane, where Nazi troops killed and destroyed an entire village in June of 1944, was vandalised by graffiti which read 'Reynouard is right'. His arrest came after a domestic warrant issued by a French court regarding seven videos made between September 2019 and April 2020, including one where he allegedly described the Nazi atrocities as 'crude slanders' and another where he spoke of 'the Jewish problem'. The alleged offences included 'public trivialisation of a war crime' and 'public challenge to the existence of crimes against humanity committed during the Second World War'. Vincent Reynouard was arrested in Anstruther in November, 2022 (Image: Herald Scotland) Holocaust denial has been a criminal offence in France since 1990 and Reynouard has been convicted on previous occasions, including being handed prison sentences in November 2020 and January 2021. His convictions date back as far as 1991 when he was sentenced for distributing leaflets denying the existence of the gas chambers among high school students. Reynouard was handed over to French authorities in February last year after spending 15 months on remand at HMP Edinburgh. Back in March this year, Reynouard was sentenced to 12 months in prison at the Judicial Court of Paris after being found guilty of denying war crimes, denying crimes against humanity and inciting racial hatred. He was also ordered by the court to pay €10,000 in damages to associations including French organisation LICRA (The International League against Racism and Anti-Semitism) and the Jewish Observatory of France. The public prosecutor had originally requested an 18-month prison sentence and a €15,000 fine. READ MORE: Notorious Holocaust denier arrested in Scots fishing village French Holocaust denier loses bid to appeal against extradition Holocaust denier gives pro-Nazi lecture after extradition to France According to AFP, a sentencing judge was due to determine how Reynouard will serve his prison sentence. Responding to the sentencing at the time, a spokesperson for Campaign Against Antisemitism told The Herald: 'Vincent Reynouard is a despicable Holocaust-denier who has repeatedly been convicted by French courts. "We are pleased that, following our previous success in having him deported from the UK to face justice in France, Mr Reynouard has been jailed. Now, he will be forced to face the consequences of his hatred behind bars—where he belongs.' Now The Herald can reveal that Reynouard stood trial at the Judicial Court of Paris at the end of May charged with "contesting crimes against humanity". The charges relate to allegations he made statements denying the occurrence of the Holocaust in a five-minute video clip promoting his latest book. Vincent Reynouard's convictions date back as far as 1991 (Image: Getty) Reports in France say a verdict on the charges - for which French prosecutors are requesting a minimum sentence of eight months imprisonment and a €5,000 euro fine - will be returned on July 11. In June last year, The Herald revealed that Reynouard hosted a pro-Nazi lecture in the southern French city of Perpignan just weeks after his extradition from Scotland. The lecture was broadcast online by French neo-Nazi website Jeune Nation - named after the most prominent French neo-fascist movement of the 1950s - and appeared in full on YouTube before being removed for violating the video sharing platform's terms of service. Screengrabs from the lecture, posted on extremist online platform Gab, showed Reynouard reading from a lectern in front of a flag for fascist pan-European alliance APF. Billed as 'a fascinating presentation that re-establishes the facts and offers a completely different vision of history', Reynouard's lecture on 'The challenging politics of revisionism' had among its list of 'discussed subjects' such topics as 'The invention of National Socialist crimes to cover up Allied war crimes', 'Enlisting youth against anti-fascism' and 'The question of gas chambers'. Reynouard was then due to give a follow-up lecture on Nazism at an event in Paris some weeks later but it was shut down by the Parisian authorities. Shortly after his arrest in Scotland in 2022, Reynouard said he expected to spend at least 'five years or more' in prison should he be extradited back to France. In a letter from his prison cell addressed to French far-right weekly magazine Rivarol, seen by The Herald, Reynouard wrote: 'Back in France, I will serve several prison sentences for 'disputing crimes against humanity'. 'In total, these sentences exceed 24 months (29 months to be exact). There will undoubtedly be other convictions for the same reason, because since my exile in Great Britain, in June 2015, I have published many revisionist videos likely to fall under the Gayssot law [which makes it an offence in France to question the existence or size of the category of crimes against humanity as defined in the London Charter of 1945]. 'Several are not time-barred, either having been published less than a year ago or already being sued. Therefore, I expect to stay in prison for five years or more.'