COLUMN LEFT/ ALEXANDER COCKBURN : Same Song, Different Verse : The uproar over gays in the military rings familiar.

The rationales for prejudice don’t alter much down the years. In April, 1948, Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower faced congressional questions about desegregation of the armed forces. Sen. Richard Russell (D-Ga.) (later a mentor of the young Sam Nunn) stirred himself:

Russell: The question of segregation is one that is always painful for me to discuss, and particularly unpleasant for me to ask the questions that I shall now, but . . . more is involved than racial prejudice. It goes directly to such vital factors as the morale, discipline and health of the troops.

You are familiar, I am sure, with the ratio of crime among Negro troops compared with white troops in the service, are you not?

Eisenhower: It was higher.

Russell: You are familiar with the reports that indicated the incidence of venereal diseases, were you not?

Eisenhower: Yes, sir.

Russell: I am sure you are familiar with the figures: that among the men examined for the draft, the incidence of venereal diseases, gonorrhea and syphilis was 252 per thousand among the Negro race as compared to 17 per thousand with the white race.

Russell did not bother to spell out the implications of his questions. Forty-five years later, retired Army Lt. Col. William Gregor, who has done extensive work for the Joint Chiefs of Staff on the issue of gays in the military, gave graphic expression on CNN’s “Crossfire” to his view of the problems caused by ending discrimination:

Gregor: I suggest you look at the studies of the attempts to induct active venereals during World War II.

Michael Kinsley: What does that have to do with homosexuals?

Gregor: Every tanker knows that on the battlefield, next to fire, the main cause of death is exsanguination. You bleed to death. The question is, if a penetrator courses through a turret and amputates a gunner’s arm, will the tank commander . . . instantaneously and swiftly grab that bloody stump to save the life of his friend? Or will he hesitate and allow the life of his buddy to slip away?

In 1948, Eisenhower responded to Russell that he believed that improved living standards and education among Negroes would eventually dissipate the senator’s concerns. In 1992, Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) pointed out to Lt. Col. Gregor that all applicants to the armed forces are tested for AIDS and, if they carry the virus, are not admitted. What the alarums indicate is merely that the segregators and the discriminators have no intellectually respectable arguments on their side.

Reform comes as a matter of political calculation. In 1948, Harry Truman was trying to steal the desegregationist thunder of his rival, Henry Wallace. In 1992, Bill Clinton was similarly trying to capture a vital political constituency.

There has, nonetheless, been a strong whiff of sham about the mighty uproar over gays in the military. One would have thought from the hullabaloo in the press that this was the fiercest face-off between a President and the military since Truman recalled MacArthur. In fact, the deal announced last Thursday was exactly what had been outlined by the President’s spokesman a week earlier: an immediate halt to queries about sexual preference, six months or so of consideration, then further reforms.

But both the White House and Pentagon had reason to promote their dispute as an eyeball-to-eyeball showdown.

For Clinton, the poor impression of a President bucking his substantive campaign commitments could be offset by a Steve Squarejaw posture on the issue of gays in the military. During the campaign, Clinton promised gays and lesbians that he would extend AIDS funding; by executive order, he would end the ban on gays in the military, and above all, he would extend the Civil Rights Act to protect gays and lesbians against discrimination.

Of course the major prize would be an extension to the Civil Rights Act, which would end a multitude of separate struggles, ranging from discrimination in the military to the anti-gay ordinance passed last November in Colorado. The executive order was seen by many gays as more a symbolic interim action.

For his part, Joint Chiefs Chairman Colin Powell is an expert at press manipulation. He has staked out his turf and also served notice that when it comes to more important struggles--over the size of the Pentagon budget, for example--Clinton can expect no quarter. Legal discrimination against gays in the armed forces will disappear in six months or a year. Real fights, if Clinton doesn’t shirk them, on the Civil Rights Act or on the defense budget, haven’t even begun.