THAT "GRAVE CRISIS" COULD COME...TODAY. I’m not alarmed that War Secretary Stimson told the House Foreign Affairs Committee there might be a "grave crisis" or a "climax" in the European war within sixty to ninety days. What worries me is the possibility it might come much sooner. Indeed, what reason does Hitler have to wait? Won’t Britain be better armed in April than she is now? Plus the Fuehrer prefers to strike at times other than when his enemies expect him. (Then again, despite the late focus in the press on Britain as Nazi Target No. 1, it’s still possible that Germany might attack next in the Balkans toward the Near East -- according to the Associated Press, the people of southeastern Europe have been "forced to eat stale black bread and pay exorbitant prices for essential foodstuffs" because Nazi troop movements and shipments of war materials to the region have tied up the railroads. Something’s going on down there, but what?)
Contrary to Senator Wheeler’s sensational accusations that Prime Minister Churchill is secretly demanding an immediate U.S. declaration of war, the most startling remarks of the last few days come from Secretary Stimson, who indicated just how far the Administration might seek to go without getting a formal declaration from Congress. As reported by Robert C. Albright in Saturday’s Washington Post, Stimson told the House Committee almost casually that the U.S. had the right under international law to "assist Britain with armed forces," and would feel free to do so if necessary under the lend-lease bill. He didn’t urge the use of armed force, but left that little nugget dangling in the air. Would President Roosevelt sanction American naval action against German vessels? Would he send U.S. planes, flown by American pilots, into action over the skies of Europe? Would he send an A.E.F. to provide support British troops? All while speciously claiming this country is still at "peace"?
Once again the isolationists are focusing their fire on the wrong targets -- alleged British perfidy, "dictatorship," etc. -- while having less to say about the most troublesome aspect of the Administration’s case. A decision to go to war must be a solemn national consensus, reflected in an act of Congress, not the cumulative effect of numerous arbitrary executive acts. And, the only thing accomplished right now by loose talk about "armed forces" is to further egg Hitler on to invade Britain now, while his chances are best. As if the tyrant needed any further encouragement.
'
WILLKIE AND THE RADIO DEBATE. I don’t know if Wendell Willkie’s "impromptu" appearance Thursday night on the N.B.C. Red Network’s Town Hall of the Air really was as off-the-cuff as the moderators proclaimed. Certainly his comments sounded prepared in advance. But it was his best statement yet of sensible bipartisanship, smashingly delivered on the air, and a sober reminder that we only have one President we can count on to defend the nation --
"We shall not keep America out of war by mere strong statements. We will keep America out of war if we supply to the fighting men of Britain the resources they need to defeat and crush the ruthless dictators. We shall not preserve this great standard of living in America by withdrawing within ourselves...I, who opposed Franklin Roosevelt with all my resources, I call upon all Americans to give him such power in this crisis that we can save America so that we can debate with him again in another election."
Unfortunately, an article in Saturday’s Chicago Tribune, by Arthur Sears Henning, flogs the question of whether Mr. Willkie’s comments might have been prepared in advance as if they were a major scandal, proving somehow that the former Republican presidential nominee is now a shadowy figure in "a propaganda organization reaching into every community in the country, the like of which the capital has never seen before....noiselessly operating to put across President Roosevelt’s war dictatorship bill." (Mind you, this is the lead paragraph in a news story). The Tribune’s source for this accusation? Norman Thomas, veteran Socialist, who carried the banner for the isolationists on the hour-long broadcast. So, suddenly the Tribune finds an old enemy, Mr. Thomas, to be eminently trustworthy, while their former best friend Mr. Willkie is acidly dismissed on the editorial page -- "He was a Republican by name for less than a year and that period was much too long." This was the same paper which headlined its election-eve editions with the words "Prosperity! No War! Willkie!", seemingly in some other century.
HOW HITLER COULD SUBDUE THE AMERICAS. Not necessarily with armies, writes Barnet Nover in his Friday Washington Post column, but with "less open and less obvious acts of aggression successfully designed to ‘soften’ the victim." In particular the Latin America countries could be made into Nazi satellites if Britain is defeated, Mr. Nover writes, and this would tremendously complicate the task of protecting North America from German conquest --
"To bring about internal disintegration in Latin America, Hitler would not have to send troops at all. In some instances he might find it sufficient to apply economic pressure to which those nations that depend for their livelihood on the export of their surpluses to Europe would be particularly subject. In other instances, Hitler might supply arms to the disgruntled Outs to enable the latter to stage a rebellion against the Ins. Following a successful war he would have arms aplenty to sell or give away to Latin America. Indeed, he might find it wiser for a time to give away those arms rather than sell them as the Standard Oil Co. used to give away lamps in China to create a market for kerosene. For such arms...could also be used to foment civil war....The defense of this hemisphere, in the event of a British defeat, would be a staggering task. It could be done. Indeed, it would have to be done by us regardless of the difficulties and the expense involved. But the probable cost is something we could hardly view with equanimity. As rich as is this Nation it might not be rich enough to do the job adequately. All the time we were spending our substance on one gigantic rearmament program after another Hitler, we may be sure, would be preparing, too. And he would have at his disposal the agricultural and mineral resources of three continents with the labor of hundreds of millions of individuals reduced to a slave status, the industrial plants and the shipbuilding facilities and armament capacity of all Europe."
No comments:
Post a Comment