Omaha daily bee., 1921-01-07
Warriors for Peace.

Warriors for Peace.
In speech to 1000 prominent men and
women at the $l000-a-plate dinner of the Euro
| peaieReef Council at the Hotel Commodore
last week, Gen. Pershing said amid great ap-
pfause:
As we contemplate the causes of the World
War and realize its horrors, every right think
ing man and woman must feel like demanding
that some steps be taken to prevent its recur-
renee. An important step would be to curtail
expenditures for the maintenance OF navies and
armks
Disarmament and pacihsm twin theories that
some claimed were utterly destroyed by the
world war, are today finding strange advocates
In those ante-belum days, women's clubs, col
lege professors ministers, and all those frankly
admitting themselves to be dealists, were hard
at work for world peace, but today it is those
who lay claim to hardheaded practically that
have taken up the cause. ...
Here is a British naval expert and member OF
Parliament, Lieut.. Commander J. NJ. Kenworthy,
who, issues this New Year message: -
The best thing that could possibly happen
to the world is this; At a certain hour on
certain day and certain month, to be ar
ranged every ship of war belonging to every
nation should be taken into deep water and
sunk with pre-arranged ceremony, officers
of the navies of all nations being literally
pensioned, their pehsions depending on their
not agitating for more warships.
No American in public life has gone so far
in his recommendations, although resolution
now before the senate looks toward gradual
scaling down of armament What the British
naval officer has proposed at sea is paralleled by
the proposal recently made by Gen. Tasker H.
Bliss in an address at Philadelphia in which he
explained why, as a professional soldier he dis
liked war, and dwelt on the wastage of life and
property due to militarism. He would have the
United States say to the League of Nations:
We will agree with you that each nation
that so desires Shall keep and build whatever
frontier and coast Notifications it wishes. Forti-
hcations cannot stride across the earth devas-
tating fields and destroying cities.
We will agree with you that each nation
may maintain its navy. No navy without an
army can conquer and hold foreign territory.
We will agree with you on date when we
shall simultaneously abolish any military
system (which is solely necessary for inter-
national war.
We will agree with you on date, as re-
mote as the existing conditions make abso-
~lutely necessary, when we shall begin the
gradual reduction Of our armed forces until
they are at the limit necessary for the main
tenance of internal order. In coming to an
agreement about this we will accept any
reasonably just principle of proportion pro-
vided it results in reasonable and material
reduction, but admitting in advance that re-
duced ornaments can no more be equaliZed
than excessive ones. We will trust to the
ultimate good sense of the common peoples
OF the nations, who suffer most from exces-
sve ornaments, to see to it that when the
movement has once begun Il is pushed as
rapidly as may be to its proper limit.
We will agree with you on the proper
amounts of material to be kept on Hand for
the reduced forces. And we will further agree
with you to cease the manufacture of material
until the amounts now on hand are reduced to
what we agree upon as necessary for the re-
duced force.
War, says this veteran, cannot be regulated
by any tribunal, and in the late conflict prac-
ticaly every rule of civilized warfare was broken
by both sides. He believes also that the use of
force between nations cannot be abolished or
materially postponed while ornaments continue
10 pile up.
Those who are surprised to hear a military
leader argue against the institution OF war might
recall the words of General Sherman, and then
listen to the genuine sentiment expressed by
many soldiers who served bravely overseas.
Hardheaded international business men, soldiers,
sailors and statesmen show signs of uniting in
this movement for the reduction of armament
both on the count of expense and danger, and
the idea may gain in favor until it far out
shadows the question Of the League of Nations,
which relies on force for its operation and has
as yet made no advance toward Tightening the
burden of armament.