The New York herald., 1921-01-17
MONDAY, JANUARY IT. 1921.
Now for More West Points.

The United States Senate makes
no mistake to vote for a reduc-
ton of the army TO 100000 officers
and men.
After the European conflict and our
part in its finish, it takes no expert
military knowledge to know some
plain facts about modern war and
preparedness for war.
One Of these is that a standing
army of 175,000, as urged by those
who opposed the reduction to 10000,
would be utterly incapable of match
ing itself against first class fight
ing Power. For the matter of that
five times or ten times 175,000 would
not be enough.
20 per cent, or so per cent, or 90
per cent. of any fighting force suit
able for great war must be licked
into shape from raw material, there
are three fundamentals TO military
safety for the United States. They
are the tools-arms, explosives, gases,
general equipment-which a trained
army needs, the skeleton organization
on which to build a trained army and
the technical ability to build it. All
of these depend, if not entirely at
least overwhelmingly, on those men
who are versed in the science Of war
out Of which grows the successful
practice of war.
Bigger standing army or smaller
standing army, what this country
needs is more West Points. In no
better and cheaper way, indeed no
other way, can the nation be assured
Of enough masters of the science of
war to devise and test the material
tools and to shape the human instru-
ments for the practice Of war.
We must repeat what we said
months ago, with not infrequent ref
erence to it later, as follows:
LET the Government -traightway
establish eight or ten more West
Points for the training of officers and
establish two or three more naval
schools like Annapolis. Il in the war
Just finished we had had ten times
the number Of West Point officers to
train our men and to handle them in
action in France our efficiency would
have been 25 per cent greater and
our loss from sickness and death
would have been. perhaps. % pcr
cent. lese"
And again:
'1n n perfectly practical sense It
would be well worth the expenditure,
in the development Of so large a
number Of trained engineers trained
workers. trained organizers as these
institutions would turn out annually
In peace times they would prove a
tremendous asset to the country and
in times of war their value would be
beyond computation"
Still again:
Our country has always been op-
posed to large standing army in
times Of peace. It is apparently no
more ready now than ever before for
systematic militarism. But It is per-
fectly obvious that In the present
condition of the worlds affairs we
must either have a large standing
army for military protection and the
maintenance of national dignity. or
have a large number Of trained off,
GERS as they are trained at West
Point to organize into efficient fight
ing forces our militia and our raw
man power"
And. as we have said. 17j,0O0 men
will no more compose such a large
and effective standing army than
10000 or 100000 or $4,000 will.
Either we must go the whole or we
might as well go none at all, except in
so far as we maintain a sufficient
force to police our national outposts
and maintain the essential skeleton
organization for the test and exercise
Of the newest devices and weapons
for the practice OF war, all Of which
are dependent, above everything else,
on those men who are perfectly
schooled and trained In the science
Of war.
If the Senate's army reduction
measure becomes law 1t win save the
country in peace millions Of dollars.