Evening star., 1933-05-01
Army Cuts Declared Unwise
In Face of Existing Needs

The proposal of the Government to
reduce the Army, In an effort to achieve
economy in that direction, has received
little support from the press, which
emphasizes the point that the present
military establishment is at or below
the minimum required for national de-
fense. The majority arguments also
include the contention that until the
world disarms, the country needs the
training that is represented in the
present personnel of that branch OF the
public service.
No organization" declares the New
York Sun, can take the place OF the
Regular Army; no other organization,
in time of emergency, will be able to
produce SO many trained men for key
positions in an expanded force or so
many men capable of training and
leading large bodies of men. The
trained personnel of the Regular Army
is national insurance; it remains to be
seen whether the Nation wants to can
Gel substantial part of its protection.
The Atlanta Journal agrees that re
trenchments should not be pressed to
the point Of endangering national
safety" and that paper argues: The
Army now has an enlisted personnel
Of one hundred and seventeen Thousand
men. assuredly no more than reasonable
prudence requires. Should IL De cut
down. as has been suggested. by twelve
thousand to fifteen thousand. the sav-
ing in money would be inconslderab!e.
but the loss in efficient defense would
be marked So. too, the proposal that
from two thousand to three thousand
officers be retired raises serious ques-
ton as to whether such economy would
not be paid for too dearly in impaired
service
During the Sixty-ninth Congress"
recalls the San Francisco Chronicle,
the conclusions as to the absolute
minimum strength of the Regular
Army necessary to carry out the duties
imposed on it by the national defense
act pointed to $4,000 officers and 1861
600 men. This. it was stated. was only
the minimum for routine duties and not
enough to permit effective preparation
in time of peace of timely and ade-
uuate mobilization in the event OF a
national emergency Contrast with the
provisions of the national defense act
and with these conclusions as to mini
mum requirements the present strength
of the Army as stated in the last re-
port of the Secretary of War. The
actual figures, as given, were l2.l8o
officers and ll9,888 enlisted men.
This. says the report, is below the point
of safety"
Among all the principal powers"
observes the San Antonio Evening
News. this country maintains the
smallest armed force-and even that
has been reduced to but a fraction OF
the sensible minimum strength" The
Evening News calls the proposals "glar-
ingly false economy" and states FUR
ther: Few units are large enough to
function satisfactorily. Altogether, Reg
ular officers and men would be called
upon to defend. by land and air, the
United States and its Territories and
possessions, stretching from the Virgin
Islands to the Philippines. In any de-
Tense scheme, stratsgists agree, the avia-
ton branch Is all-important: With so
much territory to cover, 1t IS lndispensa-
BILE to this country. Then to reduce the
Regular Army airMans flying time from
400 to so and the Rsssrvist'S from 80 to
IA hours annually would cripple that
service in any future war. Furthermore,
keeping the countrys trade routes open
is vital in both peace and war. The
most important artery, the Panama
Canal, is in the Army's hands; the gar
rison there now is far too small to pro-
tect the waterway. To-day the world Is
In disorder; wars rage ON two conti-
nents: nationalism has flared up fiercely
in Europe and Asia. With interests
everywhere, the United States holds no
guarantee of permanent peace"
"Traditienally the Army has been
starved by Congress" AYERS the Hart
ford Daily Times, with the suggestion
that every officer in the Army repre-
sents an investment by the Government
in his education and training through q
long course Of years" The Rockford
Register Republic emphasizes the fact
tAsi stAs uRlts4 statas may b tasias