The Washington times., 1935-09-28
Nation
Invites
Attack
By James T. Williams, yr.

Wv W 'H"' " "I"fStEtSoo' w ukLCI
Bagehot.
Among "the foes Of our own
household" some of the most
insidious are those radicals
who are attempting to capital
ize the natural adherence
which Americans feel for war.
Now, as always, in their ma
tional life Americans are
against war except when war in
defense of Duty, Honor, Coun.
try" is the only alternative to a
poltroon's peace.
George Washington in the
Farewell Address put the case as
true Americans would have it
put when he said:
'If we remain one people,
under an efficient government,
the period is not far off when
we may defy material injury
from external annoyance; when
we may take such an attitude
as will cause the neutrality we
may at any time resolve upon,
to be scrupulOuSly respected:
when belligerent nations, under
the impOssibiIity of making
acquisitions upon us, will not
lightly hazard the giving us
provOcatiOn; when we may
choose peace or war, as our
interests, guided by Justice,
shall counsel.
NO ENTANGLEMENTS
"Why forego the advantages
of SO peculiar a situatiOn?..
why, by Interviewing our des-
tiny with that of any part Of
Europe, entangle our peace and
prosperity in the coils Of Euro
pean ambition, rivalship, inter
ests, humOr, or caprice?"
This is the goal of that for
eign policy which we are proud
to believe is traditional Amer
ican policy-"to be respected
abroad and happy at home"
This is the goal of American
defense policy defined in the
words of the Father of His
Country when he said that
lone of the most effectual
means of preserving the peace
is to be prepared for war"
In his day Theodore Roose-
Welt convincinolv put the case
of America against war except
when DUTY, Honor, Country"
demands that defense which
only resort to arms can give,
when he said:
"The nation that in actual
practice fears God is the ma
tion which does not wrong its
neighbOrs, which does SO far
as possible help its neighbors,
and which never promises what
it cannot or will not or ought
not to perform.
peace is not the end. Right
eousness is the end. When the
Saviour saw the mOney-changers
in the Temple he broke the
peace by driving them out.
But instead Of preserving
peace at the expense Of right
eOusness, the Saviour armed
himself with a scourge Of cords
and drove the mOney.changers
from the Temple.
Righteousness should breed
valor and strength. When it
does breed them it Is trium-
phant; when triumphant. IT
necessarily brings peace. But
peace does not necessarily bring
righteousness"
George Washington's deteSta-
ton of war did not cause him
to finch from war to win
American independence.
Abraham Lincoln loathed war
but he waged war ito keep the
Union whole"
Robert E. Lee hated war but
his conception of Duty, Honor.
Country" did not permit him to
withhold his sword in defense OF
right as God gave him to see
the right.
PREPAREDNESS
"The fear of war" says a
contributor to the current issue
of the American Mercury, "has
recently heen raised by SapperS
against the common defense to
the dignity of a doctrine"
Under the title "A Soldier
Looks at Pacifism" this Ameri-
can soldier and citizen interprets
the doctrine of washington and
Lincoln and Lee and Roosevelt
with a sincerity and simplicity
that loyal American youth will
welcome. The radical sappers
against the common defense, as
this contributor points out, ap-
pear to forget that a weak ma
ton invites attack. He speaks
with the voice of true Amer1-
canism when he says:
"Invitational weakness never
produced a condition Of real
security or lasting peace. A ma
tion may have the best will In
the world; its intentions may be
above reproach; but unless its
treaties, promises, concessions
i. e., its moral judgments, as
exnreSSed thrOugh it's representa-
tives, are armed with something
more than sweet reasOnableness,
its voice is likely to 80 un-
Needed"
Copyright, 1898. The Washington Time