Evening star., 1939-10-05

not In Europe or Asia. In the end,
our ideals and way of life will be
infinitely more secure and it will
cost far less than participation in q
foreign war.
Would Be Haven Of Sanity.
Our great opportunity for service
In the cause Of civilization is to STAY
out OF this war and thus preserve
IN this hemisphere a haven of sanity
IN a world where madness now pre-
walls. We can then concentrate on
our own problems and prove that
democracy can work In a modern
economic environment. Then when
the war is over we will indeed be in
a position to give the world succor
and leadership. We will have kept
the lamp of democracy and toler-
ance alight. We will have demon
strated the soundness of our way
OF life and war weary and disillu-
stoned people will see in our ex-
ample the way to rehabilitate civil
lzation In their own lands.
But II we become involved in war,
we will be in no position to help any
one, not even ourselves. For we
will suffer the same economic COL
lapse which will be abroad in every
nation that engages in this war
We will have snuffed out democracy.
Intolerance and hate will be ram
pant in the country, and stagger-
ing debt will be piled on top of the
40 billions now owed by our Gov-
ernment.
But If we want to stay out of war
In Europe, and I know most of us
do, we must not take steps that
will take us into the war. It is
one thing for you and me to take
sides In our capacity as private
citizens; 1t is far different thing
when our Government takes sides.
Two Choices.
In other words. we cannot have
our cake and eat it, too. We either
make up our minds to stay out of
this war in Europe or by a series
Of steps we will ultimately find our
selves in it.
1t Is perfectly clear that if we
repeal the arms embargo after the
war has started, it will be regarded
abroad as an official act OF our
Government to take sides In this
war. In Great Britain and France.
they will hail it as they would
great military victory.
They will say in so many words
that we are coming in. In Germany
1t will be equally clear that we have
taken sides against them. Senator
Van Nuys of Indiana was frank
about it Sunday night over the radio
when he said in effect that what
the advocates of repeal were trying
to do was to find a way to wipe
Hitler OF the face of the earth with
out our country getting involved in
war. But this cannot be done with
any certainty. If arms, ammuni-
tions and implements of war on a
limited credit-and-carry basis are
not enough, then long-term credit
will next be provided. The john
son Act. passed to prevent nations
owing us 10 billions since the last
war, from floating any more loans
until they pay up, will be repealed,
and if this is not enough. the same
arguments which are now being
made for repeal of the arms embargo
will be made for our sending troops
abroad.
There has been a lot Of confusion
created in the public mind over this
issue. Speakers over the radio have
been leading the people to believe
that the Congress and the country
must choose between repeal Of the
arms embargo and cash-and carry.
This is not the case! Cash-and-
carry is not an alternative to repeal
of the arms embargo.
If we are determined to keep out