Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1941-07-24
l Might Be
Wrong--BUT
by p. G. Stromberg

defense program and our aid-to-
Britain are not just stubborn OPP
position to anything that Presi-
dent Roosevelt does or proposes.
1t is hard to justify or recon-
cile the attitudes of several of
our leading public men. Given
the authority and responsibility
vested in the President (God
forbid) / cannot conceive any
one of these men doing other
than the President is doing. Just
in order to get a few major
items in this discussion, what
would Senator Wheeler, or Sena-
tor Taft or Senator Champ
Clark or Senator LaFollete be
doing? Would any one of them
have taken a stand las Presi-
dent) against repeal of our badly
conceived Neutrality Bill?
Would he have declined to rec
ommend to the Congress the
appropriation of billions for our
defense program? Would he
have declined to ask Congress
to adopt the conscription bill?
Would he have remained silent
in the face of the invasion and
subsection of SO many small
countries? Would he have de-
clined to support the aid-to-
Britain campaign? Would he
have refused to recognize the
danger signals to the United
States? Would he, on the other
hand, have maintained that our
ostrich-like security of the past
decade was still an absolute
guarantee against aggression?
I'm rather under the impress
sion that any one of the men
named or any one of number
of others who could be named
would have acted in the foreign
situation exactly as Mr.. Roose-
welt has acted. And, I would
rather think of these obstruc-
tionists as irreconcilable than to
attribute to them motives which
could be construed only as mimi
cal to the welfare of the present
and future of the United States.
Under circumstances IN c h
would place full responsibility of
leadership in a crisis like the
present on the shoulders of any
one of them, feel most definite
ly convinced that we would have
embarked on defense program
with the same aims and pur-
poses we have now. Methods,
of course, would have been diff
ferent but the people of the coun-
try would have forced an aggres-
sive effort toward rearmament.
The same logic applies in con-
motion with the proposal to ex-
tend the time limit on draftees
and the National Guard. What
purpose could be served by dis
missing thousands of well :
trained men each month in order
to make room for new ones :?
Who's doing the kicking? Not
the men who have become pro-
ficient in our newly organized
armed forces. They like it and
most of them will be glad to
have their army stay extended.
The hue and cry comes again
from the obstructionists who
wall about broken promise. If
the arguments advanced by
President Roosevelt and General
Marshall have failed to convince
these men Of the necessity of
extending the time limit then it
is best to let them have their
cry out, unnoticed.
There is one feature of the
draft bill which should have inn
mediate attention. With the age
limit dropped to twenty-eight
the men past twenty-eight who
have been indicted into the serv-
ice should be mustered out as
soon as it is practical to do so.
When his induction was by lot
terry it is manifestly unfair to
hold him in the service If he
would prefer to return to civil
life. The President mentioned
this feature in his message to
Congress and it is likely that
the new legislation win provide
for the discharge of soldiers in
this bracket.