The Ely miner. [volume] (Ely, Minn.) 1895-1986, 1941-01-16
O. e N Z RAJ
HUGH S.
10 III N SO
..J!..GzHc''''''..
MNU SnNS
Washington, d. c.
OPPOSITION THINKING

A favorite lawyers trick is to give
his own version of what his worthy
opponent thinks and then tear his
Self-constructed straw man to
pieces. That is being done daily in
the current debate on foreign policy.
Those opposing our rapid approach
to a virtual war alliance with Great
Britain, are said to "think" that
no combination of powers will ever
attack us and, no matter who wins,
we can do business with them, so
why risk offending Hitler and pro-
voking him to fight us. What duck
soup that is to argue down.
These truths are self evident: that
it is to our great interest to see Brit
ain win; that the hateful destruc-
ton of England embitters every
American heart; that force rather
than honor and good will now rule
the world and that we hate that as
we hate Hitler who has been fore
most in advancing that hellish con-
dition; that we are in great danger
and that our only course is swift
preparation for invincible defense;
that we are not so defended now
and that the preparation is lag
ging shamefully. Any advocate of
what is rushing us to war alliance
who denies the sincerity of these
opinions of others as a basis for
his argument, is beclouding the real
issue-the dreadful question of
peace or war for America.
There can be only one question in
the troubled heart of every true
American-what is it best for us to
do to safeguard the present and the
future of our own country? Is it
best to engage now in a two ocean
war with one ocean navy? Is it
best for US to send, or threaten to
send, our armed forces to seize the
Azores, the Irish harbors, the tip of
West Africa and Singapore-to
plunge into warlike operations all
the way from the Straits of Dover
to the Straits of Malacca and, con-
ceivably even further-through the
Mediterranean and Red seas to
Greece, Egypt, the Dardanelles, Cal
CuLLd ana COIOnDO!
Short of this, is it best to take the
intermediate step leading straight
and inevitably to this course by put
ting our overseas shipments into
American bottoms and, with con-
voy of cruisers, attempt to buck the
line of legitimate blockade? Is it
best now to undertake to finance an
other nation in a new world war,
when we are already staggering I'M
der mountainous burden of debt
and confronting a near necessity of
doubling it as a necessity in our
own defense?
These are real and basic issues
and not at all the ill-considered or
emotional conscious or deliberate
obstruction of them by attacking
the patriotic integrity or plain san
ity of the people who raise them.
Furthermore, let this be faced: If
our defense is so wholly dependent
on Great Britain as we are now told
If she is now fighting our decisive
battle which, if lost, loses our free
dom-then the course advocated by
those who say we should contribute
unlimited material resources, but no
blood, without regard to any of the
considerations raised here-if these
things we are told are true-then
that advocated course is the most
futile and pusillanimous ever fol-
lowed by an honorable nation. If
they are true, we should have been
in this war year ago with every
thing we have. Surely there is a
question of truth here that deserves
debate. The whole of our future is
at stake on the wisdom of our
answer.