Evening star., 1942-11-06
'Teen-Aqe Druft


ing a one-year training requirement
on drafted soldiers under twenty
years of age will be the most impor-
tant item of business to come before
Congress next week when the men,
bers get back to work after their
election campaigns.
This crippling amendment was
adopted by the Senate over the pro-
tests of General Marshall, the Chief
of Staff; Undersecretary of War Pat
terson, Secretary of the Navy Knox
and the President. The latest criti-
cism of the restriction has come from
Secretary of War Stimson, who said
yesterday that the O'Daniel proposal
would "shackle" the Army. "Na-
tional disaster he warned, may re-
suit from any legal restrictions i'm
posing shackles on how the Army
may use any element of it's strength.
1t (the O'Daniel amendment flies in
the face of experience in organiza-
ton"
Against these expressions of the
best professional opinion, the sup
porters of the amendment have
nothing to offer which justifles their
stand. Naturally, they would like to
shield young men eighteen and nine
teen years of age. So would every
one else. But what logic can there
be in tieing the Army's hands in the
case of nineteen-year-old recruit,
while leaving the Army free to do as
it pleases with one who is twenty?
If the principle of the amendment is
sound, why not make it applicable to
all age groups? The answer, OF
course, is that the amendment is not
sound, and the Senate has not in
sisted on one-year training re-
quirement for all age groups because
the members know very well that to
do so would wreck the Army.
Under the training program now
in use, recruits are fed into divisions
for group training after they have
completed their basic training period.
This enables the newcomers to bene-
fit from the. greater experience of the
older men and makes it possible for
the Army to train a division as a
team in much less time than would
be necessary if the whole division
were made up of inexperienced men.
It is not feasible, however, to train a
division and then break it up, so that
older men may be sent into combat
while the younger men are kept at
home. Yet that is the effect that the
ODaniel amendment would have if
it were to become law.
In recent discussion of this ques-
ton, Roane Waring, national COM
mander of the American Legion, said
that adoption of the O'Daniel amend
ment would absolutely prevent the
beneficial and the leavening effect
that can be had in having older men
of training, experience and stability
placed side by side with younger men
furnishing the fresher qualities of
youth. Instead of being a means
of protection to these younger men,
the proposed amendment, in my
opinion, would actually result in a
detriment to their training. their
safety and their effective combat
efficiency"
1t is to be hoped that the members
of the House.. when they come to vote
next week on the Rankin proposal to
instruct the House conferees to ac-
cept the Senate amendment; will
look at the real issue squarely. That
issue, stripped of it's trimmings, is
whether we can trust the men who
are running the Army and fighting
the war. If Congress does not trust
them, they ought to be replaced, but
If they are to be neither replaced nor
trusted, then we are indeed in a
sorry state