The Waterbury Democrat., 1942-12-11

&@s0A wanted to TUT
 man power by having the Manpower Commission under the Selective Service system. 3. The Army wants to run the civilian economy, even to the extent of taking over determination of what items of civilian supply should be cut and how much, including con. trol over rationing. 4. The Army has set up a schoo to train military governors for oc. cupied countries, and these military governors will be switched to gov. erning the United States when the right time comes.
 5. Army censorship is a threat te American freedom of speech.
 6. The Army is taking over the subsidizing all the big colleges and universities, destroying the Ameri. can system of free education. 2. Army insistence on suspension of the Sherman antitrust law ir certain war production industries makes possible return of big busi. ness monopoly.
 8. Army's system of concen. trating such large percentage oi its contracts with big business is trend toward elimination oi small business from the American scene.
 g. Army insistence on exemp- tion from prize ceilings for cer- tain items of food and equipment endangers the entire national structure of maximum price regula- tion.
 TO- Army now has the largest appropriation of any department of the government and because of that fact 1t is taking over many of the programs which other de- partmentS of tke government would like to operate If they had the Army,s manpower and money.
 II. Army doesn't need 7.5 to 10 million men and its insistence on so large a force Is the main cause of the present manpower shortage.
 12. When this war is over and the 10 million men come home, they will form such a powerful minority group that they will dominate the country. Anything which would foster the creation of a military clique today would therefore be dangerous as 1t might lead to a military coup detat after the war is over.
 BoLoNEY!
 This list could probably be ex- tended, but it's long enough as it is. It is also lot of hog-wash. Where do charges such as these come from? When you run most of them down you will find that they originate with other bureaus of the federal government in Washington. All of these bu- reaus have something to loss if the Army should usurp some of their prerogatives.
 It is noticeable that thus far only the anti-Army side of the story has been told. Other gov- ernment agencies with well or- ganized publicity setups and with civilian officials willing if not eager to talk have presented their point of view forcefully and often. That side has ben getting all the
 The War Department, though it has a Washington public relations staff of over 100 commissioned off, cers, still has a lot of generals who won't talk and in many cases can- not even be approached. War De- paitment public relations policy can best be expressed by the sentence, If we don't do anything about this, 1t will soon all blow over"
 But the buildup which the civilian agencies of the govern ment are obtaining for their side of the argument, through such in- cidents as the recent WPB-Army scrap over who should be boss of plane produ:tion. may in the long run be of lasting hurt to the mili- tary effort. It has even alarmed General Marshall. who mentioned it in a recent New York speech before the National Association of Manufacturers.
 ON TH BOTHER HAND
 There is unquestionably an Army side to this argument. It might be summarized something like this:
 The Army has its hands full fighting the war and it has neither the time nor the ambition to run the civilian economy.
 All but a few hundred thou- sand of the 10 million men who make up the armed services will come from civilian life and will return to civilian life after the war is over. They can never be organized or voted as military party.
 The few hundred professional soldier officers who might be as- stunned to form the nucleus for a military clique do not have the power or the ability to put over any wartime dictatorship even if kI. A.