Evening star., 1942-11-14
The Mas Choroes

uC sviOOS N0OIQeS
Representative Mas of Minnesota
is colonel in the Marine Corps, only
recently returned from four-month
tour of duty in the Pacific. His views,
therefore, are apt to carry more
weight with the public than the nor
NAL criticism of the war effort by a
CIVILIAN member of Congress whose
information has been obtained in
washington. Mr.. Mas statements,
moreover, undoubtedly reflect the
opinions OF at least some of the Off
GERS and men with whom he was as
'soclated on active duty. He would
De a foolish man to depend on his
personal observations alone to bol-
ster up the radio speech he made on
Thursday evening.
he has made some very serious
charges, which have the effect of
undermining faith in the NAVY and
which are justified only if based on in
olsputable facts. If the facts are cor
rect, then change and punishment of
guilty personnel should follow, If
not, Mr.. Mas owes the public an ex-
planation.
certainly, If the Navy has "misled"
the public "all along" on our naval
operations in the Pacific; if the Navy
mas "mlsrepresented" the outcome of
naval engagement to fool the
Americans and thereby give them a
raise sense of optimism; if the, SOL
onions venture has been mismanaged
and is doomed to fail, these facts
should be established and the guilty
persons brought to account.
But careful reading of the text
of Mr.. Mas speech suggests that the
public would be we'll advised to with
hold its condemnation of the NAVY
until the matters dealt with rhetoric
ally by Mr.. Mas are closely exam
lned as. to supporting fact. The
speech is the sort of utterance that
is difficult to get ones teeth into. It
Is not known what battle Mr.. Mas
referred to in charging that it was
represented as victory when our
losses were greater and far more
serious than those of the Japs." The
Navy has claimed that all losses to
date have been reported; that all
Jap losses have been reported on the
best available authority This being
the case, Mr.. Mas should name the
battle and state the losses he has in
mind. The Navy could not object, on
the grounds of military secrecy.
In the loss OF, three cruisers, Mr..
Mas states I'VE suffered a disaster
that night second only to Pearl
Harbor." Is that a fact? Without
minimizing the loss of the cruisers,
which were screening the successful
landing-without loss-of reinforce
mentS at Guadalcanal, can it be
seriously argued that this misfortune
was in any sense comparable with
Pearl Harbor? Not without more
facts than Mr.. Mas gives.
1t is little difficult to reconcile
Mr.. Mas statement that Gin a few
minutes our well-started campaign
in the Solomons turned from a bril-
liant offensive counterinvasion" with
his later statement that "the Solo
mons campaign was not we'll organ
lied and not followed up at ALL" I'm
less the Maryland the Army-are
continuing deliberate policy of mis-
statement, the Solomons campaign
has been followed up to the point
where the Japs continue to suffer
disadvantage on the ground, In the
air and at sea.
AS to Mr.. Mas views on unified
command in the Pacific, there are
many who agree with him and criti-
cize the policy of unified command
under the Chiefs of Staff and the
Commander in Chief in Washington.
But the unified command controversy
is matter of debatable policy rather
than a disagreement as to fact.
The main point is that those of Mr..
Mas charges which depend for sup
port upon fact should not remain un-
answered. If true, the Navy is guilty
of more than mere Incompetence
it is guilty Of deliberate policy of
falsehood. People will not believe
that about their Navy until it is
proven. And if there is no sustain
ing proof, they will wonder why Mr..
Mas made the statements he did
make.