Evening star., 1946-09-20
Gross Distortions

Sr0SS distortions
An excellent illustration of how
mischievous loose words can be
how they can distort facts and mis-
lead the hasty reader or listener
is afforded by Secretary Wallace S
thesis that the United States, besides
getting tough" with the Russians,
harbors "a school Of military think
Ing" that advocates" waging war
against them now before they can
manufacture their own atomic
bombs.
| The War and Navy Secretaries,
declaring that there is definitely no
such thinking in their departments
and that they know of no responsible
officer who has ever advocated or
even suggested" the idea. have just
issued an effective answer to Mr..
Wallace's startling charge. But the
answer ought never to have been
necessary because the charge ought
never to have been made, and pre-
sumably it would not have been
made had Mr.. Wallace given proper
thought to the subject and used
more careful language.
1t may we'll be, of course, that
some members of the armed forces,
like any number of laymen, have
been talking along the same lines
as Dr. Harold Urey, the distinguished
nuclear physicist. But what has DR..
Urey been saying? Simply this: That
unless there is effective interna-
tional supervision of the atom, the
United States may yet find it
strict necessity" to wage a world
conquering preventive war. He has
said this, however, not because he
supports such an idea or because he
feels that the American people arc
likely to favor it, but only because
OF a desire to emphasize the fright
fulness OF the logic that will obtain
among nations If they engage in an
atomic armaments race instead of
establishing system of genuine
control. II others have been speak
ing similarly-as they have, and
rightly so-they have been engaging
in speculation so unavoidable that to
describe them as "a school of mill
tary thinking" that advocates" an
immediate attack on Russia is to
give voice to gross distortion, made
all the worse when measured against
the vast extent of Americas demo-
bilization.
Much the same thing may be said
OF M. Wallace's idea that we have
been getting tough" with Russia in
the diplomatic field. The demon
strable fact is that the phrase get
ting tough" (among the first to use
1t was Earl Browder, former head of
the American Communist party is
woefully inaccurate oversimplifica-
ton. As Secretary Byrnes and SEN
ator Vandenberg declared last July
after the Foreign Ministers meeting
IN Paris, the truth is that our policy
is simply one Of trying to establish
decent world peace with as little
delay as possible, on strong founda-
tions OF mutual trust and under
standing. But past experience has
taught us that to do this We must
combine tenacity and firmness with
patience and fair play, dealing
oluntly and frankly with the Rus
slams in an earnest attempt to win
their full coaaborat ton by convinc-
ing them that our motives are
honest, that We are not ganging up
with anybody against them, that we
are eager to cooperate with every
land showing reciprocal good will.
and that we want to do away with
war forever but refuse to be forced
or pressured into positions which we
deem to be wrong or which would
oblige us to bargain in human
rights and fundamental liberties
anywhere on earth"
When the United States pursues
such a policy it Is not getting
tough" with Russia. 1t is merely
living up to its traditional principles
In the field of foreign relations and
to It's commitments under the At
lantic Charter and the Charter of
the United Nations Mr.. Wallace
will be doing himself, the Nation
and the world service if
he studies this subject a bit more
thoroughly and resolves to guard
against the distortion of loose words
when he discusses it again. The
same holds true, of course, for any
thing more he may have to say
about our schools of military think
ing.