Evening star., 1947-06-02

Inc UnlCeQ states, summing dg-
gression, stands as the prime target
for a future aggressor, the Presi-
dents advisory Commission on Uni
versal Service states in its report
made public today. 9>@
Under chapter heading, Mature
of Possible Future Warfare" the re-
port states:
Military preparedness Is far
more complex problem for coun-
try like ours dedicated to the ways
Iof peace than 1t is for a nation with
aggressive ambitions. A nation bent
on conquest can plan and prepare
In advance for a definite campaign
and type of warfare. It selects
its own time. place, and mode of at
tack 1t need not-and in future
almost certainly will not-formally
declare war. 1t strikes when 1t is
most confident of success. Under
its Constitution, the United States
cannot.
The peace-loving nation has no
choice except to prepare for every
type of attack that might be
launched against it and from any
possible source If 1t leaves any
avenue unguarded, it must expect an
alert and skillful aggressor to take
advantage of that blind spot in its
Idefenses. The omission could prove
fatal.
The United States, stunning ag-
gression, stands as the prime target
for the aggressor of the future. This
is true both because its great wealth
makes it tempting target for con-
quest and because 1t looms as the
chief obstacle to world domination
by any power seeking to obliterate
freedom. Experience in two world
wars has made it presently evident
to all that the United States must be
Idefeated-and defeated f1rst-if ag-
gression is to succeed.
Need More Than Maginot Line.
1t is important, therefore. for LIZ
to consider how adequately pre-
pared we are against an attack
that might be made directly against
us or that might constitute a suffi-
icient menace to world stability to
embroil us in war. Our measuring
rod must be the extent to which
our preparations are comprehensive
enough to meet all dangerous types
of attack. Otherwise our prepared
ness will be a delusion-a disastrous
waste of money and effort. We must
have more than a Maginot Line
Our first necessity is to envisage
the possible nature of future war
and the degree to which it alters past
concepts of defense. Several general
factors stand out as result of
modern developments in warfare:
1. Long-range aircraft now make
it possible to deliver an attack across
an ocean or the polar cap. The in
tensity and suddenness with which
such transoceanic air raids may hit
will almost certainly be increased
sharply by developments in the near
future. How far these developments
may go was indicated by the testi-
mony of DR.. Vannevar Bush that in
! less than 10 years there would be
war planes capable of flying at
supersonic speeds and travelling at
such attitudes that interception by
any variety of antiaircraft fire was
improbable. There was general
agreement that long-range guided
missiles were unlikely of perfection
within the next decade. However,
| the possibility that missiles of this
| type might be used effectively ii
launched from planes. submarines,
or warships at short range was wide
| ly accepted.
/ Atom Weapons Cited.
| 2. To the devastating techniques
of strategic warfare developed in
! World War II have been added the
immensely more powerful weapons
of mass destruction provided by the
release of atomic energy Bacteri-
ology and chemical weapons of great
destructiveness have also been added
| to the arsenal of war, but the con-
science Of man and the danger of
reprisal have prevented their en-
| ployment. Whether this will con-
tinue to be true or whether future
aggressor will cite our possession Of
the atomic bomb as justification for