Milford chronicle., 1948-05-28

.oA~A q Jaw -nOA4A
mean a larger
peacetirne army; it
would call for more
officers, more generals, colonels and
on down the line Of shoulder
strapped uniforms. A conscripted
peacetime army would mean more
rapid promotion for those who have
made soldering a profession. Army
officers are human, and they have
the same kind Of human reactions
that are found in all Of US.
On the other side Of the argument
my neighbor insists he sees the sub
ject from a purely practical view
point. He is not, and never has
been, a soldier. Circumstances
have prevented his being called upon
to wear uniform. He sees uni
versal military training from the
viewpoint Of one Of the millions who
would do the paying. If such pay
ing would help in our preparedness
for immediate, or near immediate,
war with Russia, he is for it regard
less Of cost. But will it do that, he
asks?
Under a military training law
such as congress was considering,
the government estimates that
$4,000 young men would be called
to the cOlOrS each year. IL would
take close to 10 years before we
would have even a good start
toward a real army, probably too
late to be Of value in q war with
Russia, if such a war is TO come.
Universal military training would
prepare young men to endure the
rigors Of combat divisions. In
World War !, two out Of four men
did not see combat duty, were never
on the battlefronts. They were not
slackers, nor were they idle. They
did what they were ordered to do,
but their duties kept them well back
Of the fighting fronts. In World War
II that percentage Of non-combatants
increased to seven out Of 10. The
next war, if one should come would
call for an even larger percentage
Of non-conbatants. The tools Of war
will be science-created machines
and gadgets. Il would take an even
larger percentage Of wel-trained
technicians to keep such machines
and gadgets in working order.
Young men trained for combat could
not do the technician's job.
War preparedness, as my neigh
Dor sees it, calls for the immediate
production Of the tools Of war, those
machines and gadgets with which
the war, if any, will be fought. The
making of these tools calls for labor.
Where is labor available If it is not
taken from peacetime commodity
production? This will result in more
peacetime scarcity and more infla-
ton.
Universal military training would
cost the nation approximately three
billion dollars a year. At the same
time production Of the tools Of war
must be financed. It all adds up to
increased taxes, heavier than those
of war days, or more deficit financ-
ing.
The vote Of those whom the polls
show as favoring military training
may be influenced by the belief that
such training is preparedness for an
almost immediate conflict with Rus
Sia. It could not be that. In fact,
taking the young men out Of fac
tories which can produce the tools
Of war could be a decided disad-
vantage if we are called upon to
fight Russia in five or even six
years. Those boys garbed in over
alls, rather than in soldiers uni
forms, at work producing the tools
of war. also will be preparing them
selves for the technical jobs that
will be as essential to victory as the
soldier carrying a rifle in a combat
division.
Just as science and invention
played a far larger part In World
War II than in World War I, they
also will play a larger part h
World War III II Il comes. The
technician, the man with the me-
chanical knOw-hOw, who win keep
the scientific tools In working
order, will be even more essen
tial than The heroic, rifIe-carrying,
dOughbOy Of the combat divisions.
AS long as congress attempts to
legislate in the interests Of one OF
more pressure groups. it is inviting
trouble for all the people of the IA.
ton. No one group can be granted
an advantage without encroachins
on the rights and interest Of others.
The job for congress is to think and
legislate in terms Of all the people.
never for a group no matter how
important to the national economy
that group may be. The Taft-Hart
ley act was legislation for all and
serves as an illustration.