Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1956-10-11
Explosive Issue

CSsNS hSS0S
Republicans are now claim
ing that Adlai Stevenson's
H-bomb proposal is straining
our relations with other ma
tons. Our relations, may be
strained, but this is a result
of Republican treatment of
Mr.. Stevenson's proposal, not
the proposal itself.
In this proposal Mr.. Ste
venson has come forth with
the first concrete step toward
disarmament. BY publicly an
nouncing that we are going to
stop testing H-bombs and in
viting Russia to follow suit,
we may force the Soviet hand.
If Russia refuses to discon-
tinue such tests, doubtless she
would suffer a great diplomatic
defeat. No nation could then
listen to Soviet peace over
lures in a conscientious man.
ner. Should Russia agree to
end H-bomb testing, it would
serve to ease world tensions.
An inspection would be unnec-
essary, for we are already able
to determine when an atomic
explosion occurs in Russia by
seiSmographic means.
Contrary to Republican i'm
plications. this plan would not
require us to end other phases
of military atomic research.
1t merely asks that testing of
hydrogen bombs be stopped.
Thus, by applying Mr.. Steven
sons suggestion, the United
States stands to gain, not lose.
The Republicans, by their
opposition to this proposal,
would seem to show that they
lack the necessary ability to
bring about a real peace.
Michael Alexander.
Your editorial, Beyond
Partisanship," strongly favors
continuing nuclear bomb
tests, which Adlai Stevenson
has advocated should be
stopped.
The editorial recommends
that this subject be not used
as a football in this campaign.
1t is remarkable how little
in genuine differences there is
to choose between in the two
great political parties in this
country. Both parties gen.
orally start a few non-essential
topics for the voters to
squabble over during the cam
paign. This subject of nuclear
bombs in preparation for
global war. is a difference
which would give the voter
something to think about.
Do not great preparations
have a tendency to lead to
war? If so. we should be slow
to advance such outstanding
threats to any foreign country.
Any great political leader
such as Mr.. Stevenson who has
the courage to take a stand for
beating our swords into plow-
shares and our spears into
pruning hooks" would seem to
deserve the highest COM
mendation. II the billions we
expend annually for war pur-
poses, preparations and brib-
ing foreign countries, could be
reduced appreciably, the saw
ing could be applied to the
reduction Of the deficit or it
could be applied to relieving
poverty Of our own citizens.
Our false prosperity has not
reached them.
Bystander.
4 4
President Else hover is
quoted as saying loose talk"
when queried regarding Mr..
Stevenson's assertion an
agreement should be sought to
ban further nuclear tests and
ex-President Truman seems to
agree with the President in
substance.
In England, the vital Suez
Canal situation is discussed
and debated openly, deferring
at least their headstrong
plunge into war. In our coun-
try. the opposition apparently
is not being accorded the right
to differ.
With modern long range
bombers, an enemy attack will
be as destructive to my fam
lily here in Washington as an
attack on London would be
to the British. Jet-currents
are unpredictable in the
shakespeare and the amount
Of carryover Of radiation 10 a
given point 1t seems is not as
certainable beforehand.
With due respect for ex-
President Truman and Presi-
dent Eisenhower In their con-
illusions, Mr.. Stevenson might
be our next President, there
fore, he should be allowed 70
state his opinion without be-
ing ridiculed.
HIS.