Evening star., 1962-09-22
'Vinson VS.. McNumoro'


We have read carefully the
report OF the Hebert Com
mittee on the Defense Re-
serve Posture. Your editorial
Of September 4. ''Vinson VS..
Mcnamara" incorrectly
charges the committee with
denying an intent to inter-
fere in military policy, while
at the same time doing so.
1t also quotes passages out
Of context and In this man.
ner diStorts the thrust of the
committees report.
The House Armed Services
Committee hearings provided
abundant evidence that pro-
fessional military recommen-
dations have been repeatedly
shunted aside by the Depart
ment Of Defense in favor Of q
"dollar-policy."
The committee made It
perfectly clear that q simple
reduction in numbers In the
reserve forces in the name
/: Of "realignment" will not
produce q more effective sup
port Of the active forces.
It places great emphasis
upon the fact that the re-
serves are being weakened by
constant and inadequately
planned reorganization. The
report points up deficiencies
in the reserve program, and
it calls upon the Defense De-
partment to take steps to
correct these deficiencies. It
emphasizes that there Is no
logic in reshuffline the re-
serves in advance Of reor-
ganisation Of the Regular
Army. especially when there
is no intent to attack and
solve the real problems Of
inadequate, m odern equip
ment. .
Your editorial urges the
Chairman of the House
Armed Services Committee
and Secretary McNamara to
work together for the good
Of the country. This noble
recommendation completely
ignores the tenor Of the
Hebert Report itself, and the
specific plea in the conclu-
sion Of the committees re-
port for DOD to work with
the congressional committees
In arriving at solutions.
der the Constitution,
the Congress Is charged with
responsibility for national
defense, and for maintenance
and regulation Of the mill
tary services. The leaders Of
Congress cannot be faithful
to their oaths II they do not
meet the issues squarely. Mr..
VinSon and Mr.. Hebert have
too firmly established their
regulations for wisdom and
knowledge in this field to re-
quire our defense Of them.
Yet all Of US need to be re-
minded that our system of
government places RESPONSE
bility upon the representa-
tives Of the people. No one
has the right to set aside
our laws and our constitu-
tional system, no matter how
high a regard he may have
for his own judgments.
Your editorial, In our view,
makes the improper charge
that Reserve spokesmen"
apparently think numbers
are the only important ele-
ment In the reserve forces. A
brief look at the record would
reveal what our view actually
Is. We advocate careful or
gAnization. continual mod
erniZation. adequate train
ing, retraining Of obsolete
units, proper equipment and
sufficient personnel strength
to meet mobilization require
mentS.
While an increase in num-
bers may not necessarily
mean a better reserve: nei-
ther will q better reserve re-
suit from . reduction in
numbers. when that reduc-
ton Is rationalized to meet
budgetary instead Of mobil-
ization requirements and car
ried out haphazardly and
without an offSetting in
crease in equipment, train
ing and readiness.
John III. Foster,
Mai. Gen, Air Force Re-
serve, National President