Evening star., 1962-09-21
Prod the Leader

but that he probably Will DO
so II Premier Khrushchev
makes a speech there. Ques-
ton: Is it within the PreSi-
dents capacity to take some
action, any action. in the
conduct of foreign policy,
without first letting the Rus
slams act2
Is it possible, in other
words, for Mr.. Kennedy to
do anything of a positive
nature, or must his always
be the passive role, a reactor
to the enemy's ploy2 Was
there nothing he could have
done to prevent the wall in
Berlin or the build-up of Rus
sian arms in Cuba before
they became an accomplished
fact? Every common sense
indicator seems to say there
was.
We are frequently told that
the President is a Hamlet,
unable to act because of ag-
oniztng self-doubt. I think
this comparison is unfair to
Hamlet. Hamlet had some
initiative, some design, some
resolution, that the President
has never exhibited. He was
q dangerous adversary who
kept his enemy in fear of
what his next move would be.
Even though Hamlet had
self-doubts, he did not put
them on public display for
his enemy to examine.
II the President would ever
build up our force in a
likely trouble spot before the
Russians could exert pressure,
If he would defy a leftwing
dictator such as Sukarno, if
he would blockade a poten-
tial enemy before he could
build a fortress against us.
If he could bring himself to
stop guaranteeing the safety
Of Communist China against
Nationalist China, If he
would build up a fighting
force as in Vietnam without
first having to accept a Laos,
in short II he would act like
a man Of courage and initia-
tive should act, we could all
give John F. Kennedy the
great praise he so obviously
desires. J. C. Davis.
The United States or, at
least, its political chiefs have
for the last three years been
guilty Of the greatest display
Of self-delusion and rational
iZation ever practiced in the
history Of this country. One
might even suspect self hyp-
noSis for private political
gain or to perpetuate the
dynasty.
1t is a well-known. though
often denied fact, that United
States citizens were respon-
sible for assisting Castro into
power and for converting him
into the image Of a shining
knight in armor. Yet the
murders and repreSsions he
committed and continues to
commit against our adher-
ents, friends and the friends
of liberty we condone by look
ing the other way. Our
morality is characterized by
that bus load Of passengers
who sat in suspended anima-
ton while a band of young
toughs assaulted the bus
driver, as occurred not long
ago in our National Capital.
We ignore the steady arms
traffic, the training Of sub
versives for the expectation
Of communism and the in
citation to rebellion against
legitimate governments which
Castro. the SovietS and the
Chinese Communists using
Cuba as a base are actively
conducting at this time, to
our disgrace, in Latin Amer
lea. We try to excuse our
inaction by asking our weaker
neighborS to do the job for
us. And who will deny that
our task in Berlin would not
be today relatively simple if
we had acted in a timely and
reSolute manner in Cuba?
Probably the greatest In
dictment Of present day
United States democracy 90
is both its unwillingness and
inability to defend its friends.
We praise and clap when they
raise their voices to defend
our ideals and apologize for
our mistakes. But when these
same friends are in difficulty
with our mortal foe, interna-
tional communism in all its
many forms, and appeal to
us for help, they only dis
cover that we have turned
our back. What country or
what man Is so rash as to
trust such a friend? Have