Economic Stability—Adequate Defense?
(Continued frnm Page .18)
anna attitude toward the Soviel Union.
Certainly one is justified in assuming
this hoin the unbelievable statement
of Presidenl Eisenhower and so many
members of his entourage thai we are
nearer to peace than we ever have been
I ihink Adlai Stevenson very shrewdly
seiid ei year ago our foreign policy, in
effort, is thai we turn to the Soviet
Union and sen-. "^ mi commit one more
outrage and we will reduce our defense
budgel hv ei billion dollars." This is in
effect whal our attitude has been, unfortunately. So. whereas I could he eon-
vinced thai ei reduction is all right if
there are technical reasons for il supposing we jusl don'l need this number
of people I'm afraid lhal il is pri-
ineuilv a political decision based on unreality eiml that, in effect, we an- closer
lo weir or subjugation (whichever you
prefer i than we have been at emv lime
in the past.
(Hodces) I personally ihink thai we
musl remember lhe anus problem is
lied into our diplomatic problem. We
don't have armies jusl In have' armies or
military strength. Therefore, we have lo
ask ourselves exactly whal is the mission wr seek lor lhe' present military
Now, whether il is sound or not. I
believe we're in for a period of mild
Cold weir and lhal if aggression comes,
il cannol he reached hy direel military
action. I think il's going lo he infill ration and subversion. I Ihink lhal that's
the real danger.
Also I Ihink you have to operate
within ihe framework of ihe American
people and whal they themselves want
I Ihink lhal ihis is a bipartisan is-n,'.
and il's going lo split ihr Democrats
jusl as much eis the Republicans when
il comes down lo voting lhe siluation.
Ms.. :i pari of il is certainly due- to the
fact theit Vmericans unhappily distrust
"le mililarv. That's a tradition—
i Eliot i There ein- one or two points
'hat have1 been made thai I could seiv
a word about. In the Eirsl place, with
regard to Mr. Combs' feeling aboul
uheii the French and the Germans are
Koing to say, "Oh. the \mericans are reducing," when we're asking the French
and the Germans to increase forces.
Both have traditionally and always had
'" depend on exactly the kind of forces
toe nnw propose to create ;i trained
teserve. Thev understand the trained re-
**rve. We are proposing actually to in*
■ tease our potenti d mihl rry forces l>- i
*ery considerable number of people'.
(BURT) Doesn't this go indirectly into a
"latter of conscription, though, which Ameri-
c°ns traditionally as individualists have been
f ACTS FOHUM NEWS, August, 1955
( Eliot) Well. Americans have gol
to do some things thai they haven't
wanted to do. Traditionally, if you go
back tee Washington's firsl recommendations his sentiment on a peace estab-
lishmenl he railed for exactly whal
Presidenl Eisenhower is calling for
now. He called for it for the same
reason—a fully trained militia—a train-
eel regular Force of citizen soldiers.
(Buckley) I just wanted to comment
lhat this points to the emptiness of
this liberal slogan that you shouldn't
fight totalitarianism wilh totalitarian
methods. Conscription is totalitarian, of
course, and we recognize lhat we have
ie. use a certain number of totalitarian
methods. Il's unfortunate but we ought
to recognize it.
(Eliot) Is the defense of this re-
public totalitarian, then?
(Buckley) To the extenl thai it has
conscription. Don'l vou believe involuntary servitude is totalitarian?
(Eliot) I don't believe involuntary
defense of your country—being required
to give a peirl of your time for the
defense of vour country- -is totalitarian
(BURT) I think we should have a little bit
more illumination on our topic: the strength
of the civilian economy to support the armed
(ELIOT) When you can't get enough
full-time people because you can't pay
Ihem on a full-time payroll without
spending too much money and you can't
subtract them from the labor force—
then your only possible dependence, if
you slill need more trained defenders, is
lo have part-time soldiers, and lhal is
a trained citizen force.
(Hodces) Ii is significant that the
Senilis woulel like to helve' us armed to
the teeth no trained reserves, and
bankrupting ourselves! That's the im-
porlanl pari of ihis picture. They want
to force a situation where the West will
dr. iii my opinion, economically bankrupt.
(Combs) Ii seems to mr that military
power has. as one of its essential
components, economic power, eiml thai
postulates the economic soundness ol
the country. I'm certainly nol advocating such a wild or extravagant program
eis would imperil lhe economic stability
of our country, bul I'm wondering
whether or nol in lhe drive for ;i
balanced budget, for example, we an-
nol being rather unrealistic, \fter all.
dead men pay no eli\ idends. And I'm
not sure lhal a balanced budget is going
lo he an adequate defense eegeiiiist
Therefore, I don't aeeept lhe criterion
of. let us say. our Secretary of the
Treasury of ihe balanced budget as the
yardstick hy which we should'measure
our defensive fones at a time when I
believe, along wilh Mr. Buckley, lhal
we are in a graver peril than wr have
ever hern since the dawn of our own
national history, and that the economic
or fiscal end of this musl necessarily
he secondary to lhe basic question of
\nw I agree also with Mr. Buckley
lhal neither he nor I nor Professor
Hodges is expert in (his. It is a technical
field hui I'm wondering whether or not
we shouldn't spend more money in de-
fense ageiinsl intercontinental bombers,
against guided missiles, and in ihr enlargement and ihe augmenting of our
airpower wilh a corresponding reduction in lhe armed forces.
IBURT) Major Eliot, will you give us your
analysis of this question: Will push-button
warfare eventually replace the foot soldier?
(Eliot) Nol within ihr period of
time lhal we can plan for now. il won't.
Mr. Combs has a poinl with regard to
the defense against air attack. Thai is
one of the reasons why llie whole' military budgel has recently had lo hr overhauled. Wr have lo go in now on ei
very large' scale for continental air defense. A large' command has been sel
up eil Colorado Springs to coordinate
thr entire air defense of lhe country.
We've gol lo sprnd a greal deal more
money on defending our home territory
as ei base of operation for whatever we
might want lo do elsewhere, and lo defend our citizens and our production.
That has to he done, and it's going
to lake a very much larger slice than
we"\e had to spend on purely defensive
(Combs) Whal aboul the fool sol-
dier? Will he ever be obsolete? Is he
nol necessary for the occupation of subjugated countries?
(El.IOT) In the end you're going to
have to gel back to the poinl where
the struggle is for a piece of ground, a
piece eif territory. Man is an earthbound
creature. He ran l stay in the air very
long. He can'l slay at sea indefinitely.
He lives and has his hopes and his
home and his future, his ambitions, on
the surface of the earth.
So in the end you get hack to fighting
for territory bj poor infantrymen down
on the ground—dirty and lousv and miserable and unhappy and fighting their
wei\ forward through mud and againsl
all kinds of obstacles. Thev are the boys
who in lhe end are going lo lake an
atom-scarred shell crater jusl lhe same
as they look artillery positions—positions lhal had been prepared by con-
ventional artillery, or jusl ihe same as
they wenl forward withoul anv artillery
preparation before there was anv.
(Comhs) I had a question I wanted
(Continued on Page 42)