◆ SpookStack

5 + i he “Ae ¥ less satisfied, than its neighbors; a nation fully trained for war, and nurtured on the philosophy that right is inseparable from might. . The true facts of the European situation had been hidden from the people of England and France. They were not adequately in- formed either of Germany’s strength or of their own weakness. Politicians and ideal- ists harangued them about stepping aggres- sion, about defending freedom and democ- racy, about maintaining their way of life, but the realities of modern warfare — the elements that spel] failure or success — were seldom discussed. The orators shouted: “We must stop Hitler.” The newspapers echoed: “Down with the Nazi regime.” The people of France and/ England resigned themselves to the inevitability of war. But not a single man told how te break the Siegfried Line. T can best illustrate the attitude in the democracies of Europe by telling you of a conversation I had one evening with a French businessman on the outskirts of Paris. He had been talking for nearly an hour about the inevitability of war, and why German aggression must be stopped. a-—~—~\He advocated & declaration of war by France, “What would your first move be?” I asked him, “We must fight the Germans,” he replied. “But how?” J asked him. “Do you th'nk ‘the French army can break the Siegfried Line?” He_ looked startled, then sank back into his chair. “Oh, I don't know about that,” he answered. “That's up te the military ™men.” A week or two later, I was having hunch with one of those military men—a general in the French army. I asked him if he felt that the Siegfried Line could be broken. “No,” he replied, “J don’t think so.” And then added: “But if it could, the cost would be too high.” “What's the answer then?” ¥ asked, for the war drums were beating loudly. He shrugged his shoulders. “If only they had let us attack when we wanted to,” he said. “When we could have won, the people would not fight. And now, when we cannot win, they want war.” France waited until it was too late. England waited until it was too late. We in America have waited until it is too Jate; and yet we step closer and closer te the war, as though hypnotized by its bombing and its fury. Like France and England in 1939, We are unprepared today. We have not as many thoroughly moder fighting planes in our Army and Navy combined as Ger- any produces in a single week; and our Army is deplorably lacking in such essen- tia)’ items as tanks and antitank cannon. We have not made the sacrifice necessary for adequate rearmament. We, too, have cultivated the philosophy that it is essential to defend someone else in order to defend ourselves. Owr politicians and idealists har- angue ws about defending freedom and democracy, and our way of life, They are now shouting, “We must stop Hitler.” Our newspapers echo “Down with the Nazi regime.” But not one feasible plan has been offered us for en invasion of the continent of Europe, With the disaster of France and England fresh before us, we are following the selfsame path. mo, We, in America, are being led to war by @ group of interventionists, and foreign in- terests, against the will of a majority of our people. Every poll of public opinion has shown that from 80 per cent to 95 per cent of Americans are opposed to entering this war. Both the Republican and Bemo- ratic parties were forced to incorporate Nativar planks in their platforms, Both dential candidates were compelled to take a stand against our intervention. Yet today, although no one has made an attempt to attack us, we already have one foot in the war. We have even now entangled “our Peace and prosperity in the toils of Euro- pean ambition, rivalship, interest, humor and caprice.” What has happened to us? How was this condition brought about? The pro- cedure has not been dissimilar to that which took us into the last war. When hostilities in Europe began, it was fully realized by the foreign interests and interventionists in this country that the great majority of Americans stood firmly opposed to entering the conflict, These interventionists knew that it was useless for them to advocate openly a declaration of war by America. They therefore adopted a more subtle plan, They believed that while the people of the United States would not agree to a declara- tion of war, we could be beguiled into sup- - porting steps that would inevitably lead to war. Consequently, instead of advocatin war, they advocated steps which they calle “short of war"—steps which have already entangled us, and which will leave us no alternative to war if we continue to take them. The policy of the interventionists has been, from the beginning, to support every movement that would lead us in the direc- tion of war, and to oppose every movement that would not—always under their mask of “aid short of war." I have listened more than once to interventionists in America dis- cuss the question of what steps “short of war" would take us into war most quickly. To be specific, soon after war was de- clared in Europe, the interventionists advo- eated, and obtained, the revision of our Neutrality Act. They persuaded us that we could sell arms on a “cash and carry” basis without becoming involved in the war ourselves. They were emphatic in saying that no one asked us to lend money, or to send troops abroad. Their next step “short of war” was the demand that aircraft, cannon, destroyers and other munitions be taken from the American Army, Navy and Air Corps, and transferred to the French and British forces in Europe. In this, too, we acquiesced. Then we began to hear it whispered that we were already too far in the war to back out—whispered by the very people who had advocated the steps “short of war” which involved us. Now we are told that we have not done enough; that there must be no limit to our assistance; that we must be the “arsenal of democracy” for the entire world, lending, leasing or giving all the resources of our nation, if hecessary, to the cause of the British empire. (And here it is interesting to note that the cause of the British empire does not pre- vent us, as the “arsena] of democracy,” from supplying arms to Russia, though she be both an aggressor nation and a totaljtari- an state.) The advocates of intervention are beginning to forget the qualifying phrase “short of war.” The more daring among them are openiy discussing an Amer- ican Expeditionary Foree for Europe, Along with steps “short of war” has gone a supporting campaign of propaganda. Our country has been full of it for many months—a propaganda as subtle, insidious and effective to date as that which led us into the last war. Before we entered war in 1917 we were told, as we are being told today, that American troops would not be needed. Then, after we declared war, we were asked for a “token” division to fight in Europe. But we ended up with more than 2,000,000 soldiers overseas, and a war debt that has not yet been paid. British propaganda in the United States attempts to persuade us that Great Britain will win the war, provided she receives somewhat more help than we have, up to this moment, given her. Coupled with this has been a campaign to convince us t British victory is essential to Ame security. It is taken for granted thi would not be willing to take part in : which we felt would be unsuccessful. sequently, news releases from London mize all German successes and exags all British successes, They avoid an; cussion of war aims, peace terms o1 England can win now that Germany defeated France and controls the con’ of Europe. This is simply the ARE wartime propaganda. ]t is carried « both sides in a war. I am discussing ish propaganda because it is that to we have been subjected and therein li danger of our involvement. There is tainly no danger of our fighting on many’s side, and her propaganda in Ap has been relatively ineffective. To be specific again, you will rem that even before hostilities comm factual statements concerning the a military strength of Germany were bi attacked by the pro-British press. Th us who saw the growth of the Germ: force were severely assailed because « reports we made describing it, alt these reports now turn out to have almost unforgivably conservative. The recall that when the Germans in Austria, it was claimed by the propaga that their mechanized divisions broke | that the workmanship on their tanks, t engines, ete,, was too inferior to 9 successfully in a major war. Germa craft were said to be weakly constr there was a shortage of pilots, raw mat and fuel. We were told that Germar not have sufficient food to wage a war in addition to all this, internal cond were said to be so bad that the G people would start a revolution rather fight again. If you question the accuracy of my ment that we have been misinformed th propaganda, I ask you to glance th our daily newspapers since the war |! If you are pressed for time, take an of the major campaigns—Poland, Fi Norway, Holland, Belgium and Franee will find that we, in America, were | formed about these campaigns unt! actual military position made it impc to hide the facts any longer. Do yx member when we were informed ove radio that the French army had pene the Siegfried Line in five different p! Do you recall the headlines of battle ing on the western front during the ° of 1935-40 — battles we now know never fought? Were we told how des the Finnish position was before the break-through of the Russian army you remember how, after reading day day of Allied successes in Norway, an Germany had put her neck in a noo: were startled by the announcement th Allies were evacuating all of their f Who was it said the Maginot Line w: pregnable; that bombing planes we match for the British navy; that E: had the submarine menace well in ban had already “won the battle of the a The propagandists who made these do not bother to explain them. They that people forget quickly, and they « busy leading us along with new fa They must ecnfuse Americe’s desire England with our desire to stay out war. They must convince our peop! England is winning the war in FE even though she has lost every maj agement in which she particivated - all she needs is more help than we up to that moment, given her; and : we should get into the war, it wor be necessary to send troops. They build up the element of fear in At They must persuade us that if E | As