USE OF ATOMIC BOMBS

Press, Volume XCIII, Issue 27986, 5 June 1956, Page 3

USE OF ATOMIC BOMBS

Sir,—Field-Marshal Montgomery’s philosophy as a soldier, reported today, carries the cult of "discipline” and inhumanity to its logical conclusion, and

at the same’ time reveals its moral bankruptcy and hellish hopelessness. Accepting the un-Christian doctrine, as he plainly does, of brutality—and “regardless of the consequences”—he is "for dropping the biggest (atom) bomb possible on anybody who commits aggression.” Violence is, of course, implicit in the philosophy of this top-ranking, archetypal soldier; but it seems to me that, to include with a disregard of the moral conse quences a disregard of material considerations as well, vitiates even the narrow logic of the military mind, and points directly to madness. In the explosive atmosphere of today, no place in regard to government—whether in this country or abroad—should be allowed such as Field-Marshal Montgomery. They constitute a dangerous anachronism. —Yours, etc., PAUL MALING. June 4, 1956.

Sir,—Montgomery’s statement about using the H-bomb regardless of consequences may incorrectly create impressions that he is a raging lunatic. Montgomery is completely objective, thoroughly detached, hermetically sealed and sterilised of all human values and sentiments through a lifetime of militarist indoctrination, and is talking militarist science, whose labels carry no stigma in scientific circles. So we must pity, sympathise, and have unlimited compassion for Montgomery, who is a classic example of environment. Until we reach the austere militarist intellectual plane of Montgomery some will not understand him. As the economic crisis deepens, others can be accused of aggression (as before), but the peoples’ voice must be preferred to those of pseudo-professors of politics and the sciences. The West must have war preparations to keep going and the East must have peace to get going! Peace is economic war and war is economic peace.—Yours, etc., MELVILLE B. MITCHELL. June 4, 1956.

Sir, —What a simple world the soldier lives in! Lord Montgomery, giving his views "as a soldier,” is reported to have said, "If there is any sign of aggression anywhere I would drop an atom bomb. I’m for dropping the biggest bomb possible on anybody who commits aggression, 'plat’s my philosophy; finish it.” How simple! As a soldier, he should know that the last surmise is incorrect, even though the dropper of the biggest bomb probably went out himself. And does he think it is so easy to define this "aggression” he talks about? How much longer is the soldier-militarist to call the trine of modern civilisation? Montgomery’s views conflict with the analysis of the situation given us last night by Dr. Toynbee—that none of the great Powers were willing to use bombs. If so, has not the time come to dismiss General Montgomery as out of date?— Yours, etc., June 4, 1956.