Aid For Vietnam

Press, Volume CVI, Issue 31319, 15 March 1967, Page 12

Aid For Vietnam

Sir, —With his usual tortured arguments, “A. B. Cedarian” makes an odious comparison between the Vietnam shambles and the war against Hitler. A small token force is not enough if the Government’s excuses for joining in this savage, undeclared war are at all valid, and the tiny increase only confirms our timid faith in that cause. In 1939 we were united in opposing aggression. Today we are far from united, but even those who are so sure that we are fighting aggression in Vietnam can bring themselves to make only a feeble gesture towards the “enemy,” reserving their venom for those of us who are convinced neither by the facts nor of the sincerity of our Government’s interpretation of them. As more and more become convinced that neutralisation of Vietnam is the only solution, it becomes more obvious that anything short of victory by violence would spell defeat for America. —Yours, etc., VARIAN J. WILSON. March 13, 1967.

Sir, —It is said that the general idea with regard to “aid for Vietnam” is to blast it with high explosives. Actually, however, it is undoubtedly felt that appeasement would be a deterrent to peace rather than war. In world affairs there is no means of maintaining peace through law enforcement as is the case within a state. Collective security is a myth. The leading nation of an era is, however, called on to prevent aggression among lesser States. America is thus acting in the role of a police authority. New Zealand assistance is in the nature of an insurance measure.—Yours, etc., T. M. SHAW. Westport, March 14, 1967.