REALISM IN DEFENCE

Evening Post, Volume CXXVI, Issue 102, 27 October 1938, Page 8

REALISM IN DEFENCE

(To the Editor.)

Sir—Your sub-leader, "Realism in Defence," though bringing defence matters before the general public, fails to stress the most vital issue. Most people in New Zealand would not be very much concerned about the ultimate fate of Samoa, but they should be concerned about the fate of New Zealand. Why discuss the fate of Samoa when New Zealand is itself, practically defenceless against naval attack? I say this with some knowledge of naval procedure. In modern warfare surprise is the keynote of success. An attacking fleet under cover of darkness and with darkened ships could take Wellington in a night, and we would be powerless to stop. it. No bombing aircraft could face the concentrated fire of twenty first-class warships anchored in the harbour. , ■ • ■ . Even if we could afford it we have not the docking facilities to maintain a battle fleet to save our shores, but it is within our means and reach to procure naval units that could destroy anyattacking fleet. To our two light cruisers we should add four more. Each of these crufters should be the parent ship of at least three motor torpedo boats. With fast cruisers to take these boats to the scene of action a hostile fleet would take a very grave risk in entering New Zealand territorial waters. If it is wise to spend £17,000,000 per year on social security, it is absolute foolhardiness not to spend a few millions on territorial security. What would be the use of scheming for social security if the people face the risk of their country being dominated by another nation?-! am^te,^^