THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES MONDAY, October 30, 1939. AMERICA’S CHOICE

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23952, 30 October 1939, Page 6

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES MONDAY, October 30, 1939. AMERICA’S CHOICE

It was the main contention of Senator Borah when he stated in the United States Senate the case for the “ Isolationist ” groups, of which he is the acknowledged leader, that repeal of the embargo on the shipment of arms to belligerent nations would mean the involvement of America in a second world war. President Roosevelt, who has courageously and unflinchingly staked his political prestige on this issue, has stated not once but repeatedly that while he does not intend that the United States should retreat from a neutral position, Americans cannot be neutral in thought when the European democracies are joined in a struggle with the aggressive forces of totalitarianism. To maintain an embargo on the sale of arms and munitions ,to countries at war, he has argued, was equivalent to presenting Hitler with an Atlantic fleet. The Senate’s decision to repeal the embargo, reached with more than a 50 per cent, majority, after a prolonged debate, has provided the “ Isolationists ” and incidentally the German Reich —with an answer that unquestionably represents the opinion of the American people. The United States, for reasons that may be regarded as valid, cjoes not desire to become a participant in the war. But the United States is not prepared to stand passively obstructing the democracies in a conflict which is essentially the concern of people believing in the same things as the Allies, and living under a similar code of freedom. The revised Neutrality Act, which is confidently expected to receive the endorsement of the United States House of Representatives, does not involve, nor need it threaten to involve, America in an overseas war. Its provisions contain ample safeguards to prevent American citizens or American shipping from being placed in a position of jeopardy that might draw the United States into war. But it does represent a clear-sighted if tacit admission that America wants the Allies to win the war, and win it quickly, and that she is prepared to help them in its prosecution to the utmost of her industrial capacity. It has been said that this is in a large measure a war of machines. No country is better equipped and more competent to produce the machines of war than the United States. The resources of this great nation become, with the revision of the Neutrality Act, available to Great Britain and France, the conditions being that they shall pay for their purchases ’as they receive them, and transport them across the Atlantic in their own vessels. With both these conditions Great Britain and France are able to comply. Hitler’s Germany is not. In the war of the machines the United States has committed herself to taking a most important part, and at the same time has acknowledged that in the war of ideas she has debated the moral issues and made a choice for the representatives of justice and right. Towards a conflict that can have but one outcome America is contributing in a manner that may greatly hasten the victory. The Senate’s smashing defeat of an amendment demanding a referendum prior to a declaration of war that would necessitate sending United States soldiers' outside the Western hemisphere suggests that America stands even more resolutely against Nazi-ism than the terms of the Neutrality Act alone might imply.