POINTS OF VIEW

Te Awamutu Courier, Volume 53, Issue 3843, 7 December 1936, Page 5

POINTS OF VIEW

OPINIONS OF OUR READERS. DEFENCE—OR WHAT ? Sir, —.Your correspondent “ P. 8.1.” (I appreciate what those initials stand for !) tells only half the story when he calls attention to the need for compulsory national defence, and cites Holland and three other European countries that have not had a war for a century or more, and yet haVeTCWri.pulsory military training. Norway and Sweden are two. of. them-—and I would like any critic of military training to tell me of any other country without compulsory training which produces men of such splendid physique as those two. And Switzerland cannot be far behind them in the matter of the people’s physique; and I have never heard of the Dutch" being termed ‘ runts ” or “ rejects.” New Zealanders, being at a great distance from Europe’s danger zones, are not so alive to the necessity of learning to defend their country as are the peoples of the Old World. Wh are on a par with Australians in that respect, and I notice there is a perpetual outcry across the Tasman for compulsory military or physical training. If the necessity arises no one doubts that, as in 1914, the response would be adequate in point of riuufbers and willingness, but the indications are that the next call will be a more urgent one than the last, and that less time will be granted for preparation. Willingness is not the only essential. Training and knowledge are all-important. When war conics to a country which relies solely on the volunteer system fearful sacrifices of untrained men must be made at the outset even if the victory is gained at the last. New Zealanders should not need to be reminded of that fact. Ask any returned soldier. If New Zealand is to have a defence force worthy of the name, some kind of compulsory service will have to be re-introduced. An enemy countrywill not hold its hand until matters are argued out by a lot of “ pacifists ” or politicians. Read recent history, and you will find that all other countries strike first and “ hang the arguments.” Our present method of national defence is little better than a joke—and in saying this lam not decrying the enthusiasm or usefulness of the present-day volunteers. They should be commended. The following plan is suggested, ffw consideration: 1. All men th beeome liable to military training for home defence at the age of 18 year_&.', ij. Service for the first year to consist of six months’ continuous trainings.-D. In subsequent years until attaifiihefit of the age of “ refresher ’• training ot fourteen (continuous) days pe'r annum. I can imagine the howl of execration, not only from the pacifists, but also from the money-bags—practic-ally all of whom are, of course, over military age—while lots of young fellows between 18 and 26 years will yell to high heaven and declare that they will “ take to the bush ” rather than serve. Well, men like the Hon. R. Semple have very convincing ways of lining up men into labour battalieas for public works. How about getting him to “ convince ” the objectors ? If they are not willing to give -service to their country, ship them overseas to some place where there is n.omepd for training to defend their country. If my suggestion found favour, training could be carried out in permanent camps, preferably not too close to the cities. The approximate number of youths attaining the age of 18 each year would be 12,000 —I think that is a reasonable estimate—so that 6000 men would be continuously in camp; and by the time the first batch passed into the “ reserve ” at 26 years there would be nearly 100,000 fullytrained men in the country. “ But what of the cost ? I’ is the cry that would be raised. Wbll, the cost would certainly be heavier than that of the present unsatisfactory volunteer system; but there would be a worth-while fighting force in return for the outlay. Furthermore, with six thousand men removed from the labour market,, unemployed-relief expenditure would be permanently reduced. “ Lead-swingers ” would of course, have to be dealt with, or there would be too much “ lead-swinging ” and not enough physical fitness. The suggestion is not advanced as a final plan, but as a genuine suggestion towards what is rapidly becoming the most important, though the most overlooked, question in New Zealand despite the activities of the Defence League to enliven public opinion. If the Dominion is sincere in its protestation that it does not desire to shelter behind the skirts of Great Britain, we (Parliament and people alike) must consider restoring compulsory military service, and not let pacifists run the whole country. If a war occurs those same objectors .will be howling loudly for protection, and all their talk will not avail them. Britain s motto for many decades was Be prepared I ” I don’t see whv it should not be New Zealand’s now. I am, etc., D.I.G.