DEFENCE SYSTEM.

Evening Star, Issue 22447, 18 September 1936, Page 13

DEFENCE SYSTEM.

TO TSJt EDITOR. Sir, —If tho issues at stake were not so grave I would heartily agree with my* correspondent who has a grouch against the treatment meted to him after he had given loyal services. This matter is not one for expression of disgust nor for disguise of the real aspect of the value of military training. A statement was made in the House of Commons, when dealing with cruiser strength, to the effect that in the event of war outlying 'iminions might be left to their own resources. Do we need any further argument or guidance as to our duty to each other? We are far away from our mother’s apron strings. It is no use singing and asking “ God to defend New Zealand ” if we are unwilling to fit ourselves for that task. War sometimes occurs suddenly, and to send half-trained sons, brothers, and husbands to fight unprepared is nothing short of murder. Witness the recent features of the untrained civilians of Spain exposing themselves to fire. No British ex-soldier or experienced “ digger ” would d ■ that. In my last letter on this subject I stated that we could not defend New Zealand on account of our lengthy coastline and insufficient fighting men trained ready. We have got to realise these grim facts, but are we going to submit or are we going to make a show? That is the question. If a ship was sinking in a rough sea it would be a pessimist indeed who would exclaim “ Wo cannot save ourselves,” but wiser heads would say “We will have a jolly good Mry anyhow.” s The first line of defence is the British Navy. Modern aircraft has made the wiseheads in the Admiralty hesitate as to the wisdom of placing too many eggs in one basket. Battleships at £7,000,000 each to be torpedoed or bombed by massed air attack are now a doubtful proposition.. It is then, just as well that the fleet, rapidly becoming obsolescent, was scrapped ; >. the 'terms of the Washington Treaty. In case of a war involving the Empire, should the enemy scatter its fleet many corsairs would threaten our Empire’s ports and trade routes. All ablebodied men capable of bearing arms should train now voluntarily—if numbers arc not forthcoming, then compulsorily—for why should, if called upon, any man, no matter his vie s or social rank, risk his life to save cowardly “stay-at-homes”? This is a duty, a necessary and unpleasant task. Every man well trained in rifle fire and in the

use of machine guns, and every man ready to pilot aircraft (of which we need may hundreds) will be an asset in time of need. The Minister of Defence is occupied in a dual task. This urgent question involves action ; therefore the post of Minister of Defence should be taken over by some experienced mag of long service; it cannot be ignored any longer. There has been some neglect in the Homeland also. Britain’s C 3 nation should have been more evenly distributed. The food problem calls for this, not to speak of man power in sparsely-populated dominions. To those who ask “ What have I to fight for? ” I urge the horrors of aggressive Fascism. I am as good a Communist as any, but am not imbued with class hatred; that gets us nowhere. I believe in the Christian virtues of Communism, that it would obviate the necessity of defence everywhere and would level us all—as we shall be in death —and if this was applied world wide would frustrate the armament sharks; but we must take tilings as they are. We shall evolve these things as we learn; we have a lesson to pay for.—l am, etc., B. E. Kite. September -17. v