Clapper: The test
By Raymond Clapper
…
Air Transport Command
U.S. troops move in and things are changed!
By Max Cook, Scripps-Howard staff writer
…
Reading Eagle (December 29, 1943)
ON THE RECORD —
What price victory?
By Dorothy Thompson
New York – (Dec. 28)
Victory, says the President, the Vice President, and Gen. Eisenhower – is a certainty, probably during the New Year.
The sobering complement to these statements is that this victory will be bought by rivers of blood, spilled for our cause by the youth of the nation.
This youth is recruited, regardless of class and occupation. Workers’ sons and boys from Exeter and Yale, hillbillies and Park Avenue scions serve in equal danger. All are paid according to the Army schedule, and none, from private to general, in any proportion to his hazards and responsibilities.
On all fronts, a united nation fights – joined in common discipline and common democratic comradeship.
In all wars, the contrast between the spirit of the front and the spirit of the civilians has given rise to breaks between the nation at the front and at home, and between the generations, too. In all wars, the compensation of the soldier is the discovery, under fire, of the living reality of comradeship and mutual dependence.
Returning soldiers from all wars hope to bring home this spirit and reconstruct the nation they have saved, in this spirit.
And in almost all wars, they have been disappointed. The shattering of this illusion is what has repeatedly created the “lost generations,” turning the bright faith of democratic brotherhood into cynicism and despair.
One would think that the hope of early victory and the knowledge of its cost would occupy every American to the exclusion of any other consideration; that hearts would be suspended in prayer, minds concentrated in the most fundamental thinking, and hands be moving ever faster, as the supreme test approaches.
The moment will come when thousands of our sons have an eye on a wristwatch, not to see whether it is time to stop, but time to go – time to hurl their so-young bodies at the enemy’s steel, each knowing exactly what is at stake, for himself, his comrades, and his country.
On the fronts, the vision of victory means a tightening of all ranks.
At home, it means a loosening of all ranks.
At the front, every soldier prays that his own life will be spared. Not one of them wants to die. The instinct for survival is as strong in them as in you or me.
But each, confronting the enemy, knows that his life is only protected by the life of the whole. He is one with his comrades. If one is wounded, the other will try to save him at the risk of his own life, for so he would be done by, and so therefore he must do.
At home, the enemy presents himself through distant communiqués. Presumably he will soon be beaten, and then, where will each of us be? The specter of victory looms on the horizon, and with it the reckoning of the cost. Each begins to eye the other with envy. Who is getting the most? Which industrialists? Which workers?
The greater the pressure for winning the war, the greater the pressure each group can bring. Stabilized farm prices? Everybody needs food – and they’ll pay for it.
Renegotiate contracts, to squeeze out unconscionable profits? Where would the country be without the industrialists?
Raise wages? Easy, when even the threat of a strike can bring a nation to its knees.
And there’s an election coming, and of course it matters almost equally with victory which set of politicians holds the jobs.
Peace for the soldier means the reprieve of his life, the grant of the transcendent boon.
And peace for the soldier, because he is still young, and envy and greed have not frozen his blood, means the chance to help make a future for his country in which envy and greed are not the invisible rulers.
The worker at the front looks forward to an America with a decent living for himself and his comrades. If the workers at home are improving conditions, he is glad. But what is improvement? Something that only can last for the short period of the war boom?
What the worker-soldier demands of his labor leaders is that they shall back him now and be planning for the future, not plotting to grab another 10¢ at his cost.
What the soldier who dreams of a business of his own demands of business is that it should leave some place for him and not monopolize the works while he is gone.
What the soldier-student interrupted in his studies is thinking of, is how the world got into this mess and how he can help pull it out, if he survives. Nor does he believe that modern democracy is just a continuous war between self-seeking pressure groups all worshipping Mammon.
Let politicians, labor leaders, industrialists, farmers, and black-market operators beware of youth that comes home disillusioned of their own people. That should worry all of us more than wages, dividends, or prices.
For, at the front, our sons have learned that the life of the community is more than the profit of the individual and that one can contemplate death only in the company of those who share a common purpose.
1 Like
Völkischer Beobachter (December 30, 1943)
Roosevelt zeigt die kalte Schulter –
England verrät die ‚garantierten‘ Polen
…
Lohnforderungen am laufenden Band –
Roosevelts Schwierigkeiten immer größer
Von unserer Stockholmer Schriftleitung
dr. th. b. Stockholm, 29. Dezember –
Die innere Lage in den Vereinigten Staaten bleibt auch nach dem Eingreifen Roosevelts in den Streik der Stahlarbeiter und der militärischen Abwendung des drohenden Eisenbahnerstreiks weiter gespannt. Schon ist der Verband der Automobilarbeiter, der Hunderttausende von Mitgliedern umfaßt und dem die Arbeiter in den Flugzeugfabriken und Panzerwerkstätten unterstehen, mit neuen Lohnforderungen aufgetreten, dem sich auch 330.000 Arbeiter in der Bekleidungsindustrie angeschlossen haben.
Als besonders bedenklich wird es in Washington und Neuyork bezeichnet, daß der Präsident selbst von seinem Stabilisierungsprogramm abgewichen ist, als er im Gegensatz zu dem Beschluß des Kriegsarbeitsamtes einer rückwirkenden Aufbesserung der Stahlarbeiterlöhne zustimmte, um die Wiederaufnahme der Arbeit in der Stahlindustrie zu sichern. Bis jetzt sind aber erst wenige Arbeiter wieder zur Arbeit erschienen, und es ist nicht ausgeschlossen, daß sich Roosevelt auch in der Stahlindustrie genötigt sehen wird, militärische Machtmittel einzusetzen. Vorläufig sehen die Arbeiter das Zurückweichen des Präsidenten geradezu als eine Aufforderung zu neuen Lohnerhöhungen an. In kürzester Frist sei, so meldet Svenska Dagbladet, die Stahlproduktion in den Vereinigten Staaten auf den tiefsten Stand seit Bestehen des amerikanischen Rüstungsprogramms gesunken.
Die amerikanischen Kriegsgewinnler und ihre Presse versuchen zwar, Stimmung gegen die Forderung der Arbeiterschaft mit der Begründung zu machen, daß die amerikanischen Soldaten an der Front kämpften, während die Arbeiter nur an Lohnerhöhungen dächten. Dieser Behauptung steht allerdings die Tatsache gegenüber, daß die Arbeiter am Kriege nichts verdienen und die von ihnen gestellten Forderungen nur darauf zielen, die Löhne den immer weiter steigenden Preisen anzupassen. Dafür ziehen Rüstungsindustrie und Wall Street sowohl aus den gesteigerten Preisen wie aus den niedrigen Löhnen gleichzeitig Nutzen.
Ein unangenehmes Verlangen
Einig ist sich die amerikanische Öffentlichkeit in der wachsenden Erkenntnis, daß Roosevelt wie im Frieden nun auch im Krieg auf wirtschaftlichem Gebiet völlig versagt hat. Bezeichnend ist ein Aufsatz in der New York Herald Tribune, in dem der Präsident scharf angegriffen wird und in dem es heißt, der Verlauf der Lohnkrise habe bewiesen, daß es Roosevelt nur um seinen persönlichen Einfluß gehe. Während des ganzen Krieges habe Roosevelt es immer wieder zugelassen, daß sein persönliches Ansehen bei den Arbeitern praktisch die einzige stabilisierende Kraft im Wirtschaftsleben der Nation war. Wenn sein Ansehen diese Probe überlebte – es sei schon gefährlich ramponiert – werde es nicht ausreichen, um das Land durch die Stürme zu führen, die noch vor ihm liegen. Denn dieses Land müsse noch weiter für den Krieg mobilisiert werden, und das könne nur durch eine allgemeine Dienstpflicht geschehen.
Mit der Forderung nach Einführung der allgemeinen Dienstpflicht wirft die republikanische New York Herald Tribune Roosevelt einen recht unangenehmen Knüppel zwischen die Beine. Denn es handelt sich dabei um eine Forderung, die von der Arbeiterschaft immer wieder abgelehnt wurde, weil diese mit Recht befürchtet, daß die allgemeine Dienstpflicht nicht der Nation, sondern wiederum nur den Rüstungsgewinnlern zugutekommen könnte.
Schrei nach neuem Programm
dnb. Genf, 29. Dezember –
In einer Pressekonferenz nahm Roosevelt zu den kritischen Äußerungen über seinen kürzlichen Vorschlag Stellung, daß „der New Deal“ beendet werden sollte. Der Präsident gab einen langen Überblick über das innenpolitische Programm des New Deal und meinte, jetzt brauche er ein neues Programm, um nach dem Krieg mit der neuen Lage fertig zu werden. Damit gab Roosevelt das Scheitern seines New-Deal-Programms offen zu. Was er aber nicht sagte ist, daß er sich über das Fiasko durch eine maßlose Aufrüstung hinwegrettete, durch die schließlich das Land in den Krieg getrieben wurde.
‚Defätistische Mystik‘ im Volke
v. m. Lissabon, 29. Dezember –
Wie New York Times zu berichten weiß, habe die innere Gleichgültigkeit der amerikanischen Massen gegenüber dem Krieg Ausmaße erreicht, welche die Regierung beunruhigten. Radio Boston stellte der Weihnachtsrede Roosevelts folgende Bemerkung nach:
Soeben hat uns der Präsident die Errichtung der zweiten Front für 1944 und damit eine Unzahl von Opfern angesagt. Wir werden zu bluten und zu leiden haben und täten gut, uns schon jetzt seelisch darauf vorzubereiten, anstatt an der Wirklichkeit des Krieges vorbeizuleben. Siege werden in der Geschichte nicht verschenkt und auch nicht nur mit einer großen Produktion erkauft. Wir sollten weniger Wahrsager konsultieren und mehr auf die Fachleute hören, die Hitlers und Hirohitos gewaltige Kriegsmacht richtig beurteilen und einschätzen können.
Diese realistischen Auslassungen stellen den Beginn der großen agitatorischen Aktion dar, die Roosevelt nach seiner Heimkehr mit seinem Reklamechef Elmer Davis verabredete, um der wachsenden Kriegsmüdigkeit der Yankees entgegenzuwirken. Diese brennend notwendig gewordene Aufrüttelung wurde auf Grund eines ausführlichen Rapports des Leiters der Bundessicherheitsbehörde Edgar Hoover beschlossen. Dieser faßt in diesem Bericht Wahrnehmungen und Erfahrungen seiner Beamten im gesamten amerikanischen Bundesgebiet zusammen, übereinstimmend stellten diese von der amerikanischen Bevölkerung fest: Wachsende Indolenz gegenüber jeder Form der Kriegsanstrengung, weil immer lauter gesagt werde, daß ein Sieg wie im letzten, so auch in diesem Weltkrieg nur Früchte für den Kapitalismus tragen könne; wachsende Zunahme des Fatalismus, des Aberglaubens, weil die Menschen eher geneigt sind, mehr Prophezeiungen als Zeitungsberichten Glauben zu schenken; einen gefährlichen Ruck nach links in der gesamten öffentlichen Meinung Amerikas unter gleichzeitiger Steigerung der bolschewistischen Agitation, welche sich im Schatten der kriegsbedingten Verwilderung der Sitten und der niedrigen Moral sehr geschickt ausbreite.
So etwa sieht das „Großwerden der defätistischen Mystik“ aus, welches Edgar Hoover so große Kopfschmerzen bereitet.
U.S. Navy Department (December 30, 1943)
CINCPAC Press Release No. 215
For Immediate Release
December 30, 1943
Army heavy bombers of the 7th Army Air Force attacked Maloelap on December 28 (West Longitude Date). Our planes encountered heavy opposition by Zeros. Two Zeros were destroyed, 10 were probably destroyed. Two of our planes were shot down.
Army light bombers of the 7th Army Air Force escorted by Army Airacobras made low-altitude attacks on Mille on December 28. Several of our planes received minor damage. Navy search Liberators of Fleet Air Wing Two were intercepted near Kwajalein on December 28 by 10 enemy fighters. Three planes were destroyed. We lost one plane.
Enemy bombers made high-altitude evening nuisance raids at Tarawa on December 27 and again on December 28, causing no damage.
U.S. State Department (December 30, 1943)
The Ambassador in the Soviet Union to the President
Moscow, 30 December 1943
Secret
Op priority
Your 291729.
The minutes prepared by Bohlen relating to the question of the Italian ships will be found beginning with the 2nd paragraph of the minutes of the 6 p.m. meeting 1 December. These minutes are as follows:
Mr. Molotov inquired whether it would be possible to obtain any answer on the Soviet Union’s request for Italian ships.
The President replied his position on this question was very clear; that the Allies had received a large number of Italian merchant ships and a lesser number of warships and that he felt they should be used by our three nations in the common cause until the end of the war when the division based on title and possession might be made.
Mr. Molotov answered that the Soviet Union would use these ships during the war in the common war effort, and after the war the question of possession could be discussed.
The Prime Minister asked where the Soviet Union would like to have these ships delivered.
Marshal Stalin replied in the Black Sea if Turkey entered the war. If not, to the northern ports.
The Prime Minister said it was a small thing to ask in the face of the tremendous sacrifices of Russia.
Marshal Stalin said that he knew how great the need for war vessels was on the part of England and the United States but that he felt the Soviet request was modest.
Both the President and the Prime Minister said they were in favor of acceptance of the Soviet suggestion.
The Prime Minister said it would require some time to work out the arrangements and that he personally would welcome the sight of these vessels in the Black Sea and hoped some English war vessels could accompany them in action against the enemy in those waters.
He said it would take a couple of months to work out the arrangements with the Italians, since they wish to avoid any possibility of mutiny in the Italian Fleet and the scuttling of the ships.
It was agreed that the ships would pass over to Soviet command sometime around the end of January, 1944.
I have compared Bohlen’s notes with those of Major Birse now in Moscow who acted as interpreter for the Prime Minister and they agree on all points of substance. Major Birse has some more detail in regard to the Prime Minister’s explanation as to why the delay of a couple of months was necessary and the desire of Great Britain to help in the reconditioning of Soviet ships when the Dardanelles was open. Both Bohlen and Birse recall the Prime Minister asking Eden during the discussion how many war vessels were covered by the Soviet request and Eden replied “1 battleship, 1 cruiser and 8 destroyers and 4 submarines.” This is the number which the Soviet Government asked for at the Moscow Conference. My recollection is quite clear[ly] confirmed by both Bohlen and Birse that the number of ships under discussion at the meeting recorded above was that requested at the Moscow Conference and no mention was made of ½ of the Italian Fleet being turned over to the Soviet Union, nor do we know of any discussion about Italian ships at any other time during the Tehran Conference.
The Pittsburgh Press (December 30, 1943)
Half of Berlin in ruins; Fortresses rip Germany
British drop 2,210 tons on capital; France also raided
By Phil Ault, United Press staff writer
…
Cold slows fighting –
Allies pushing beyond Ortona
Canadians advance despite booby traps
By C. R. Cunningham, United Press staff writer
…
Planes pound defenses –
Yanks attack Jap airdrome
Showdown battle starts on New Britain
By Don Caswell, United Press staff writer
…
Bad news for Japs –
Nazi defeat in 1944 seen by Adm. King
Plans drafted to shift Allied might into the Pacific
…
Invasion within 2 weeks is forecast by Germans
But Allies hint opening of a second front is still months away
By J. Edward Murray, United Press staff writer
…
Wage formula may be raised
Living costs freeze basis provides ‘out’
By Fred W. Perkins, Scripps-Howard staff writer
…
Traffic moves on railroads as unions bow
Settlement still up in air for 18 that agreed late to work
…
Congress gets two plans to check farm land boom
By Daniel M. Kidney, Scripps-Howard staff writer
…
Yanks tired of speeches, even those of First Lady
Invalided Army sergeant back from Pacific also says soldiers ‘fed up’ on Lewis
…
In Washington –
FCC to oppose expansion of press in radio
New policy is said to put newspapers on spot, infer monopoly
…
Soldier vote support
Washington (UP) –
Democratic National Committee Chairman Frank C. Walker predicted that Congress will enact compromise legislation, making it possible for servicemen to vote in the 1944 election without controverting states’ rights.
He said in a telegram to Sidney Hillman, chairman of the CIO Political Action Committee, that he can conceive of no member of Congress being willing to deny the soldier the “chance to make his voice heard in a national election” since it would be “a strange democracy that singled out for disfranchisement the citizens who are giving the greatest service for democracy.”
He said:
What could be more absurd than to remove from the election the votes of 10 million of our most patriotic citizens?