HomeMy WebLinkAboutThe Wingham Advance-Times, 1963-03-07, Page 9Young Eyes on the Future
Listening to the youthful speakers
at the Royal Canadian Legion public
speaking contest in the High School
auditorium on Saturday evening, we were
struck by one outstanding fact. From a
list of 20 possible subjects all the second-
ary school competitors and many of those
from the elementary schools, chose topics
which had to do with the future, in one
form or another.
We began to wonder about the most
accurate way of assessing those who are
"over the hill." Normal procedure is to
look for a receding hairline, bifocal lenses
and a comfortable paunch gone just a
wee bit sloppy. These measures are but
the outward signs. Inside, we who are
not .so young unconsciously tend to turn
ever more frequently to the golden days
of the past. (The fact is, of course, that
they were anything but golden when we
had to struggle through them). Those
who are still truly youthful face directly
into the future.
The fact that next week, next month
or 1964 could bring utter annihilation
does not enter their minds. except as a
matter of pure statistics. The future, to
these promising young minds, is woven
from the limitless possibilities of a com-
pletely new age. They do not think of
the mushrooming cloud of an atomic
bomb; they dream of the limitless scope
which is opening before them. They are
already contemplating a world in which
there will be boundless nuclear energy to
supply the peaceful needs of mankind.
They can now see, with their young, un-
clouded vision, regular. trips to other
planets, colonies of earth people on
worlds of which we have never heard.
All this smacks of the days when you
and I pored over Buck Rogers in the
comic strips. Friends, Buck has become
science reading today, and if you can ac-
curately recall some of his adventures you
may well marvel at his author's all but
miraculous ability to see 40 years into
the future,
Space has virtually come to meet us.
Last week in Colorado Springs our press
party was addressed by a Polish -born
technician, who is the NORAD advisor on
developments in space. He told us that
BEMEWS, the department of our defense
command which keeps track of threats
from beyond the atmosphere, is presently
tracking over 200 pieces of "hardware"
orbiting around our planet. By 1970 he
anticipates the number will be in the
thousands. The detection devices which
record these orbits are so sensitive that
articles no larger than a lead pencil are
carefully mapped every time they pass in
their earth -circling track.
We are living in an age of precision.
The intensity of concentration needed
for survival is staggering to a generation
such as ours where a sailor, if he was
smart, could navigate "by guess and by
golly" and the first flier who accomplish-
ed anything worthwhile flew "by the seat
of his pants."
Our thoughts, as we listened to these
intense young people, were largely hinged
upon the fact that they must be right;
they must have sound minds; it is im-
perative that they be logical and unemo-
tional — otherwise their elders, who
would like to pass on so much sage coun-
sel — are doomed.
The future lies entirely in the hands of
these young people. In all times past
changes have come slowly. The young
folks simply had to learn from their eld-
ers, for the world changed only an inch in
an eon. Not so today. Acceleration has
caught us and survival lies with those
who can visualize a new world in one
generation.
The Choice Is Ours
Last week's editorial comment on
whether or not Canada should acquire
nuclear defensive weapons has brought
forth a great deal of comment from our
readers. Most typical of these remarks
was from the persons who expressed ap-
preciation for the facts the article con-
tained.
on-
tained.
Not all agree that our nation should
have atomic weapons. This edition of
The Advance -Times contains an intelli-
gently -worded letter from Norm Wel-
wood, to which we would draw your at-
tention, for it clearly states the major
arguments against Canada's employment
of nuclear defensive weapons.
Since this question is bound to be a
major issue in the election on April 8th,
we strongly urge every reader to give
careful consideration to both sides of the
problem. It is clear, after Prime Min-
ister Diefenbaker's Prince Albert nomina-
tion address, that he does not favor our
use of nuclear weapons, for he spoke of
having them "readily available" in case of
emergency. That would mean hours to
arm a Voodoo aircraft and days to arm
our Bomarc missiles. Attack warnings
would be roughly one hour for the ap-
proach of manned bombers and 15 minu-
tes for ICBM missiles.
Mr. We!wood's letter implies that, as
observers, we hove been "sold" by our
military leaders at NORAD headquarters
on the need for nuclear arms. That is
possible, though after 30 years in the
newspaper business we have developed
some resistance to the sort of officials
who are out to "sell."
The problem resolves itself fairly
clearly into whether or not Canada is to
become a neutral nation — something
after the order of Belgium at the outbreak
of World War I, and just as vulnerable,
for we lie athwart the path of the invader.
To send our fliers out against possible
Russian attack in aircraft armed only
with conventional weapons, to oppose
bombers armed with nuclear missiles
would be plain murder. Do you recall
what happened to the Polish air force
in 1939?
The position of Canadians who want
to see our forces armed with the most
effective weapons is made clear by the
stand of Douglas Harkness, former minis-
ter of national defence, who resigned over
the issue. There is no desire to bring
Canada into the "nuclear club." Our na-
tion has neither the desire nor the capa-
bility to deliver highly destructive atomic
bombs to enemy territory. The one im-
portant thing is to make our defenses
against any possible attack as strong as
possible at the present time.
Our editorial of last week admitted,
as do the military leaders, that our pre-
sent defenses would be ineffective against
the big missiles, but at the present time
they are not the major threat. If we do
not present a sound defense against man-
ned bombers they will always remain the
major threat and the potential enemy will
have no need to continue the big missile
program.
The most alarming aspect of the en-
tire question is the attitude of the thous-
ands of Canadians who have, apparently,
been beaten before the first shot is fired.
They simply resign themselves to the be-
lief that nothing we can do will save us
from our horrible fate. This attitude is
apparent not only in regard to our mili-
tary forces, but is carried into bur per-
sonal lives, as evidenced by the lament-
able lack of interest and activity in
emergency measures preparations.
THE WINGHAM ADVANCE - TIMES
Published at Wingham, Ontario, by Wenger Bros. Limited
W. Barry Wenger, President - Robert O. Wenger, Secretary -Treasurer
Member Audit Bureau of Circulation; Member Canadian Weekly Newspapers Associ-
MC ation; Member Canadian Community Newspapers Representatives
Authorized by the Post Office Department as Second Class Mail and
for payment of postage in cash
Subscription Rate:
One Year, $4.00; Six Months, $2.25, in advance
U.S.A., $5.00 per year; Foreign rate, $5.00 per year
Advertising Rates on application
barn Utianciejlintt
Wingham, Ontario, Thursday, March '1, 1963
SECTION TWO
Letters to the Editor
Dear Editor:
You make a forceful argu-
ment for nuclear weapons in
your editorial. It is certainly
true there has been a lot of con-
fusion which has not been help-
ed by the changing attitude of
politicians. However, it might
be that our so called lack of
decision to aquire nuclearwea-
pons, is the best thing that
could have happened to Canada.
In general, I believe your
argument reflects the views of
NORAD and particularly, our
Air Force. There is no ques-
tion that these opinions are ex-
pert, the end result of military
training and logic. We can
respect them but consider them
only in relation to some other
considerations. Military policy
is always influenced to a de-
gree, by the desire of any Ser-
vice to maintain the status -quo
and to press for bigger and bet-
ter weapons. I think the argu-
ment would have been much
more valid some six to eight
years ago when the threat
would have been delivered ex-
clusively by manned bombers.
This is 1963. A nuclear at-
tack on this continent would
likely be launched, suddenly,
without warning by a coordin-
ated all-out maximum force.
This would consist princpaly, of
long range ICBMS, with me-
dium range missiles launched
from ships and submarines and
possibly a manned bomber
force also. Nothing yet devis-
ed can stop it. The warning
time could be less than fifteen
minutes. We know, and in-
deed can be thankful, that the
USA would immediately launch
a devastating counter attack
which would just as successfully,
penetrate all enemy defenses.
It is said that present US and
Russian stockpiles of nuclear
devices, is the equivalent of
ten tons of conventional ex-
plosives for every man, woman
and child in the world. Bert-
rand Russel, in a recent inter-
view, said that after such a
holocaust we might, by a con-
servative estimate, expect to
see the entire population of
Europe dead, while three-fifths
of the population of North
America would perish. Sur-
vival of the remainder is only
possible by following strick
emergency measures procedures,
and these do not, by any mean
answer all the questions.
Against this background, we
are debating whether we should
arm our few Bomares, Voodoos
and 104's with nuclear war-
heads and rockets. It should be
apparent, that with either large
or 'small' warheads, these wea-
pons become meaningless.
Russia and the USA have
now, more than enough nuclear
force to completely destroy all
mankind. We cannot alter this
fact one particle whether we
have nuclear arms or not.
Any increase in the number
of nations having nuclear wea-
pons can only lead to further
mistrust, fear and the possibility
of an 'accident'. A new nuc-
lear partner here will encourage
another nuclear partner on the
other side. The only real hope
for man lies in curtailing, con-
trol and ultimate disarmament
of all nuclear weapons.
We owe the Americans a
decision, one way or another,
as soon as possible. We should
reject the offer for nuclear wea-
pons now, firmly and finally,
while continuing to maintain
our conventional forces as part
of NATO in Europe. In NORAD,
we might continue and increase
our share in the detection, plot-
ting and communications set-up,
providing more sites and assum-
ing a greater share of the cost.
If we follow this course,
Canada's capacity to work for
disarmament will be made
easier, the chances of getting
some further progress will be
better. We can do this, have a
greater measure of indepen-
dence in our relations with
other states, while still taking
a share in the Western Alliance
through NATO and NORAD.
The entire problem of de-
fense and our part in NATO is
difficult and complicated.
Weapons and defense systems
change rapidly, forcing policy
changes. For example, accord-
ing to an editorial in the past
issue of Macleans, current
American thinking is said to
favour a strong, convenionally
armed NATO force, without
the 'small' tactical nuclear
weapons. The policy change
has come with the realization
that a small weapon, used in
relatively small war or incident,
could only too quickly lead to
massive use of bigger weapons
in an all out war. The risk ap-
parently is too great and it is
thought the well armed conven-
tional force would be sufficient
deterrent for any 'incident'
that might develop.
We can be sure that Cana-
dians will be assailed with all
kinds of arguments, pro and
con in the next five weeks.
Sincerely,
N.J. Welwood.
Wingham, Ontario.
Editor Advance -Times,
Dear Sir:
As a result of the recent
fracas in Ottawa, the average
Canadian hasn't the foggiest
idea of which party stands for
what. We are a mixed up
bunch and are so terribly tired
of listening to elegant phrases,
million dollar words and glor-
ious promises which always
seem to end up in a big noth-
ing, decorated with a few
extra taxes because someone
down there found out John Doe
had one thin dime in a piggy
bank and Ottawa figured they
should have it. Maybe we
should throw up our hands and
just vote for the best looking
man.
Isn't it about time we had a
dignified Parliament? Isn't it
about time we stood up among
nations with honesty and fair
play? Isn't it about time the
representatives got together and
reasoned instead of yapping at
each other like a bunch of ten-
year -olds?
Canada should avoid all
nuclear weapons and advocate
peace and work at it with all
we've got. Much of the dis-
content in Canada is caused by
the overload of taxes the citi-
zen is burdened with. Each
year the load gets heavier until
it is impossible to keep above
board and after struggling all
year and practising the strict-
est economy, it isn't very en-
couraging to find we are still in
debt and gradually getting in
deeper.
A married man earning
$3000.00 or less shouldn't pay
income tax at all. I would ap-
preciate it if one of our repre-
sentatives would try living on
this amount for a year. If he
tries it and comes up at the
end of the year with all his
marbles, I'd gladly vote for
him because he'd have a won-
derful secret we'd all like to
get in on. One thing for sure,
he'd know why we keep build-
ing mental hospitals.
All Unions should be strictly
Canadian. Why keep sending
our precious dollars across the
line when we need them so
badly ourselves? Surely it
isn't up to us to keep Jimmy
Hoffa in clover while he grins
like a cheshire cat and softly
whispers 'sucker'.
Let's run this country on a
business -like basis. Make
every penny count and waste
nothing. Cut out frills. We're
weary of every Tom, Dick and
Harry heading to Ottawa for a
handout while the rest of us
pay for it. We're tired to
death because we have been
lugging a tub of butter on our
backs for years. Each year
that fat little tub gets heavier
and if we sell a pound to light-
en the load, we find we have
to pay considerably more than
a dollar in taxes for so doing.
As a matter of fact that bucket
of butter costs us around $40, -
000,000 or more a year. If
that's what our government
calls good business, its about
time we got someone down
���Illl'I!'I!1161�I ILIiilClllllllll8111111111'alllll!Illilllll!illlhlllll'llilllll' I'!I,'! ilh �'IiC11111i�1' Ili ;II �;I flli i u' il'i l!!IIIGIII I� 'Jl91I!Ill!!I "'!I h i' I '=`
SUGAR
and
SPICE
= 1'
lill11111111i11I111111
is
;; lll!!IIII!iliii li!iillillll�y Bill S m l l eyIIIII111 �Jbollllllllic
Not without regret, and with a few secret misgivings,
I made a big change a couple of years ago. Frazzled,
scrambled, and slightly addled, I took myself aside, and we
had a serious talk. Just the two of us.
"Smiler, old boy," I said
to me, "how much longer do
you intend to keep up this
nonsense? Is this what you
fought in the war for? Is this
what you really want out of
life, to be a seller of four -
dollar ads, a chronicler of
endless meetings about noth-
ings, a pacifier of old ladies
of both sexes who have a
beef, a lugger of papers to
the post office, a member of
40 organizations, a payer of
mortgages, a fighter of lost
causes, and a lousy husband
and father?
"I d'no," said me in my
straightforward, Canadian
way. "Wutcha gotten mind?"
Well, what do you do when
you talk to a moron? You
humor him, that's what you
do. So I explained carefully
and clearly about ulcers, and
pensions, and security, and
family togetherness, and the
fact that I was 40 and ready
for pasture. Me listened open-
mouthed. This was all new.
* * *
As a result, soon after, I
dog -paddled my way out of
the turbulent stream of life
as a weekly editor into the
quiet backwater of life as a
school teacher. I figured I
would lie back and float there
for a while, resting up before
I sank quietly out of sight
among the bullfrogs and the
pollywogs and the tepidity
and the mud of the academic
pond.
But I must have fallen
asleep in that pond and been
washed out to sea, with a
force -eight gale b 1 o w in g,
breakers everywhere, my col-
lapsible life -belt doing just
that, and my emergency
rocket flares in my other
pants.
It's just not that simple.
You can't just turn your back
on Life, that aging but still
lively mistress you've kept in
style for years, had so much
fun with, done so many crazy
things with, and expect her
to let you walk quietly into
the arms of that Other Wom-
an—dear old dim, dull Peace.
She won't do it. She'll hurl
abuse at you in public. She'll
throw gravel at your window
on moonlit nights. She'll
trip you as you march heavily
toward respectability. She'll
put black squirrels in your
attic and black thoughts in
your head. She'll just plain
raise hell until you take her
back.
I've tried. I've looked the
other way when she flaunted
herself. I've held her at
arms' length until I ran out of
arms. I've put my head in
the sand when she approach-
ed (and received a kick in the
rump for my pains).
But she's given me the
works. I determined I would
never act on another commit-
tee, join another organization,
donate any of my free time to
anything, or do anything for
anybody, unless it were life
or death.
What happened? :Life
cackled with glee, and I find
myself on numerous commit-
tees, a member of several
organizations, lurching out of
bed to teach Sunday School,
collecting for the Red Cross,
putting out the school year-
book, and giving help to back-
ward students, after hours.
I determined I would be a
better husband. Life sneer-
ed. Every time I tried to
oust a bad habit, she was
right there, tantalizing. So
I still lug home the box of
suds, light one fag from the
end of another, stay up till 4
a.m. reading, occasionally try
to tell my wife she's wrong,
and avoid any discussion of
repairs, renovations or re-
newals.
I decided to be a better
father. Life chortled. When
I took up skiing, the kids
were embarrassed. When I
come home ready for a father-
ly chat, everybody disap-
pears. When I ask them if
they'd like to go for a nice
family drive, they look at
each other significantly and
roll their eyes. Only this
morning, Kim said, "Dad, you
don't seem happy any more.
You're acting kinda strange
lately."
* * *
I swore I'd never have any-
thing to do with politics
again, on any level. Life
snickered. I'll swear it was
she who put the skids under
Dief, just to make a fool of
me. At any rate, not one, but
two of the local candidates
have asked me to give them a
hand, and I've promised both.
These are only the major
obstacles she has thrown be-
tween me and my courtship
of that cool but complacent
lady known as Peace. She
has also: Bashed in the rear
end of my car; loaded my
eavestroughs with ice to the
pendulous point; arranged
for my cat to get in the fim-
ily way again; tricked me into
getting five weeks behind in
my work; broken the zipper
on my snowboot, and put my
hot water system on the
blink.
I give up. Come back, you
old trollop, and I'll embrace
you as of yore, and forget
about Peace, who never did
appeal to me much anyway.
there to remove all subsidies
and let the butter barons pull
themselves out of their predica-
ment. After all, the small
businessman has been facing a
crisis for years but he doesn't
race down to Ottawa for a hand-
out every other day. No, he
just keeps plugging along and
hopes he doesn't go broke.
That old hog wash about
Canada having such a high
standard of living is a laugh.
The average Canadian is wor-
ried sick about our whole econ-
omy and has forgotten how to
laugh. Walk down a street
some day, look into a few
faces and see for yourself.
This economic confusion and
growing debt and restlessness in
our country is just what 'little
old Krushy' back there in Mos-
cow has been waiting for. I
can visualize him licking his
chops and figuring just how he
can get his two cents worth in
while dissension rips across our
country.
The average Joe isn't inter-
ested in a million new ideas.
He wants lower taxes, fair play
and a chance to hang on to a
few scrawny dimes for a rainy
day.
The question is: Who will
give us that kind of govern-
ment? Where can we find a
completely honest man, famil-
iar with the Ten Command-
ments and The Golden Rule;
one who has the humility to
ask for Divine Guidance and
then get down to business and
get this Country hack on an
even keel?
If other readers feel as I do
about this, then run for a pen
and paper and say your little
piece before it's too late!
Little Old Granny