Loading...
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