To the Editor of the CRIMSON:

I think some of the arguments used in your Credo justifying the isolationist stand deserve to be answered from the opposite viewpoint.

"On the war side of the scales" you say: "we will be adding millions of men to the carnage; we will pour wealth and resources down the drain; we will be opening the doors to fascism internally which may destroy the very freedom that interventionists would have us go abroad to defend."

According to the experts, however, it is improbable that the sacrifice of these millions will ever be necessary. Most of them would, in any case, be better employed in our own aircraft and ammunition factories. Of course we should be obliged to expend some of our 'wealth and resources' but I do not think that they would be "poured down the drain" if used in the defence of our liberty and our civilization. Furthermore even if we follow your advice and refrain from any intervention we would be faced, in the event of a German victory, with the necessity of expending a large amount of our "wealth and resources". We would have to turn this country into an armed camp in a state of siege and we would certainly be forced to sacrifice an amount of freedom equal to that which you hold so certain to be lost by intervention.

Better to Fight Now Than Later

No sane American would desire us to spend our wealth and resources on the implements of war, but as this will be necessary if the Allies lose, should we not rather give them our full economic support now. Would it not be best to support those who fight on our first line of defence rather than to wait, preserving our neutrality like the people of Norway and the low countries until we find ourselves alone and friendless in a hostile world?

I think you are mistaken in saying that "we are doing all we can by shipping planes" under the Neutrality Act; but "what they could use, of course, is a million men". As you then point out, we have no million men anywhere near ready; but we do have a good air force and a capacity for airplane production which could be greatly increased with governmental aid. We have great economic power which the Allies can draw on at present only subject to restrictions and hindrances. And lastly we have the potential power of making gentlemen like Mussolini hesitate a bit before deciding whether it's really a band wagon to be jumped on.

You say that under isolationism we can prevent a Fifth Column of dissatisfied citizens by extending democracy to every American. Did Scandinavian democracy prevent the Quislings. And if we have dissatisfied citizens now, how will they be changed during a period of defensive crisis?

Lastly you assume that a German victory after an extended struggle would leave that country exhausted. But would the Nazis remain long exhausted with the iron of Newcastle and the oil of Rumania in their possession?

By all means "let the United States" as you say "make itself impregnable". But let us not wait for the attack on this hemisphere. Let us support our first defences. Let us make the sacrifice of American lives less likely. Let us be selfish but let us not be foolish. Philip Mayer '43.