This entirely neglects the fact that air superiority is still but a preparation for land victories and that neither Britain or the U. S. will be in any position to back up any air superiority they might assume, for quite a number of years. Again, if they do, what reason is there to believe that invasion of the continent will be any more likely to succeed than German attempts to invade Britain at a time when the relative strengths of the warring powers were at a higher disparity than they may ever reach again in this war?

Professor Taylor's reply is even more evasive. I'm still interested in what is wrong with Mr. Dennis' arguments and not what is wrong with Mr. Dennis.

Mr. Fairbanks' answer is of the quality inserted in the Boston dailies--loaded with aspersions and a free and utterly unqualified use of the term "defeatism" whenever an argument which opposes intervention is advanced.

I'm disappointed. I had hoped to see better replies than these. I had hoped to see, for example, these questions answered:

I. Can Britain defeat Germany without American manpower?

II. Could the U. S. and Britain allied defeat Germany?

III. If they do defeat Germany is it to restore free trade, the small nation, and democracy throughout the world? What dangers will they then face in opposition to these aims?

These and many other questions are present in Mr. Dennis' letter. Why weren't they answered? George J. Grindle '42