75-08-B4
- Main Page \ Reagan Radio Commentaries \ 1975
| << Previous Broadcast | Next Broadcast >> |
Contents
Peace[edit]
Transcript[edit]How much is it worth to not have World War III? I'll be right back. While in London I had an opportunity to visit with various government officials including those concerned with foreign affairs. Inevitably the conversation turned to the world situation and how to maintain peace and just as inevitably the Soviet Union was automatically accepted as the possible threat to peace. Just as 40 years ago it was Nazi Germany that loomed as the storm cloud on the horizon and of course that storm cloud did eventually fill the sky and rain fire on all the world, the leaders of that generation saw the growing menace and talked of it but reacted to the growing military might of Germany with anguished passiveness. Will it be said of today's world leaders as it was of the pre-World War II leaders they were better at surviving the catastrophe than they were at preventing it? World War II didn't happen because the nations of the free world engaged in a massive military buildup. In most countries including our own, too little too late described the reaction to the Nazi military colossus. What does it take for us to learn? On every hand here and abroad when the suggestion is made that we strengthen the military capability of NATO the reply is that it's not politically expedient to increase spending for armaments because the people are against it. Our own Congress which is willing to run an eighty billion dollar deficit for every kind of social experiment, screams long and loud for reduction of the budget for defense, but have any of the political leaders laid the facts out for the people? Of course the overtaxed citizenry in Europe and America want government spending reduced but if we're told the truth, namely that enough evidence of weakness or lack of willpower could tempt the Soviet Union as it once tempted Hitler and the military rulers of Japan, I believe our decision would be in favor of an ounce of prevention. Certainly we haven't forgotten that after World War II the Japanese told us they decided on war when they saw our army staging war games with wooden guns. They also took note that one month before Pearl Harbor, Congress came within a single vote of abolishing the draft and sending the bulk of our army home. It has recently been revealed that for 12 years a behavioral scientist at the University of Hawaii has headed up a team of distinguished colleagues in a federally funded computerized study of international behavior. Summed up in one sentence, they've learned that to abdicate power is to abdicate the right to maintain peace. The study, focused mainly upon Red China, Russia and the United States. Every bit of data from trade to tourism from threats to treaties was fed into the computers. The findings proved conclusively that what Lawrence Beelinson wrote in his book, "The Treaty Trap" is true. Nations that place their faith in treaties and fail to keep their hardware up don't stick around long enough to write very many pages in history. According to the report, quote, "It is not equality in power that reduces hostility and conflict. Rather it is power dominance or submission. Peace is purchased by making yourself stronger than your adversary or by dismantling power and submitting to one's enemies." Unquote. Power is not only sufficient military strength but a sound economy, a reliable energy supply and credibility in the belief by any potential enemy that you will not choose surrender as the way to maintain peace. Thomas Jefferson said the American people won't make a mistake if they're given all the facts. This is Ronald Reagan. Thanks for listening. |
Details[edit]
| |||||||||||
Added Notes[edit] |
