Love in Power
SIR:
CONGRATULATIONS ON EXCELLENT COVERAGE IN YOUR MAY 21 ISSUE OF THE PERONIZATION OF ARGENTINA. IN OPINION OF THIS AMERICAN, A QUARTER-CENTURY RESIDENT THERE, THIS REPRESENTS SUPERB REPORTING. MASON FORD
STOCKHOLM
Sir:
Your cover is just what little Eva has been waiting for. Senora Peron will consider it a sweeter present than a new Dior gown.
ANNETTE KALSON
Pittsburgh
Truman, MacArthur et al.
Sir:
If we must have wars, the best possible way to fight them is with professional forces, on isolated battlefields, for limited objectives . . . The war in Korea is thus . . . the best possible under the existing circumstances. MacArthur. however great a soldier, is wrong. Marshall and Bradley are right.
THOMAS H. JOYCE
New York City
Sir:
In his testimony before the Senate committees, Defense Secretary Marshall stated that he ... knew the Chinese Communists were Marxist Communists.
Marshall further testified that, as President Truman's special envoy, lie had gone to China to work for a [coalition] government, which would include the Chinese Communists. As such, the two facts appear to be incompatible . . .
It is true that the corruption of the Nationalist government called for its own downfall. But had it not been for Marshall's mission and his subsequent rejection ... of Wedemeyer's report, the Chinese Communists would not have been able to play their hand successfully . . .
L. LAI
Columbia, Mo.
Sir:
. . . The whole fallacy in our thinking, or at least in the thinking of Truman and Marshall ... is that we can . . . achieve a true and lasting peace with Russia. Between the slightly bombastic and egoistic MacArthur and the weaseling Marshall . . . I'll take my chances with MacArthur, much as I once admired Marshall . . .
WILLIAM ISLER Cleveland
Sir:
... I belong to that vast, silent group of Americans who are deeply troubled by the MacArthur incident . . .
Instead of closing ranks against the common foe--Russia--too many Americans are gleefully riding behind a dismissed insubordinate Army officer and will cheer him to any reckless extreme--just so it will embarrass and harass our present Democratic President.
I did not vote for Mr. Truman; [but] shame on anybody . . . who now willfully hampers our country's foreign policy, or alienates our badly needed allies by playing party politics in our time of peril . . .
If Hero MacArthur today held General Eisenhower's assignment, he would be screaming for us to negotiate any kind of peace with Red China and pull out of the completely worthless Korean peninsula and rush every division to our really important and strategic outpost, Western Europe. But being a good soldier, Eisenhower obeys orders and stays out of party politics. All credit to him . . .
DON M. GILBREATH Marion, Ind.
Sir:
. . Whatever the merits of the pros & cons in the MacArthur-Joint Chiefs of Staff controversy, it seems to me that . . . the world must be governed if it is not to be destroyed . . . This means, of course, limited federal government for this planet . . .
PALMER VAN GUNDY La Canada, Calif.
Bunt in Korea
Sir:
The MacArthur v. Truman issue recalls a baseball anecdote . . .
The story concerns John McGraw; the occasion was a tight ball game, with the Giants one run behind in the ninth inning and a runner on first. The next batter, Casey Stengel, was ordered to bunt so as to sacrifice the runner into a position to tie the score. Stengel tried to bunt one and fouled . . . The next pitch . . . looked so good he took a full swing at it, knocked it over the fence, and won the ball game. Imagine the injured feelings of Stengel (the hero of the battle), when upon rounding third base, he heard Manager McGraw angrily bellow, "You're fined $100."
Stengel won the game by disobeying orders --but he might just as well have lost it by his action . . . The reason McGraw was so incensed was that although that game was important, even more important was the winning of the pennant . . . And no manager can win if he cannot depend upon his players carrying out the orders given them.
I believe that General MacArthur is myopically concerning himself with the Korean situation alone . . . while President Truman must concern himself with . . . the many other aspects of the global situation . . .
DAVID M. BANEN, M.D.
Belmont, Mass.
New Words for Old
Sir:
. . . Mrs. Millard V. Barton delights in applying the new word "niffle" to the occupant of the White House [TIME LETTERS, May 14]. Since she lives in Texas, a state where nearly everyone has at least some knowledge of the Spanish language, I call her attention to the very expressive word clandicar, which means "to proceed in a bungling manner, without rule or order."
H. L. FAIRFIELD
Kendall, Fla.
Sir:
Thanks to Ivor Brown who rescued the word "niffle," and thanks to Mrs. Millard V. Barton of Austin, Texas, who gladly seized the word as a ladylike name for Mr. Truman, and thanks to TIME (April 30, May 14) for publishing both wonderful events.
May I suggest a new word for the English language, Trumaniffle . . .
G. P. KURTZ
Cleveland
Sir:
. . . My father was a Southern gentleman of the old school, and although he knew nothing about penicillin, jet propulsion and atomic bombs--even in my wildest moments I could not imagine him calling the President of the United States a "niffle." We have improved in many ways on my father's mode of life, but certainly we have not improved on his simple moral code contained in the now almost forgotten Golden Rule: "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you . . ."
MCAFEE W. CULLINAN
Laredo, Texas
Sir:
. . . Just let the press and the Republicans become a little more vicious and the Democrats will have the next election in the bag.
I'm one Republican who [will] vote for Mr. Truman.
MRS. MARGARET FANDL
Allentown, Pa.
Religion in Schools
Sir:
Much credit is due to TIME for the excellent May 14 review of Henry P. Van Dusen's book God in Education. Such a book is more than welcome today when too many self-styled educators either sneer at religion or contemptuously dismiss it as a bundle of myths . . .
CHARLES A. MCCARTHY
Waban, Mass.
Sir:
. . . When religious theologians talk about teaching "ultimate truth" and "ultimate reality" to children in public schools, what do they mean? . . .
The success of the American public-school system lies in its approval by the near-unanimous consent of the people. The introduction of religious teaching into it would destroy this approval and would thus jeopardize the continued success of the system . ..
DAVID I. CAPLAN
West Lafayette, Ind.
1952 Olympic Events
Sir:
Fad-starting TIME (with its "double-breasted seersucker" et al.) had to do it again by quoting Dan Parker's suggestions for the Russians who say they will compete in the 1952 Olympic Games [Parker samples: "the heel-and-toe walkout," "the running high dudgeon"--TIME, May 7].
I offer "The stop, hit and dump," "the blabberin' throw," "the 50-league hot foot," "the fog-rolling contest," "the frisk us thorough," "the Tito-totter balance" "the atom hoard jump," and "the high-hurdle delays."
ELIZABETH TOWNER STAFFORD
Long Beach, Calif.
TV Taste
Sir:
. . .We do want TV to become a medium of education for our children, but our teenagers are embarrassed and younger offspring wide-eyed at the poor taste shown by the Barbours of One Man's Family [TIME, May 14].
We want our children to know the facts of life--not see them enacted. And we certainly don't want them to have the idea that all homes discuss sex at the breakfast or dinner tables. I greatly disagree that "the strength of the U.S. lies" in such a family as the Barbours.
DOROTHEA SOMMER
Massillon, Ohio
Exit from the Nation
Sir:
In your May 21 Press section under the heading "Exit from the Nation" you ran a report which conveyed an inaccurate impression . . . Without arguing the merits of [Editor Freda Kirchwey's] libel suit, I want to state that my decision to resign as executive editor of the Nation antedated the libel suit brought against Mr. Clement Greenberg and the New Leader, and no connection between the two actions should be implied.
HAROLD C. FIELD
Executive Editor The Nation
New York, N.Y.
International Oil
Sir:
. . . The new Iranian Premier Mohammed Mossadeq who, as correctly reported by TIME [see Cover Story], is anti-British and somewhat anti-American, is to a greater degree anti-Russian. I doubt very much that he and the Parliament or the Iranian people as a whole will allow the Communists to capitalize on the nationalization of oil in Iran.
Your views in connection with the British activities in Iran are quite accurate, but you actually cannot blame the State Department since they . . . tried to persuade Mr. Attlee during his visit to Washington approximately three months ago to reach an agreement with Iran similar to the agreement reached with King Ibn Saud by Aramco.*
In postwar years the U.S. has achieved a spectacular success in making potential allies out of bitter enemies such as Japan. There is no reason why American foreign policy should not keep the friendship of those nations who have friendly dispositions towards this country, such as Iran.
J. J. ZAND
Columbus, Ohio
Less Censorship
Sir:
Well, Oliver Twist has been finally released [TIME, May 14], although in abridged form . . . The power of the movie industry to censor, so well demonstrated in this case ... is contrary to the traditions of this country . . . The people who do such things in the name of tolerance and understanding spread anti-Semitism rather than diminish it ...
WILLIAM M. BURDETTE JR. Arlington, Va.
*Arabian American Oil Co.
This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.