18, 19 and Fight

Congress is still playing politics with the draft act. The O'Daniel amendment, disqualifying teenagers from overseas service until the completion of a year's training, can only complicate the organization of fighting units. The facts of war will not be altered; American "babes" will still be torn from their high-school teachers' arms. A few more Texas mothers may vote for "Pappy," but politics not military necessity will have called the tune. As amended the bill remains an election measure, proving to the people that Congress is allowing the Army requisite manpower, but making the proof so painless that it can not help the progress of the war. Congress has effectively postponed the controversial issue, induction of married men, until after elections by throwing a new group into the military pool, but if the O'Daniel amendment stands the new eligibles cannot be classed as military effectives. The second front, says Congress, can wait. Mr. Hitler take note.

The eighteen-nineteen year olds are glad to see the draft extension. Subject to call when they leave high-school, they will no longer be drafted when halfway through college or in the middle of an apprenticeship for war industry. Their position is clarified. Similarly, an unamended bill, by placing under the Army and Selective Service control of the entire group of military eligibles, could have made effective offensive planning possible. We are too far committed to action to allow an election minded Congress to tell our generals when and where they may use their men. The people were ready for draft extension before Congress recognized its political feasibility; they are still ready, and they want no strings attached.

Whether or not the 'teen-agers should be used immediately is a question for the Army to decide. The experience of our allies has indicated that in most instances those under twenty are less well equipped for combat service than older, more experienced men. England took its married men first, postponing until the last the use of men under twenty. Our Army might well do the same were it allowed free choice. Instead, military leaders have been forced to squabble with Congress over each new group, and Congressional hedging on the use of married men has made the use of 'teen agers an immediate necessity. Until the Army is allowed free choice from the entire field,--married or single, eighteen or over--politics rather than military need will make the choices.

The eighteen-nineteen draft is an integral part of an all-out war effort. But it is no more so than the induction of married men with or without dependents. This is the time for the Army to decide who shall go and when. It is time for a quibbling Congress to stop hamstringing military procurement, to let down the remaining bars and to allow military effectiveness to control the decisions.