Style: APA

Cited page

Citations are available only to our active members. Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

X X

Cited page

Display options
Reset

Getting US into War

By: Porter Sargent | Book details

Contents
Look up
Saved work (0)

matching results for page

Page 338
Why can't I print more than one page at a time?
While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.

short rations that the Army might have guns and tanks and airplanes. It was he who bred the generation of young fanatics in love with the art of war. It was he who seemed last week to be closing the covers on four centuries of European history."

Lives, too, will be necessary. P. J. Philip cables from Paris, "'There will be 20,000,000 dead and destruction everywhere before this business is finished', one commentator said today". (N.Y. Times, June 2) June 7, 1940


NOTES
(1)
"The cost of the United States of entry into another World War would very likely be double the cost of the last World War, and would result in a 'lowered standard of living for generations to come', it is estimated in a somber study of modern war costs by the National Economy League. The League, which is identified with very conservative political opinion here, suggests that the annual expenditure for direct war costs alone probably would amount to $30,000,000,000 as compared with $15,000,000,000 for the war in 1917-18; and that the public debt, now near the legal limit of $45,000,000,000 might well reach $70,000,- 000,000 to $75,000,000,000 in the first year and pass $100,000,000,000 in the second." ( Chr Sci Monitor, Nov. 13, 1939)

London cable to N. Y. Times, Feb. 4, 1941, "Cost of war to Britain $16,000,- 000,000 for year", is about the same as the U. S. is planning to spend. We are good spenders. World War I cost America almost as much as it did Britain. Britain may be able to unload a larger part of the cost on us. They notify us that for the 60 days ending March 31, they will need 600,000 pounds or about something short of $3,000,000.

The New England Letter of the First National Bank of Boston, early in 1941, said, "The present war is the costliest conflict in history. British expenditures are placed at nearly 15 billion dollars a year. On a population basis, this would be the equivalent of about 45 billion dollars annually for the United States". Paul Mallon, Oct. 25, 1940, reported, "Defense commission publicity . . . disclosed expenditures are now running at a rate of $200,000,000 a month. Last year, long before the defense commission was established, the rate of expenditure was $100,000,000 a month. Current plans contemplate a hopeful outlay of $1,000,- 000,000 a month, from 13 to 18 months hence".

(2)
British Major L. L. B. Angas in his digest #70, Jan. 4, 1941, tells us, "Invasion of Germany would however require an army and air force at least double the size of Germany's. Say 8 to 14 million men. The British Empire might provide half (the Empire has only 75 million whites), so U.S.A. (and or Russia) would have to provide the other half, say 4 to 7 million men. This being so, if the Washington plan (eventually) is to smash Hitler completely, America will have to build an army of 50,000 tanks and say 7 million men (half to be kept in America), and not just rely on the hope or sporting chance that an air force of

-338-

Select text to:

Select text to:

  • Highlight
  • Cite a passage
  • Look up a word
Learn more Close
Loading One moment ...
of 640
Highlight
Select color
Change color
Delete highlight
Cite this passage
Cite this highlight
View citation

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?

Questia is operated by Cengage Learning. Copyright © 2013. All rights reserved.

The Questia advertising network includes: