THE NOME NUGGET
Published Monday, Wednesday and Friday by The
NOME PUBLISHING CO.
Nome, Alaska
Telephone: Main 125 P. O. Box 618
SI.50 PER MONTH S16.00 A YEAR
W. A. and EMILY BOUCHER.Editor*
Entered as second class matter October 14, 1943, at the postoffiee
at Nome, Alaska, under the Act of March 3, 1879.
Friday, August 8, 1947
How We Could Stop The Russians Cold
(The Denver'Post)
PURGING ALL OPPOSITION, Russia is forging the
steel links of a totalitarian front stretching from the
Baltic to the Mediterranean. Then, with all disaffection
silenced by the strangling grip of Communist police;
Russia will be ready for the next move: Infiltration and
conquest of the west. We are watching the plot unfold.
The urgent question is whether the Truman doctrine, as
now exercised, will be enough to stop it short of war.
In the Truman doctrine, America seeks with the force
of her unequaled economic strength to wage a counter
offensive against Russia’s aggressive totalitarianism.
Our dollars—translated into food, clothing, fuel and
machinery for the physical revival of Europe—are a
powerful weapon. But are they enough?
Many Americans, some of whom are attracted to the
appeasement school of Henry Wallace, are deeply con
cerned at what they fear to be a lack of “idealism” in
the Truman doctrine. There is some foundation for this
anxiety.
Our fault, however, is not the lack of idealism, for
that is the very core of American foreign policy—the
ideal that men and nations must be free. Need we cite
the history, for instance, of America’s China policy
wherein this country has for many decades stood as a
protector of Chinese sovereignty? An historic apprecia
tion that aggression anywhere threatens our own secur
ity accounts m large measure for this policy, and in that
sense we are pursuing self-interest. But there is a strong
underlying theme of altruism in our attitude toward
other nations which at times has led critics among us to
call America “Uncle Sap.”
Our fault is rather that in the present crisis we are
not making effective use of this idealism. In our great
strength we talk too much of dollars and not enough of
the rightness and justice of our position. In so doing we
are neglecting what should be our strongest lance.
We need to fix clearly and firmly in the knowledge
of the world that ours, is a fight for freedom and justice.
We need to make that the rallying point for nations of
good will. We need to give the world the assurance that
a common front of free men and free nations is stronger
than the forces of slave states. If we do these things we
can stop Russia cold.
We have talked in threatening terms of haling Russia
before the United Nations. We should cease this hesitant
bluster and do so. To be sure, such action would shake
U. N. to its foundations and could well topple it. But, if
U. N. cannot stop Russia, it is time we quit kidding our
selves and rebuild it into the kind of organization which
can.
A showdown with Russia is inevitable. We should
force it now with our trumps of might and right. To that
end, we suggest this program:
That the United States obtain a special session of the
United Nations assembly—not the security council, but
the entire membership—and before this body lay the
whole record of Russian perfidity and aggression.
That we press for a clear determination of Russian
guilt.
That we thereupon take leadership in a denunciation
of Russia by all nations of good will,, establishing a line
up of free peoples through which to exert all possible
moral pressure on the Soviets.
That we confront Russia with a choice in such terms
that she must either foreswear her present course of ag
gression ot face expulsion from the United Nations.
That in the subsequent event of Russia’s expulsion or
forced resignation we reorganize the United Nations
I THEY’RE BITING T
wm, wvf ^rwnotis,
4f41?iN6$,tTe.
along the lines possible among nations of democratic,
libertarian outlook.
Finally, that we devote the full strength of America
to aiding the reconstruction of friendly nations and to
! building up the power and prosperity of the democratic
bloc.
We advocate this program as a democratic answer to
totalitarian aggression. Through these measures we can
give backbone and purpose to nations which otherwise
are doomed.
By compelling a showdown with Russia we can, if
necessary, force her from the family of decent nations.
The appeasers will be horrified at such a suggestion. But
now, when the power is still on our side, is the fateful,
moment.
Russia and her satellites would be morally and econo
mically isolated. The united world of free nations would
become so overwhelmingly powerful that Russia would
be stopped by the same fear she now inspires among her
divided victims. Nations now under Russian domination
through fear would be given the courage to break away.
And, finally, there would be the hope that a chastened
Russia might seek re-entry into the world family.
Drastic? Of course it is. But we have listened too long
to the sirens of compromise and appeasement. Society
does not compromise with rape; nations cannot compro
mise with the mass rape of aggression.
Murder In Palestine
(The Denver Post)
THE JEWISH TERRORISTS in Palestine have struck
another blow against the Zionist cause, a cause that has
been much crippled in recent months because of their
criminal activities.
By murdering two British army sergeants in cold
blood the terrorists should completely negate any sym
pathy that they have built up. In the past they have
killed British soldiers and others, but these were acts
of violence, which could be construed as war. This
smacks of Nazi methods.
The Irgun Zvai Leumi claims that these were “execu
tions” in retaliation for the “murder” of three terrorists
who were convicted and hanged this week by order of a
British military court. The three terrorists were tried
for participation in acts of violence—violence that has
cost hundreds of British, Jewish and Arab-lives since
the end of the war.
But the two British sergeants, Clifford Martin and
Mervin Paice, had comitted no crime; unless, like the
I. Z. L., one believes that belonging to the British army
in Palestine is a crime. They were kidnaped by the ter
rorist*1 at Nathanya on July 12. Now the terrorists have
“tried” them, found them guilty of being members of a
force “illegally occupying Palestine” and finally mur
dered them.
If the terrorists were recognized as a military force,
and even if they were subject to the provisions of the
Geneva convention as they claim, this murder would
still be a crime. Since the end of the war scores of Jap
anese and Germans have been executed by the Allies for
killing prisoners in cold blood.
This case is exactly the same, and
it, too, is murder.
The terrorists and their adher
ents in this country have attempt
ed to canonize Dov Bela Gruner, a
terrorist who was executed earlier
this year. Many Jews, and many
non-Jewish Americans, believe
that the British martyrized him. If
Gruner was a martyr, he was still
a criminal, for he had broken the
laws of the land. But these two
British sergeants will be martyrs
in the true sense, for they com
mitted no crime whatsoever.
This “sentence" and the "execu
tion" of these two men will force
Americans to stop and think.
American author-playwright Ben
Hecht and his contributors to ter
rorism should think hardest, for
in their newspaper, magazine and
rally campaign they have solicited
funds that enabled the I. Z. L. and
Stern gang to continue their terror
campaign.
The Jewish National council
broadcast a warning to the terror
ists that any act of retaliation
would be an unpardonable sin as
well as a crime against Palestine
Jewry. The Vaad Lemui is obso
lutely right. Such action will do
nothing but hurt the cause of the
Jews—and continuation ot terror
ism may well leave the Jews wth
every man’s hand turned against
them.
That’s That
By BRUCE GUSTIN
• * ——
Russia’s veto of the United Na
tions security council decision to
set up a Balkans commission was
the last straw. Not only did it
block any action by the interna
tional organization to restore
peaceful relations in the “cockpit
of Europe.” but it showed the ut
ter futility of trying to get along
with the Russians. They talk
peace. But every move they make
is calculated to foment discord.
The inescapable conclusion is that
they don’t want to get along with
anybody, especially the United
States.
The Russian veto— the eleventh
Moscow has used to hamstring the
United Nations ‘experiment—was
exercised in the most exasperating
manner imaginable. It appeared to
bo a calculated attempt to aggra
vate and antagonize. The resolu
tion was voted on. paragraph by
paragraph Instead of announcing
the Soviet veto at the star , Rus
sian delegafr Or^m,Tko abstained
from voting until each paragraph
had been approved by an over
whelming majority.
Western railroads say that 28
I of the 44 rule changes demanded
by operating unions would require
them to. pay more money for the
same or less work. As an example.
they cite the union demand for
one full crew for each Diesel
power unit used on a train. They
say that would mean “a freight
train hauled by a four-unit Diesel
would have to carry four engin
eers. four firemen, four conduc
tors and at least eight brakemen,
or a total of twenty instead of
five.” A more flagrant example of
“featherbeddiYig” can hardly be
conceived.
This demand for a full crew for
each Diesel unit seems to bp one
of the things prohibited bv the
Taft-IIartley act. That measure
classes as an “unfair labor prac
tice” anv “attempt to cause an em
ployer to pay for services which
are not performed or not to be per
formed.” When one crew can han
dle a four-unit Diesel locomotive
just as easily as one unit, three
extra crews would not perform
any necessary services. They
would merely add to the operating