AMERICA'S INTERNATIONAL IDEALS
sion ourselves. Who, then, is likely to attack the United States?
Military experts do not seem to have any unanimous opinion on this subject. In the very nature of the case, they cannot be unanimous: for no one can foretell future events, much less the events that depend upon the present uncertain character of international relations. Indeed, it is this very point that is most urged by those who are advocating military preparedness: we do not know who will strike, or when. It might be Japan, we are told; it might be Germany; indeed, it might be even Great Britain. The other day I listened lo the congressman who has been most prominent of all in the recent agitation for America's preparedness. Unequivocally, he urged that adequate preparedness means preparation against a possible attack from Great Britain. Certainly, if we are to enter the armament competition with right good will and with the purpose; of preparing ourselves against all possible contingencies, we must, with characteristic American thoroughness, be able to meet successfully the attack of any nation of the world. If the military program is to be practical at all, this is precisely what it must mean.
But, now, suppose we adopt this as our program. We are to prepare against war with Great Britain. Just what does this mean? We certainly must fortify our 3,840 miles of Canadian frontier, for no military expert can possibly doubt that Canada would be made one of the strategic bases of operations on land. We must make our army large; enough and efficient enough to withstand any invasion over this frontier. We must thoroughly fortify our extensive coast line on the Atlantic and on the Pacific. We must increase our navy to the
[29]
