University of Wisconsin Stevens Point - Horizon / Iris Yearbook (Stevens Point, WI)

Page 11 text:

MILITARISTIC AND PACIFISTIC - - - IRRATIONAL? BY LAURA THILL CATHIE MORTENSON NANCY CORDY War is a game people have been playing since time began. At first, war was recognized as a survival game. One individual possessed a necessity which another individual wanted. The result was a fight to acquire a desired object — at any and all expense. Next, war became a game of you have it and I want it.” War then progressed to a game of corporate interest and business ethics. The contemporary position which war maintains may appear precarious but the inevitability of war still exists and will continue to exist until human beings adopt a more satisfactory method of solving their disputes. The guidelines for the war game are not structured by the gun and bomb or knife and blood format. War involves any dispute, psychological or physical, between two human beings. In an attempt to present several divergent views on war and peace, or militarism verus pacifism on this campus, interviews were conducted with Lt. Col. Neil O'Keefe of the Military Science Department: James Missey of the English Department: and David Wrone of the History Department. The inverviews were conducted separately to avoid rhetorical debate. The general format of the questions presenter! to the three men were essentially the same. Changes occurred only where a question was’not applicable to the particular interviewee. IRIS: What made you choose the military as a career? O’KEEFE: Having entered the service as an ROTC graduate. I found that the responsibilities given to me as a commissioned officer were challenging and the positions held, interesting and rewarding. Military life appealed to me in most all respects. Therefore, based upon actual experience. I chose to make the service my career. Although pay and other benefits are not as great as found in many other professional fields, they are adequate. One particularly attractive aspect, of course, is the opportunity to travel and meet other people from different lands and cultures. There is also a sense of pride and satisfaction that one feels in serving our country, which is much the same as that realized bv teachers, doctors, politicians and other similar vocations. The past 19 years on active service have been most gratifying and satisfying, and. because of these and many other favorable qualities. I would certainly select the same profession again, given the opportunity to do so. IRIS: What incident or incidents caused you to follow-pacifism? MISSEY: I suppose I was first turned on to pacifism when, as a freshman in college. I was rather active in the Methodist Church. I met a number of people in that context. both students and ministers, who favorably impressed me by the qualities of their lives: and so I was in a sense forced to examine their beliefs and to revaluate my own spekticism concerning pacifism. I should add that, though I was first introduced to pacifism within Christianity. I do not believe the doctrine of nonviolence (which I tend to use interchangeably with pacifism) is confined to that religion: indeed. I no longer call mself a Christian. NEIL L. O'KEEFE r LIEUTENANT COLONEL. Corps oP Engine |u •PROFESSOR OF MILITARY SCIEMCE 7

Page 10 text:

HISTORY OF ROTC AT WSU-SP BY SANDY HEMAUER A Reserve Officers Training Corps (ROTC) was initiated on the WSU-SP campus in the fall semester. 1968. As stated in the 1968 catalog. “WSU-SP and the United States Army will jointly offer military training leading to a commission as an officer in the Regular Army or the reserve components of the Army.” The ROTC program has been under consideration for this campus since February 2, 1966, when Dr. Kurt R. Schmeller, Assistant to the President, inquired of Robert S. McNamara. Secretary of Defense, regarding the establishment of a ROTC program here. At that time only one such program existed in the WSU system which was an Air Force ROTC unit at Superior, initiated in 1947. From Schmeller, the matter was handed to Acting President Haferbecker, May 23, 1967. At this time Colonel John R. McLean, Professor of Military Science at UW-Madison and ROTC coordinator for the Fifth Army indicated an interest in opening up additional units on WSU campuses. Acting on this request, Haferbecker on May 26 wrote to the Commanding General of the Fifth Army stating in part “We know that the students generally in the Wisconsin State Universities would like to see such programs established on several of our campuses.’' Further information and an application was received. The Academic Council at WSU-SP voted on June 19, 1967, 12 in favor, 2 opposed, to support the application of the university for a ROTC unit here in the fall of 1969. At a regular faculty meeting on October 5, 1967, Haferbecker reported on the application for ROTC. A motion that the faculty recommend withdrawal of the application by the Acting President was discussed at length. The motion was defeated, however, by a vote of 93 to 68. On November 24, 1967, notice was received from the Secretary of the Army, Stanley R. Resor, that WSU-SP had been selected as a senior ROTC unit. Enrollment was to begin for the fall semester. 1968. On January 30, 1968, Haferbecker appointed 6 faculty members and 1 student senate representative to a Special ROTC Curriculum Committee. This committee held several open meetings between February 12 and March 27. On April 5, 1968. the committee submitted its recommendations to the Faculty Curriculum Committee which approved the ROTC curriculum proposals on April 17. Copies of the proposals were distributed to the entire faculty. The ROTC curriculum was considered by the faculty at its regular meeting of May 2, 1968. After extended discussion, the curriculum was approved by a vote of 67 to 52. The ROTC curriculum was offered concurrently with regular undergraduate courses in the fall, 1968. The curriculum provided a course of military training consisting of two years basic and two years advanced study. As stated in the 1968 catalog: “The training is designed to prepare students to enter their military service in a leadership capacity as commissioned officers and to lay the foundation for future Army leaders in time of emergency.” During the advanced course the cadets receive an allowance of $50.00 per month. During a six-week advanced summer camp period the cadet is paid $208.00 per month, based on one-half the pay received by a 2nd lieutenant. A student may apply during his sophomore year for the advanced course. A six-week basic summer camp previous to the junior year satisfies the two-year basic course requirement for those who are not enrolled in ROTC during the freshman and sophomore years. Cadets who complete the ROTC program receive 16 ROTC credits applicable towara a degree. In the fall of 1968 the Military Science Department had four faculty members. ROTC enrollment at the beginning of the semester was approxmiately 200 freshmen in the basic course and 14 in the advanced course. Approximately 125 freshmen remained at the close of the semester. Eleven seniors comprised the first ROTC graduating class in spring, 1970. In the fall semester, 1970, the ROTC program enrolled approximately 140 freshmen and retained a total of approximately 65 upperclassmen. Four faculty members remained. No major changes have been made in the program since its initiation. ROTC also offers extra-curricular activities to its members, the largest organizations being the Pershing Rifles and the Rangers. ROTC also sponsors a Military Ball each spring. Currently, ROTC senior units exist on approximately 279 United States campuses. Approximately 750 junior units are in operation at the high school level. ROTC enrollment at the college level has generally declined over the nation during the last few years. However, possible increases are in sight with proposals to raise the ROTC scholarship quota and to double the monthly allowance to $100.00. Lee Sherman Dreyfus, WSU-SP President, currently represents the Fifth Army on the Army Advisory Panel on ROTC Affairs to which he was appointed in October, 1969. 6

Page 12 text:

IRIS: Whore did your interest in the irrational originate? WRONE: My development of aware- ness of the question of peace and war gradually emerged out of scholarly pursuits on the source of the irrational in modern society. IRIS: What is your opinion of the current “peace movement ? Do you think it is effective? MISSEY: The peace movement, of course, is a mixed bag: some | arts of what many people think to be the peace movement are not anti-war but anti-imperialist. In any case. I do not support those elements of the anti-war movement which condone violence, for violence doesn't stop violence but only extends its area. Nor do I support the moderate wing of the movement, which believes in petitioning and writing letters of the government and in electing so-called peace candidates to office. People need to take a much more active control of their lives, including the making of peace. Hence, what I do support is vigorous, nonviolent direct action, like draft resistance, war-tax resistance, fasting, strike's, boycotts, and nonviolent obstruction of violence. As to whether I think the peace movement has been effective, it’s very difficult to say. On the one hand, the Indochina War has not been stopped, but on the other hand the War might've been greatly escalated on both sides if there had not been a strong peace movement in this country to check our government. (The movement's ability to restrain the war-making of our government has indirectly been a brake on the other side.) But the questions of effectiveness are ultimately not the right questions, even though some of the things I said in the preceding paragraph may imply that I think effectiveness is an important consideration. One can never know what the consequences of an act will be. so that whether to commit the act must be determined in terms of its intrinsic rightness or wrongness rather than in terms of what its effects will be. WRONE: I group the peace movement with the military and feel it is possessed of precisely similar principles that would require lengthy discussion for a full understanding of the point. To my mind, the peace movement with its historical antecedents largely accounts for the continued existence of war. In addition to a failure to be well read, peace advocates center in false questions such as the role of the individual in society, the crude emoting over men and incidenfs and the worship of their ideas like a revealed religion. Their (peace advocates) definition of peace is false and what they seek and call peace is not peace. But. if one’s heart and mind are suffused with the cause, all criticism must be mistaken, they aver. O'KEEFE: The question is very broad. The divergent views of the many people who are. in varying degrees, associated with the peace movement are often complex and frequently contradictory. We must be very circumspect about generalizations. My guess is. however, that for every member” who is sincere. informer! and motivated by the highest ideals, there is a corrupt counterpart whose motives are false, deceitful or even sinister. Are they effective? To the extent that their agitation makes us think, invites self-examination, makes us review our positions, there is a great deal of good done. But “they should do the same. I have no doubt that the movement, on occasion, has harmed the public interest of the United States and the so-called Free World. Constructive criticism should be their goal. IRIS: What is your opinion of U.S. involvement in Southeast Asia? WRONE: America is in Southeast Asia to impose an American empire and develop a bastion from which to continue a twenty-five year old attack upon Red China. Democracy and “freedom are hollow dogma to allow the intellectuals and liberals to apologize for the attack and a method of brainwashing the American public. Needless to state, we do not require an empire to maintain a decent American life; we need one to maintain a military machine to attack China. I also “feel the thrust of Jim Garrison's book. Heritage of Stone, is sound: Military-business groups murdered John Kennedy because he was stopping the American military and withdrawing us (America) from Southeast Asia. O’KEEFE: The answer to the question of whether we should have intervened in Viet Nam or not will be discussed. debated and argued for many years to come. I'm sure certain decisions made by Presidents Eisenhower. Kennedy and Johnson would have been different if it were possible to view the entire situation in retrospect. No matter what has taken place in the past. I do think now is the time for the United States to disengage. MISSEY: It’s wrong. IRIS: Do you favor the troop withdrawal as an effective means of ending the war? Why or why not? O'KEEFE: I believe President Nixon's timetable will end. or all but end. U.S. ground participation in Viet Nam. This plan is rational, feasible and desirable. Accordingly, by June. 1972. only a relatively small number of American troops will remain and the burden of self-defense will be properly borne by South Vietnamese troops. We have bought them time, and I feel history will bear this out. Hopefully, the North Vietnamese will be reluctant to deal with a strengthened South and will seek negotiation. WRONE: I view this question dif- ferently than the militant and social pacifists. I would neither fight nor pull out. I would change the present organizational structure in Viet Nam from one for war to one for genuine peace. I would pump $100 billion into Viet Nam and move in a million more men and make that distant area, when we finished, the finest place to live on the face of the earth. And. it would be Viet Nam for the Vietnamese. I would use unemployed engineers, technicians, craftsmen and scientists, sustained by the military supply systems to build good, true and extremely beautiful roads, homes, hospitals, libraries, parks and so forth. We, as a nation, have the capacity to do this. Certainly we have the idealism. This would help remove the guilt upon the nation's conscience caused by that bitter conflict. You note I did not mention the educational system of Viet Nam. I would leave that entirely to the Vietnamese as we have no one in America capable to advise them or to assist them in building a good system. MISSEY: I believe we should immediately and unconditionally withdraw from Indochina because it would be morally right to do so. As to whether or not our withdrawal would end the war. I cannot say with absolute certainty; though I'm pretty certain that it would. Ideally, the decision to withdraw should be made by the men in the 8