(UNTITLED)

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP66B00403R000200160051-5
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 14
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 29, 2004
• Sequence Number: 51
• Publication Date: August 7, 1964
• Content Type: OPEN

1964
Approved Forl Release 2005/02/10 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000200160051-5
17857,
Tense Treaty In the protection of their free- larity between the Cuban resolution on "Wayne, there Is no difference between
dom as a contribution to international peace. the one hand and the Formosa, the the
it pledges military action only to resist ag- Middle East, and the pending resolu- and thetposition that you have taken
gression against American forces in that tions on the other hand. consistentl
area. Of course, the President has authority y with regard to the other
to respond to attacks upon American forces But returning to the comment of the resolutions. No one can really quarrel
without any approval in advance by Con- Washington Post that there is no sub- with your conclusion that the joint reso-
gress. So the resolution means only a re- stance In Senator MORSE's charge that lution does go beyond the inherent au-
commitment of the Nation to the policy it the resolution amounts to a "predated thority of the President to act In the
has been following-an almost unanimous declaration of war," I should like to read self-defense of our country and does
recommitment in the face of the inexplicable for the benefit of that unenlightened vest in him authority to proceed to carry
North Vietnamese challenge. editorial writer of the Washington
This means of reasserting the national Post out a campaign that amounts in fact
will, far short of a declaration of war, follows page 2 of the joint resolution: to the waging of war."
sound precedents set in other crises. Presi- Resolved by the Senate and the House of Mr. President, I do not believe we
dent Johnson noted in his message to Con- Representatives of the United States of should do it. It is not necessary to do
gress that similar resolutions had been America in Congress assembled, That the it. There is inherent power in the Presi-
passed at the request of President Eisen- Congress approves and supports the determi- dent as Commander in Chief under the
hower in connection with the threat to nation of the President- Constitution to meet an attack Immedi-
Formosa in 1955 and the threat to the. diddle Not the Congress, but of the Presi ately, and then come to the Congress of
East in 1957. The same course was followed dent-
in 1962 at the request of President Kennedy the United States asking for a declara-
to meet the missile threat in Cuba. None as Commander in Chief, to take all necessary tion of war. We should require those
of these emergencies led to war. Rather, measures to repel any armed attack against steps, rather than give the President
the firm action that, this country took inter- the forces of the United States and to pre- blanket authority under the joint reso-
rupted Communist maneuvers that might vent further aggression. lution to .otherwise have led to war. proceed to wage war without
Congress ought to be very pleased with The joint resolution thus gives the a declaration of war.
the now firm establishment of this mech- President warmaking power. Ah, but it may be said, and is said, by
anism for meeting an emergency with a I shall come to another section of the some in conversations with me, "But,
united front. Reliance solely upon the power resolution same item in a moment. The WAYNE, a President would not do that
of Congress to declare war as a last, resort Commander in Chief, the President of for very long."
would not be appropriate in these days of the United States, haft the inherent con- I do not care whether he does it for a
repeated crises short of war. A resolution stitutional power immediately to defend short time or a long time. It is not
of support for the executive arm in meeting the United States in case of an attack, necessary for him to do it, so long as he
an emergency has all the virtue of rallying but he does not have the inherent power has the inherent authority to meet at-
national
strength behind a firm policy--
without taking king the calamitous step of war r after that Immediate defense to proceed tack with immediate self-defense ac-
in this nuclear age. We surmise that the to make war. That Is the distinction tions.
almost unanimous sentiment behind this which this unenlightened editorial writer As I said In 1955, I believe it is im-
resolution on Capitol Hill reflects apprecia- of the Washington Post has never portant in these trying times that we not
tion for the President's sharing of responsi- grasped. extend and expand the authority of the
bility as well as support for the tough Mr. President, the right of immediate President of the United States beyond
punishment for aggression that he initiated, defense Is something quite different from the limits of the Constitution.
Mr. MORSE. The Washington Post the right to proceed to lay out a cam- It may be said that If the President
has demonstrated in editorial after edi- paign of war. Under the joint resolu- should commit an unconstitutional act
torial that it does not have a good con- tion the President would be given the under the joint resolution, or if the joint
stitutional lawyer on its editorial staff. authority to go beyond immediate self- resolution in effect, as argued by the
The editorials published in the news- defense of the United States and pro- Senator from Oregon, is an attempt to
paper demonstrated that fact constantly, ceed with a war campaign. That is why give to the President an unconstitutional
In an editorial which appeared in this I say today, as I said in 1955, and as I power, he can be checked. I wish I
morning's issue of the newspaper there said at the time of the Middle East res- could say that he could be. The diffi-
appears the following statement: olution, that such resolutions constitute a culty in relation to these constitutional
There is no substance in Senator MoasE's predated declaration of war. The questions as they involve the Presidency
charge that the resolution amounts to a Washington Post editorial writers ought of the United States is that we do not
"predated declaration of war." to consult with Senators who occupy high have a procedure for having them tested
One wonders whether. or not the edi- positions in the Senate on the other side in the U.S. Supreme Court. That has
torial writer has ever read the joint reso- of the issue in connection with the de- been the subject of great discussion,
lution. No one can read the joint reso- fense activities of the country. They concern, and debate among constitu-
lution and the authority proposed to be might be surprised to learn that they tional lawyers for many decades. It is
given the President in the joint resolu- are not quarreling with the Senator from difficult to bring the President of the
tion without recognizing that it would Oregon in regard to the effect of the United States before the U.S. Su-
clearly authorize the President to pro- joint resolution. The joint resolution preme Court. Our constitutional fathers
ceed to follow whatever courses of action does propose to give to the President provided for other procedural checks
are necessary in his opinion; and such of the United States authority beyond upon the President of the United States,
action would.constitute authority to con- the inherent authority that he already one of which is impeachment, which,
duct war. possesses to act immediately in national of course, is unthinkable when we
I should like to make an additional self-defense, have a President who seeks only In
comment on a statement in the editorial Mr. President, that Is a very important the exercise of. his powers-though he
in reference to resolutions passed by pre- distinction in constitutional law. The may be mistaken in regard to having ex-
vious Congresses. In the body of the Senator from Oregon repeats that, under ceeded an inherent power-to protect
editorial the statement as made: the Constitution, the President has no the interest of the United States. But
President Johnson noted in his message power to wage war until a declaration that is a check that is provided In the
to Congress that similar resolutions had been of war Is passed by the Congress. The Constitution. Then, of- course, we check
passed at the request of President Eisen- joint resolution is a contravention of the President in regard to the purse
hower in connection with the threat to For- article I, section 8, of the Constitution, strings by way of appropriations.
mosa in 1955 and the threat to the Middle just as the Formosa resolution and the We have the authority, of course, to 1957. na t in at the The same course Kennedy Middle East resolution were contraven- check the President by way of appropria-
1962 request of Preside y tions of the Constitution and caused the tions, with his ancillary check on Con-
to meet the missile threat in Cuba. senior Senator from Oregon in the de- gress of the veto. It is not impossible to
The editorial writer apparently had bate on those two resolutions to take a eventually get a case before the Supreme
not read, or certainly had not read re- stand In opposition. As one of the Court involving the warmaking powers
cently before he wrote that editorial, the Armed Services Committee leaders of of the President, but the legal road could
Cuban resolution, for there Is no sin-d- the Senate told me this morning, be long and tortuous. The time con-
Approved For Release 2005/02/10 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000200160051-5
 17858 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE August 7
sumed would make the question moot by the Constitution. I am for giving the In the resolution before the Senate-
the time , it was decided as far as the White House no more power than the and I shall read the section to which I
emergency is concerned will give rise to Constitution gives him, have referred and another section mo-
the issue in the first instance. I have heard sincere colleagues on the mentarily-the President of the United
When Congress passes a joint resolu- floor of the Senate-and I respect States would be given power to make war
tion such as this, it is practically impos- them-differ with me in regard to the in relation to operative facts not now in
sible-in fact, I think it impracticable- effect of the joint resolution. There are existence, but which may come into ex-
procedurally to have the power checked, also colleagues on the other side of the istence in futuro. That cannot be recon-
on constitutional grounds, before the U.S. issue who have come to me and said, ciled with article I, section 8 of the Con-
Supreme. Court. I do not know, and I as did one who discussed it with me this stitution.
know of no constitutional lawyer who morning, "Wayne, there is no doubt as For the education of the unenlightened
has ever been able to point out, a pro- to the effect of the resolution that you editor of the Washington Post who wrote
cedure by which we could bring the are pointing out, and that you pointed the ignorant editorial in respect to this
President before the Court on the charge out in 1955. It bothered me in 1955; but constitutional point, I hope he will re-
that he was making war unponstitu- we have every reason to. count on the read article I, section 8 of the Constitu-
tionally. I can hear the Court, in refus- fact that the President of the United tion, and that he will read again-assum-
ing jurisdiction, say, "Congress will have States will not abuse the power." ing that he ever read the resolution be-
to follow the procedures set out in the Mr. President, I do not think he would fore he wrote the editorial-the section
Constitution for checking the President." deliberately abuse the power, but he to which I have referred and read, and
So I am concerned about the resolution could most sincerely exercise the power which I repeat. That part of the joint
in respect to its giving to the President in a manner that would result in great resolution reads:
what I honestly and sincerely believe is damage to this Republic. The Congress approves and supports the
an unconstitutional power-that is, the There is an elementary rule of law determination of the President, as com-
power to make war without a declaration which states that when we come to deal mander in Chief, to take all necessary meas-
of war. It feeds a political trend in this with procedural matters, if a procedure ures to repel any armed attack against the
country that needs to be checked. For is subject to abuse we had better change forces of. the United States and to prevent
some time past in this Republic we have the procedure. further aggression.
been moving in the direction of a gov- My majority leader, who always is Let us analyze that sentence for a
ernntent by executive supremacy. courteous to me and was exceedingly moment. Let us analyze that part of
It is very, interesting to listen to the courteous to me in arranging the for- the sentence that deals with the inherent
arguments that one hears for extending mat for this debate; has heard me say power of any commander in chief, any
and expanding the power of the White many times as we have served together President, to react immediately in. the
House. It is exeremely important-and in this body that we should never for- defense of this Republic. That part of
I speak, soberly and out of, a depth of get that our substantive rights are never the sentence is not needed. He has that
great sincerity-that we never grant a any better, and can never be any better, power now. If there is to be read into
single power to any President, I care not than our procedural rights. Our pro- that part of the sentence which starts
who he is, that in any way cannot be cedural rights determine our substantive on line 4-"to take all necessary
reconciled with that precious funda- rights. There are no substantive rights measures to repel any armed attack
mental foundation of our Republic; unless there are procedures for imple- against the forces of the United
namely, a system of three coordinate and menting them. States"-authority to commit an act of
coequal branches of Government. I have said many times-and the aggression, preventive in nature, it goes
It is dangerous to the freedoms and statement should be applied to this is- beyond the Constitution.
liberties of the American people to vest sue, because it is applicable-let me de- That was my argument in 1955. How
in any President, at any time, under any termine the procedure of any human well I remember it. In 1955 I partici-
circumstances, power that exceeds the institution or the administration of any pated in the same format of committee
constitutional concept of three coordi- law, and I will determine all the sub- organizalton in which I took part yester-
nate and coequal branches of Govern- stantive rights anyone may have under day; namely, a joint meeting of the
ment. that law, that tribunal, or that admin- Armed Services Committee and the For-
Istrative body. Let me determine the eign Relations Committee. I opposed
The American people will quickly lose For-
their The Amer is you pl not stop feeding lose of any courtroom, and I will the Formosa resolution. My recollection
the rrend toward Government nme t p cedine g determine all the substantive rights that is that in committee in 1955 two of us
t et supremacy: In r opiniby execu- on, the can be adjudicated in that courtroom." took that position. When we came to
joint upremacy would do just exactly Although some critics will say that the floor of the Senate, my recollection solution that nt It would give to the just exactly this principle involves a legalistic ab- is that I was supported by a third mem-
theUnited States v authority wof straction, nevertheless the great ? prin- ber, as I said last night, the great Sen-
th Unit'e eSt, he an a tht need, which, s any ciples of so-called legalistic abstraction ator from New York, Herbert Lehman;
sof the imagination. He has in- are principles that determine, in the last and I believe we ended in 1955 with
stretch t rent power to react, in the self-defense analysis, whether one remains a free man three Senators voting against the reso-
herent nr not This i
t
a......._..., a .L_ _ ..
s
rue
the Constitution and the laws of our speak for itself-I said, as I say now, that
It is particularly essential that we country determine our substantive rights I was standing in a position on the floor
continue to require a President of the as freemen. of the.Senate in which a few other liber-
United States to conform to article I, In my judgment, the pending joint als had stood throughout the history of
section 8, of the Constitution, in regard resolution tinkers with and impairs the this great parliamentary body. Like
to making war, and that we continue to great procedural rights of the American them I was confronted with the choice
hold any President-I care not who he people written in article I, section 8 of of telling the American people what I
is-undex the strictest restraint with re- the Constitution-namely, that the was satisfied they were entitled to know
gard to the making of war. power and the right to declare war is about their foreign policy, and run the
We have entered an era of civiliza- vested in the Congress, and not in the risk of violating the rules of secrecy of
tion in which an unconstitutional act of President of the United States. the Senate, thereby risking the discipline
war on the part of a President of the War cannot be declared speculatively; of the Senate, or failing in my obliga-
United States can lead to nuclear war -war cannot be declared in future under tion to tell the American people things
and the end of .this Republic, no matter article I, section 8 of the Constitution. that I thought they were entitled to
how sincere a President may be in. his War cannot be declared to meet. hypo- know in regard to the foreign policy of
intentions in respect to exercising the thetical situations yet to arise on the the country and. avoid running the risk
power to make,war. horizons of the world. War is declared of being, disciplined by the Senate.
We need to be on guard in respect to in relation to existing operative facts of If Senators will read that speech they
vesting power in the White House. The the moment of the call for a declaration 'will see that I said I thought I could give
White House has plenty of power under of war. the American people what they should
Approved For Release 2005/02/10 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000200160051-5
 1964 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE 17859
be warned about within.the rules of the the Constitution. All that the President after Pearl Harbor, in 1941, obtain from
Senate, without subjecting myself to needs to do is to come before Congress Congress a declaration of war. What
Senate discipline. Senators, will find and ask for a declaration of war. He has more is needed?
that I saidT-I paraphrase the speech, but inherent authority to meet an emergency A constitutional principle is involved.
accurately: that requires national self-defense action It is dangerous to give to any President
I wish to tell the American people that prior to the time he gets to the Congress." an unchecked power, after the passage
this is a preventive war resolution; and if Senators will note in the RECORD that of a joint resolution, to make war. Con-
any Senator has any question about it, let -I used the beginning of the war with sider the procedural complications that
him go to the Foreign Relations Committee -
____, ".., ..
-
I
l
Roosevelt exercised the power as Com- takes in the conduct of a personal war-
Who was then John Foster Dulles- mander in Chief to defend this country for it would be a Presidential war at that
and the testimony of the Chairman of the in national self defense, but he came to point, How would the President be
Joint Chiefs of Staff of the Military Estab- Congress for a declaration of war, stopped? He could not be stopped. Con-
lishment- I made that argument in 1955. I re- sider what would happen to this Repub-
Who was then Admiral Radford. peated it in summary form at the time lie if we got into that kind of conflict
I said: of the Middle East difficulty, and I am with the President in carrying out the
If Senators will read that testimony, they summarizing it again in this historic joint resolution.
will know that behind this resolution is the debate.
proposal that the Military Establishment and I have heard no answer in all the in-
those in charge of American foreign policy tervening years to the constitutional
are to be given the authority to make a point that I now raise, and of which the
strike against the mainl
d
f
C
an
o
.
hina before editor of the Washington Post who wrote and security of the area is reasonably as-
China makes a strike against the United the editorial this morning is ab sured by international conditions created by
States. Such a strike would be an act of Ysmally action of the United Nations or otherwise,
aggression. Such a strike, would be an act ignorant. except that it may be terminated earlier by
of war. Authorization for such a strike in Mr. President, this joint resolution is concurrent resolution of the Congress.
the Formosa resolution amounts to seeking not needed for the defense of the Re-
to give to the Military Establishment, with- public. It should not be used to make That would create a nice mess, would
out a declaration of war, the power to make an end run around article I, section 8, it not? That would be a nice portrait
war. Senators will find that. clear power in of the Constitution. So long as an at- of the United States to paint before the
the resolution.
Senators will remember that in 1955
the senior Senator from Oregon took
that position in the hearing before the
committee. My position became known.
After I took that position the chairman
of the committees sitting jointly, Mr.
Walter George, of Georgia, declared a
recess, and announced that he would go
to the White House for the purpose of
discussing with the President the argu-
ment that I had made in committee. He
went to the White House, Out of that
conference came the famous White
House pronouncement with respect to
the Formosa resolution, in which Presi-
dent Eisenhower announced that he, and
he alone, would make the decision under
that resolution as to what course of ac-
tion this Government would follow in
implementing, the Formosa resolution.
Senator George came back and had
a conference with me. He thanked me
for what he considered to be the service
I had rendered. He said, "It was a very
important service. I would not support
the resolution in the absence of the
White House announcement." He said,
"WAYNE, I hope you will work with me
now to help get the resolution through
the Senate."
I said to the chairman of the Foreign
Relations Committee, who served on that
occasion as chairman of the committees
sitting jointly, "That does not make it
any better so far as I am concerned.
You missed the point of my objection.
Although the testimony in committee
would have left the impression that the
Secretary of State and the military offi-
cials could have made the decision, they
will still be making the decision, because
the President will follow their advice."
I said, "I would not vote for it if they
had no voice in it at all, because I will
not vote to give to any President this
power, because the Congress of the
United States must jealously guard its
prerogatives under article I, section 8 of
tack is in progress, the President has the eyes of the world. What havoc of dis-
inherent power to protect the Republic unity that kind of procedure would en-
in self-defense. But there is reserved compass.
to Congress, under the Constitution, the What is wrong with letting the
responsibility of passing judgment on Constitution operate as written by our
whether or not even an attack calls for constitutional fathers? Why this indi-
our declaring war. It may very well be rect amendment of the Constitution?
that after a response to an attack, the There are Senators, for whom I have
attacking party may start diplomatic deep affection, who become a little
maneuvers into motion-to surrender, to shaken, in our private conversations,
capitulate, to ask for a negotiated set- when I say, "What you are really seeking
tlement, or to resort to the rule of law- to do is to get around the amending
which might cause Congress, in exercis- process of the Constitution. In effect,
ing its authority under the Constitution, You are trying to get around article I,
to check the President and cause him to section 8, by amending the Constitution
decide not to make war at that time. It
is an important procedural check.
It is easy, understandable, and natural
in a time of high national emotion, in a
time of strong patriotic fervor, to say,
"Give 'em the works." It is also true
that in such an hour of high national
emotion and hysteria, we who sit in seats
of responsibility, so far as the legislative
process is concerned, can say, "Let us
wait. Let us first analyze the situation
on the facts, and then vote the authority
that is needed to protect the country.
Sincere and honest men can differ as to
But, say some, see what the end of
section 3 provides:
This resolution shall expire when the
President shall determine that the peace
by way of a joint resolution.-
I do not believe we ought to establish
any more precedents of this kind. I do
not accept the argument that because we
have made two mistakes in the past-
we made no mistake in connection with
the Cuban resolution; and I shall speak
of that later-because we made mistakes
in the Formosa and the Middle East joint
resolutions, we can make another one.
Even a repetition of mistakes does not
create a legal right in the President.
I do not believe it is good legislative
process to repeat mistakes. We ought
to stop making them.
such authority shall take." In effect, this joint resolution consti-
an of
the Camendmentiut article I, sect
In 1955 and again in 1957 the senior tion 8, ,
Senator from Oregon took the position, would
on give the President, , in that it
as he does In the instance of this resolu- and effect, the power to tm kepwar i in
tion, that the Middle East resolution and the absence of a declaration of war. It
the Formosa resolution would be grants is also important to demonstrate to the
of authority to the President to exercise world, including the free nations, that
power which would amount to predated the Constitution of the United States is
declarations of war. That should not not an instrument to be tinkered with;
be done. It is not necessary. All the that the Constitution is a precious, sa-
world knows that any country that at- cred document, so far as our form of
tacks the United States will be met im- government is concerned, and is not sub-
medi t ely with the exercise of the in- ject to subversion in the legislative proc-
power of the President, under ess. We should never miss an opportu-
the Constitution, to defend the Republic. nity to demonstrate this principle to the
All the world knows that if any country totalitarian nations of the world. We
continues an attack upon this country, should never forget that under Fascist
the President will come before this body or Communist regimes there are no
and quickly, as the great Roosevelt did rights and liberties of the person.
- Approved For Release 2005/02/10 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000200160051-5
 Approved For Rlease 2 05 RE18 C A_RWMM403R000200160051 ugust 7
17860
It is proposed, by this joint resolution, in 1955, I made clear that I had ob- ward the creation of a government by
gaging to stand up and
to subvert the n a subterfuge, so far as article I, trigger-happy military mn, hand the States, hat I am willingin
gging
section 8, is concerned. We should not psychology of diplomats who convince oppose the overwhelming majority
do that. We should not in any resolu- themselves that it is necessary to pull against me, and take all the castigation
tion tinker with the Constitution in re- the trigger before an act of war has been and criticism which Is fobou don to bbee
spect to the powers and prerogatives of committed against us. heaped the President, and the limitations upon Mr. President. we like to boast-and tional principle that I am sincerely con-
such powers and prerogatives. for the most part our glorious history vinced is vital to the very preservation
Going back to section 1 of the resolu- sustains the boast-that we are not an of this Republic.
tion, I assert again that in the language aggressor nation. Resolutions such as I am satisfied that if we continue to
"to take all necessary measures to repel the pending joint resolution, as well as build up a wall, brick by brick, prece-
any armed attack against the forces of the Formosa resolution and the Middle dent by precedent, which separates the
the United States," there is no question East resolution, frequently raise grave executive branch of the Government
about the inherent power of the Presi- doubts among our friends in the free from the people resulting in making the
dent to do so without a resolution. world as to whether there are not great executive branch of the Government
I have stated that if this proposed differences between our theory and our more?an and more en inaccessible he Cory rect
grant of power implies that the right practice.
of the President of the United States So, then as now, on the constitutional vital and preservation of the Republic
to take all the necessary measures to grounds to which I objected in the For- and our constitutional system upon
"repel any armed attack against the mosa resolution, I voted against it-as I which It is based,
forces of the United States"-which shall vote against the pending joint reso- M Mr. if twiss ae f-defe se we
former Secretary of State Dulles and lution today.
Admiral Radford asked for in 1954- I repeat this, so that there can be no resolution. If it is to empower the Presi-
includes the authority to commit an act misunderstanding of my position: So far dent to commit an act of aggression be-
of aggression before an act of aggression as the inherent right of the President to fore an act of aggression is committed
is committed against the United States, meet an aggression in the self-defense upon us, as was the program in 1955,
on the basis of the theory of a preven- of the Republic is concerned, the pending and as was openly testified to, let me
tive war, that is a dangerous doctrine. resolution is not needed. The President say-I can say it now-as the transcript
It cannot possibly be reconciled with the has that inherent right now, under the will show, by the Secretary of State and irman
the
Joint Constitution; nor can it be reconciled Constitution. ommitt But, act of war in the ab- Staff atathe time, it is a dangerousiprece-
with sound sounr national policy.
should I remember that t in 19 1955 former Secre- scence of an aggression, he does not have given, nevershou dthave been granted
you wait State Dulles said to me, "Would " pending resolution cannot giveiit to Them by the Congress, and should not be
you wafor the e Red Chinese to strike?" of ue
My reply was that when I thought of under the Constitution. granted now under the pending resolu-
the billions of dollars I had joined in of Of course. can on sanction nht his xercie i tion.
that for the defense of country, That Turning to the language I have read, In- eluding great sums ums of money for intier what the Senate will be doing today in "to repel any armed attack against the
voting
ligence
d concern service, if tre were particular aInconstitutional effect, the Congress is mean that the attack must ha e s arted,
about about a Red Chinese air ir base mean th
Presi ent
all the
closest telligence the coast of Alaska ka and our saying ad a to the unconstitutio ally a d we and his advisers have to conclude is that
as tlligence agency had given us reports
in
the will look the other way," because it is in all probability an attack may be
as to what it had found in regard to the
size of that Communist air armada, i known that there is no existing procedure made.
would wish to believe that when the first which would be effective by which we can That is preventive war. There is no
Red Chinese plane left the ground and check the President. Once the pending power In the Constitution for the Presi-
started for Alaska, our alerting stations resolution is adopted, the Senate thereby dent of the United States to wage a pre-
and our intelligence would be such that will sanction such conduct. There Is no ventive war. I cannot imagine a set of facts which would our planes would meet it before it ever he'U U.S. Supreme Court forefinal d before ter- President of th United States, the Con-c by taking rea eache Alaska.
At that time, I also made perfectly urination of the constitutionality of this gress, the Department of State, and those
clear to former Secretary of State Dulles course of action in time to be effective. in the Pentagon Building to become
and former Chairman of the Joint I am asked, "Should we not amend alarmed about the danger of an attack
Chiefs of Staff Admiral Radford, that the Constitution in this respect?" against the United States that cannot be
under international law we could not I believe that we should amend it by taken immediately to existing channels
such a to rethe Congress the power of solution as this one. tionaleself-defense wo de stilt vest In
possibly justify our being an the first instance. I frankly stated that to pass denying
it was a risk which we must run in order Because the past situations such as are the inherent constitutional power of the
to remain In a sound constitutional present in this case are such rarities, so President. are
doing
very framework under our system of govern- of a poolitical realisstnto ek oI w~thatu we muc a abouttuing those channels of in-
ment.
Why should we give arbitrary discre- shall never get anywhere with that kind ternational law does not excuse us. And
tion to mere men who happen to hold of constitutional amendment. The only as we use those channels of international
office at a given time, when the Amer- time we become interested in it Is when law, the inherent power of the President
ican people and their lives are at the a crisis such as this exists. When a crisis to defend this country continues. With
mercy of the discretion of those mere exists, it is so serious that people are all the military might of this country at
men? not going to become interested in a very the present time, the world knows that
One of the great protections that the Important constitutional abstraction, that power of self-defense is adequate
American people have in constitutional even though it is a constitutional ab- to protect the security interests of this
theory, under our form of government, straction which after all, is determina- country until the processes of interna-
is that we are a government of laws and tive, in the last analysis, of their rights tional laws ~grnnttheir acourse bout . mean-
no e
not of men. Granted, we are a govern- as free men. There
ment of laws, it is also true that those In times of hysteria and high national Ing of the next four words on line 6 of
laws must be administered by men. Hu- emotionalism, it is only human for most page 2 clearly authorize---"to prevent
man failings being what they are, we people, particularly those not sitting in further aggression."
must always keep a check on the exer- the seats of legislative responsibility, to That is when the whole realm of judg-
cise of the discretion of mere men who be willing to look the other way on such ment upon the part of the President of
administer government, or we shall con- questions as I raise in this debate again the United States comes into play. That
stantly run the risk of being victimized this year. But I believe It is so danger- is when we substitute the President for
by arbitrary and capricious discretion. ous to establish another precedent to- article I, section 8 of the Constitution.
Approved For Release 2005/02/10 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000200160051-5
 Approved For Rc8 figI i'A CJ? 66130 NP0200160051-5
17861
1964
That is when we say to the President,
"You can go beyond acts of immediate
self-defense of the Republic. You do not
have to come to the Congress, as Franklin
Roosevelt did after Pearl Harbor, and
ask for a declaration of war. You can
proceed in the exercise of your judgment
to prevent further aggression."
The uninformed, unenlightened editor
of the Washington Post who wrote that
stupid editorial in this morning's paper
has not,_ the slightest conception of the
meaning of those words. If he had, he
-would not have written in his editorial:
There is no substance in Senator Moesr's
charge that the resolution amounts to a
"predated declaration of war."
That is exactly what those words
mean. it is incontrovertible. The Pres-
ident would not have to come and ask for
a declaration of war. He would be given
sanction by Congress to make war with-
out a declaration of war. It will be
noted that I do not say "the authority,"
for the authority cannot be granted by'
Congress. Congress cannot amend the
Constitution in this way. This does not
conform to the amendment processes of
the Constitution. It is proposed that
Congress sanction the action of the Pres-
ident in making war if, in his judg-
ment, he thinks making war is neces-
sary to prevent further aggression. I
shall come to that point later. 'But that
is why I said last night that so many
want to "turn away from the most deli-
catequestion involved in the debate.
That is why I said last night-and shall
discuss it at greater length today-that
the. President and our country were quite
right in meeting the attack on the de-
stroyers last Tuesday night. But, in my
judgment, that did not empower him,
under the right of self-defense, to try to
proceed beyond protecting those ships,'
and strike the mainland of North Viet-
nam. In my judgment, that constituted
an act of war-not an act of self-de-
fense.
Mr. President, at that point, under our
treaty commitments,. our allegations in
regard to the absolutely inexcusable and
illegal attack on our ships on the high
seas by the North Vietnamese forces
should.have been taken immediately to
the United Nations. As to that attack
we had an unassailable case. They at-
tacked us on the high seas and we re-
sponded in self-defense.
We were clearly within our interna-
tional law rights. Unfortunately we did
not stop there. We then went beyond
our rights of self-defense and proceeded
to bomb the mainland of North Vietnam.
We either support a rule of law pro-
cedure or we ignore it. We ignored it.
We had an irrefutable case of violation
of international law by_ North Vietnam
in connection with their attack on our
ships. We would have a hard time, under
international law, supporting our subse-
quent attack on North Vietnam in the
absence of a declaration of war. There
will be those who will say that that is
cutting the line pretty fine. Neverthe-
less, the difference is between acting
within the Constitution and acting out-
side of it. It is the difference between
staying within our rights of self-defense
and proceeding to turn ourselves into an
aggressive warmaking power.
No one despises, hates, and repudiates
more than does the senior Senator from
Oregon, communism, Communist re-
girries, including North Vietnam, Red
China, Cuba, Red Russia, and all of the
rest. But I do not propose to allow my
hatred, my detestation, my complete dis-
gust with the police state methods of a
Communist regime to cause me to give
support to a proposal to go outside the
constitutional guarantees of our system
of government. I want to keep my Gov-
ernment in an impregnable position, so
that we can go before any international
tribunal and establish our case, and not
have thrown back in our teeth a showing
to establish a series of allegations in re-
gard to the exercise of power and mili-
tary might on the part of the United
States that takes us outside the frame-
work of international law.
There is no doubt that the language,
"to prevent further aggression," rouses
all the objections that I made in 1955 to
the Formosa resolution. This proposal
seeks to vest in the President of the
United States the power to carry on a
so-called preventive war. By preventive
war, we mean making a war against an-
other country because it is assumed that
that country is about to make war, or
contemplates making war, against the
United States. Such authority is not to
be found in the Constitution. The Con-
gress cannot give such authority to the
President of the United States as far as
the Constitution is concerned. It can
sanction the exercise of the authority,
but the exercise of the authority would
still be just as much outside the Con-
stitution as though the President acted
without the joint resolution, The joint
resolution could never make legal the
exercise of such authority by the Presi-
dent of the United States.
That is not the only place in the reso-
lution in which we would give to the
President a preventive war authority. I
refer the Senate to section 2, line 7,
which provides-
SEC. 2. The United States regards as vital
to its national interest and to world peace
the maintenance of international peace and
security in southeast Asia. Consonant with
the Constitution-
It has been agreed, by way of an
amendment to the joint resolution, that
that means the Constitution of the
United States-
and the Charter of the United Nations and
in accordance with its obligations under the
Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty, the
United States is, therefore, prepared, as the
President determines, to take all necessary
steps, including the use of armed force; to
assist any member or protocol state of the
Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty re-
questing assistance in defense of its freedom.
Mr. President, that is an awful power
to give to a President. If the Washing-
ton Post does not think that that is a
predated declaration of war, the editor
ought to start asking himself some ques-
tions about certain hypothetical situa-
tions.
Shall we allow any President of the
United States to decide, with no check-
that is, no check for immediate applica-
tion-to take all necessary steps, includ-
ing the use of armed force, to assist any
member or protocol state of the South-
east Asia Collective Defense Treaty re-
questing assistance in defense of its
freedom?
We had better pause long enough to
take a look at the nature of some of the
countries involved, because many of the
countries are not free Countries. Many
of those countries are totalitarian coun-
tries. Many of those countries are dic-
tatorships. It is wishful thinking to
assume that it would be safe to give the
President of the United States un-
checked authority to proceed to use
American boys in defense of those coun-
tries on the basis of claims that acts of
aggression are being committed against
them by some other country, without a
congressional check. Have we reached
the point in American foreign policy
where we are going to permit the Presi-
dent to send American boys to their
death in the defense of military dicta-
torships, monarchies, and fascist re-
gimes around the world with which we
have entered into treaty obligations in-
volving mutual security, no matter what
the provocation and no matter what
wrongs they may have committed that
cause an attack upon them? Are we
going to do that without a check of Con-
gress by way of a declaration of war?
What are we thinking of? What time
factor would justify such precipitate
action?
Mr. President, this Senator will never
Vote to send an American boy to his death
anywhere in the world under any such
language as is contained in that part of
the joint resolution. It is of utmost
importance that we surround that
language with a congressional check.
And there is none.
One could say, as I said a few moments
ago, "But, Mr. Senator, the Congress can
terminate this authority by a concurrent
resolution."
I have already pointed out the kind of
hassle that such a situation would
create, and the kind of disunity that
such action would produce. The Amer-
ican people should be protected from a
possible abuse of the authority. So long
as abuse of a procedure is possible, the
procedure should be modified to prevent
the possibility of the abuse.
Mr. President, that is why it is so im-
portant that we hold any President-I
care not who he is-to Article I, section
8, of the Constitution in the carrying out
of mutual security agreements. We
should hold him to the approval of the
Congress before the fact and not after
the fact.
Mr. GRUENING. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. MORSE. I yield.
Mr. GRUENING I wish the Senator
would discuss what seems to me the obvi-
ous escalation of the war by the au-
thority granted in section 2 of the joint
resolution-
To assist any member or protocol state of
the Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty.
Mr. MORSE. I was about to do so.
Mr. GRUENING. Hitherto we have
been dealing wholly with South Vietnam.
Approved For Release 2005/02/10 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000200160051-5
 17862
ApprovedCF 1 ggF W5/0?/ 80 -RD A$&R%403R000200160051-A2igust 7
The President has stated his purpose,
which is quite evident-not to extend the
war.
In the section to which I referred we
are including a number of additional
nations into which we could send our
Armed Forces. The Joint resolution
would extend the prospective war all over
southeast Asia, would It not?
Mr. MORSE. It certainly would, with
no check on It.
Mr. GRUENING. In other words, in
effect, the Congress would authorize an
escalation of the war to Thailand, Laos,
Cambodia, North Vietnam, South Viet-
nam-and what else?
Mr. MORSE. Pakistan.
Mr. GRUENING. I have In my pos-
session, which I Intend to present when
the foreign aid bill comes before the Sen-
ate, a statement from a high official of
Pakistan indicating that hi.; government
has no intention of using the nearly $1
billion in military aid that we have given
to Pakistan to help out our cause because
It is needed in their prospective difficul-
ties with India.
Mr. MORSE. The Foreign Minister of
Pakistan In effect made that statement
in Washington, D.C., when he addressed
the Press Club not so many weeks ago.
He was asked by a newspaperman at the
meeting to state whether or not Pakistan
could be counted upon to be of assistance
in southeast Asia. He said, "No."
He gave his reason. His reason was
Pakistan's involvement with India.
Pakistan has no intention of responding
to any calls to SEATO members.
I yield further.
Mr. GRUENING. It seems to me that
the joint resolution presents an unlim-
ited authorization for war anywhere in
southeast Asia, including Pakistan,
which is really not In southeast Asia, but
which is in south central Asia, and It
seems to me a very dangerous, unwar-
ranted, and unprecedented action.
Mr. MORSE. Do not forget, Pakistan
is a member of SEATO; It obligations
to South Vietnam are the same as ours.
Mr. GRUENING. Yes; but It has
shown no disposition whatever to carry
out its obligations under that treaty.
Mr. MORSE_ That is correct; but, she
being a SEATO member, we would be
obligated to go to her assistance.
Mr. GRUENING. This resolution, in
effect, is an authorization which would
be the equivalent of a declaration of war
by the Congress. Would it not be?
Mr. MORSE. I think so.
Mr. GRUENING. That is one thing
I am very apprehensive about. If we
should get into an all-out war, which I
fear may happen, this resolution would
be considered the authorization by the
Congress to so proceed. Would It not?
Mr. MORSE. That is correct.
Mr. GRUENING. I expressed my
views on it yesterday. I do not at all
criticize the President-in fact, I think
the President was correct-for repelling
the assault, whatever may be the back-
ground, on American vessels and destroy-
ing the attackers. I approve of that ac-
tion, but the resolution goes far beyond
such action, which apparently precipi-
tated the request by the President for
such a resolution, and covers the whole
of southeast Asia area. I distinctly dis-
agree with the administration policy.
As I have stated repeatedly, this was
a polio which the President inherited,
and from which I hoped he would dis-
engage himself. He inherited It from
the Eisenhower administration, from
John Foster Dulles, when we picked up
the fiasco the French had engaged In
with the loss of over 100,000 young lives.
We contributed vast sums of money to
that operation. It was obviously a fail-
ure.
Now we have escalated it, as could be
foreseen, and as I In fact did foretell,
and as the Senator from Oregon fore-
told, Into an all-out war in southeast
Asia. Regrettably, the end Is not yet. I
am extremely fearful about the situation.
This is a moment when patriotic pas-
sions are aroused, and It seems indicated
that we should do whatever the Presi-
dent asks.
It Is very painful for those of us who
disagree with the policy. I felt it was
wrong In the beginning and have re-
peatedly stated for 5 months that I
thought It was wrong, and that we should
continue to try to find a peaceful solu-
tion; that we should take the Issue to the
United Nations, and seek a cease fire.
It Is, as I have said, painful not to support
the President, but I cannot do so In good
conscience under the blanket terms of
this resolution.
Mr. MORSE. As the Senator knows,
last night it was impossible for him, be-
cause of a previous appointment, to be
present when I paid my high respects to
him for his courage, statesmanship, and
leadership In this matter for many
months past. I said last night that the
Senator from Alaska had put the issue
squarely.
Now, in a very few moments, the Sen-
ator from Alaska has summarized suc-
cinctly the major points of the address
I have been making on the floor of the
Senate the last hour and 15 minutes. I
wish to formalize those points before I
come to the next major issue which I
shall discuss in my speech.
What I have said expresses my views
as to the power that would be granted to
the President in the resolution. It is
what I have called an undated' declara-
tion of war. I summarize the points as
follows:
First, the unlimited language of the
resolution would authorize acts of war
without specifying countries, places, or
times. That language cannot be recon-
ciled with article I, section 8 of the Con-
stitution. It amounts, in fact as well as
in law, to a predated declaration of war.
Next, as I said last night, we have
armed forces in South Vietnam, some
20,000, or more, apparently, with the
number increasing by plane load after
plane load.
Senators can bemoan and warn against
a land war in Asia, but the resolution
would put the United States in the mid-
dle of the Vietnam civil war, which is
basically a land war.
Under the resolution Congress would
give to the President of the United States
great authority, without coming to the
Congress and obtaining approval by way
of a declaration of war, to carry on a land
war in South Vietnam. The choice is
left up to him.
As I said last night, the interesting
thing is that South Vietnam, with a
population of 15 million, and an armed
force of 400,000 to 450,000 men, has been
unable, through all the years of the holo-
caust in South Vietnam, to put down a
Vietcong force of a maximum of 35,-
000 men. The Pentagon and the State
Department, in testifying before the
committee, say the number probably
does not exceed 25,000. We have to have
more than 20,000 American boys over
there, to the in whatever numbers they
are killed, in an attempt to win that war.
And for whom?
Mr. President, the leaders of this Gov-
ernment keep talking about freedom in
South Vietnam. There is not one iota
of freedom in South Vietnam, for the
South Vietnamese people, by and large,
do not know what the word means. I
quoted, in a speech the day before yes-
terday, a letter I received from a Repub-
lican Member of Congress, in full sup-
port of the position I have taken on this
issue. I paraphrase it, although the quo-
tation Is already in the Rzcoao. He said
that the average man of North or South
Vietnam would not know what democ-
racy looked like if he met it on the main
street of Saigon. The difference between
their governments is like the difference
between tweedledum and tweedledee.
But both are interested in the next bowl
of rice.
That is why this Senator has been
pleading for years, in connection with
foreign policy, that the great need of the
United States in the field of foreign
policy Is to export economic freedom, and
to stop exporting military aid, for our
military aid makes Communists. Pre-
pare the seedbeds of economic freedom
for the masses of the people of any coun-
try and we prepare for the growth of
freedom. Unless the people are first
economically free, they cannot be politi-
cally free; and, what is more important,
they will never understand political free-
dom until they are first economically
free.
There is great danger now that Con-
gress will give to the President of the
United States power to carry on what-
ever type of war he wishes to wage in
southeast Asia. That is why I said, in
answer to an argument that was made on
the floor of the Senate yesterday, an-
parently some colleagues are laboring
under the illusion that perhaps the reso-
lution would reduce the danger of fight-
ing a land war in Asia. There is not a
word in the resolution that has any
bearing on the subject. To the contrary,
the broad, sweeping, sanction of power-
note my language, because it cannot be
done legally-the broad, arbitrary,
sweeping power Congress is sanctioning
for the President would in no way stop
him from sending as many American
boys as he wants to send into South Viet-
nam to make war.
As the Senator from Alaska has said
over and over again, and as I have Joined
him in saying, all South Vietnam is not
worth the life of a single American boy;
and the killing of a single American boy
in South Vietnam is an unjustified kill-
Approved For Release 2005/02/10 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000200160051-5
 Approved For Release 2005/02/10.: CIA-RDP66B00403R000200160051-5
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
1 964
17863-
ing. It ought to stop. It is not going
to stop until we turn our warmaking pol-
icy into a peacekeeping policy. It is
not going to stop until we insist that
our alleged allies in SEATO come in with
as many divisions of peacekeeping units
as are necessary to keep the belligerents
apart. It is not going to stop until the
United Nations, under the procedures of
international law, can come in and keep
the peace and set up whatever controls
are needed, by way of United Nations
trusteeships if necessary, to bring that
war to an end.
This result will not be, achieved by
unilateral military action. It makes me
sad to have to say it, but I am satisfied
that history will record this horrendous
mistake of the United States in its false
assumption in the year 1964 that it could
supplant in South Vietnam military con-
trol by Asiatics with military control by
the United States.
We could never win such a war. We
might win military victory after military
victory. If we did not stop the escala-
tion, we would kill millions of people, be-
cause the escalation, step by step, would
lead to all-out bombing of North Viet-
nam and Red Chinese cities. When we
were through, we should have killed
millions, and won military victory after
victory, but we should still have
military!war.,
lost the The United States can never dominate
and control Asia, with 800 million-people
in China Alone, That kind of war would
create a hatred for the United States
and for the white man generally that
would persist for centuries. Dominating
Asia, after destroying her cities and kill-
ing her millions by bombings-that is
the danger that we are walking into-
would not make the white man supreme
in Asia, but only hated.
We know what the floods of human.
history do. Eventually the white man
will be engulfed in that Asiatic flood
and drowned.
I do not know wiry we should be so
shortsighted. It is difficult to follow the
processes of international law. I sup-
pose the saddest announcement that has
been made recently is that of the Secre-
tary General of the United Nations, Mr.
U Thant, from Burma, who is not even
a shadow of the great world statesman
who preceded him, Dag Hammarskjold.
He announced in Washington yesterday
his grave doubts as to whether the Se-
curity Council could help resolve the
matter.
Mr. President, we will never know
until such procedures are tried. The
Secretary General should have been
using his voice and his influence to per-
suade the Security Council to carry out
its obligations under the charter. Not
a word has been heard from the Secre-
tary General in regard to the power and
United Nations.
The Secretary General knows the
power of the General Assembly if the
Security Council is incapacitated by a
Russian veto. I repeat what I have said
for many months past on the floor of the
Senate. I wish to put Russia on the spot.
No. 153-2
Let her exercise her veto, if she dares.
The rest of the world will be her judge.
We did not find her following that course
in the Middle East, or in Cyprus, or in
the Congo.
I was highly disappointed by what I
considered to be the abdication of lead-
ership and responsibility on the part of
the Secretary General of the United Na-
tions in the unfortunate statement he
made in Washington yesterday.
The next point I wish to make, by
way of summary, is that the fear ex-
pressed by some Senators in this debate
against involvement in a land war means
no more than the reservation expressed
in 1954, that we should not become mil-
itarily involved in South Vietnam. We
did not intend then to do any of the
things we are now doing in South Viet-
nam, but we have done them. That
pious expression of intention in 1954
came to naught. ? This policy is sucking
us into military involvement deeper and
deeper, and will continue to suck us in,
under this resolution, deeper and deeper.
Mr. President, you and I will be gone
in a few years; but I am satisfied that the
end of the road that we are traveling
today will be the engulfment and drown-
ing in world history of the influence of
the white man in Asia, if we follow this
course of action.
I despair frequently at the Pact that
so often people in positions of responsi-
bility are inclined to think only of the
present, and not a century hence. Yet,
when we are dealing with matters of
foreign policy and the roots of peace or
war, we need to remember that the seed
we plant today, be it a seed of peace or
seed of war, is the seed that will finally
come to fruition in a blossoming plant,
perhaps a 100 years hence.
I say most respectfully and sadly that
in my judgment, in this resolution, we are
planting seeds not. of peace, but of war.
Those who will follow us in the years to
come will cry out in anguish and despair
in criticism over the mistake that was
made in 1964 when the joint resolution
was passed.
Why do we do it? I do not know.
We are dealing here basically with a
civil war between conflicting forces in
South Vietnam. So many in this debate
have overlooked the geographic problem.
Let us not forget that prior to the
Geneva accord of 1954 North Vietnam
and South Vietnam were one people.
One could go into North Vietnam today,
after he had been in Saigon, and think
that he was still in South Vietnam. He
would feel the same way if he first went
to North Vietnam and then to Saigon.
They are the same people. Unfortunate-
ly, as a result of the partition under the
Geneva accord in 1954, they were divided
into two countries, North Vietnam and
South Vietnam.
Many of the people in South Vietnam
who are involved in this civil war have
close relatives in North Vietnam., One
reason why the military. dictator-puppet
whom we are supporting in South Viet-
nam, Khanh, is having so much difficulty
with the mass of the people-and he is
having a serious difficulty-is his Insist-
ence that he must stage a blood bath in
North Vietnam. He will never get the
support of the people, because a blood
bath would kill the relatives of hundreds
of thousands of people in South Vietnam;
and vice versa.
It is a tragedy that the Vietcongs try
to subvert South Vietnam, but that is a
reality. The solution is not the exercise
of military might. As a critic of De
Gaulle on many points, I say that the sad
fact is that the De Gaulle solution is far
superior to the American solution. The
solution is a political and economic solu-
tion, not a military solution. De Gaulle
is right. We should go to the conference
table. We should not take the American
position that we will go to the conference
table only after we dominate the battle-
field.
If we ever establish that principle, we
shall have assassinated the rule of law as
an instrumentality for settling disputes
among nations. If we ever take the posi-
tion that we must first dominate the bat-
tlefield, that we must be in control, that
our orders must be carried out, then go-
ing to a conference table will mean only
that the dominating authority tells the
others at the conference table what, in
effect, Adlai Stevenson unfortunately
said in the sad speech he made some
weeks ago before the Security Council-
that, in effect, we are going to do what
we think is necessary, and the others can
like it or not. When he did that, as I
said, he extinguished his lamp of world
statesmanship.
We cannot follow the theory that un-
derlies the present policy of our Govern-
ment; namely, that until we first domi-
nate the battlefield, we will not follow
De Gaulle's suggestion to settle this dis-
pute at the conference table. De Gaulle
is right. This problem will never be set-
tled except by a political and economic
settlement. It can never be settled by
the -imposition of the military might of
the United States upon Asia.
Mr. GRUENING. Mr. President, will
the Senator from Oregon yield?
Mr. MORSE. I am glad to yield to the
Senator from ilaska.
Mr. GRUENING. As I have said on
previous occasions, my mail has been
running several hundred to one in favor
of withdrawal; in favor of the policies
I have urged. Only this morning, I am
in receipt of a number of telegrams which
relate to the pending joint resolution. I
shall read one of them into the RECORD.
It comes from Oakland, Calif.:
OAKLAND, CALIF., August 6, 1964.
Senator ERNEST GRUENING,
Washington, D.C.:
The statement of policy of Oakland's
Women for Peace representing 400 women in
regard to Vietnam. Because U.S. military
involvement in Vietnam endangers world
peace and because the American people have
not been properly informed about the mag-
nitude and significance of our involvement,
therefore we urge full public discussion and
congressional debate to explore nonmilitary
alternatives to the problems. We urge that
the United Nations be employed to negotiate
settlement and we urge that the 14-nation
committee set up by the Geneva conference
be reconvened to implement the United Na-
tions settlement.
OAKLAND WOMEN FOR PEACE.
Approved For Release 2005/02/10 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000200160051-5
 17864
Mr. President, I have a number of
other messages, which if time permits,
should be in the RECORD. They are from
Palo Alto, Calif., Van Nuys, Calif., from
a professor at Denison University, from
New York City, from Cambridge, Mass.,
from Fresno, Calif., from Richmond,
Calif., several from Washington. D.C.,
from South Kortright, N.Y., from
Framingham, Mass., from Berkeley,
Calif., from Kemberton, Pa., from Balti-
more, Md., from Fairlawn, N.J., from
South Laguna Beach, Calif., from Null
Valley, Calif., from Flushing, N.Y., from
Ann Arbor, Mich.
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, will the
Senator from Alaska yield, to enable me
to clarify the procedural situation?
Mr. GRUENING. I yield.
Mr. MORSE. I wish to yield the floor
and save the remaining time for the Sen-
ator from Alaska to use for the final re-
buttal, after the proponents of the joint
resolution have used their hour. We
have only 8 minutes left.
The telegrams are important. Sena-
tors will find In the RECORD 10 pages of
telegrams that I received yesterday In
response to the speech I delivered the
night before last in opposition to the
joint resolution.
I am satisfied that at the grassroots of
America the people are overwhelmingly
with the Senator from Alaska and the
Senator from Oregon. My mail is run-
ning more than 100 to 1 in support of our
position.
I shall yield the floor; and later, at the
close of the debate, the Senator from
Alaska will make the final statement.
Senators who are pleading for the pas-
sage of the joint- resolution are thinking
of President Johnson. I yield to no one
in that respect. I have complete con-
fidence in and high regard for President
Johnson, and shall campaign with all my
heart for his reelection next November.
I merely think he is dead wrong on this
issue. The most loyal service I can
render any President is to disagree with
him when I think he is wrong and to try
to correct his mistaken course of action.
Mr. President, on yesterday I asked
unanimous consent to insert In the
RECORD a cross section of the messages
that I had received in connection with
the position I had taken on the predated
declaration of war resolution in respect
to Asia which passed just a few minutes
ago.
I said that they were all favorable ex-
cept two. Two of them had questioned
the human source of my paternity. I
did not think that under those circum-
stances they would be very fitting mes-
sages to insert In the RECORD.
I now ask unanimous consent to have
printed in the RECORD a cross-section
sampling of part of the messages that I
have received today in respect to my po-
sition in opposition to the predated dec-
laration of war resolution that the
Senate, in my judgment, unfortunately
passed today. All the messages I have
received today are favorable. "I received
no messages in opposition to my position.
The PRESIDING OFFICER Without
objection, It Is so ordered.
(See exhibit 1.)
ARLINGTON. VA.,
August 7, 1964.
Approved For Release 2005/02/10 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000200160051-5
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD SENATE August 7
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, I now
yield the floor, with the understanding
that the distinguished junior Senator
from Alaska [Mr. Gaux?rn GI will close
the debate after the proponents of the
joint resolution have spoken.
EXHIBIT I
PHILALELPHIA, PA.,
August 2. 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
You may be speaking to an empty house
but the people are listening. Keep talking.
J. H. FEANCO.
EUGENE, OREG., August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE Moses.
Washington, D.C.:
Please continue as national conscience.
Job needs someone with guts.
Mr. and Mrs. D. M. MORrORD,
Mr. and Mrs. G. D. SLAWSON.
Mr. and Mrs. it. M. Wlarr.
PORTLAND, OREG.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE.
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.:
Support your effort while requesting prac-
ticality and moderation.
JAMES A. HUNT.
PORTLAND, OREG.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE.
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.:
I commend your courageous and forth-
right vote against U.S. Military action in
Vietnam.
WASHINGTON. D.C..
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE.
Senate office Building.
Washington, D.C.:
You are the only sane American leader who
can save us from certain disaster. Help.
Mrs. SELMA R. REnc.
NEW YORK, N.Y.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE Moser,
Washington, D.C.:
CADA admires greatly the courage you dis-
played yesterday when making the statement
on Vietnam. Although we are divided on
the solutions of the problems in Vietnam we
stand united with support of you as a posi-
tive force In the Senate campus. Americans
for Democratic Action urgesyou not to sur-
render your very high conviction.
ALBEET REINES,
Member, National Executive Commit-
tee Campus, Americans for Demo-
cratic Action.
DETROIT, MICH.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
senate office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
My admiration to you for your courageous
statesmanship In this national crisis.
Dr. SIDNEY LErrsoH.
DENVER. COLO..
August 7_1964.
Senator WAYNE Mouse,
Senate office Building,
Washington, D.C.;
Thanks for courageous stand against Asi-
atlo war. Persuade President to let United
Nations settle conflict.
NATHAN L. BEATrY.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Support your determined stand on policy
in southeast Asia.
NEw YoRx, N.Y.,
August 7, 1964.
Hon. Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
Congratulations for your brilliant exposi-
tion of true conditions In South Vietnam.
KATHLEEN MALLOY.
DETROIT, MICH.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington. D.C.:
Applaud your courageous stand South
Vietnam representing best interest of Amer-
ican people.
HuNTSVU,LE, ALA.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senator From Oregon,
Washington, D.C.:
Heartily endorse your stand against the
proposed aggressive foreign policy of the
United States.
NEW YORK, N.Y.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
Thanks for Vietnam speech. Keep it U.
G WEN REYES.
NEW YORK, N.Y.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washintgon. D.C.:
Thanks for saying In your speech what had
to be said.
DETROIT, MICH.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
Support your steadfast stand for Vietnam
peace. America needs your voice,
Mr. and Mrs. EMANUEI, GRAFT.
BURLINGTON, MASS.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE.
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Congratulations on your stand against
war. We are not always right. God bless
NEW Yom, N.Y.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE-MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
More power to you. Hope you win more
NORTHRIDGE, CALIF.,
August 7, 1964.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.:
You are right. International dispute
should be settled by discussion and action in
the United Nations rather than by war and
bombs in this age of massive nuclear
weaponry.
A carte blanche declaration of war now
might unleash trigger happy GoLDwATEa In
Approved For Release 2005/02/10 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000200160051-5
 Approved For Ren~ee 2005/02/10 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000200160051-5
1964
CGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE
17865
the unhappy event that he should become
President, .
.Mrs. T. M. STOUT.
August 7,1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
We support your position and your cour-
age. Please keep up the fight.
Mr. and Mrs. CALVIN GooD.
BASKINORIDGE, N.J., August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
I approve of your stand on Vietnam.
WINIFRED J. HEARN.
FRAMINGHAM, MASS., August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
.Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Congratulate and support your courageous
stand against military madness in south-
east Asia.
MARGARET WELCH.
PENELOPE TURTON.
NEW YORK, N.Y., August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE.Moass.
Washington, D.C.:
Stand firm. Oppose any further action in
Vietnam. Congratulations your independ-
ence.
ANNA V. COLLOMS.
BETHESDA, MD., August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
America fortunate in having benefit of
your voice in Congress on Vietnam. Confi-
dent public supports your despite Congress.
LOUISE GREENWOOD.
WASHINGTON, D.C., August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
My most esteemed Senator, may the stars
and stripes wave forever while such splendid
and honest folks like you and Senator
GRUENING. Both of your statements about
recent U.S. action in North Vietnam gives
me reassurance that not all America has
gone completely nuts with arrogance and
immorality. May the Lord bless you both for
your courage and integrity.
Sincerely,
DETROIT, MICH., August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Congratulations on your speech on Viet-
nam. Best wishes.
ROBERT BRYCE.
NORTH HOLLYWOOD, CALIF.,
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Support your position on southeast Asia
crisis. Urge negotiate immediately to pre-
vent world conflict.
Mrs. ROSE BOIN.
DETROIT, MICH., August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
The following is copy of wire sent to Sena-
tor PHILIP HART: "We urge you to support
Senator MORSE's proposal to place the Viet-
nam situation before the U.N. We have
stucUed the wisdom of this in previous situa-
tions. We are convinced it is wise on this
occasion,"
Reverend and Mrs. EsTEL I.ODLE..
LA JOLLA, CALIF., August 7,1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Thank you for taking a stand on another
escalation of war in North Vietnam. Thank
God for at least one man of reason and
courage in the Senate..
Dr. and Mrs. JOHN H. TAYLOR.
Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.:
Thank you for your loyalty to the U.S.
democratic form of Government and to its
people. Keep the good work up.
OLGA SELKE.
YORBA LINDA, CALIF.,
Senator WA'PNE MORSE, August 7, 1964.
Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.:
Yours is only voice of sanity in Washing-
ton. Keep talking.
Mr. and Mrs. JOSEPH L. McNICHOLS.
NEW YORK, N.Y.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.:
Commend you for courageous Vietnam
stand. Exert all influence to prevent escala-
tion. Urge negotiated peace.
STEPHEN SLANER.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
Complete support for your courageous
stand. Democratic alternative to war and
communism must be found.
Mr. and Mrs. RICHARD ROMAN.
COSTA MESA, CALIF? August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
Congratulations your courage and moral
stand during this crisis. Good luck with your
speech.
STANLEY GOTTLIEV.
NEW YORK, N.Y., August 7,1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Grateful for your courageous Stand in Viet-
nam crisis. You are a brave honest man.
EUGENIE S. INTERMANN.
SAN BERNARDINO, CALIF., August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Urge immediate submission of entire Viet-
nam situation to United Nations.
EMMERSON and CAROLYN SIMONDS.
BERKELEY, CALIF., August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: May I thank you for
your stand on the Vietnam incident and your
suggestions to cut foreign aid. .Thank you
for your courage and effort.
Sincerely,
Mrs. A. P. ALLEN.
PHILADELPHIA, PA., August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.:
Congratulations on your stand regarding
Johnson's air raid. I pray your speech to-
morrow will prove persuasive. More power
to you.
ARNOLD R. POST.
NEW YORK, N.Y., August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
Your heroic and outspoken stand on Viet-
nam merits vigorous support. We support
your action.
PHILIP SHUGAR.
SKOKIE, ILL., August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.:
I commend you highly for your courage
in virtually standing alone on the resolution
of the Vietnam crisis. I only wish my own
Senators DOUGLAS and DIRKSEN would have
equal stature.
HUGH EDWARDS AND FAMILY.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
ENCINO, CALIF.,
August 7, 1964.
Few persons have courage enough to ap-
pear as good as they really are. Congratula-
tions and good luck on your position con-
cerning North Vietnam.
Mr. and Mrs. FREDERICK ARNOLD.
HOUSTON, TEE.,
Senator WAYNE MORSE, August 7,1964.
Washington, D.C.:
Keep up your great fight for sane foreign
policy.
-Mr. and Mrs. MARTIN ELFANT.
NEW YORK, N.Y.,
Senator WAYNE MORSE, August 7,1964.
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Congratulations and thank you for your
stand against war in Asia. Please continue
your efforts.
W. G. PovEY, M.D.
STONYPOINT, N.Y.,
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate House,
Washington, D.C.:
We support your Vietnam stand and en-
courage you to continue.
PAUL and VERA WILLIAMS.
GREATNECK, N.Y.,
Senator WAYNE MORSE, August 7,1964.
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Urgently request continuation of your ef-
forts for peaceful negotiations in Vietnam.
NORMA YARVIN.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
Keep the message going on Vietnam, we
are behind you.
HOWARD and LEAH FRITZ.
DOWNERS
SENATOR WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
GROVE, ILL.,
August 7, 1964.
I laud you on your courageous stand on
the crisis on Vietnam.
Mrs. DOTTIE SHERLOCK.
NASHVILLE, TENN., August 7, 1964.
Senators WAYNE MORSE and
ERNE3T GRUENING,
The Capitol, Washington, D.C.:
Congratulations on being the only two
Senators and courageous Members of the
Approved For. Release, 2005/02/10 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000200160051-5
 17866
Approved For Release 2005/02/10 : CIA-RDP66BOO403R000200160051-5
7
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE g
whole U.S. Senate and House of Represent-
atives who have not surrendered their souls
and consciences to an unprincipled order
that will lead to the ultimate destruction of
this Nation and the world.
Mrs. WALTER CURRY.
BELAIR, MD.,
August 7, 1964.
SENATOR WAYNE MORSE,
Senate. Office Building,
Washington. D.C.:
Heartfelt thanks and
your wise courageous
Vietnam.
strong support for
decision regarding
WATERVn,LE, MAINE,
August 7, 1964.
SENATOR WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Admire your courageous stand. Am sure
many level head Americans are With you.
HENRY VARNUM POOR.
SEATTLE, WASH.,
August 7, 1964.
SENATOR WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
Thankful for your stand on Vietnam. You
speak for many citizens who oppose brutal
cruelties.
ROBERT and JOSEPHINE STEPENS.
MILWAUKEE, Was.,
August 7,1964.
SENATOR WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate, Washintgon, D.C.:
Support your stand and vote against re-
solution reenforcing outrageous action of
bombing North Vietnam.
Mr. and Mrs. JOHN S. WILLIAMSON. Jr.
ELI.sLEY, MASS., August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Courage. Keep true facts on Vietnam be-
BELL, CALIF'.,
August 7, 1984.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washintgon, D.C.:
Our deepest gratitude to you for presenting
the truth about Vietnam. You have illus-
trious precedence for your views and cour-
age, notably Lincoln's on the Mexican War.
Please continue your wonderful work.
Mr. and Mrs. FRANK LYMAN.
NEWPORT BEACH, CALTY..
August 7. 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washintgon, D.C.:
We are grateful for your sanity stand
JACxsoW, MICH.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washintgon, D.C.:
We applaud your South Vietnam stand.
Many Americans agree please continue your
courageous fight.
Mr. and Mrs. DouLASS BENNrrr and JOHN
BENNvrr.
TORRANCE, CALIF'.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
I support your "no" vote against military
retaliation against North Vietnam.
Mrs. VICTOR M. COLTON.
NEW YORK, N.Y.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MoasE.
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Congratulations your partrlotic stand for
W. C. KELLY.
DOWNERS GROVE, ILL.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Your stand of Vietnam crisis is courageous.
Congress must fully investigate in prior Viet-
SILVER SPRING. MD.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MoasE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Thank you for your courageous stand in
BROOKLYN. N.Y.,
August 7, 1984.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
With you is our hope for the future. Con-
tinue your wonderful work and stand on
Vietnam.
Mr. and Mrs. J. SOLOMAN.
EAST HAVEN, CONN., August 7, 1964..
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.:
I heartily support your position on Viet-
nam. Please continue as sole voices of Amer-
NEW YoRx, N.Y., August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Chambers,
Washington, D.C.:
Have wired Senators, Congressmen, urging
they support your splendid stand.
JACOB EPSTEIN.
BANTA CRUZ, CALM.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washintgon, D.C.:
Thank you for your stand on Vietnam.
HERBERT and ELEANOR FOSTER.
SILVER SPRING, MD.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washintgon, D.C.:
Wholeheartedly support your endeavors
to have Vietnam problem negotiated.
Mrs. J. WEIcHBSoD.
CHEVY CHASE, MD., August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE.
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Appreciate your wonderful work In Senate
and especially your stand on Vietnam.
RUTS BENDER.
enthusiastically applaud your lone stand
against the Johnson resolution. It was the
sole act of sanity in the national news today.
You have spoken for peace-thinking Amer-
leans. Our very deep appreciation.
Mr. and Mrs. PAUL BRENNER.
BROOKLYN, N.Y., August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Congratulations on courageous speech Au-
gust 8. Please send a copy.
Prof. EDWARD PESSEN.
PORTLAND, OREG.,
August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, -D.C.:
Want to express our appreciation for your
forthright statement of August 5 on Viet-
Mr. and Mrs. JOHN A. DUDMAN.
PORTLAND, OREG.,
August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Your stand on Vietnam makes good sense
to us. Yours is voice in the dark, but not a
weak one. Use It and God bless you.
Mrs. EDWARD PorrER and Mrs. STANLEY
HOCHMAN.
PORTLAND, OREG.,
August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE.
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Approve your stand against Vietnam ac-
tion.
Some D. WILLIAMSON.
PORTLAND. OREG..
August 6, 1964.
senator WAYNE MORSE.
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Bravo.
PORTLAND, OREG.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
We agree with your South Vietnam stand.
Insist It go to U.N. for settlement.
Mr. and Mrs. IVAN ICKES.
PORTLAND. OREG.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
We wish to assure you of our support of
your position on Vietnam.
Mr. and Mrs. LAIRD C. BRODIE.
PORTLAND, OREG.,
August 7, 1964.
senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
We support your position on Vietnam.
Your courageous stand will hasten negotia-
tion.
PORTLAND, OREG.,
August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Strongly approve your position in Vietnam
involvement. Urge efforts for nonmilitary
solution of crisis.
ROBERT J. RUMSEY.
SCARSDALE, N.Y., August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
We agree with your statement that war
should not be declared by resolution. We
Approved For Release 2005/02/10 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000200160051-5
 Approved For Release 2005/02/10 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000200160051-5
1964 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 17867
SANTA PAULA, CALIF.,
still recognize the importance of life will
August 7,1964.
honor your decision to stand on honesty in
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
this dark hour.
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
JOSEPH and Jo ROBERTS
Washington, D.C.:
We applaud your position against Vietnam
:
Wish to express appreciation of your cou-
war. Keep up your defense of welfare all
rageous stand against our involvement in
mankind.
Vietnam.
Mrs. WILLIARD J. SMITH..
MEDFORD, OREG.,
August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C..
Commend efforts against Vietnam war.
U.N. discussions including China best as-
surance southeast Asia neutrality.
MARIE M. BOSWORTH.
PORTLAND, OREG.,
-August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Appreciate your no vote on Vietnam reso-
lution. You make reality instead of ritual.
WALLY PRIESTLEY,
Democratic Nominee, State Representative.
LONG BEACH, CALIF.,
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Applaud your courageous stand on Viet-
nam. Please continue trying to get problem
to U.N.
JAMES and FRANCES GOODWIN.
LOWER MERION, PA.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
You're the only right one in the Vietnam
vote. Please don't stop.
Mrs. WILLIAM TAYLOR.
SEATTLE, WASH.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C..
Congratulations Senator MORSE on the
stand of truth you take pertaining Vietnam.
Keep it up.
Mrs. CHARLES KOPPEL.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
Thousands know WAYNE MORSE's stand on
Vietnam is right we need. Expect your sup-
port.
RHEA MILLER.
BELLEVUE, WASH.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
Wish Senators JACxsoN and MAGNUSON
thoughtful as you on Vietnam. Talk, not
force, only solution.
Mr. and Mrs. E. C. McINTOSH.
PRAIRIE VILLAGE, KANS,
August 7,1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Glad someone had nerve enough. Thanks.
TOM WAGNER.
PHILADELPHIA, PA,,
Senator WAYNE MORSE, August 7,1964.
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
We Who value liberty and justice for all
applaud your efforts.
OAK PARK, ILL.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.:
Congratulations on your stand regarding
resolution.
E. W. BARBOUR.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I hope you continue
your courageous and gallant fight in expos-
ing the fakery and double involvement in
the North and South Vietnam war, You
have the well wishes and prayers of many
here in Los Angeles.
HARRY J. SILVER, M.D.
WASHINGTON, D.C.,
August 7,19'64.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Our entire family supports your admirable
and heroic stand against the Vietnam reso.
lution.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
The Senate,
Washington, D.C.:
Good luck on Vietnam.. With you all the
way.
PHILADELPHIA, PA., August 6, 1964.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Congratulations on your courageous stand
today opposing blank check resolution; wish
there was some way of widely publicizing
your position.
Roz and BERT KLEINBERG.
FLORENCE and ALEX FREUND.
DETROIT, MICH., August 6, 1964.
Hon. Senators MORSE and HART,
Washington, D.C.:
Do everything possible to stop escalation
of war in Vietnam.
Mr. and Mrs. KEN DRUCKMAN.
TAKOMA PARK, MD., August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Our family of five supports your heroic
position on Vietnam.
SAM ABBOTT.
NEW YORK, N.Y..
August 7, 1964.
TAKOMA PARK, MD., August 6, 1964.
Senator MORSE, of Oregon,
Washington, D.C.:
Support your position regarding American
activities southeast Asia. Keep up the fight.
GEORGE ABBOTT.
Senator WAYNE
U.S. Senate,
Washington D.C.:
In the heart of the crisis you have the
courage to tell the truth and for that you
hold our deepest gratitude. Those who can
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington D.C.:
I believe your speech is in the best interest
of our country.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C..-
We applaud your courageous stand against
this vicious war in Vietnam.
Mrs. ROSE BURGER.
CAMBRIDGE, MASS.,
August 6, 1964.
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Thank you for courageous words about
southeast Asia.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
CHICAGO, ILL.,
August 6, 1964.
We endorse completely your stand on Viet-
nam and congratulate you for your courage,
JUNE and LLOYD ENGELBRECHT.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
DEAR SENATOR: We and many other citi-
zens appreciate your courageous stand on
preventing an irresponsible fruitless war in
Asia. We hope you can win the support of
your Senate colleagues.
Dr. MARTIN GOLDBERG,
University of Pennsylvania.
Dr. DONALD RASMUSSEN,
The Miquon School.
NEW YORK, N.Y.,
August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
We applaud your courageous stand against
this vicious war in Vietnam.
Mrs. RHODA TANGER.
FLOURTOWN, PA.,
August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Grateful for your wisdom and courage in
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
RYE, N.Y.,
August 6, 1964.
I commend your brave and correct stand
as majority of one on Vietnam resolution.
BARBARA WATSON.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Support your courageous stand on North
Vietnam crisis. Hope you will vote against
resolution.
LEONARD FEINSTEIN.
Approved For Release 2005/02/10 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000200160051-5
 elk
17868
Approved For Release 2005/02/10 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000200160051-5
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE August 7
CROTON FALLS, N.Y., DETROIT, MICH., LA MIRADA, CALIF.,
August 6, 1964. August 7, 1964. August 6,1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE.
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Warmest gratitude for sane and courageous
condemnation of V.S. provocative action to-
ward North Vietnam.
TEAc' D. MYGATD.
DEAR.BORN, MICH.,
August 6, 1984.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.:
World opinion with you. Admiring your
courage.
Mr. and Mrs. EDMUND KaasOER.
FLUSHING, N.Y..
August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Your stand on Vietnam reflects our deep-
est convictions. Thank you.
B=as HORNE.
SANTA MONICA, CALIF..
August 8, 1964.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Please accept the thanks of a conservative
Republican for speaking as you did today on
Vietnam. You are 100 percent right. Do not
let your voice subside or we may all be en-
gulfed by bipartisan stupidity.
DONALD C. WARNER.
WEST HARTFORD, CONN.,
Auguyt 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Please accept prayerful thanks for pub-
licly expressing your protest to our recent
action in Vietnam. Many thinking Ameri-
cans hold your sentiments, we are weary of
wars, hypocrisy, deceit, and maneuvering by
cynical minds and hearts. You are a beacon
MOUNT VERNON. N.Y.,
August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
God bless you for your stand on Vietnam.
We're with you.
ELAINE and RICHARD $UNTE.
PHILADELPHIA, PA.,
August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
New Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
We support your courageous stand at this
U.B. Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Building,
Washington, D.C.:
I strongly approve your courageous stand
on Vietnam.
CHICAGO. ILL.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington.-D.C.:
Support your efforts for peace for our Na-
tion and humanity. Accept my thanks.
SARA SIMONS GAARD.
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF.,
August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Thank you for your courageous stand on
U.S. actions and policy In southeast Asia.
The U.S. Government is taking us needless-
ly toward war. President Johnson should
not have a "free hand" as states in bipartisan
resolution. United States should withdraw,
allow Vietnam self-determination.
JEFF MARCHANT,
MARY HAAN.
MOUNT VERNON, N.Y.,
August 8,1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
I heartily approve your stand on Vietnam
and deplore Johnson's action.
Dr. BERNICE BAUMAN.
SCARBOROUGH,N.Y.,
August 6, 1964.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.:
Please give them heck in your remarks to-
day before the Senate. Maybe some of the
Senators will have the guts to stand up too
and tell the American public the truth about
Vietnam. You are a credit and a real public
servant to our country.
RAYMOND E. DRAPKIN.
DETROIT, MICH,
August 6, 1964.
Hon. Senators MORSE and HART,
Washington. D.C.:
Do everything possible to stop escalation
of war in Vietnam.
PENN VALLEY, PA.,
August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Your devotion to principal and conscience,
your courageous campaign to expose and halt
the drift to war, exemplifies the highest tra-
dition of American patriotism and statesman-
ship. If nuclear war is somehow avoided
and historians continue to record the past,
you will be ranked high among American
leaders who fought the hardest fight, keeping
their country always right.
LEE BENSON.
Los ANGELES, CALIF..
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Congratulations on your stand on Vietnam.
I believe you alone represent the thinking
informed American In the Senate. I strongly
urge the adoption of De Gaulle's proposals on
southeast Asia. We should pull out of Viet-
nam and let the U.N. in. WAYNE MORSE for
President.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
God bless you for your lonely and cour-
ageous fight for truth and peace gratefully.
Mr. and Mrs. LEaLIE BAI.AaaA.
NEW YORK, N.Y., August 6,1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.:
We applaud and approve your action
in the North Vietnam debate. Your fight Is
courageous and in the highest tradition of
American democracy. We wish you godepeed.
Mr. and Mrs. LAWRENCE EISENBERG.
NEw YORK, N.Y.. August 6,1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
We congratulate you for your courageous
stand on Vietnam. Seep fighting.
Dr. and Mrs. SAMUEL SIEGEL.
NEW Yong, N.Y., August 8,1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
You truly stand for peace. Congratula-
tions.
Mr. and Mrs. MARTIN AuzuO.
NEW Yoaic, N.Y.,
August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Many thanks for your stand on Vietnam
would that there were more like you.
B. BERMAN.
YELLOW SPRINGS, OHIO,
August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
Strongly support your stand on Vietnam
situation in addresses and articles and on
Senate floor.
ORISCOM MORGAN.
MENLO PARK, CALIF., August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington. D.C.:
We congratulate you on your courageous
humanitarian stand on Vietnam at al.
ELSIE and Louis RENNE.
CHICAGO, ILL.. August 6,1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Strongly support your position on Viet-
nam. Geneva conference should Immediate-
ly be convened.
Mr. and Mrs. JOSEPH ENGEL.
Los ANGELES, CALIF.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE.
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
We commend you for your courageous posi-
tion on Vietnam. We hope you do all you
can to prevent further involvement in south-
WEST PICO DEMOCRATIC CLUB,
D. RABINOFF, Vice President.
LONG BEACH, CALIF.,
August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Congratulations on your stand on Viet-
nam, your Integrity, and honesty commend-
able. Stand for America.
ALBERT OLIVER.
Nsw YORK, N.Y.,
August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
We applaud your courageous stand against
this vicious war In Vietnam.
Mrs. ROSE NASSOF.'
SYRACUSE, N.Y.,
August 7, 1964.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
We and our friends fully support you in
your stand on Vietnam especially In present
crisis. We applaud your courageous action in
Approved For Release 2005/02/10 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000200160051-5
 ..1964
Approved For Release 2005/02/10 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000200160051-5
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
speaking out defense of morality. We urge fortunate in having at least one Congressman
you maintain your position. willing to speak out for sanity and reason.
17869
Mr. and Mrs. SAM FELD, Don't be browbeaten into silence-for with- Senator WAYNE MORSE,
out your courageous voice the sham will be Washington, D.C.:
PALO ALTO, CALIF.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
We support your struggle for peace in Viet-
nam. American intervention must end, not
increase.
Mr. and Mrs. W. B. HOUSTON, Jr.
RICHMOND, CALIF., August 7, 1964.
Senator MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Wish to express my disapproval of in-
creased military action in Vietnam.
ELSIE FARROW.
SANTA ROSA, CALIF., August 7, 1964..
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Heartily indorse your rational stand
against escalation of hostilities without con-
gressional debate.
MAY SCHWARTZ.
PULLMAN, WASH., all too apparent. If I can be of any help in Deeply appreciate your honesty and cour-.
-August 6, 1964. the fight for peace, please call on me. age. Keep talking,
Senator WAYNE MORSE, AL A. MARCHIONE. BRUCE CHURCH.
"
Senate O
ice Building,
Washington, D.C::
"There was truth, there was untruth, and
if you cling to the truth even against the
whole world, you were not mad."
We support your truthful stand on Viet-
nam.
Joseph Morrow, Marian Morrow, Ben
.Beals, William Wilson, Nicholas Sofios,
Jon Miller, Richard Frucht, Vernon
Davies, Department of Sociology and
Psychology, Washington State Uni-
versity.
NEW YORK, N.Y.,
August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
Your courageous speech against our fool-
hardy and. vicious war in Vietnam was won-
derful.
ROBERT GROSSMAN,
NEW YORK, N.Y.,
August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
In my opinion your courageous stand on
Vietnam must be accepted by our Govern.
ment.
SHALOM SPERBER.
LAGUNA BEACH, CALIF?
August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
We agree wholeheartedly with your views
on Vietnam. May your speech today con-
vince others.
VIRGINIA RICE.
NEW YORK, N.Y.
August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
The Senate,
Washington, D.C.:
Bravo for your brave but lonely stand on
Vietnam. We support your position wholly.
PHILIP and ELAINE GERMAN.
LAGUNA BEACH, CALIF., August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
We are in full accord with your stand on
the situation in Vietnam.
Dr. and Mrs. LEWIS G. PYNE.
BROOKLYN, N.Y., August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Keep up the good
work. You are not alone.
BARRY GOLDENSOHN.
SANDWICH, MASS., August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Again you speak sense on Vietnam. Full
support from your constituent on vacation
in Massachusetts.
BARBARA CROWLEY.
WASHINGTON, D.C.,
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Congratulations for you determined efforts
to save the peace in Vietnam. America is
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
Applaud your courageous stand on Viet-
nam.
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF.
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
Congratulations on your courageous stand
on Vietnam situation.
Prof. DAVID EAKINS.
SEATTLE, WASH.
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Continue outspoken. Following message
sent to President Lyndon Johnson: "Take
military out of Vietnam. Mere presence is
provocation for nation which depends on
force and intimidation. Right military ac-
tion is wrong moral action. Retaliatory
strike constitutes wider war. Our responsi-
bility and the imperative of our day is to
effect positive nonviolent means for solu-
tion of international problems"
-IRWIN R. HOGENAUER.
AUSTIN, TEX.
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
There is one sane voice in the Senate on
Vietnam. From loyal liberal Democrats.
CHESTER. A. BRIGGS.
EL PASO, TEx.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Your courageous resistance to Vietnam
resolution historical. Wiring Senator YAR-
BOROUGH to support you.
SAMUEL Z. WINTROUB.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Agree with and thank you for speaking out
on facts about South Vietnam situation.
KATHERINE MARSHALL.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Congratulations for your courageous
stand. United Nations should handle Viet-
nam problem,
SUZANNE SCHMIDT.
CHAMPAIGN, ILL.,
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Congratulations on your lonely and cou-
rageous defense of intelligent, realistic for-
eign policy in a dangerous age. Yours is not
a profile but a soaring monument of courage.
Approved For Release 2005/02/10 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000200160051-5
NEWTON, MASS., August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
We strongly support your stand opposing
military action in Vietnam. We urge you to
fight against the President's resolution on
the Senate floor.
SAUL ALICE VICTOR,
FRED ARONOW.
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
We salute your courage In being the truth-
ful conscience of our country. We are reach-
ing the point of no return in southeast Asia
and involvement in a situation that will be
far worse than Korea with a tragic and fruit-
less outcome in death and destruction. We
pray for peace.
Tom SIEGEL and family.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.:
CHICAGO, ILL.,
August 7, 1964.
We applaud and support your stand. on
Vietnam policy.
Dr. and Mrs. ROBERT C. BUSCH.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Thanks for speaking out. We violate peace
and own freedom by waging undeclared war.
IRVING FROMER.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
NEW YORK, N.Y.,
August 7, 1964.
Grateful for your sane voice. Following
telegram sent President Johnson, Senators
KEATING and JAVrrs: "Alarmed escalation war,
agree with Senator MORSE, terrible mistake,
urge immediate cease fire and negotiations."
 17870
Approved CONGRESSIONAL/ RE1CQ6 4:R1 fhNP403R000200160051 ug
gut 7
BEVERLY TM , CALM., PORTLAND, Oaza.,
August 7, 1964. August 6, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MoasE, Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.: Senate Office Building,
Congratulations on your position on Washington, D.C.:
President's Vietnam resolution. Strongly support your brave stand on Viet-
Mr. and Mrs. R. KARaHMER. nam.
Los ANGELES, CALrr.,
August 7, 1984.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
Yours Is a lone voice in the wilderness but
thank God for that voice.
RUTH R. PECK.
BROOKLYN, N.Y.,
August 7,1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE.
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Congratulations on your wonderful stand
on Vietnam. Yours seems to be the only
voice of reason. Please continue all efforts
for cease are and peace in Vietnam.
ROBERT PHILLTPOPP.
NEW YORK, N.Y.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.:
Congratulations on your courageous stand
against those who seem only too eager to
stampede us into disaster. You will go down
In history as a truly great American. We
are behind you a hundred percent.
EDWARD and FLORENCE SHATPER.
ALNAMSRA, CALM?.,
August 7,1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: We applaud your
courage in speaking out against the provoca-
tive and suicidal course our Government is
taking in Vietnam. You can be assured that
there are millions of Americans who support
your voice of sanity which speaks but against
a policy which is both unjust and dangerous.
ROBERT and PAMELA HONCHELS,.
NEWPORT BEACH, CAT ..
August 8, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE.
Washington, D.C.:
Your discerning appraisal of Vietnam prob-
lem gives hope.
Thank you.
COMMITTEE MEETINGS DURING
SENATE SESSION TODAY
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
yield myself 1 minute.
I ask unanimous consent that the
Committee on Public Works, the Sub-
committee on Internal Security of the
Committee on the Judiciary, and the
Subcommittee on Financial Institutions
of the Committee on Banking and Cur-
rency be authorized to meet during the
session of the Senate today.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
MAINTENANCE OF INTERNATIONAL
PEACE AND SECURITY IN SOUTH-
EAST ASIA
The Senate resumed the consideration
of the joint resolution (S.J. Res. 189) to
promote the maintenance of interna-
tional peace and security in southeast
Asia.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
yield 5 minutes to the distinguished Sen-
ator from New York.
Mr. KEATING. Mr. President, the un-
provoked attacks on U.S. vessels in Inter-
national waters by armed PT boats from
North Vietnam rightly led to a strong
reaction on the part of the United States.
Although there had been some sugges-
tion from the Department of State that
the first attack might be an isolated In-
cident, there was no doubt -whatsoever
pret the sharp revival of partisan po-
litical activity as a sign of division and
mistrust on the part of the American
people. In my judgment, the members
of the Republican Party have a partic-
ularly heavy responsiblity to make clear
at this time their full support and bi-
partisan backing for the action under-
taken by the President of the United
States in defense of free world interests.
This the leaders of the Republican Party
have done. For my part, I should like to
make perfectly clear that I stand 100 per-
cent behind the President. He has my
prayers for the heavy responsibility he
bears at this time and my assistance and
support in whatever way can be most
useful to our Nation's security.
Mr. President, there are and will al-
ways be differences of opinion as to the
wisdom of the policies which have
brought us to the present impasse.
There are, and always will be, differences
as to the future direction and detail of
American policy in southeast Asia. But
when the moment arrives that It is
necessary to order the Armed Forces of
the United States Into action, the Presi-
dent Is Commander in Chief. The al-
legiances of the Nation is to him. And
the entire Nation joins In mourning the
American airmen lost in action during
this crisis.
Mr. President, there can be no doubt
that these actions pose the threat of ex-
panded military operations in Asia.
What should the long-term policy of the
'United States be If we should be faced
with the prospect of conflict with Red
China? I do not believe this conflict is
upon us today, but undoubtedly the situ-
ation today Is more explosive and more
dangerous than it was a week ago. The
guns of August have again resounded
through the world and none can tell the
final result. Prompt retaliation was nec-
essary.
namese PT~boats in the early evening ties toward Asia, both the free nations
signaled a new course of action by Viet- of Asia and the Communist aggressors,
b
y
nam Communists, perhaps a calculated must not be determined merely
effort to escalate the conflict in Asia or speedy reaction to Communist offen-
perhaps a probing operation to test the sives. For the future, the United States
strength of the U.S. reaction. must determine whether we will defend
President Johnson's strong and un- the Independence of the nations of
equivocal statement followed by the ac- southeast Asia at any cost and with any
tion now taken should answer some of force, or whether our military and politi-
the questions that may be asked by our cal policies will be strictly limited. This
friends and enemies around the world will be a major International issue for
h Id h th rou hly
o g
Los ANGELES, CALL?.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE Moass: Our gratitude and
support in your sane declarations on Viet-
nam. We need you.
Dr. and Mrs. HAROLD N. ZEMELMAN.
SAN FRANCISCO, CALM,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.:
We are proud of you, keep trying to drive
some dignity and sense and commitment to
humanity into policies on southeast Asia.
Mr. and Mrs. E. T. HIRSCHMAN.
LOS ANGELES. CAL!?.,
August 7, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
If Lot had found one honest man God
would have saved Sodom and Oomorrba.
Please keep telling the truth about war and
peace in Vietnam. There may be hope for
Washington.
Warmest regards.
s
as to what the United States will do. years to come. It ou
Even more specifically the retaliation explored not only within the executive
against coastal facilities in North Viet- branch of the Government but in full
nam which supported the raiding PT coordination and consultation with
boats should make clear to them that Members of Congress and with the full
Communist forces In Asia are embarked knowledge and understanding of the peo-
upon a collision course in which, If neces- pie of the United States.
con-
l
t
e
e
nary, the full strength of the U.S. mili- Mr. President, I have comp
tary will be brought to bear. This resolu- fidence in the ability of our Govern- .
tion confirms the support of Congress for ment to handle any immediate crisis in
a firm policy of resistance to Communist southeast Asia, but the long-term crisis
aggression in southeast Asia. must be penetrating etttled only after long-term of the
it is curious, and perhaps something factors are thoroughly weighed by all of
more than a coincidence, that In recent part years the greatest cold war crises have Nose who the daiense of thfreedome si-
come in the months immediately preced- future f and
ing an American election. The process the our Nation.
of free elections and political campaigns Through this resolution the Congress
and it is making clear Its present support for
Communist experience
li
t
I
,
en
o
S a
ROBE T M. PECK. may be that the Communists misinter- our Commander in Chief at the moment
Approved For Release 2005/02/10 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000200160051-5