Nomination of Henry L. Stimson, Hearing ..., on Nomination of H.L. Stmison to be Secretary of War, July 2, 1940 |
Common terms and phrases
act of war airplane Allies American armed force Army ask a question believe belligerent Britain and France British and French Cabinet CHAIRMAN Colonel Stimson committee Congress consider convoy depends domestic policies duty emergency Europe fact favor foreign policy gentlemen going hard-earned civilization hemisphere Hitler 3,000 miles international law intervention JOHNSON of California JOHNSON of Colorado June 18 matter mean ment Military Affairs Monroe Doctrine MORRIS SHEPPARD munitions national defense national unity necessary Neutrality Act neutrality venture Newfoundland non-American power North Atlantic outposts position present President private citizen protection resort to armed rules of international sea power Secretary of War Secretary Woodring Selective Service Act Senator BRIDGES Senator CHANDLER Senator HILL Senator JOHNSON Senator MINTON Senator REYNOLDS Senator SCHWARTZ Senator TAFT Senator VANDENBERG ships signatory situation speech spirit statement stop Hitler 3,000 thing United States Senate victim views word
Popular passages
Page 29 - Whereas by their participation in the Pact sixty-three states have abolished the conception of war as a legitimate means of exercising pressure on another state in the pursuit of national policy and have also renounced any recourse to armed force...
Page 8 - We reaffirm our opposition to war as an Instrument of national policy, and declare that disputes between nations should be settled by peaceful means. We shall continue to observe a true neutrality in the disputes of others...
Page 29 - In the event of a violation of the Pact by a resort to armed force or war by one signatory State against another, the other States may, without thereby committing a breach of the Pact or of any rule of International law, do all or any of the following things: (a) Refuse to admit the exercise by the State violating the Pact of belligerent rights, such as visit and search, blockade, etc.; (b) Decline to observe towards the State violating the Pact the duties prescribed by International Law, apart from...
Page 29 - State, not being a party to the original dispute, may, without thereby committing a breach of the Pact or of any rule of international law, do all or any of the following things:— (a) Refuse to admit the exercise by the State violating the Pact of belligerent rights, such as visit...
Page 29 - A signatory state which threatens to resort to armed force for the solution of an international dispute or conflict is guilty of a violation of the pact.
Page 13 - ... and he regarded the participation of the United States and of Britain as indispensable to the success of such a federation. Twenty-two years later, in March, 1939, Mr. Henry L. Stimson put the case not differently from Veblen's: I believe that our foreign policy cannot with safety be geographically limited to a defense of this hemisphere or of our own continental boundaries. On the contrary, I think that if we should stand idly by without protest of action until Britain, France, and China are...
Page 11 - Res. 271) approving nonrecognition of the transfer of any geographic region in the Western Hemisphere from one non-American power to another non-American power...
Page 29 - Whereas by their participation in the pact 63 states have abolished the conception of war as a legitimate means of exercising pressure on another state in the pursuit of national policy and have also renounced any recourse to armed force for the solution of international disputes or conflicts — "1.
Page 12 - These last seem to me to be in conflict with the foreign policy in which I concur. In his January address to Congress the President truly stated that the success of a national foreign policy depends upon having behind it a strong and united people. But national strength is not promoted by an extravagance which comes dangerously near the impairment of our national credit. It is not promoted by discouraging the business welfare of the country upon which depends the economic power of the nation. It...
Page 14 - ... safe from that new terror of war — the bombing of large cities from the air. But the question now is: Having these unique and powerful advantages, how shall we use them? Having this present security from attack, how shall we conduct ourselves in this threatening world? Shall we bury our heads in the sands of isolationism and timidly await the time when our security shall be lessened and perhaps destroyed by the growing success of lawlessness around us? Or shall we use our present strength and...