The New York Times Book of World War II, 1939-1945

by The New York Times

  The fliers are really the only ones who see the sun with any regularity. They have a bad time taking off and landing, but once they get “upstairs”—and it often is not far—they have the sun and blue sky above them and below the blanket of fog, white as snow, with the volcanic peaks of the Islands poking through it.

  All this, of course, of just one base, but I am told it is very similar all the way along the Aleutian chain. The weather here is not to be confused with that in Alaska, where it is much warmer in the summer and colder in the winter, but where the sun shines more frequently and there are trees and frequent evidences of civilization.

  This description of life at this base does not cover, either, the life of the infantry. Nobody loves them. All they do is fight. They bivouac out in the hills, miles from the PX’s and theatres, or on the lonely beaches. They eat from field kitchens and sleep, a lot of the time, in pup tents and on the ground. Occasionally they march in to take a bath or see a movie or go to church, but the buses don’t run to their camp and getting a ride back home often is a difficult assignment. As a result they seldom come to “town,” as the main Army and Navy camps are called.

  Does anyone like it? Of course they don’t. But the great majority of them recognize that it is something that has to be done and they want to get along with the doing. Their chief complaint is that it seems to take so long.

  I overheard a conversation the other day that seemed to cover the majority attitude. It was two Navy chief petty officers talking. One apparently had just got his orders for some other base or ship.

  “Wish you were going back to the States, Joe?” the other asked him.

  “No,” he said, “as long as this war is going on I would rather be out here helping fight it. When I go back I want to go back to stay.”

  AUGUST 21, 1943

  NAZI SECRET WEAPON DUE

  Goebbels Tells Germans It May Halt Allied Raids

  LONDON, Aug. 20 (AP)—Dr. Joseph Goebbels, Adolf Hitler’s propaganda chief, told the German people today a new secret weapon might soon give them relief from Allied air raids.

  “The new weapon against the aerial war imposed upon us by the enemy is under construction,” he wrote in his article in the propaganda publication Reich. “Day and night innumerable busy hands are engaged in its completion.”

  The text was broadcast by the German radio and recorded by The Associated Press.

  AUGUST 27, 1943

  The Roosevelt Statement

  WASHINGTON, Aug. 26 (UP)—The text of President Roosevelt’s statement on United States recognition of the French Committee of National Liberation:

  The Government of the United States desires again to make clear its purpose of cooperating with all patriotic Frenchmen, looking to the liberation of the French people and French territories from the oppressions of the enemy.

  The Government of the United States, accordingly, welcomes the establishment of the French Committee of National Liberation. It is our expectation that the committee will function on the principle of collective responsibility of all its members for the active prosecution of the war.

  In view of the paramount importance of the common war effort, the relationship with the French Committee of National Liberation must continue to be subject to the military requirements of the Allied commanders.

  The Government of the United States takes note, with sympathy, of the desire of the committee to be regarded as the body qualified to ensure the administration and defense of French interests. The extent to which it may be possible to give effect to this desire must, however, be reserved for consideration in each case as it arises.

  LIMITED RECOGNITION

  On these understandings the Government of the United States recognizes the French Committee of National Liberation as administering those French overseas territories which acknowledge its authority.

  This statement does not constitute recognition of a government of France or of the French Empire by the Government of the United States. It does constitute recognition of the French Committee of National Liberation as functioning within specific limitations during the war. Later on the people of France, in a free and untrammeled manner, will proceed in due course to select their own government and their own officials to administer it.

  The Government of the United States welcomes the committee’s expressed determination to continue the common struggle in close cooperation with all the Allies until French soil is freed from its invaders and until victory is complete over all enemy powers.

  May the restoration of France come with the utmost speed.

  SEPTEMBER 5, 1943

  BADOGLIO POLICY MAKES ITALY A BATTLEGROUND

  Country Is Invaded After Mussolini’s Successor Tries to Carry On War as Partner of Nazi Germany

  BIGGER ORDEAL IS ON THE WAY

  By EDWIN L. JAMES

  If ever anyone asked for it, Badoglio did. When Mussolini, the bombastic partner of Hitler, went into the limbo as the United Nations were cleaning up in Sicily, the way was open to Italy for the best sort of peace she could get. Badoglio passed up the chance. Whether or not the presence of German troops in Italy influenced his decision is beside the point from a military point of view. He declared he would fight on against the Allies.

  Surely Badoglio knew that the Italian Army could not save his country from defeat. It was apparent that he was counting on German help, and the truth is that he had the evidence of the presence of the Nazis all around him. But that did not change the basic fact that he did not make peace and elected to fight

  Now Italy proper has been invaded. And that is but the beginning. It is perfectly plain that Italy is fighting Germany’s war. Hitler has evidently decided to make a battleground of Italy. There he intends to fight a delaying battle against the advancing Allied armies. It is too early to tell to what degree the Italian troops will fight a last-ditch battle, but it is not too soon to say that the battle in Italy is primarily a German battle. Italy has nothing to gain from it; tactically, Germany has a good deal to gain. If she could make the Americans and British fight their way all along from the toe of the Italian boot to the Alps she would perhaps have gained months of delay in any other big attack against her “European Fortress.” Italy is being a sucker for the Nazis.

  Marshal Pietro Badoglio in 1943.

  MISSING A PEACE CHANCE

  As the Allies invade Italy proper there is still talk from Italian sources of a “reasonable” peace. These statements are always linked to the statement that the United Nations’ demand for unconditional surrender is impossible because it would be undignified for Italy to accept such terms. Looking over the various emanations from Rome on the subject of peace one finds the idea that the Allies should agree not to occupy Italian soil if Italy should surrender. The Allies could not listen to such a proposition because they intend to use Italian soil and port facilities for the war to beat Hitler. One may imagine that perhaps the chief reason for which the Nazis are planning to defend the north of Italy, where they have sent forces estimated at from fifteen to twenty-five divisions, is to prevent the United Nations from using airfields south of the Alps.

  The possession of such fields would bring a large part of southern Germany, including Munich, and a large part of Central Europe, including Vienna, Budapest, Linz and Innsbruck, within easy reach of United Nations bombers. If Italy could obtain a peace which would prevent the use of such airfields and prevent the Italian Adriatic coast from being used for a drive into the Balkans, should the Allies decide on such a campaign, it would spell a German victory of no small importance. Therefore the idea made no headway whatsoever in Washington and London.

  Badoglio had a chance to surrender and get his country out of the war. He missed the chance. His country will suffer. The longer he holds on to a forlorn hope, the more his country will suffer.

  ONLY A BEGINNING

  The landing of Montgomery’s men on the Messina Straits is but the beginning. The Americans have not yet been heard from. In view
of the long distance between the toe of the boot and North Italy, it would be no surprise if there were other Allied landings up the coast. Naples has been softened by repeated bombings. The railroads have been crippled.

  And in considering the possible strategy of the attackers, it is not to be forgotten that Rome has been declared an open city. That means it is not to be used for military purposes. All of the railroads from the south, with one minor exception, run through the capital. Will the Germans use those roads through Rome? One guesses that the Allies have means of finding out. Furthermore, if Rome is an open city it is not to be defended. This does not mean that the Allies may not occupy it. Under such conditions the capital region looks like a soft spot.

  The Germans have made it evident that they will try their big defense in the region of the Po River, running across northern Italy. Their fighting south of that position probably represents a delaying action, and, of course, if the Allies undertake to fight their way all the way up from the Messina Straits to Milan, the Nazis can accomplish a good deal of delay.

  THE FIFTH YEAR BEGINS

  It is not without interest that as the fifth year of Hitler’s war begins, the Germans are fighting a defensive war everywhere. They are fighting to delay the Russian advance to the east and they are fighting to delay an Allied advance to the south. Even in the war of the air, which they started in their attacks against England, they are on the defensive.

  The Germans make it plain that such is the kind of war they intend to fight from now on. One imagines that even Dr. Goebbels has given up hope of conquest in Russia. Germany is driving ahead nowhere; she is now trying to hang on to what she has stolen in the hope that the effort to take it away from her will tire her enemies so that she can keep her frontiers intact and hold on to some of her loot. It is in such an effort that Badoglio is giving aid and assistance to Hitler.

  But it will be no fun for Italy and the Italians. The question will surely soon arise as to whether the repressive measures taken by the King and Badoglio will suffice to hold in line all of the Italian people, who must by now realize what sort of a fight they have undertaken. One may imagine that if and when Rome is occupied a crucial situation for Badoglio may arise. And a King in flight loses much of the dignity of his office.

  A VERY BIG CAMPAIGN

  The Italian campaign is a major undertaking. It is the biggest thing the British and Americans have started in this war. They know they face a formidable foe in the north of Italy. But they have cards to play. Although the Germans in the past three weeks have sent large air forces into Italy, there is every prospect that the United Nations will retain air supremacy during the whole campaign. That is of tremendous import.

  Furthermore, the Germans have a bad line of communications. The main support runs through the Brenner Pass, where the railroad and the roads are vulnerable. It is reported that Allied bombers have already wrecked a vital bridge on the railroad. There are many bridges over the mountains and there are many spots where damage to the railroad can be most difficult of repair. The closer the Allies can put airfields, the more attacks can be made on the Brenner Pass.

  There are other minor lines for supplies running north of Trieste. But they are not large and are also open to attack from the air and possibly from the land by forces sympathetic with the Allies.

  On the other hand, the Allies’ lines of communication are not easy. They are long—running back to the United States and Britain. They are, too, subject to attack. But the large difference exists in the circumstance that the basic sources of supplies for the Allies are much more safe than the German sources.

  And, taking into consideration the size of the Italian campaign and its importance, Stalin should realize, and, of course, he does, that it constitutes a great aid to the Russian front. The troops and planes which fight the British and Americans in Italy cannot fight Stalin in Russia.

  SEPTEMBER 5, 1943

  What About Women After the War?

  By Elinor M. Herrick

  Director of Personnel and Labor Relations, Todd Shipyards Corporation

  I have no idea what the women of America think should be their place in the post-war world. And I am a trifle irked when a “special interest” woman’s group states with what appears to be authority that “American women want this” or that. Too many men, likewise, think they know what is good for women. The truth is that there is no common denominator for women and no spokesman for American women—or for men, either.

  Different women want different things. I think most of them—whether they will admit it or not—want only to marry, have a home and children and a man to do their worrying (and sometimes their thinking) for them. Some marry wanting children and can’t have them. Some simply want a life of ease—with a marriage license.

  And, of course, there are other women who want Careers—capital C. Others want to be “socially useful.” A lot of women have to earn their living whether they want to or not, either because they have no one to support them or because they are suddenly thrown on their own resources when husbands die or divorce them. A lot of women want homes, children and careers—all three.

  So, you see, it’s all very mixed up. The solution won’t be easy. We need a clear-cut social and economic plan. When I say “plan” I certainly don’t mean that we should fall back upon the easy old-fashioned economic solution mouthed so piously after the last World War: “Woman’s place is in the home”; “married teachers must de dismissed”; “no married women hired.” That campaign brought nothing in its train but secret marriages deception and sordidness. It didn’t work. It couldn’t work.

  We’ve got to tackle the problem now. Unless some tough-minded thinking is done soon the war will end with women a drug on the market, as they were twenty-five years ago. Any solution will have to cover such basic questions as:

  Are we going to plan so that there will be a job for everyone who wants to work? Or only for those who need to work?

  Are we going to bar men of independent income from jobs when the war is over? If not, then why should we bar women who don’t need to work but want to?

  Are we going to build a system in which everyone must work, produce to justify his existence?

  Are we going to say that everyone, regardless of sex, who wants to work must have the opportunity?

  What employment conditions will we face when this war ends? There are many more men in the armed services today than at the peak of the last World War, and many more women in industry today than ever before. The Selective Service Act of this war makes it mandatory for employers to re-employ the returning soldier if there is any job at all for him, ejecting employees hired since the soldier left in order to make room for him. This is only fair. Even the temptation to retain women because they are cheaper labor has been largely removed in this war by the government policy of “equal pay for equal work,” and most employers have not even used the loophole in that policy.

  Many women who have become accustomed to the independence of having their own money will want to continue in their jobs. Others are already finding the strain of double duty at home and in the factory too hard. Those women who are bored by housework and have found excitement and companionship in the factory will not want to give this up. Some women will want to keep their jobs in order to ease the economic strain until their men, back from the war, find their places. Thousands of soldiers will never return and it is important and only fair that their wives or daughters should have the chance to work.

  It is wishful thinking to believe that the majority of America’s newly recruited woman power will flock back into the home. Many will because of their children. Many will not who should. On the other hand, there are already indications that a substantial number of the women war workers will choose voluntarily to give up their jobs. I venture to say that the most frequent reasons for this decision will be that many women left their homes to meet a goal—pay off the mortgage, earn enough for a college education for a child, or buy a new parlor suit
e or a fur coat. Their objective attained, they quit the job. Many others will undoubtedly leave because they have been unable to maintain proper conditions for their children or have found the physical strain of the combined home and factory job too great.

  There will be more unmarried women in the post-war generation. What of them? Will not the increase in their numbers offset the married women who elect to return to their homes? The majority of these single women must work to live. For those who need not work there is plenty of useful, important community service to be rendered, but we have always put the dollar sign as the valuation of work. Volunteer social work will not have much appeal even to those who do not need to earn and who, during these busy war years, have been engaged in exciting war work, driving ambulances or driving generals.

  Then there is the vast army of professionally trained women who have been given a place in the sun—at least temporarily. The professionally trained woman has always found it notoriously difficult to secure adequate opportunities in her chosen field and to advance therein. American women have had greater educational opportunities and have used them more widely than the women in any other country. Yet after receiving this expensive education, too often they find themselves frustrated by the professional caste system. And too often they have failed to maintain their sense of perspective and sense of humor. But they have had an uphill fight when there should have been no necessity to fight.

  The woman past 40 also will present a problem. Her children have grown up, gone off to school or college. She feverishly throws herself into a round of bridge games, a literature or music club, with Wednesdays for the local charity organization, and becomes dissatisfied because there is no reality, no substance to the occupations at hand. Should she not be offered a chance to train herself for useful employment? Can’t we break down the taboo upon employment of women over 40?