Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
4526359
label
Southwest Missouri State College Telelecture, April 30, 1971
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
4526359
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Southwest Missouri State College Telelecture, April 30, 1971
citationUrl
collections
Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers
Speeches
subjects
Arms control
Compulsory national service
Middle East conflicts
Vietnam War, 1961-1975
War protests
iiifBase
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
4526359
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1971-04-30
month
4
year
1971
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1971-04-01
month
4
year
1971
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
url
mediaId
4b73d05099224ce7
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box D31, folder "Southwest Missouri State College
Telelecture, April 30, 1971" of the Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech
File at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. The Council donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Remarks by Rep. Gerald R. Ford--a Telelecture to Bolj. Sci, students, S.W. Mo. State Colleg
Friday, April 30, 1971.
I have found from experience that the subjects of greatest concern to college
students are foreign policy questions and the draft. So let me discuss these topics
for a few minutes and then I will take whatever questions you want to ask.
There are
positive developments on the foreign affairs front despite the
continue tension in the Middle East and the pounding taken by some South Vietnamese
troops
when the Laotian incursion came to an end.
We are getting out of the Vietnam War. The U.S. involvement there is ending.
The President now is removing U.S. troops from Vietnam at the rate of nearly 15,000
a month, SO that we will be down to about 184,000 by next Dec. 1.
In
November the President will make another troop withdrawal announcement. If our
withdrawals continue at the May-t6-December rate, we will be down to 50,000 men by
the
fall of 1972.
So we are getting out of the war in Vietnam. We have succeeded in averting a new
war in the Mideast, where a de facto cease fire is continuing. And we have made a
solid beginning in the
U.S. Soviet talks aimed at cutting back the strategic arms
race.
We are getting out of Vietnam while giving our friends in Southeast Asia the time
and the means to defend themselves against Communist aggression. I believe the
prospects now are that the South Vietnamese will retain their independence and that
the rest of Southeast
Asia will remain free of Communist domination.
As for those
who
shout, "Ou now," I say that they would
throw away
our investment in South Vietnam at the very moment when success appears
within reach. I think we can salvage something from the dreadful
mistake
of a guerrilla war in
Southeast Asia fought on the enemy's terms. I think
Digitized from Box D31 of the Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
-2-
we can salvage the right of self-determination for the South Vietnamese. There is a
chance that an independent South Vietnam can survive
the
cruellest onslaught
by Communist aggre ssors in
the world's history.
I
would make this one comment about the antiwar demonstrations that have been
taking place in Washington. Those who demonstrated peacebly have acquitted themselves
creditably. But those who have engaged in disruptive tactics--i in civ il disobedience--
have broken the law and have infringed upon the rights of others. Not only have they
violated the law, but they have brought discredit on the entire peace movement. Their
activities have been counter-productive.
Turning now to the Mideast, I would point out that the
United States took the
initiative there to start the two sides talking and to stop the fighting. A year ago
there was daily combat along the Suez Canal. There was growing danger that the United
States and the Soviet Union would be drawn into a direct confrontation. Now we have
at least a de facto ceasefire--and a kind of indirect negotiation. As for Israel's
refusal simply to accept the erms of the United Nations resolution, I think this is
understandable. After all, Istael is surrounded by enemies on all sides--enem ies who
are backed
up by the armed might of the Soviet Union. Israel cannot be blamed for
wanting defensible frontiers.
We know that centurie S of hatred and decades of hestility cannot be ended overnight.
There will have to be painful compromise on both sides before any kind of viable
feerment can be reached in the Mideast.
In the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks--the so-called Salt Talks--the United States
and the Soviet Union are carefully examining the strategic competition that has grown
apace in recent years despite the capacities for overkill on both sides. I would hope
that specific agreements can be reached to curb the arms race. However, there now is
-3-
evidence of a determined Soviet buildup of a new missile equal and perhaps superior
to the
25-megaton Russian SS9. This new development poses a definite danger to
the SALT talks. Intell tigence reports also indicate that the Soviet Union may have
begun putting multiple warheads on some of its
SS9 missiles. So this also is
an ominous development. This leaves the United States no alternative but to remain
strong while continuing to push for the kind of strategic arms agreement we can rely
upon.
Let me
now turn to the draft. The House has approved and the Senate is working on
a bill to extend the draft for two years while paving the way for establishment of an
all-volunteer armed force. One provision of the new draft bill eliminates college
college
deferments. But prospects are that
deferments will simply be phased out-not ended
abruptly.
Dr. Curtis Tarr, the director of Selective Service, calls college deferments the last
remaining inequity in the draft law. As you may know, the President a year ago ended all
occupational and
paternity deferments. So we now have only college
deferments.
What the new draft bill does is to practically double military pay for the lowest
enlisted grades. The idea is to make military pay and fringe benefits competitive with
certain civilian jobs and thus make the military more attractive to our young men.
We cannot end the draft overnight because to do so would be to gamble with the
Nation's
security. But we do believe that under this new legislation we will move
steadily toward zero draft calls and an all-volunteer force.
And now I will answer any questions you may have.