Senator THURMOND. If we are fighting communism like we ought to be fighting it, though, on every front, that is, from the political angle, the diplomatic angle, the economic angle, and all facets of it, because it is a total war, isn't it, if we are fighting it that way, then it is always in the foreseeable future that there can be a splitoff on a satellite, isn't there? Isn't that true? General SMITH. Well, it is the province, of course, of people above and beyond my station to decide when and if and how, if it is to be done over Senator THURMOND. General Smith, does the national evaluation of the nature of the aggressive threat to our country conclude that the Soviets will evolve internally without pressure from us to a peaceful nonaggressive socialist society? General SMITH. That might be a pious hope, Senator. I don't think that there is any evidence from where I sit that this will evolve into a Senator THURMOND. In other words, you don't personally think so, do you? General SMITH. I don't, sir; no. Senator THURMOND. Well, do you know whether the national evaluation of it provides this or not? General SMITH. I should think that we would all hope for it, but when it might come I don't know, and again I am speaking outside of my province. Senator THURMOND. General Smith, does the national evaluation of the nature of the aggressive threat to our country conclude that there is no longer a high degree of unity of control by the Communist hierarchy of the worldwide Communist apparatus? General SMITH. I don't know whether it does or not, Senator. Senator THURMOND. I would like to ask you this question. What is the national evaluation of the nature of the aggressive threat to our country and the free world with regard to the conspiratorial tactics of Communist imperialism? General SMITH. Would you repeat that, please, sir? Senator THURMOND. I would be glad to. What is the national evaluation of the nature of the aggressive threat to our country and the free world with regard to the conspiratorial tactics of Communist imperialism? General SMITH. Senator, this is I think a question which I couldn't give you an educated answer on. I am concerned in my duties with the physical threat which is presented by the Communist block in terms of aircraft and troops and ships and the like, and I don't have time to study the machinations of their politicians. Senator THURMOND. You are not familiar, then, with the national evaluation? General SMITH. In those terms, no, sir, I am not. Senator THURMOND. Do you think that the censorship of speeches as covered in the record of this hearing, and I referred you to a good many of these, reflect the national evaluation of the nature of the aggressive threat to our country? General SMITH. No, sir. My candid opinion from the examples you haps some of them not too well taken. They could be improved on in the administration, of the review which is made of the speeches. Senator THURMOND. General Smith, if you as Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force do not known the details of the national evaluation of the nature of the aggressive threat to our country, how can those thousands of persons under you with much more limited access to sources of national policy possibly know and thereby effectively execute the Air Force policy to inform the public on the national evaluation? General SMITH. When the Air Force speaks of the national evaluation of the threat, it should be in terms of that part of the threat which affects aerospace power, as I thought I said in my statement, Senator Thurmond. I don't think we should expect our people below, or perhaps I should know more about the evaluation of the totally political side than I do, but I didn't want you to think that I could here give you an up-to-date effective political evaluation. I cannot do it. Senator THURMOND. Well, even of the aggressive nature of this threat? Are you familiar with the national evaluation of the aggressive nature of this threat? General SMITH. I am familiar with the aggressive nature of the Communist threat, yes, sir. Senator THURMOND. But are you familiar with the national evaluation of it? General SMITH. I believe I am, sir. Senator THURMOND. Of the nature of the aggressive General SMITH. I believe I am, that it is aggressive. General SMITH. Yes, sir. Senator THURMOND. In other words, you are telling us, then, that the national evaluation is that it is an aggressive threat. General SMITH. Yes, sir. Senator THURMOND. And it is an aggressive threat, as I understood from you, internally and externally, both. General SMITH. Well, I Senator THURMOND. Or a total threat, so to speak, as we mentioned a few moments ago. General SMITH. The external threat is the one I have been directing my attention to. Senator THURMOND. You have been primarily concerned with the external threat. General SMITH. Yes, sir. Senator THURMOND. But you do realize the total threat, economic, political, and diplomatic, and other phases. General SMITH. Yes, sir. Senator THURMOND. Thank you. Senator STENNIS. Thank you, Senator. Counsel, do you have any further questions? Mr. KENDALL. I have no further questions. Senator STENNIS. General Smith, do you have anything further some mission for tactical air to perform before complete victory would be established? General SMITH. Yes, sir. They all feel that they are an integral part if war comes and we are to have a victory. The Air Defense Command in preventing as much as possible damage to our country, the Tactical Air Command particularly in Europe to assist and perform with our ground forces over there, and those of our allies, and the Strategic Air Command to strike the blow at the enemy's strategic targets. Senator CASE. You have heard it said, of course, that the best defense is a good offense. General SMITH. Yes, sir. Senator CASE. In your experience isn't there a little tendency in SAC to emphasize offense? General SMITH. Oh, there indeed is, but I think it is a healthy thing. Senator CASE. Well, I am not criticizing. I personally happen to think that a good offense is the best defense, but on the other hand, when one is briefed in Colorado Springs, he finds that there are some people who think there is a deterrent capability even in a good defense. General SMITH. There is, sir, and I subscribe to both of those. Senator CASE. But, if you are in one command and then in another command, don't you find that the command you are presently associated with really thinks theirs is a little superior in its importance! General SMITH. Well, Senator Case, there is a certain esprit de corps which relates to one command as opposed to another. Senator CASE. Personally, I don't think that is bad. I think it is a good thing that each one thinks that their work is extremely important. General SMITH. I think it is good. But there is enough cross-fertilization so that each appreciates the other's contribution. Senator CASE. Well, as I tried to bring out by these different assignments of yours, you are in a particularly good position to appreciate this cross-fertilization of ideas and theories. General SMITH. Yes, sir. Senator Thurmond, I am going to call on you next, but I want to say something for the record here. The long sheets, like the ones I hold in my hand, have the dates in parentheses, usually covering the major part of 1961. These long sheets refer particularly to speeches of witnesses who were expected to be called during this hearing. They, therefore, give the full information as to the changes, the wording, the revised wording, and what agency gave the changing, as well as the reasons, if any, that were shown on the speeches. All that information is carried on these that we have delivered to the press. The remaining speeches that were reviewed have the changes represented in the large brown-covered book. It was quite a chore indeed to put all this together and make all these copies. So the speeches that did not pertain to people that probably would not be witnesses just weren't treated as extensively as the ones that were going to come in the record through examinations of the wit Any information that is available on any of these as to these changes, the source of the changes, suggested reasons, and so forth, is all available to the committee or anyone else. It is just a matter of digging it out for those that have not already been done. I hope I have made that clear to the committee and to the press. Senator Thurmond? NATIONAL EVALUATION OF THE INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL Senator THURMOND. General Smith, to the best of your understanding, does the national evaluation of the nature of the aggressive threat to our country include communism wherever it exists as a part of the threat or does the threat only include certain types of communism? General SMITH. Well, my personal feeling, Senator Thurmond, is that communism wherever it is found is a threat. Senator THURMOND. For your information-I agree with your answer. For your information, however, there is one-there was a note on one speech, a notation by the State Department that read this way: It is only the externally aggressive type (Sino-Soviet) which the United States is committed to check. Well, my understanding is that we would check communism whether it is aggressive or internal or any kind of communism, wherever it raises its head, in whatever form, economic, politic, diplomatic, or otherwise, and whether it is military. Is that your understanding? General SMITH. Yes. But I think our military main effort, of course, is directed against the aggressive military threat which SinoSoviet communism presents. Senator THURMOND. Now, does the national evaluation of the threat conclude that the aim of the Communists has always been and still is to dominate the world? General SMITH. Yes, sir. Senator THURMOND. There is no question about that, is there? Senator THURMOND. That the aim of the Communists is to dominate the world, and by that we mean that they intend to take the world, including this country, is that right? General SMITH. That is my understanding of their aim. Senator THURMOND. And there is no question about it since 1917 when Lenin took over Russia and made the statement then that the aims of the Communists were to be the gravediggers, the heirs, and successors to the governments of the world, that that policy has been followed continuously since by his successors. Is that true? General SMITH. I believe so. Senator THURMOND. Now, General Smith, does the national evaluation of the nature of the aggressive threat to our country conclude that the time of splitoff of satellite nations from the Communist bloc is not in the foreseeable future? General SMITH. I don't know what the people who run our foreign relations, and the State Department, namely, feel about the changes Senator THURMOND. If we are fighting communism like we ought to be fighting it, though, on every front, that is, from the political angle, the diplomatic angle, the economic angle, and all facets of it, because it is a total war, isn't it, if we are fighting it that way, then it is always in the foreseeable future that there can be a splitoff on a satellite, isn't there? Isn't that true? General SMITH. Well, it is the province, of course, of people above and beyond my station to decide when and if and how, if it is to be done over Senator THURMOND. General Smith, does the national evaluation of the nature of the aggressive threat to our country conclude that the Soviets will evolve internally without pressure from us to a peaceful nonaggressive socialist society? General SMITH. That might be a pious hope, Senator. I don't think that there is any evidence from where I sit that this will evolve into a Senator THURMOND. In other words, you don't personally think so, do you? General SMITH. I don't, sir; no. Senator THURMOND. Well, do you know whether the national evaluation of it provides this or not? General SMITH. I should think that we would all hope for it, but when it might come I don't know, and again I am speaking outside of my province. Senator THURMOND. General Smith, does the national evaluation of the nature of the aggressive threat to our country conclude that there is no longer a high degree of unity of control by the Communist hierarchy of the worldwide Communist apparatus? General SMITH. I don't know whether it does or not, Senator. Senator THURMOND. I would like to ask you this question. What is the national evaluation of the nature of the aggressive threat to our country and the free world with regard to the conspiratorial tactics of Communist imperialism? General SMITH. Would you repeat that, please, sir? Senator THURMOND. I would be glad to. What is the national evaluation of the nature of the aggressive threat to our country and the free world with regard to the conspiratorial tactics of Communist imperialism? General SMITH. Senator, this is I think a question which I couldn't give you an educated answer on. I am concerned in my duties with the physical threat which is presented by the Communist block in terms of aircraft and troops and ships and the like, and I don't have time to study the machinations of their politicians. Senator THURMOND. You are not familiar, then, with the national evaluation? General SMITH. In those terms, no, sir, I am not. Senator THURMOND. Do you think that the censorship of speeches as covered in the record of this hearing, and I referred you to a good many of these, reflect the national evaluation of the nature of the aggressive threat to our country? General SMITH. No, sir. My candid opinion from the examples you |