New York, Sept. 29—Jimmy Carter’s statement to the labor convention in L.A. that America has the choice of war or peace, according as America votes for Reagan or Carter, tells us more about the ravenous ambition of the President of the United States than about the objective international order. One of these days those of us who all along have conceded to Mr. Carter that he is a genuinely moral man are going to have to give up on that argument. Genuinely moral men do not put their ambition to stay in power as the absolutely first order of national business. Mr. Carter does. If, in order to effect re-election, he had to say that Reagan was suffering from sickle-cell anemia, it is difficult, given the record, to suggest he would hesitate.
But consider, then, the objective situation at the moment. Mr. Carter has been Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of this country for almost four years. A war has broken out between Iraq and Iran. We cannot now know what will be the final reaches of that war, but we do know this, that if it should actually go so far as to threaten the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, we do not know what we could do about it.





Comments