Basic HTML Version
In YOUR Life:
The
BIG
Question...
SURVIVALI
The leader
of any one of a
number
of
nations
could,
now,
in
a
rash moment, touch off the
nuclear
war
that COULD ERASE HUMAN LIFE
from the earth! And there's not much time to
P
RESIDENT NIXON'S visit to Com–
munist China was called a peace–
seeking mission. But heads of
nations - l've said it before - have
been seeking peace for thousands of
years.
Yet none h(tve fotmd it!
We need soberly to face it - we
may not have even one more decade
to come up with the SOLUTION! Up
to somc three dccades ago, it was
different. Thc world had TIME! Jt has
been faced with the question of peace
for millenniums. But now we are on
a collision course head-on with the
question of SURVIVAL!
Now- Five Means of Mass
Destruction
At least five means of mass-destruc–
tion exist today that could destroy
all human life on this planet!
Thaf1 the
ft~clor
that 11111ke1
tlll
the
dilference
.
1
On his return to Washington, Mr.
Nixon said: "We have demonstrated
that nations with very big and funda–
mental differences can learn to discuss
those questions calmly, rationally and
frankly, without compromising their
30
find the ANSWER!
by
Herbert W. Armstrong
principies. This is the basis of a struc–
ture for peace." But that is the same
basis by which nations have attempted
to achieve peace for millenniums.
Consider soberly: "... Very BIG and
fundamental differcnces ...
with0111
[either Jide] compromiJing their prin–
cipies"
-
can THAT be the basis for
peace? Tt never has bcen!
When you realize that, on thc Com–
munist side, those very big and funda–
mental differences are
selfúhly (/ggrer–
sive
-
differences involving dcsigns
on ultimately
ronq11ering and taking
011er
the free world -
that
is no basis
for peace! Yet that is, and has becn
from the beginning, the OIG and
fundamental DJFFERENCE in thc Com–
munist objective!
But - MOST JMJ>ORTANT - up to
now,
ONLY
the problem of peacc was
involved. But toda}' we are facing the
question of SURVNAL!
Notice briefly sorne of the inter–
national reactions to this "peacc mis–
sion." A report in
Time
on the mission
says: "Still, almost everywhcre, the
China trip prompted fresh pondering
about the unsettling ncw shapc of
world diplomacy and, in sorne coun–
tries, about the future state of ties
with the U. S."
One example: In Europe and
Britain the joint communiqué issued
at Shangbai, and signed by President
Nixon, was viewed with misgivings of
a further loosening of U. S. ties in
support of Europe. This sort of
European misgivings is the very thing
that could trigger an immecliate crash
program to unite Western Europe in
a rcsurrection of the old "Holy Roman
Empire" - as a thircl colossus among
the great military powers, equal to or
stronger than either the U. S. or
Russia!
And that
co111d qtlickly
trigger the
1111clear
11'/0RLD WAR
JI/!
This is not intended as a personal
criticism of Mr. Nixon's visit to Red
China, nor of his efforts in "seeking
peace." A President of the United
States enters office BOUND by many
circumstances. 1 would be the last to
say that l could do better.
1 am simply grateful that I do not
find myself in the position of being
so bound and restricted.
1
have been
PLAIN TRUTH Moy 1972