RESPONSES TO THE PRESIDENT'S SPEECH

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP88-01070R000100690003-7
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 17
• Document Creation Date: December 20, 2016
• Document Release Date: March 9, 2007
• Sequence Number: 3
• Publication Date: April 24, 1983
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-01070R000100690003-7
RADIO TV REPORTS, INC.
4701 WILLARD AVENUE, CHEVY CHASE, MARYLAND 20815 656-4068
PROGRAM Public Response/C-SPAN
DATE April 27, 1983 10:00 P.M.
STATION C-SPAN
SUBJECT Responses to the President's Speech
Washington, D.C.
CARRIE COLLINS: We're going to try and take as many
calls tonight and get your responses to the President's speech
and to the special order that followed that. And our guest,
again, Congressman Wyche Fowler, a Democrat of Georgia.
Congressman, you are a member of the Select Intelligence
Committee, which deals with this issue. And you also just
returned, about a month ago, from a trip down to Central America.
Now, we just heard your response on the floor, and you mentioned
that you don't agree with the President's methods of bringing
about his goals in Central America. Would you elaborate on that?
REP. WYCHE FOWLER, JR: I'll try, Carrie. And I'm
delighted to be with you.
I tried to say, and I think it's necessary to reiterate,
that I don't know anybody in the United States Congress that does
not agree with the President's publicly avowed statements for our
policies in Central America. I mean we are for stability in the
region. We are for the protection and the fostering of human
rights, if for no other reason than the pragmatic one. Because
if you do not have governments that protect human rights, you
inevitably go back to instability and more revolution, and the
cycle continues. And we also agree that hostile influences ought
to be contained or eliminated to the greatest possible extent in
our hemisphere.
My question, and many of my colleagues that have some
foreign policy responsibilities, is whether or not the methods
chosen by the President are the best methods, are they suc-
cessful, or are they actually counterproductive? And I do think
that the continued emphasis on the military solutions,
Material supplied by Radio N Reports, Inc. may be used for file and reference purposes only. It may not be reproduced, sold or publicly demonstrated or exhibited.
Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-01070R000100690003-7
 Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-01070R000100690003-7
rather than political solutions and economic solutions, negoti-
ations, serious negotiations, not just lip service, are the
problems that we need to address.
I thought the President was more conciliatory in his
tone this evening, though there was nothing new in his policy
that I could identify.
But the question is, are we seeking a military solution
in Central America, or are we genuinely trying to put together
the kind of negotiated settlements that will lead to long-term
stability and progress?
COLLINS: The President also announced in his speech
that he will be sending a special envoy down to El Salvador to
help with elections. Is that a step towards a non-military
solution?
REP. FOWLER: It is indeed. And I certainly support
that. I hope that it will be a person of sufficient stature in
foreign affairs, and authority, that will be able to deal with
the whole range of problems, economic, political and military, in
Central America. I was surprised that he did not name him or her
this evening. But I support that concept and think it's a
positive step towards the kind of solution that I described.
COLLINS: Now, this is the first time that the opposing
party has taken on a special order after a speech before a joint
session of Congress. Why this issue and why this time?
[Laughter]
REP. FOWLER: It is the first time. But I think it was
-- I think we get so many calls for reaction from the press and
from the citizens across the country, that this was an experiment
that probably will be repeated.
COLLINS: Okay. And speaking about getting a response,
we're going to go right to the phones. We've got a call standing
by from Virginia Beach, Virginia....
MAN: The speech of the President of the United States
speaks for itself. I am so proud, and foresee a sunrise for
Central America. God bless President Reagan and God bless the
good and conscious people of this country that will support him
in his courageous step in the area of Central America. It's
about time that the people that take freedom and democracy for
granted will realize that you don't cure cancer with aspirin.
And communism is cancer.
Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-01070R000100690003-7
 Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000100690003-7
Let's show Russia, Cuba, Nicaragua that there is a limit
on the aggressiveness of communism doctrine in our Free World.
If we do not promptly, our children of the United States will not
have the same life that we're living, thank God, now.
COLLINS: Caller, what do you mean, act promptly?
MAN: Your country, America, face reality. Freedom has
a price. And stop the mislead propaganda of the United States
about reality on Central America and foreign affairs.
I am a businessman in Guatemala, and I have to struggle
day by day with the threat of communism, the guerrillas destroy-
ing our economy, burning villages, farms, raping our women,
killing our children.
I ask the United States of America, the Congress, just a
question: What would happen if that would be happening in this
country?
COLLINS: Okay. Thank you.
MAN: If you love your country, your family and liberty,
help this great man called Reagan, which I am very proud of him,
that history has already a superlative place for him.
COLLINS: Okay. Thank you.
REP. FOWLER: Carrie, I don't know that any elaboration
-- it wasn't a question, just a comment.
Of course, whenever you have violence, you have instab-
ility. And violence is the fact of life in Central America. If
the violence continues, it doesn't make any difference whether
it's coming from the right or the left, the communists or the
capitalists, then we're going to continue to have refugees coming
north to the United States, people homeless, and the terrible
tragedies that the caller described.
The question is whether or not the military solution
ought to be the primary goal of the United States, or whether
it's possible. And I think we'll probably be hearing more about
that from other callers.
COLLINS: Lompoc, California.
MAN: ...All I have to say is my commander-in-chief is
doing a very good job. That's all I wanted to say tonight.
REP. FOWLER: Thank you very much for calling.
COLLINS: Now, you -- as I said, you just took a trip
Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000100690003-7
 Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-01070R000100690003-7
down to Central America. And the caller previous to this caller
mentioned the activity that was going on there. Now, I under-
stand there were reports coming out that the guerrillas in El
Salvador are doing quite well for themselves. What is your
understanding of that, having just returned?
REP. FOWLER: Well, Carrie, I think there are serious
questions and some factual determinations upon which some of us
are going to disagree. And I think we've seen lately that we are
very worried about the government of El Salvador, that we are
supporting. They have had free elections. And we hope that they
are going to be able to build support and minimize the violence.
And most of our aid -- or all of our aid, across the board,
economic and military, is to try to contain the guerrillas and
eliminate that threat.
But certainly what I heard, and since I have been back
we have seen that there have been many statements out of the
State Department and people who know who are very concerned that
the guerrillas are gaining and that there's more and more damage
being done by the guerrilla forces.
And, of course, that is one of the reasons for the
President's specific request to increase the military aid, and
that is to train more combat soldiers in El Salvador and do
everything they can to discourage the guerrilla activity.
But it's a very complex situation. It's not going to be
solved overnight. And that's one of the questions that the
President did not address this evening, which is how long are we
willing to go on, how long is it going to take, what kind of
force is necessary.
And maybe I can spark a little controversy with your
listeners out there by saying this: that if El Salvador and the
region is in the vital security interest of the United States,
should the President of the United States be saying what he did
tonight, that he has no plans whatsoever for American forces? Of
course we do not ever want to use American forces when it is not
necessary. But if our own backyard is in our vital security
interest and if the threat is as great as the President said it
was this evening, should he, as commander-in-chief, or should we,
as the Congress, rule out the use of American military forces if
that is necessary to protect the national security interest of
the United States?
COLLINS: Congressman Wyche Fowler is joining us. And
we're getting your responses on the President's speech.
Hialeah, Florida. What did you think of the President's
speech tonight?
Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-01070R000100690003-7
 Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-01070R000100690003-7
MAN: ...I thought it was great. And God bless the
President of the United States.
I am a combat veteran. I fought with the Marine Corps
in Vietnam. And I am Nicaraguan-born. I was raised in Califor-
nia. I've been to Nicaragua and I've seen what the Sandinistas
are doing in my country, in Nicaragua.
COLLINS: When was the last time you were there?
MAN: I was there before and after the takeover of the
Sandinstas.
Now, I ask Representative Fowler, what's going to happen
to all the strong people of Texas when the domino theory takes
effect and all these Texans are going to be fighting the commu-
nism when it's too late? When you have people like Christopher
Dodd out of Connecticut, you have Kostmayer out of Pennsylvania,
and the Representative that's with you right now --what's going
to happen when communism strikes the Rio Grande?
REP. FOWLER: Well, I think you may have been on the
phone waiting to come on. I think I raised that question. If
communism is threatening the Rio Grande or any of the citizens of
the United States of America, then we will unquestionably use
American forces to defend ourselves. And that's why we have an
American armed forces.
COLLINS: Let's go out West to Monterey, California.
MAN: I'd like to ask the Congressman, in view of all
the facts of the situation in Central America, how can you
maintain that President Reagan is trying to impose a military
solution when in fact the exportation of aggression from Nicara-
gua and other sources is in fact in trying to impose a military
solution? It seems to me you've got the -- you're mixing apples
and oranges, and not facing reality.
REP. FOWLER: Well, that's a good question. And I'm
certainly not trying to mix apples and oranges, or metaphors.
But we have signed, along with all of our neighbors in the
hemisphere, what is known as the Rio Treaty, signed in 1947, that
we will not violate the national sovereignty of any of our
neighbors. And if another country in the hemisphere is doing it,
that does not give us license to throw away and tear up our
charter obligations in the Organization of American States or
anywhere else.
I wish that the president had spoke longer and in more
detail about that problem this evening. Because if the Nicara-
guans, as the President says, is importing arms to aid the
Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-01070R000100690003-7
 Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-01070R000100690003-7
guerrillas in El Salvador, I woulid have liked to know what our
policy should be toward the Nicaraguans. He described conditions
in Nicaragua, much of which I share. But the fact of repression
and the fact of broken promises does not give us an excuse, in my
humble opinion, to use any means necessary to try to tell any
country what kind of government they will have or what kind of
government we will tolerate in the hemisphere.
Even if we could -- and I would agree with that. I'd
like -- that'd be a nice -- that'd be a nice world. But even if
we could, which we can't, we then get to the question of what our
treaty obligations are and whether or not, if one country is
going to act like a monster, whether that gives us a license to
do the same.
COLLINS: Spring, Texas. Did you see the President's
speech tonight?
MAN: Yes, I did.
COLLINS: What'd you think?
MAN: I liked it. You know, a lot of things went
through my mind when I was looking at the speech. And one, I
went through the era of reconciling in my mind Vietnam, and in
particular with Central America. I went through support in the
middle and late '60s to absolute revulsion when the true facts,
as I see them today, came out.
Now, you have a tendency to be sort of negative with
regard to any involvement that we might have in Central America.
On the other hand, this is not seven or eight thousand miles away
from where we are.
COLLINS: So what do you think we should do, then?
MAN: Well, I think, in some respects -- now, this is
indirectly answering your question. But the Sandinistas, in some
respects, have blundered by showing only an exchange of dictator-
ship to dictatorship.
My question to Representative Fowler is -- and I'm not
doing this from an argumentative position. But what is the
alternative? That's a question. The second question might be,
what -- you mentioned pragmatics. Three-fourths -- according to
the President's figures, that is -- three-fourths of all the aid
that's going down there is non-military.
We realize that violence is horrible. But what happens
if the leftists take over by absence, by our absence or any
absence created by non-military support?
Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-01070R000100690003-7
 Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-01070R000100690003-7
What is the alternative, Congressman?
REP. FOWLER: Well, I think that's a fair question. Let
me try to do my best to answer it.
The alternative is to seek a regional solution in
Central America by working with our allies in Central America,
Mexico, Venezuela, Colombia, Panama, in trying -- all of whom
have at least as great an interest in not having hostile influ-
ences in their neighborhood as we do. In fact, the countries
that I have just named have been meeting, as you probably know,
calling themselves the Contadora group, named after an island on
which they met, and have said over and over again that we ought
to get all military advisers, military activities, to the
greatest possible extent and as soon as possible, out of Central
America.
But we've got to seek a combination of economic,
political, and military solutions as a last resort.
But I think that, to answer your question, the alter-
native is to openly and publicly acknowledge that the United
States should not be doing it alone, that we ought to be working
in conjunction with our allies. All of our Western European
allies agree on that fact, with the exception of Margaret
Thatcher in Britain. The French have criticized us. The Germans
have criticized us. The Italians have criticized us. The
Belgians have criticized us. The Dutch have criticized us. I
could go on and on.
The reason is that they -- the same criticism that I
have. The objective is a worthy one, the containment of commu-
nism. The question that we ought to be asking ourselves, is our
policy, the way we are doing it, successful? And it seems to me
that the evidence is mounting that rather than containing this
cancer, as one of the callers called it, we are uniting the
country of Nicaragua against the United States, being accused of
the United States being the bully coming down and supporting
those who would overthrow a government, and once again posit-
ioning ourselves as being the heavy in our own backyard.
We've got to learn some lessons of history. We should-
n't be doing it by ourselves.
COLLINS: Seattle, Washington.
MAN: ...It seems to me that if we are advocating our
American system, and so on like that, that perhaps we ought to
just offer statehood to Puerto Rico and Salvador.
Would you like to comment on that, please?
Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-01070R000100690003-7
 Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-01070R000100690003-7
REP. FOWLER: Well, I think that the people of Puerto
Rico are going to make that decision very soon. They will have a
vote as to whether or not they ought to join the Union, if they
wish to join the Union.
I haven't thought about statehood for El Salvador.
Despite the fact that it's pretty close, as the President
described, I'm not sure that we ought to extend statehood that
far down into the isthmus.
A stronger case -- I am greatly in support of the people
of El Salvador, their courage in fighting this expansion of
communism, once they have had this elected government. But a
much stronger case could be made, if you were going to advocate
statehood, for Panama, where we have unquestioned security
interest, because of the canal, and where we have millions,
probably billions of dollars invested of American free enterprise
and located in that country.
But for some of you, I'd like to remind that when we had
the debate over the Panama Canal, there was substantial opinion
in this country, including Ronald Reagan, that that would be the
worst possible thing that we could ever do, to transfer the
canal, that it would lead to a takeover, that it would lead to
loss of security in our backyard. And the State Department this
week, only this week, issued a report that said that our finest
friend in Central America was Panama, that it was a bulwark of
the democratic process, that we had shored up our security by the
way that the transfer of the canal was in operation.
So, I urge all of you to examine the rhetoric, try to
determine the facts for yourselves about what is our best policy
and best interest in Central America.
COLLINS: Fort Benning, Georgia.
MAN: I'm a staff sergeant in the United States Army
here at Fort Benning, and I'm an instructor here.
REP. FOWLER: Proud of you, Sergeant.
MAN: Well, thank you very much.
There's a couple of things I wanted to say, and I'd
appreciate it if you'd answer my questions after I finished all
three of them.
The first thing is that it occurs to me that the
President of the United States is the elected leader of our
country, and he has made a decision as to how our country should
proceed in a policy matter. And I wonder why it is that an
Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-01070R000100690003-7
 Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000100690003-7
elected representative, who really has no more experience in
military or policy matters than any other common individual,
other than being elected by a representative group of his state,
really has the knowledge or the know-how to challenge those
policy decisions. Once our leader has made a decision, it occurs
to me that it's our responsibility to lockstep and follow him.
Now, you know, I heard it said in his speech that this
was not and should not be a partisan situation or a partisan
argument. But it occurs to me that this is a partisan argument.
It is a liberal-versus-a-conservative argument, not a Democratic-
versus-Republican argument.
Now, my company today, a company of initial-entry
soldiers, shot today for qualification. They were shooting as
basic trainees to qualify with their rifles. We had to stop
today because we could not afford the bullets, in the United
States Army, in order for them to qualify.
When they bivouac during basic training, they do not
have enough money on this post to provide them with air mat-
tresses. They sleep on foam mattresses on the ground.
And it occurs to me that this is a general perception
that we in the military have, that those in the liberal sector
simply do not wish to provide the money or have not yet come to
the point where they're ready to pursue the things that we must
in this country to show a strength and a determination that
eventually we're going to have to show.
I'm going to go to Central America someday. I'll be
there and I'll fight. And it'll be because this country hasn't
shown the resolve that it must show to prevent me from going
there.
Thank you very much.
COLLINS: Caller, before you go, the President said in
his speech -- and we talked about this -- that activities in
Central America do affect our national security, of this country.
Do you think that's the case?
MAN: Oh, absolutely. You know, this isn't a Vietnamese
situation. It's nowhere near a Vietnamese situation. In the
first place, in Vietnam we accomplished our mission. Our mission
to police an area. Our mission was not to purge that entire
section of a cancer. Our mission was to police a southern
sector. We did it. We did it well. And we accomplished our
mission without the support of our country.
Central America is a situation in which we can clean out
Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000100690003-7
 Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-01070R000100690003-7
that entire environment within six weeks if there is a resolve
from our country to do so. If our Congress tells us to go into
Central America and clean that portion of the country out, we can
and will do it within the specified amount of time, no matter
what the amount of time is set by our command.
COLLINS: Okay. Thank you, Fort Benning.
REP. FOWLER: Well, Sergeant, as a graduate of the Fort
Benning Infantry School, I want to say that I hope that you'll
spend a little time, rather than preparing your political
speeches, reading the Constitution of the United States. The
President is the elected leader, the President of the country.
But we have a bicameral system. We haved a Legislative Branch
and an Executive Branch and a Judicial Branch. And under the
Constitution of the United States, we are jointly responsible for
setting the foreign policy and the domestic policy of the United
States.
I'm very happy to hear that you don't have enough air
mattresses to be comfortable. But that does not -- it's not
going to cause me to lose any sleep tonight. We are trying to
prepare tough men. And when I was there, we slept on -- didn't
even have the foam. We used blankets. So, if that is your only
complaint about the service to your country, I hope that you
won't pass that on to your troops.
And lastly, I have certainly not raised any partisan
questions tonight. And most of my colleagues -- if you saw the
debate after the President's speech, this is not a partisan
issue. It's not a liberal or conservative issue. It is what is
in the best interests, the vital interests of the United States
of America. And how we achieve the alliances with the people who
live closest to us, in Mexico, in Panama, in Honduras, in El
Salvador, in Nicaragua, and how we achieve long-term stability
that will enable us to trade and work together, those are the
questions. And the only way to do that is to get together, as a
Congress, in conjunction with the President, and at the same time
protect the vital security interests of the United States.
COLLINS: Culver City, California.
MAN: ...The other question I had dealt with the
President's message tonight. And I've heard a lot of people talk
about how we should learn from our recent mistakes, etcetera,
etcetera. There's been quite a few people expound on that. And
obviously, they're talking about Vietnam.
I think, really, our most recent mistake was in Iran.
And I think that is a lesson that we should learn. That when we
cut a country loose, what happens to the country? There are
Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-01070R000100690003-7
 Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000100690003-7
Would you like to respond?
REP. FOWLER: Well, I think that there are lessons of
history. And our policy -- policies in Iran are certainly
subject to all sorts of hindsight and mistakes.
I think the debate over Central America, though, ought
to be focused, if we're going to go into that area, on the fact,
as Admiral Bobby Inman, who was the Deputy Director of the CIA,
said when he left, one of the most respected of our intelligence
officers, that we have not learned the lesson that sometimes it's
better to have an unfriendly government that you can at least
deal with than have a government that we helped install that then
cannot govern. That's when you really get into trouble, when you
go to all this effort to prop up a government, and all of a
sudden it goes under. That's what happened in Iran. And after
we failed with the government that we were supporting, we got the
Ayatollah.
Now, of course, it's much more complicated than that.
And in the brief time, we can't go into it in any great detail.
But I wish you'd think about the other proposition. And
that is, simply, that we just can't always have exactly the kind
of government that we would like in these countries. And we
cannot dictate to the people of Nicaragua, who they're going to
have as their leaders.
We want elections, yes. But the Russians have elections
too. Sometime elections don't prove anything.
But when we stand on firm moral ground and when we
attempt to work with our neighbors in the hemisphere, our allies,
and say, "We want your help. We want your participation. We
want to work with you to promote the common values that we share,
capitalistic values of good economies where you can trade, and
governments that share those resources with, the biblical phrase,
the least of these, our brethren," we have a real opportunity for
progress.
But if we think that we can determine, in every sover-
eign state, what kind, precisely, of government that we are going
to require, I think we're making a tragic mistake.
COLLINS: Miami, Florida.
WOMAN: I am from Nicaragua. I have been here for four
years, after the communists took over my country. I want to tell
you and all the Americans how lucky you are to have a President
Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000100690003-7
 Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-01070R000100690003-7
like Mr. Reagan. If all the congressmen and all the men in the
House of Representatives has his clear view about what the
communists want, you North Americans won't have to suffer what
the refugees from all part of the world has to suffer, without
our houses, our land, or missing our families that the communists
have murdered.
I pray to God that all of you never suffer what the
communists have done to us. I feel sorry for the North Americans
that still believe in the negotiation with the communists.
Because in a few years, if they win, you, the North Americans,
will be, if you are not a communist, in a concentration camp with
all of us that are not, because we will not have another free
country to go.
And to those representatives, especial to the one from
New Mexico, they won't think the same way if they were from any
countries from Central America.
And Mr. Fowler, if you went to my country, Nicaragua,
maybe you passed by my house. It took us ten years to make. And
now a Russian communist is living there.
Thank you.
COLLINS: Caller, before you go, are you -- what about
negotiations between the Nicaraguan government and the leftist...
WOMAN: You will never have to negotiate with those
people. They can tell you any lie, and they will never do what
they say.
COLLINS: Now, what happened to you when the Sandinistas
took over?
WOMAN: Well, my husband is North American. And that
was the only thing. They gave us 15 minutes to leave our house.
And after, I asked them why, because, you know, we were not
guilty of anything. We were not even with the government, with
Somoza. He say that my husband has the three aces. And I asked
him what the three aces means. And he say he's rich, he's from a
good family, and the worst of all, he's North American.
COLLINS: Okay. Thank you, Miami.
Go back to the phones?
REP. FOWLER: Well, my only response, I think -- of
course, my sympathies go out to the caller, my deepest sympa-
thies. Anybody that has to flee their country under whatever
circumstances.
Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-01070R000100690003-7
 Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-01070R000100690003-7
But the question of negotiations will not go away. We
negotiate with the Soviet Union, the Communist Soviet Union,
because the alternative is all-out war. We negotiate with the
Chinese Communists. President Nixon is the one that broke that
ground. And we have had peace and have not had to fight since
those negotiations continue with those countries.
We cannot walk away from it, but we cannot refuse to
talk, when the only alternative to refusing to negotiate,
refusing to seek constructive discussions in the region is to
create more and more refugees, like the caller.
COLLINS: Maryville, Arizona.
MAN: I'd like to address a couple of questions to the
Congressman.
Number one, Congressman, I am from [unintelligible].
Before the American people expect to make any kind of agreement
with the communists, it is totally foolish [unintelligible].
This will never happen.
I'd like to hear your comment on that.
REP. FOWLER: Well, I think I just gave the comment on
that. I know there are people who think that any negotiations
are fruitless. But the President, President Reagan, supports
negotiations, called the START talks. We are trying to enter
into arms control because it's the only way to make the world
more safe rather than less safe.
And for those of you, like this caller and the last,
that say we don't want to talk, we should never negotiate,
certainly we should negotiate from strength. We're doing that.
We are trying to get our allies to be with us so we don't fight
alone to control communist expansion.
But the alternative to talking is to blow ourselves up.
And I don't think that's a very acceptable alternative, and
neither does the President of the United States.
COLLINS: Indianapolis, Indiana.
MAN: I'd like to make a comment, please, on the
gentleman from Georgia. He called and he talked about not being
able to have air mattresses and things. And I'd like to say that
the comment he made, I thought, was not very good, because he
took the comment on the air mattress and he did not make the
comment about the bullets, not having the bullets. And these
people are fighting for our country.
Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-01070R000100690003-7
 Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-01070R000100690003-7
REP. FOWLER: Well, I fought for our country. And I did
not mean to deliberately -- I tried to answer the question
specifically, as he asked me to.
I find it very hard -- and I've already made a note to
find out about why there is a shortage of bullets there. We've
increased the expenditures in the military budget every single
year for the last three years by very large amounts. It's the
only place where we have not cut in trying to balance the budget
and follow President Reagan's recommendations. He's proposing
another 10 to 12 real increase after this year.
I will find out why there are not enough training
bullets at Fort Benning. And if they let me come back, I'll
report to you on it.
But I didn't think that other comment ought to be left
without some response to it.
MAN: ...the air mattresses. But the bullets are
different.
As far as the other comment I'd have to make -- if the
Russians can attack Afghanistan and they can go in there with
their brute force, or they can go into Czechoslovakia, or
wherever; and we have people that ask for our support, and I am
in full agreement that we should go in and support anyone that
asks us to thoroughly, and with people, whatever.
I've never been in the Army, but I personally would be
willing to go.
And I appreciate your comments.
REP. FOWLER: Well, I appreciate yours. And I do think
that that is a real question that I hope we will never have to
address, as to whether or not, if our vital interests are being
threatened in our own hemisphere, whether or not we will have to
go back to the draft, have to use American forces. And Lord
knows, all of us are trying to prevent that.
But I appreciate your comments.
COLLINS: Let's go to San Juan, Puerto Rico.
MAN: I'd like to say a couple of things. First of all,
in response to what that gentleman said about giving statehood to
Puerto Rico. I think that'd be the greatest thing that could
happen to Puerto Rico. First, because we're all American
citizens. And second, among other things, that Puerto Rico,
having their population smaller than practically all of the
Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-01070R000100690003-7
 Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-01070R000100690003-7
states of the Union, has given more lives in wars fighting for
the United States than any other state.
Second, with regards to President Reagan's speech, I
think it was a very good speech, although he was a little bit
short. I always wonder why nobody ever says things clearly.
COLLINS: What do you mean?
MAN: I don't understand why people don't see that we
have Cuba, we have Grenada, we have Nicaragua, El Salvador is
falling. And you can bet that if Salvador falls, Guatemala's
going to fall, Honduras is going to fall, Mexico's going to fall.
And where are the United States going to stand?
I mean, someday, the United States is going to have put
up or shut up.
COLLINS: Caller, do you think we ought to send...
MAN: ...fight for their life, or they're going to have
to just give up, because that's the aim of communism -- the
United States -- because that's the only adversary that the
United States has -- the Russia has.
COLLINS: Do you think we ought to send troops down
there, in addition to aid?
MAN: If it's necessary, I think it should. Because
this is the domino principle. All they're trying to do is block
the United States. They're going to isolate the United States.
And I hope I'm not alive to see the day that all our rights, all
our liberties, all our congressmen, all the liberty of press, the
media, and everybody will be eliminated, like they have been
eliminated in Cuba, in Nicaragua, in Russia, in Poland, in
Czechoslovakia. The unions -- look what's happening to Solidar-
ity in Poland. No unions. And that's the aim of communism, the
United States. And the time will come -- I hope not, but the
time will come that, due to the efforts of the liberals in the
United States, that's going to happen.
COLLINS: Okay. Thank you, San Juan.
...New Jersey, go ahead.
MAN: I've been listening now for the past hour, and it
seems as though, if I can take your response tonight, the cross-
section we're getting is almost unanimous -- just about unanimous
throughout the country that people support the President and seem
to favor some kind of intervention on the part of the United
States to help the government of El Salvador to suppress the
rebels.
Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-01070R000100690003-7
 Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000100690003-7
And yet we're listening to the Congressman here, who
seems to be subtly saying, well, maybe we shouldn't; we should
negotiate.
What is there to negotiate with? You've got a group of
a few thousand rebels who say that they have some rights to take
over the government. They want to change the government. And
yet we saw last year where 85 percent of the electorate came out
and they participated in the vote and they wanted democracy and
they want to select their own government. And we're saying
negotiate with people who don't want to take part in elections,
who want to dictate. We've seen it happen all too often through-
out the country.
And I'm wondering, what about here in the United States?
If the consensus that I've listened to tonight is any indication,
why do we have these liberal congressmen telling us, you know,
maybe we shouldn't give the President what he wants, or maybe we
should give him half of what he wants?
REP. FOWLER: Well, I just will hold my tongue as to
your interpretation of what I have said. Obviously, you haven't
listened very closely. I said very clearly that I supported our
objectives in El Salvador and that we do have an elected govern-
ment there. And that is why the Congress, in conjunction with
the President, is trying to help that elected government stay as
the choice of the people and fight off aggression.
The people hear what they want to hear. And we don't
get a cross-section of the people calling in to C-SPAN, as much
as we would like to. We get a cross-section of the people who
are up at this hour or happen to be listening to the program or
who are interested enough in public policy to do so because they
-- they, being C-SPAN -- provide a very fine service of informa-
tion to the American people.
In conclusion, before we have to go, I would just like
to say to the people of the United States who are listening that
I was pleased to have the opportunity to be on the show this
evening; and to simply urge you, as one caller suggested, to look
behind the rhetoric of any and all elected officials, including
Wyche Fowler from Georgia or your congressman or the President of
the United States. That's the only way that we have a truly
representative system, is for you to be an informed citizen.
If you believe that what is happening in Central America
are affecting -- is affecting our vital security interest, then
you have to ask yourself, should we be using American forces to
control it and contain it as soon as possible? If you believe
that it is in our vital national security interest to have a
certain kind of government in El Salvador or Nicaragua, then you
Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000100690003-7
 Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000100690003-7
have to ask how long you are willing to fight for that and how
long you're willing to support the protection of that government
in office.
And these are legitimate questions. I do not quarrel
with them. But this is the area that the debate ought to center.
All of us want to minimize communism. We'd like to get rid of it
forever, because we know what it does to people in Afghanistan
and Poland and all those that the caller asked. We believe in a
moral system of values. We believe in capitalism as the best way
to give encouragement to people and self-determination.
The question is not waving the patriotic flag. The
question is how serious are we about it, how successful is our
policy, and how far are we willing to go to insure that policy.
Thank you, Carrie, very much for having me.
Approved For Release 2007/03/09: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000100690003-7