8. Intervention would be a liberal education for our people in world politics; give outlet to a vast amount of spirit and energy and would furnish a shining example. 9. It would definitely stop further massacres of Armenians and other Christians, give justice to the Turks, Kurds, Greeks and other peoples. 10. It would increase the strength and prestige of the United States abroad and inspire interest at home in the regeneration of the Near East. 11. America has strong sentimental interests in the region; our missions and colleges. 12. If the United States does not take responsibility in this region, it is likely that international jealousies will result in a continuance of the unspeakable misrule of the Turk. 13. “And the Lord said unto Cain, Where is Abel, thy brother? And he said: ‘I know not; am I my brother’s keeper?’” Better millions for a mandate than billions for future wars. Reasons Against 1. The United States has prior and nearer foreign obligations, and ample responsibilities with domestic problems growing out of the war. 2. This region has been a battle ground of militarism and imperialism for centuries. There is every likelihood that ambitious nations will still maneuver for its control. It would weaken our position relative to the Monroe Doctrine and probably eventually involve us with a reconstituted Russia. The taking of a mandate in this region would bring the United States into politics of the Old World, contrary to our traditional policy of keeping free of affairs in the Eastern Hemisphere. 3. Humanitarianism should begin at home. There is a sufficient number of difficult situations which call for our action within the well-recognized spheres of American influence. 4. The United States has in no way contributed to and is not responsible for the conditions, political, social, or economic, that prevail in this region. It will be entirely consistent to decline the invitation. 5. American philanthropy and charity are world wide. Such policy would commit us to a policy of meddling or draw upon our philanthropy to the point of exhaustion. 6. Other powers, particularly Great Britain and Russia, have shown continued interest in the welfare of Armenia. Great Britain is fitted by experience and government, has great resources in money and trained personnel, and though she might not be as sympathetic to Armenian aspirations, her rule would guarantee security and justice. The United States is not capable of sustaining a continuity of foreign policy. One Congress can not bind another. Even treaties can be nullified by cutting off appropriations. Non-partisanship is difficult to attain in our Government.