Friday, March 21, 2003

For some reason I have taken it upon myself in the next few days to go to the most obscure of American newspapers and see how they respond to the Gulf war. Why? Basically, because the Washington Post and New York Times may speak for some people, but not all, and if there is to be a real change in public attitudes towards the war, the place to really sense this may well be in the smaller papers.

So let's start off with this editorial from the Mitchell Republic of South Dakota, titled: Americans never want war

Some excerpts, and you can take it from there:

Americans have never wanted war...

It was no different in the wars that followed, for
the most part. Americans wanted no part of
World War I or World War II. It was a European
problem. It took a direct attack by the Japanese
to fan the flames of war in the United States, and
even then there were many who opposed involvement
- despite Hitler’s juggernaut throughout Europe...

What Americans have done throughout history is
stand up for its friends, help those who have asked for
assistance, and attempt to invoke policies that promote
freedom and human rights throughout the world...

At the activation ceremony Saturday at the Middle School, it was
obvious that the people who filled the bleachers and folding
chairs were there to support our men and women in uniform.
No anti-war signs marred the landscape; no protests marred
the ceremony...

Support was what was needed, and support was what the
National Guardsmen received...

One can almost cut the Midwestern isolationism, drenched in the earnest language of Wilsonianism (though after reading this you might think twice before using that word).

No comments:

Blog Archive