Ken Hanly wrote:
>Bush has already termed this a war. The terrorist act
>has created an almost overpowering sense of patriotism and desire for
>revenge among the populace.Bush has no choice but to do something relatively
>dramatic even if it should involve some US casualties. I doubt there will be
>much if any sympathy in the west for the thousands of innocents who will be
>killed in Afghanistan or Iraq.
I was away for the weekend, and am a bit behind on email, so this may
have been addressed. But U.S. public opinion is a little more subtle
than this, though of course everything could change once bombs start
flying. But here's an excerpt from today's Wall Street Journal,
reporting on a WSJ/NBC poll:
>At the same time, the poll showed a consensus behind the idea of
>ensuring that targets for American retaliation are fully
>justifiable. That suggests Mr. Bush isn't under pressure to strike
>before investigators can pin down responsibility for last week's
>attacks.
>
>"I'd hate to be attacking innocent people who had nothing to do with
>it," said Jack Pearson, a 47-year-old printing-company manager in
>Orlando, Fla., who was among the 81% of respondents saying the U.S.
>government should "wait to be sure" before striking. But he added,
>"When we do find out who it was ... attack them very aggressively
>and take them out completely."
Doug
