pynchon-l-digest V2 #2197

[Don Corathers]

I have tried to stay out of the current acrimonious conversation, partly
because I am comfortable in my long-time lurker status and partly because it
seems to me that arguing with Doug is an enormous waste of energy. But I
grow weak. For
the record:

Doug:
Public opinion
> remained overwhelmingly in favor of the war throughout the 60s.

Right. That would be why Lyndon Johnson decided not to run for re-election
1968 after being embarrassed in the New Hampshire primary by an obscure
peace candidate.

This statement feels a mite revisionist to me, shaded to make two
circumstances that are fundamentally different seem more similar.


> Today, I expect that if you threw a rock into a crowded street most
> anywhere in the U.S outside a few progressive and liberal enclaves

Not many people would consider the town where I live a liberal enclave, but
if you tried that exercise in my
neighborhood you would almost certainly hit somebody who thinks the Vietnam
war was a horrible mistake, and not just because we lost. And then he'd want
to have a serious conversation with you about that damn rock.

As others have pointed out, there are no meaningful moral parallels between
this war and Vietnam.


  The US has a
> legitimate grievance against the perpetrators of the September 11 attacks,
> but it's using the wrong tactics to go after them

I have read all of your posts since September 11, Doug, and I have not yet
encountered a workable alternative to what is being done. We are dealing
with an army that is essentially a wholly owned subsidiary of Al Queda. Do
you really think the Taliban is going to tolerate the insertion of
"peace-keepers," as you suggested the other day? If you believe that bin
Laden must be neutralized, and I do believe that, the only available course
of action is military force.

Like Quail and others who have posted here, I am profoundly saddened by what
my country is doing. But I believe that it must be done.

Don Corathers