Intervention vs. isolationism

The author of the Opinion page article "A Sustainable US Foreign Policy," June 1, analyzes polls that indicate public support for the war against Iraq and interprets this as a preference for "engagement" over "isolationism." This conclusion suggests that the only available options are military intervention or isolationism. Isn't it possible for a country to be engaged in the world affairs without resorting to the use of force?

The implication that those who opposed the Persian Gulf war were isolationists is inaccurate. The people I know who counseled against the war are all ardent internationalists whose concern for the well-being of the citizens of other countries led them to oppose the use of deadly force. Robert McMahon, Lansdowne, Pa

Letters are welcome. Only a selection can be published, subject to condensation, and none acknowledged. Please address them to "Readers Write," One Norway St., Boston, MA 02115.