In a student poll conducted by The Dartmouth, 1,314 respondents expressed strong approval for the Bush administration's response to the September 11th incidents and supported military action for "as long as it takes" to combat terrorism.
Students surveyed also expressed support, to a lesser extent, for foreign policy as a prime venue for counter-terrorism measures.
The breakdown within the poll's first question, "For how long do you support U.S. military engagement to combat terrorism?" found 60.7 percent of respondents selecting the "as long as it takes" option. 25.4 percent expressed a lack of support for any military action, 8.5 percent suggested military response for up to a year, and 5.4 percent approved of no more than three months of action.
In response to the question "What is the United States' most effective tool against terrorism?" 53.1 percent of students selected "intelligence," 24.5 percent chose "foreign policy," 12.0 percent pointed to "military force," and 5.4 percent chose economic policy.
Sentiment among students was largely behind the president, with 57.1 percent of students responding affirmatively to "Do you approve of the Bush administration's handling of this situation so far?" 15.7 percent of students said "no," and the remaining 27.2 percent were unsure.
Nearly all students interviewed by The Dartmouth advocated the option of continued military action until the problem is solved.
"Terrorism disrupts our way of life; we can't give in and live in a world in which people are afraid to go to sporting events," Aidan Donahue '04 said.
Lindsay Earls '05 concurred. "I feel we need to show the world we won't take this," she said.
Kedar Deshpande '05 offered an opposing perspective: "I think [terrorism] has to be stamped out, but at the same time continuing military action by the United States would almost be a bullying tactic."
Regarding potential casualties among American servicemen engaged in long-term offensive actions, most students indicated that the high stakes justified losses.
"I think we're going to lose lives either way," Jeremiah Pyle '05 said.
Donahue said that he would not be "terribly upset" if drafted for this conflict, saying, "Something like this you can't be in the middle on."
Students expressed greater doubts concerning the country's preparation for military action after the relative peace of recent decades.
"We've been living a dream ... I don't think we're ready," Tinskua Perez '04 said.
"Right now [the American people] are ready. I don't know if enthusiasm will remain in the coming months," Chris Goncalves '04 said.
Deshpande said of the value of intelligence measures, "we're able to prevent [such incidents] before they happen," though he allowed that the World Trade Center and Pentagon crashes represented failures on the part of the intelligence community.
"We can tell that intelligence isn't their best weapon," Perez said.
With respect to foreign relations, several students who spoke to The Dartmouth approved of a conditioned reconsideration of Middle Eastern policies, with most supporting the US's recent repeal of sanctions on India and Pakistan.
"I think we've made some decisions in the Middle East in the past for self-serving reasons," Nicole Drezner '04 said.
"The biggest mistake we can make is uniting the Islamic world against us," Goncalves said, though adding that, "Every sanction we lift is not going to make us all new friends."
"We can make a number of mistakes ... If we have a lengthy trial and hold [bin Laden] against his will, we risk making him a martyr. It's a tricky situation," Donahue said.
Students who supported military action were generally in favor of air strikes and raids by Special Forces, but were more wary of the use of mass ground forces.
Many students specifically cited last week's speech before a Joint Session of Congress as a moment when they were particularly compelled by the efforts of the Bush administration.
"I liked that he stated the US's agenda as an ultimatum rather than something negotiable," Goncalves said, also pointing to the inclusion of victims' families in the audience as a showing of unity.
Pyle mentioned Bush's statement that nations are "with us or against us" as a highlight, while Drezner said she found what she was looking for in Bush's emphasis that the response would be not just retaliation, but a long-term effort to eradicate terrorism.
"[Bush] made it clear that we're pro-Muslim and don't have anything against their religion," Donahue said.
Deshpande pointed to international approval of Bush's policy thus far, standing in contrast to the president's reception at such recent events as the Race Conference in South Africa.
"The rest of the world is standing behind him, and that's a significant change," Deshpande said.
