Newspapers from across the country join the 84 percent of Americans
who support the Chemical Weapons Convention. Excerpts from some of
the more than 100 endorsements include:
“It would be an extraordinary act of irresponsibility if this
decades-long effort to reduce the threat of chemical terrorism and
chemical war were to be scuttled by a hostile or indifferent Senate
leadership.”
| The Keene Sentinel, New Hampshire
|
“With Gulf War veterans complaining of illnesses that may be linked
to Iraqi chemical weapons and the United States facing the dilemma of
what to do with those weapons remaining on its own soil, you would
think the U.S. Senate would see the wisdom of ratifying a treaty to
do away with poison gas.”
| The Decatur Daily, Alabama
|
“Chemical warfare is a vile way to wage war and, in the estimation
of U.S. commanders, is not effective.”
| The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Georgia
|
“Our troops will never be protected by chemical weapons. They will
only be threatened by them.”
| Salina Journal, Kansas City, Kansas
|
“The aim ... is to force the nations of the world to destroy their
chemical weapons and the facilities in which they are made. Since the
United States already started this process, it has nothing to gain by
refusing to join a treaty that would require others to do the same.”
| Deseret News, Salt Lake City, Utah
|
“A treaty sparing the world from the deadly peril of chemical weapons
would enhance ... civil protections, not undermine them.”
| The Post Standard, Syracuse, New York
|
| Editorial support of the CWC includes: |
|---|
USA Today
Birmingham News
Los Angeles Times
New Haven Register
The Miami Herald
Honolulu Star-Bulletin
Idaho Falls Post Register
Chicago Tribune
Indianapolis Star
The Des Moines Register
The Louisville Courier-Journal
Portland Press Herald
|
The Boston Globe
Detroit Free Press
The New York Times
Dayton Daily News
The Oregonian
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Charleston Post & Courier
Dallas Morning News
The Salt Lake Tribune
The Seattle Times
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel |
“... ratification of the Chemical Weapons Convention ... would serve this
country’s economic and security interests.”
| St. Petersburg Times, Florida
|
“History has shown that chemical arms are dangerous even to the army
that uses them, often killing more civilians than combatants. We urge
approval of this historic pact. America’s military and economic
security - and moral leadership - are at stake.”
| The Denver Post, Colorado
|
“The very best reason is that it puts the United States on the right
side of this issue, the ethical side.”
| The Charlotte Observer, North Carolina
|
“But the fact that those rogue programs exist provides all the more
reason for the treaty’s ratification. With the treaty, all nations
would come under intense international pressure to abandon their
chemical programs.”
| The Tennessean, Nashville, Tennessee
|
| |
