Where are both sides in reader opinion on Russo Ukraine war?

The Chicago Tribune published 2 letters Friday criticizing the mild op-ed by Jasen Castillo urging restraint on US/NATO war aims in the Russo Ukraine war (“The nuclear risks in Russia’s war with Ukraine are real”, October 31).

With 2 out of 2 readers totally supporting unlimited US weapons support for Ukraine till it wins the war, readers might conclude this represents widespread public support for US war aims. The opposite is true. A recent poll conducted for the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft found 57% of likely voters strongly supporting US pursuing diplomatic negotiations as soon as possible to end the war even if it requires Ukraine making compromises with Russia. Just 32% of responders opposed such negotiations.

The reasons supporting negotiations are many: misuse of limited US treasure, faraway conflict not imperiling US national interests, continued war destroying Ukraine internally, recognition of US provocations making war inevitable, and most importantly, as outlined by Castillo’s op-ed, possible nuclear war.

The Tribune has a duty to accurately reflect valid public opinion supporting negotiations to end the Russo Ukraine war.