[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
"Kent State was a "party school" at that time (I did a fair amount there myself) so the combination of a lot of drunk students and the feeling of having the campus being occupied by a military force was an incendiery combination."

They invited the military force on campus by their violence and the incendiery combination that set the ROTC building on fire, only a few weeks after the UCSB burning of a bank building.

I was a "dirty hippy", college dropout for the second time , and dating a Kent State coed on May 4, 1970 and within a month I had enlisted in the Army and was on my way to basic training. It was an unfortunate tragedy, but it had the opposite effect on many of us. Until then the anti-war movement was sex, drugs, rock and roll and more sex...an excuse to party. When it got to the point of Black Panthers, the SLA and kids getting killed we realized just how out of control we really were.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah I agree in part. But I think that you find at least some of the largest demonstrations against the war occurred after Kent State. After Kent State, when the U.S. started scaling down it's involvment in Vietnam and the number of young men drafted started it's decline, alot of the "out of control" conduct was defused as a result.

I'd also point out that many people enlisted in the National Guard as an alternative to participating in the war. Whether or not it was appropriate to bring in the National Guard to Kent State is open to debate I think.