BAR HARBOR – By a 203-to 54-margin, voters adopted a resolution Tuesday night opposing a pre-emptive strike against Iraq.

The votes were cast in ballot form after residents debated for 45 minutes the issue of whether the United States should pursue a war with Iraq or seek a solution to the conflict through United Nations sanctions.

Stephen Montminy, commander of the local American Legion post, argued that negotiations through the U.N. were not the solution for dealing with Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.

“Are sanctions going to work for this guy? Probably not,” Montminy said. “Geopolitics is not something we should be playing with in this community.”

Others agreed with Montminy that the issue was not one that should concern the town as a whole. “This vote is just plain not appropriate,” said resident Neal Miller. The proposal to adopt the resolution was an attempt to intimidate President Bush, he said.

“This is not right. Policy can be changed without challenging the deepest convictions of people,” Miller said.

Some opposed to the resolution said that the vote Tuesday – which was scheduled by the town council after it twice rejected requests from the group MDI United for Peace to adopt the resolution – was misleading because it was not truly representative of the town residents as a whole. Others, however, disagreed.

“The work of the world is done by those who show up,” said resident Steve Perrin. Perrin, an Army veteran, said that Saddam Hussein was a “miserable” human being, but questioned the wisdom of seeking his ouster through military force.

“What I do know is that peace begins at home, with me,” Perrin said.

After the vote MDI United for Peace member Amanda Kendall said she was pleased by the debate and by the outcome of the vote.

“It has definitely been a learning experience,” Kendall said. “It gives me hope for real democracy here in America.”

MDI United for Peace, in January and again last month, approached the town council and asked that it adopt the resolution opposing war with Iraq. The council in January, without letting members of the group speak, voted to take no action on the proposal. In February, members of the council rejected the request a second time, indicating they did not feel comfortable substituting their votes for those of all residents.

Tuesday’s special town meeting was scheduled after the council decided all residents should have the chance to vote on the issue.