Sullivan, along with Toomey, was one of only a pair of councillors who opposed a resolution last week to put a banner up in front of City Hall, calling on the U.S. to bring its troops home.

Sullivan's analysis of the city's war mood, however, is not universally shared. Others offer a socio-economic explanation for the city's division.

"A lot of [Central Square working-class] people here are really upset that a lot of money is going to be spent there and not over here," said Bill Cavellini, a Cambridge taxi driver for 17 years and local activist for 17 years. "The feedback I'm getting is: dammit, we've got drugs and we've got crime here and we've got a terrible situation in Massachusetts, and it may not get better for five years and we need the money here. I think that's class-based and I think It's racially based.

Councillor Jonathan S. Myers, a relative newcomer to Cambridge who flew to Washington last week on behalf of the City Council to urge Bush to negotiate a peace, said he sharply disagreed with Sullivan's explanation. It is still far too early to gauge the city's mood accurately, Myers said.

"I think that's a very superficial analysis," Myers said when told of Sullivan's remarks. "That's a pretty cynical attempt to put division within the city."

"I certainly know many long-term residents of the city who feel that we should have had retraint. We had nine councillors who joined in agreement two days before the war urging restraint and calling on the President not to go to war. There wasn't that kind of [division] one week ago," he said.

"I don't think you have had enough time to judge where everybody in Cambridge is at, I think the test is how long [the war is] going to last."