Quote:
|
Originally Posted by analog
I can't imagine a measure of a war's success being touted as "at least fewer people died than we thought would."
|
it's obvious i wasn't implying that. it is however a good thing when casualties are much lower than predicted. such feelings can be sincerely had without speaking to the overall success of a war.
to those clamoring for a response to the questions posed in host's first post in this thread... i'd like for them to search for an actual question mark in his text. in fact, there were no questions posed... only survey results that have absolutely nothing to do with the thread. i read the post in its entirety. perceptions of voters have NOTHING to do with our military operation and its success or failure.
there are perhaps two reasons for the confusion in this thread. firstly, perhaps i have not done very well in communicating the thrust of this thread to begin with. secondly, i believe that the tendency to bring hate of the President into every discussion clouds nearly everything about political discussion on this forum.
the title of the thread is "what did you expect?" the good lord knows that horse has been beaten to death. it wasn't about voter perception or whether you thought the war was just. the question is about the way you perceive a war to have been prosecuted regardless of your thoughts on its genesis (an assertion i feel i've had to beat to death). it was about your prediction if you cannot respond with what your expectations were of its success and how the results have compared with your forecast... you have nothing to contribute to this thread. anyone, regardless of their political persuasion is equally capable of answering these questions as it relates to their own person.