"Do you favor an amphibious assault to open up a second front in the European Theater?"
And, still fully acknowledging that Iraq is not WWII, here's what some of the questions from the Washington Post-ABC News Poll released today might have sounded like if it had been taken during WWII:
"All in all, considering the costs to the United States versus the benefits to the United States, do you think the war with the Axis Powers was worth fighting, or not?"
"Again thinking about the goals versus the costs of the war, so far in your opinion has there been an acceptable or unacceptable number of U.S. military casualties in the Pacific Theater?"
"Do you think the war with the Axis Powers has or has not contributed to the long-term security of the United States? IF YES: Has it contributed to the long-term security of the United States a great deal, or somewhat?"
"Do you think the Roosevelt Administration does or does not have a clear plan for handling the situation in the Pacific?"
"Do you think the Republicans in Congress do or do not have a clear plan for handling the situation in the Pacific?"
"Do you think the number of U.S. military forces in the Pacific should be (increased), (decreased), or kept about the same?"
Labels: MWR: master of the WWII metaphor
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home