First of all, Mary Anne, casualty numbers never drop. Rates go up and down. The numbers never will, except maybe on Resurrection Day.

Second, it is not unusual for an entity we have declared war on to step up its hostile activities. Why doesn't this get across to anyone?

We attacked terrorists in several nations, killing many, imprisoning more, and sending the rest fleeing into exile. And now they're striking back. What the hell do you expect?

For the fiftieth time, would you expect that there would be fewer terror attacks right now if we had overrun only Afghanistan? That there would be no hostility from al Qaeda? No vengeance?

And where would they be attacking us right now? Where would the Syrians and Iranians be sending their goons?

I am beginning to realize that some people actually have no idea what a war is about, why it is fought, or what the goals are. They deal from raw perception, without reason or abstraction. The war is a bad one because soldiers are dying. It's bad because the enemy is increasing its attacks as the war progresses. War is bad for children and other living things. This is why Donald posts numbers, seeing only death, and not seeing what anyone accomplished with those deaths. And believe me, if we weren't in Iraq, he would be posting the numbers from Afghanistan, where the terrorists from all over the Middle East would then be focusing their rage.

The idea that the only criteria on which a war can be judged is the number of casualties is so amazingly simpleminded that I can't believe anyone here subscribes to it. By this measurement, most of our most successful battles would be considered rank failures.