You could possibly be the most oft-mistranslated poster here, Bob. Why didn't you just give a straight answer when I asked you how you voted? I read you to answer that you rejected all four choices because you disagreed with them, and voted some imaginary "best fit". You wrote: "In case you're looking for a detailed response, I'll take the fourth answer -- my choice -- apart sentence-by-sentence". I translated: "In case you're looking for a detailed response, my choice is to take the fourth answer apart sentence-by-sentence". Then you proceeded to disagree with it too, appearing to have not selected any of the four choices. But now I see how you intended your sentence structure to read. Maybe I'm "dash-challenged", but I WISH you would have written it more clearly. But nonetheless, I have to apologize to you. Because even though you didn't actually score a "perfect", you officially did; so it was not truly a lie.
But the debate now continues over that which technically keeps you from getting a REAL score of "perfect". Your posting history reveals that you advocate the initiation of military aggression into foreign nations for reasons other than defending American soil. For example, you have actually suggested that wars can't be judged in real time; implying that they can only be judged in hindsight by looking at the accidental benefits. Among other things, that's essentially advocating war for the purpose of illegitimate gain (stealing/conquest). ----------------------------- I DID complete the test, so your question is nonsensical.
