None of that changes that militarily the start of that war was considered extremely militarily successful, and this one is off to an even more successful start.
And your original response to me had nothing, at all, to do with what I originally wrote, hence me expanding on what I wrote that you responded to, not your new tangent.
Military/tactical success does not mean strategic victory, but understanding the current reality of both is worthwhile. There is plenty of other discussion here on strategic victory for you to comment on/add your insight.
So I guess we are both just talking past each other.
My man, you said "If you look at what has been achieved versus what was achieved in the same time period in the previous Gulf wars ... " - I responded directly to that, saying it was a stupid measuring stick.
If you wanted to say different things, you should have said them. What you said was bizarre and silly. Come on, now.