jmog;1271091 wrote:There, I posted the whole original quote not just your out of context snippet.

Look again, at the very beginning I said "I'm beginning to wonder IF..."

It was a hypothetical and never said that I believed we absolutely should do it.

Read it again, it basically said "I wonder if threatening certain cities would stop the terrorists from attacking"

No where did I say we should do it, that is unless you take only a portion of the text and cut the rest out like you did.

You are smarter than that Boat, don't stoop to that level.

Whatever you say guy who was "wondering" whether a proper response would be for the United States threatening to attack the Holiest cities in Islam in a totally different sovereign nation.:rolleyes:

jmog;1271094 wrote:Reading comprehension is your friend.

What I can't comprehend is how you could even "begin to wonder" about such a ridiculous idea.

What a joke of a thread.

I love the options are just do nothing or bomb.
Complete lack of knowledge of the way international relations occurs.

BoatShoes;1271900 wrote:What I can't comprehend is how you could even "begin to wonder" about such a ridiculous idea.

Reading some of your posts that want us to spend ourselves into oblivion, I wonder this same thing all the time.

Nuke the whales!

Anyone see this? http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/18/world/film-protests/index.html?hpt=hp_c1

I'm not very knowledgable on current events and world affairs and all that. I've been following along this thread and saw this. But is there really a point in Egypt doing this? If those eight people have any sense, they aren't going to set foot off this continent.

jmog;1273000 wrote:Reading some of your posts that want us to spend ourselves into oblivion, I wonder this same thing all the time.

Well there's a difference you see. My opinions/ruminations about increasing aggregate demand temporarily via government spending when interest rates are at the zero lower bound are rooted in empirical evidence from the real, actual world. In other words, probably a good idea that is warranted by evidence.

Your opinions/ruminations about the United States threatening all of Islam and cities totally unrelated to the terrible events in Libya are grounded in ethnocentrist gut feelings. In other words, a terrible and ridiculous idea completely devoid of any evidentiary support.

But I suppose that if you come to your conclusions about world affairs using an epistemology that is based upon arbitrary gut feelings I can see how one might find my position incomprehensible.

BoatShoes;1274615 wrote:Well there's a difference you see. My opinions/ruminations about increasing aggregate demand temporarily via government spending when interest rates are at the zero lower bound are rooted in empirical evidence from the real, actual world. In other words, probably a good idea that is warranted by evidence.

Oh really, how did creating an increased, spurious, housing demand work out?

I think the lesson to be learned, especially by liberal theoreticians, is that you cannot create real demand. Demand is driven by true need and value.

Please, keep government out of the markets.

QuakerOats;1275284 wrote:Oh really, how did creating an increased, spurious, housing demand work out?

I think the lesson to be learned, especially by liberal theoreticians, is that you cannot create real demand. Demand is driven by true need and value.

Please, keep government out of the markets.

rabble rabble rabble