Stimulus Dollars At Work

[sandinista]

Of course, when one is attacked, one is attacked, so in those cases, one's choice is to either sit there and take it or respond.

thats it eh? If you're attacked you only have two options, bomb, destroy, and occupy a country or two for a decade or do nothing. ridiculous.

Coito said "sit there and take it" or "respond". Under "respond" comes quite a few sub-options, not only what you decided to fill in for him.

So how might you have dealt with Al Qaeda the day after 9/11?

fair enough. Although I don't know what "sit there and take it" means either, both phrases are too vague to comment on. As for 9/11 and appropriate responses, I think that may be a little too much off topic for this thread.

[Coito ergo sum]

Of course, when one is attacked, one is attacked, so in those cases, one's choice is to either sit there and take it or respond.

thats it eh? If you're attacked you only have two options, bomb, destroy, and occupy a country or two for a decade or do nothing. ridiculous.

Coito said "sit there and take it" or "respond". Under "respond" comes quite a few sub-options, not only what you decided to fill in for him.

So how might you have dealt with Al Qaeda the day after 9/11?

fair enough. Although I don't know what "sit there and take it" means either, both phrases are too vague to comment on. As for 9/11 and appropriate responses, I think that may be a little too much off topic for this thread.

Sit there and take it in the context of someone attacking you would mean that you don't respond, you just sit there. And take it. It ought to be pretty clear.

[Coito ergo sum]

Of course, when one is attacked, one is attacked, so in those cases, one's choice is to either sit there and take it or respond.

thats it eh? If you're attacked you only have two options, bomb, destroy, and occupy a country or two for a decade or do nothing. ridiculous.

It would be ridiculous to say that by "respond" the only thing that could mean is "bomb, destroy, and occupy," yes.

Are you defending the stimulus because the government wasted other money? Great argument.

me defend the US government? whaaa? Of course I'm not, if you could read, you would see I am just saying that, if your whinging about wasted money look towards the real waste.

Stimulus is real waste -- a trillion is a lot.

[sandinista]

Of course, when one is attacked, one is attacked, so in those cases, one's choice is to either sit there and take it or respond.

thats it eh? If you're attacked you only have two options, bomb, destroy, and occupy a country or two for a decade or do nothing. ridiculous.

Coito said "sit there and take it" or "respond". Under "respond" comes quite a few sub-options, not only what you decided to fill in for him.

So how might you have dealt with Al Qaeda the day after 9/11?

fair enough. Although I don't know what "sit there and take it" means either, both phrases are too vague to comment on. As for 9/11 and appropriate responses, I think that may be a little too much off topic for this thread.

Sit there and take it in the context of someone attacking you would mean that you don't respond, you just sit there. And take it. It ought to be pretty clear.

well, depends on who it was. If it was a child or someone weaker than me than I wouldn't respond. I'd walk away. Also, if it was someone "attacking" me (ie punching me in the face) I could respond by killing them and their family. Always with the black and white with coito.

[Coito ergo sum]

thats it eh? If you're attacked you only have two options, bomb, destroy, and occupy a country or two for a decade or do nothing. ridiculous.

Coito said "sit there and take it" or "respond". Under "respond" comes quite a few sub-options, not only what you decided to fill in for him.

So how might you have dealt with Al Qaeda the day after 9/11?

fair enough. Although I don't know what "sit there and take it" means either, both phrases are too vague to comment on. As for 9/11 and appropriate responses, I think that may be a little too much off topic for this thread.

Sit there and take it in the context of someone attacking you would mean that you don't respond, you just sit there. And take it. It ought to be pretty clear.

well, depends on who it was. If it was a child or someone weaker than me than I wouldn't respond. I'd walk away. Also, if it was someone "attacking" me (ie punching me in the face) I could respond by killing them and their family. Always with the black and white with coito.

Were we talking about a child?

What the fuck are you even talking about "always with the black and white?" You have a black and white attitude, on almost every issue.

You fucking asked me what "sit there and take it" meant and I explained to you what I meant. Why do you insist on being antagonistic and combative on every single issue?

[sandinista]

What the fuck are you even talking about "always with the black and white?" You have a black and white attitude, on almost every issue.

Now you've resorted to "i know you are but what am I"? I guess this may be the only appropriate response:

Why do you insist on being antagonistic and combative on every single issue?

why do you?

[Coito ergo sum]

What the fuck are you even talking about "always with the black and white?" You have a black and white attitude, on almost every issue.

Now you've resorted to "i know you are but what am I"? I guess this may be the only appropriate response:

I find it amazing that someone with as ideological and "I'm right and you're wrong" attitude as you have could possibly make the claim that someone else views the world "black and white." I mean, you're among the least nuanced thinkers on this forum, that's for sure.

Why do you insist on being antagonistic and combative on every single issue?

why do you?

Right - just look at the the last page or two on this thread. See who starts in on whom first.

[sandinista]

I find it amazing that someone with as ideological and "I'm right and you're wrong" attitude as you have could possibly make the claim that someone else views the world "black and white." I mean, you're among the least nuanced thinkers on this forum, that's for sure.

I hope it's at least warm in your bubble. Don't fart.

I find it amazing that someone with as ideological and "I'm right and you're wrong" attitude as you

You are joking? Ideological? Coming from you? Like I said, enjoy your bubble.

[Warren Dew]

And CES - Please stop using the Washington Times as a source of information.

Hey, they're not as bad as the New York Times.

[sandinista]

And CES - Please stop using the Washington Times as a source of information.

Hey, they're not as bad as the New York Times.

all corporate media, propaganda machines.

[JimC]

It worked well in Oz, after the GFC...

There were quite a few bureaucratic stuff-ups, it could have been better managed , but it did the job it was meant to...

[Coito ergo sum]

And CES - Please stop using the Washington Times as a source of information.

Hey, they're not as bad as the New York Times.

all corporate media, propaganda machines.

Best to make them all State run, that way they wouldn't be propaganda machines...