Originally Posted by Ezekiel
Originally Posted by logtroll
I haven't asked 100 times, but I have asked numerous times, which claim are you making? Sometimes it's "is" sometimes it's "almost always". Surely you see the difference.
If you don't know by now then I can't help you. Sorry grin
I don't know by now because you are unpredictably inconsistent on the matter. It's kind of like trying to add fractions without converting to a common denominator first. Pretending that I am stupid doesn't magically allow the fractions to add up.

I can only conclude you do not, in fact, know the difference. I estimate that about half of the posts on your "intended consequences of war" twist in this thread have been about trying to unravel which you mean between an absolute or a qualified position on economics being the cause of war. If you can't see that your position vacillates freely between two very different claims, then I suppose it is pointless to try and discuss it with you.

You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
To change something, build a new model that makes the old model obsolete.
R. Buckminster Fuller