You’re correct that the messenger does not change the truth of the message, but in this particular instance, they’re also simply incorrect irrelevant of their sincerity. They say that no one believes a thing and they got downvoted. That itself shows that in all likelihood most people who have seen the comment disagree, suggesting that at least some believe it. The only way to defend the statement is to try to argue that those people don’t count, which would be special pleading.
He also meant when he said Palestinian deaths were unacceptable but then he let 20,000 extra ones die before making the ultimatum to Netanyahu that his advisors and supporters asked him to do 5 months ago.
He also said “30,000 Palestinians are dead, we cannot let it be 60,000” but watch by the end of the summer when Famine sets in and Joe has nothing but disapproving press releases.
OMG you’re that 2 day old account that said NATO wants war.
GO outside and touch some grass. Why do I even bother.
Edit: just incase anyone is actually wondering, the way U.S. Treaties work means Biden is essentially legally obligated to continue providing aid until he is legally forbidden from doing so. The president does not have full control of foreign policy; although the president has some capacity to act independently, they are still bound by the will of congress.
That’s being intentionally misleading. Biden bypassed Congress twice to give Israel more weapons. That’s not something he was obligated to do, and proof he is NOT “bound by the will of Congress.”
As Bernie Sanders and other senators have pointed out, US law says arms transfers must stop if we have a credible concern the weapons are used for war crimes or if the receiving country is actively blocking US aid. Both of those things are happening but Biden is claiming he hasn’t seen any of this so he won’t enforce the actual laws and treaties on the books.
Biden’s hands are not tied like you’re pretending they are.
Even if I am wrong, which is certainly possible, it is uncharitable of you to say that I’m being dishonest.
Biden bypassed Congress twice to give Israel more weapons.
I’m not terribly surprised to learn about that; early on, he was very supportive of Israel, and publicly appeared to view the situation differently than he appears to do so now. As such, when this happened is extremely important: if it was prior to the State of the Union Address, then it’s absolutely irrelevant to my evaluation of his current motivation and my prediction of his potential actions.
US law says arms transfers must stop if we have a credible concern the weapons are used for war crimes
Yes, I’m aware. As I state in another comment, my hope is that his current trend of escalating criticism is an effort to maneuver himself and the majority of congress into a position where he cut off aid without political backlash against his position by congress or against the united states from their allies. Time will tell if this is a show or if he’s sincere.
it is uncharitable of you to say that I’m being dishonest
Because you insist that Biden is not the one ordering weapons shipments and that he is bound by law to do so, and when I give evidence that the law says otherwise you say “yes I am aware.”
And yes, Biden bypassed Congress twice in December and then approved another last month. He doesn’t even do that for Ukraine.
The honest thing to do would be to acknowledge the mistake and withdraw your claim.
The treaties were enshrined in law, which is more specific. For example:
Provided further, That of the funds appropriated under this heading, not less than $3,300,000,000 shall be available for grants only for Israel which shall be disbursed within 30 days of enactment of this Act: Provided further, That to the extent that the Government of Israel requests that funds be used for such purposes, grants made available for Israel under this heading shall, as agreed by the United States and Israel, be available for advanced weapons systems, of which not less than $815,300,000 shall be available for the procurement in Israel of defense articles
Removed by mod
I believe that when Biden says he won’t put US troops into harm’s way he means it.
Just ignore them, it’s a troll account.
Maybe, maybe not, either way they’re right
You’re correct that the messenger does not change the truth of the message, but in this particular instance, they’re also simply incorrect irrelevant of their sincerity. They say that no one believes a thing and they got downvoted. That itself shows that in all likelihood most people who have seen the comment disagree, suggesting that at least some believe it. The only way to defend the statement is to try to argue that those people don’t count, which would be special pleading.
He also meant when he said Palestinian deaths were unacceptable but then he let 20,000 extra ones die before making the ultimatum to Netanyahu that his advisors and supporters asked him to do 5 months ago.
He also said “30,000 Palestinians are dead, we cannot let it be 60,000” but watch by the end of the summer when Famine sets in and Joe has nothing but disapproving press releases.
I believe it. Biden has been publicly fed up with Israel’s shit for a while now. I predicted this exact response yesterday.
So fed up he’ll conveniently drop a few more billion dollars of ammunition on Israel’s shores
Please see the other thread where this issue is discussed.
Removed by mod
OMG you’re that 2 day old account that said NATO wants war.
GO outside and touch some grass. Why do I even bother.
Edit: just incase anyone is actually wondering, the way U.S. Treaties work means Biden is essentially legally obligated to continue providing aid until he is legally forbidden from doing so. The president does not have full control of foreign policy; although the president has some capacity to act independently, they are still bound by the will of congress.
That’s being intentionally misleading. Biden bypassed Congress twice to give Israel more weapons. That’s not something he was obligated to do, and proof he is NOT “bound by the will of Congress.”
As Bernie Sanders and other senators have pointed out, US law says arms transfers must stop if we have a credible concern the weapons are used for war crimes or if the receiving country is actively blocking US aid. Both of those things are happening but Biden is claiming he hasn’t seen any of this so he won’t enforce the actual laws and treaties on the books.
Biden’s hands are not tied like you’re pretending they are.
Even if I am wrong, which is certainly possible, it is uncharitable of you to say that I’m being dishonest.
I’m not terribly surprised to learn about that; early on, he was very supportive of Israel, and publicly appeared to view the situation differently than he appears to do so now. As such, when this happened is extremely important: if it was prior to the State of the Union Address, then it’s absolutely irrelevant to my evaluation of his current motivation and my prediction of his potential actions.
Yes, I’m aware. As I state in another comment, my hope is that his current trend of escalating criticism is an effort to maneuver himself and the majority of congress into a position where he cut off aid without political backlash against his position by congress or against the united states from their allies. Time will tell if this is a show or if he’s sincere.
Because you insist that Biden is not the one ordering weapons shipments and that he is bound by law to do so, and when I give evidence that the law says otherwise you say “yes I am aware.”
And yes, Biden bypassed Congress twice in December and then approved another last month. He doesn’t even do that for Ukraine.
The honest thing to do would be to acknowledge the mistake and withdraw your claim.
So you knew I was dishonest because of the content of the reply I gave when you said I was dishonest? 🤨
Sounds legit. Every part of your comment is without flaw. I’m sure you read all of mine; it’s the perfect response.
People keep saying that. But I have read those treaties.
QME is so vaguely defined that it’s essentially useless
The treaties were enshrined in law, which is more specific. For example:
We are also deliberately ignoring the war crimes they are committing so that we can still supply them
Removed by mod