Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Stuff you just can't make up

The Management is not responsible for the contents of this forum. Enter at your own risk.
Re: Stuff you just can't make up
Post by PeterZ   » Wed Apr 12, 2017 12:53 pm

PeterZ
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 4859
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 1:11 pm
Location: Colorado

gcomeau wrote:
You know that besides there being a difference between lying and having incomplete information, there's also the fact that they can manufacture more of that stuff right? Or bring it in? As in, that statement could have been true when it was made?


She lied. Here is the quote from WaPo. She asserted that the administration found a solution to the goal of dealing with the threat of chemical weapons. Not chemical weapons, but the threat of those weapons. She asserted that the solution to that threat was found in diplomacy. She lied. That threat was not eliminated. Whatever chemical weapons existed or didn't exist before during or after their applied solution did not remove the threat those weapons represented as she asserted in her comments.

She lied.

“We were able to find a solution that didn’t necessitate the use of force that actually removed the chemical weapons that were known from Syria, in a way that the use of force would never have accomplished. Our aim in contemplating the use of force following the use of chemical weapons in August of 2013 was not to intervene in the civil war, not to become involved in the combat between Assad and the opposition, but to deal with the threat of chemical weapons by virtue of the diplomacy that we did with Russia and with the Security Council. We were able to get the Syrian government to voluntarily and verifiably give up its chemical weapons stockpile.”
— Susan E. Rice, then-national security adviser, in an interview with NPR’s “Morning Edition,” Jan. 16, 2017


https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2017/04/11/wapo-susan-rices-comments-on-syrian-chemical-weapons-was-a-total-lie-n2311825
Top
Re: Stuff you just can't make up
Post by gcomeau   » Wed Apr 12, 2017 12:56 pm

gcomeau
Commodore

Posts: 924
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 5:24 pm

PeterZ wrote:
gcomeau wrote:
You know that besides there being a difference between lying and having incomplete information, there's also the fact that they can manufacture more of that stuff right? Or bring it in? As in, that statement could have been true when it was made?


She lied. Here is the quote from WaPo. She asserted that the administration found a solution to the goal of dealing with the threat of chemical weapons. Not chemical weapons, but the threat of those weapons. She asserted that the solution to that threat was found in diplomacy. She lied. That threat was not eliminated. Whatever chemical weapons existed or didn't exist before during or after their applied solution did not remove the threat those weapons represented as she asserted in her comments.

She lied.

“We were able to find a solution that didn’t necessitate the use of force that actually removed the chemical weapons that were known from Syria, in a way that the use of force would never have accomplished. Our aim in contemplating the use of force following the use of chemical weapons in August of 2013 was not to intervene in the civil war, not to become involved in the combat between Assad and the opposition, but to deal with the threat of chemical weapons by virtue of the diplomacy that we did with Russia and with the Security Council. We were able to get the Syrian government to voluntarily and verifiably give up its chemical weapons stockpile.”
— Susan E. Rice, then-national security adviser, in an interview with NPR’s “Morning Edition,” Jan. 16, 2017


https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2017/04/11/wapo-susan-rices-comments-on-syrian-chemical-weapons-was-a-total-lie-n2311825


Please read your own source.


"removed the chemical weapons that were known from Syria, "
Top
Re: Stuff you just can't make up
Post by PeterZ   » Wed Apr 12, 2017 1:06 pm

PeterZ
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 4859
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 1:11 pm
Location: Colorado

PeterZ wrote:
She lied. Here is the quote from WaPo. She asserted that the administration found a solution to the goal of dealing with the threat of chemical weapons. Not chemical weapons, but the threat of those weapons. She asserted that the solution to that threat was found in diplomacy. She lied. That threat was not eliminated. Whatever chemical weapons existed or didn't exist before during or after their applied solution did not remove the threat those weapons represented as she asserted in her comments.

She lied.

“We were able to find a solution that didn’t necessitate the use of force that actually removed the chemical weapons that were known from Syria, in a way that the use of force would never have accomplished. Our aim in contemplating the use of force following the use of chemical weapons in August of 2013 was not to intervene in the civil war, not to become involved in the combat between Assad and the opposition, but to deal with the threat of chemical weapons by virtue of the diplomacy that we did with Russia and with the Security Council. We were able to get the Syrian government to voluntarily and verifiably give up its chemical weapons stockpile.”
— Susan E. Rice, then-national security adviser, in an interview with NPR’s “Morning Edition,” Jan. 16, 2017


https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2017/04/11/wapo-susan-rices-comments-on-syrian-chemical-weapons-was-a-total-lie-n2311825

gcomeau wrote:Please read your own source.


"removed the chemical weapons that were known from Syria, "


Please read her underlined comments. They were able to find a solution to the threat not proximity of chemical weapons via the Russians and Security Council. Lies.
Top
Re: Stuff you just can't make up
Post by gcomeau   » Wed Apr 12, 2017 1:14 pm

gcomeau
Commodore

Posts: 924
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 5:24 pm

PeterZ wrote:
gcomeau wrote:Please read your own source.


"removed the chemical weapons that were known from Syria, "


Please read her underlined comments.


I did. But I read all her comment so I know which chemical weapons she said they removed the threat of.

Namely, the known stockpile.

Context.
Top
Re: Stuff you just can't make up
Post by PeterZ   » Wed Apr 12, 2017 1:23 pm

PeterZ
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 4859
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 1:11 pm
Location: Colorado

gcomeau wrote:
PeterZ wrote:
Please read her underlined comments.


I did. But I read all her comment so I know which chemical weapons she said they removed the threat of.

Namely, the known stockpile.

Context.


This statement was untrue. She did not qualify the threat as limited to the known stockpile, but the broader more pervasive threat of chemical weapons. she describes what weapons were removed, but the goal of the policy was the removal of the threat those weapons represented not simply the weapons themselves. That threat was not removed and so she lied because she knew that threat was not removed.

Funny how you take the Presidents words literally to illustrate his lies, but refuse to do the same for Democrats.

Our aim in contemplating the use of force following the use of chemical weapons in August of 2013 was not to intervene in the civil war, not to become involved in the combat between Assad and the opposition, but to deal with the threat of chemical weapons by virtue of the diplomacy that we did with Russia and with the Security Council.
Top
Re: Stuff you just can't make up
Post by gcomeau   » Wed Apr 12, 2017 1:35 pm

gcomeau
Commodore

Posts: 924
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 5:24 pm

PeterZ wrote:
gcomeau wrote:I did. But I read all her comment so I know which chemical weapons she said they removed the threat of.

Namely, the known stockpile.

Context.


This statement was untrue. She did not qualify the threat as limited to the known stockpile, but the broader more pervasive threat of chemical weapons.



I quoted where she limited it to the known stockpile. so this statement is absurd. You can't say she didn't qualify it by insisting we only consider the underlined portion then not underlining thee qualification to pretend it doesn't exist.



she describes what weapons were removed, but the goal of the policy was the removal of the threat those weapons represented not simply the weapons themselves. That threat was not removed and so she lied because she knew that threat was not removed.

Funny how you take the Presidents words literally to illustrate his lies, but refuse to do the same for Democrats.


Reading all the words she actually used IS taking her literally.


Our aim in contemplating the use of force following the use of chemical weapons in August of 2013 was not to intervene in the civil war, not to become involved in the combat between Assad and the opposition, but to deal with the threat of chemical weapons by virtue of the diplomacy that we did with Russia and with the Security Council.



Yup.

Did she say "remove the threat of all chemical weapons for all eternity?" No she did not. She was referring to, and I quote again, "the chemical weapons that were known" as of August 2013. Removing THAT threat.



To believe that given her specific statement that that was what she was referring to the correct way to read her statement is to strip away the entire thing except a fraction of a single sentence you decided to underline and rip out of its surrounding context then declare that clearly they were claiming that for all future time no chemical weapon would ever be made, imported, or deployed in Syria is beyond ridiculous. And it is sure as hell not "taking her literally".
Top
Re: Stuff you just can't make up
Post by PeterZ   » Wed Apr 12, 2017 1:51 pm

PeterZ
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 4859
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 1:11 pm
Location: Colorado

gcomeau wrote:Yup.

Did she say "remove the threat of all chemical weapons for all eternity?" No she did not. She was referring to, and I quote again, "the chemical weapons that were known" as of August 2013. Removing THAT threat.



To believe that given her specific statement that that was what she was referring to the correct way to read her statement is to strip away the entire thing except a fraction of a single sentence you decided to underline and rip out of its surrounding context then declare that clearly they were claiming that for all future time no chemical weapon would ever be made, imported, or deployed in Syria is beyond ridiculous. And it is sure as hell not "taking her literally".


Her solution didn't last 4 years, let alone for all eternity. She asserted that the Russians and Security Council imposed a solution that abated the threat. The threat re-appeared and so the problem wasn't solved. The threat could have manifested at any time since Syria last used the chemical weapons. So, it was not removed even temporarily. This would be true even if the actual weapons were removed, which we don't know is the case.

One might argue that because they were used 4 short years after their supposed removal, that they were never removed in the first place. We have no proof that they were ever removed and pretty damning evidence that they were not. Bottom line is that the evidence indicates that Rice lied.

I know you won't believe that. Fine. We disagree.....as if that is a surprise.
Top
Re: Stuff you just can't make up
Post by gcomeau   » Wed Apr 12, 2017 2:14 pm

gcomeau
Commodore

Posts: 924
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 5:24 pm

PeterZ wrote:
gcomeau wrote:Yup.

Did she say "remove the threat of all chemical weapons for all eternity?" No she did not. She was referring to, and I quote again, "the chemical weapons that were known" as of August 2013. Removing THAT threat.



To believe that given her specific statement that that was what she was referring to the correct way to read her statement is to strip away the entire thing except a fraction of a single sentence you decided to underline and rip out of its surrounding context then declare that clearly they were claiming that for all future time no chemical weapon would ever be made, imported, or deployed in Syria is beyond ridiculous. And it is sure as hell not "taking her literally".


Her solution didn't last 4 years, let alone for all eternity.


No, it just removed the threat of the weapons known to exist, by removing those weapons.

You know, like she said.


The definition of lying that was covered earlier addresses the rest of your argument here.
Top
Re: Stuff you just can't make up
Post by PeterZ   » Wed Apr 12, 2017 3:47 pm

PeterZ
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 4859
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 1:11 pm
Location: Colorado

gcomeau wrote:
Her solution didn't last 4 years, let alone for all eternity.


No, it just removed the threat of the weapons known to exist, by removing those weapons.

You know, like she said.


The definition of lying that was covered earlier addresses the rest of your argument here.[/quote]

That's the problem. It didn't remove the threat. Ever. Syria retained the capability to use chemical weapons. Russia did nothing to prevent their using chemical weapons. They simply chose not to until trump took office. She lied.
Top
Re: Stuff you just can't make up
Post by gcomeau   » Wed Apr 12, 2017 3:55 pm

gcomeau
Commodore

Posts: 924
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 5:24 pm

PeterZ wrote:
gcomeau wrote:No, it just removed the threat of the weapons known to exist, by removing those weapons.

You know, like she said.


The definition of lying that was covered earlier addresses the rest of your argument here.


That's the problem. It didn't remove the threat. Ever.


Of the weapons that were confiscated it did.

Which. Is. What. She. Said.

Geez.
Top

Return to Politics