I’m sorry but this is simply an unserious argument.

It's plenty serious. You don't like how they acted and how they gave partial explanations so you're calling it an obvious lie even though it's not.

They didn't say it was their absolute only option or something like that, as far as I know. (If they did say that you needed to mention it.) That would have been a clear lie. Saying Israel moved first is just... plausible.

▲

mullingitover 2 days ago | parent [-]

> You don't like how they acted

I don't like having my intelligence insulted by such brazen falsehoods, so in that regard this is true.

I'm happy for your heroic amounts of credulity, it must make life a lot easier in this administration.

	▲	Dylan16807 a day ago \| parent [-]
		>> You don't like how they acted > I don't like having my intelligence insulted by such brazen falsehoods, so in that regard this is true. Okay I guess I assumed you disliked the stuff you were calling a lie and a moronic cover story. > I'm happy for your heroic amounts of credulity, it must make life a lot easier in this administration. It's not that I'm being very credulous, it's that they said very little about their decision process. The claims you're objecting to are relatively minor details about the situation. You keep exaggerating the implications of their claims every time you say why they must be wrong.