A career State Department official resigned from her post on Tuesday, saying she could no longer work for the Biden administration after it released a report concluding that Israel was not preventing the flow of aid to Gaza.

Stacy Gilbert, who served as a senior civilian-military advisor to the State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM), sent an email to staff saying she was resigning because she felt the State Department had made the wrong assessment, The Washington Post reported, citing officials who read the note.

The report was filed in response to President Joe Biden issuing a national security memorandum (NSM-20) in early February on whether the administration finds credible Israel’s assurances that its use of US weapons do not violate either American or international law.

The report said there were reasonable grounds to believe Israel on several occasions had used American-supplied weapons “inconsistent” with international humanitarian law, but said it could not make a definitive assessment - enough to prevent the suspension of arms transfers.

  • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    5 months ago

    Making a criticism doesn’t require that I have a solution to the problem that’s been set up by the insistence that Biden be the nominee. If that leaves you feeling incomplete, that’s your issue.

    • JimSamtanko@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Complaining about something while offering no solutions and expecting to be taken seriously is about as fucking stupid as not voting and expecting things to change.

      You were asked a simple question, that for all the talk you people seem to do here- should be simple to answer…

      But NONE of you can answer it. It’s litetally your shut down code. And I’m going to ensure that everyone knows it.

          • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            That was never your criteria, until I answered.

            Who would you suggest instead of Biden?

            And, don’t even bother editing, I’m taking screenshots. Just kidding. But I could, and you still got clapped.

            • JimSamtanko@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              5 months ago

              It’s implied. Otherwise, why not just say…. Darth Vader, or anyone else with zero chance to win. Because making suit up is SO fun!

              I asked in good faith, who could win November if not Biden. It’s a given that I was talking CURRENTLY RUNNING candidates.

              But you people never respond in good faith. Which is exactly why I asked what I did. To show to everyone how you cannot answer a simple question that challenges your agenda.

              Thanks for adding your two cents.

              And why would I edit? I’ve nothing to hide. It’s all there. You and your pal getting…. Clapped? Is that a thing? Sure…

              let’s go with that.

      • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        I just don’t think your attempt to derail the primary thrust of my point is worth answering. I didn’t comment about who else might run or how well they would be doing.

        You are trying to engage in a red-herring fallacy, and the royal “we” (since you used the royal “you”) are dutifully ignoring it.

        There being or not being other viable candidates is irrelevant to Bidens chances at winning. Its a non-sequitur. If its important to you, you should come up with an answer to that question. I would be interested to hear what you come back with.

        • JimSamtanko@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          5 months ago

          Nope. That might work on the high school kids you’re used to arguing with, but I’m holding you to the wheelhouse of the topic:

          Your inability to answer a simple question. You can either answer it, or admit your entire argument is flawed.

          You come here and ask people to not vote for Biden, without suggesting an alternative. So either you’re actively trying to get Trump elected, or you don’t know how elections work.

          Either answer the question, or admit to one of the aforementioned.

          Your choice.

            • JimSamtanko@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              5 months ago

              …. they said, on the Internet, as I laughed in enjoyment at their attempt to troll, just before I blocked them in one moment, and forgot about them in the next.

          • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            5 months ago

            Nope. That might work on the high school kids you’re used to arguing with, but I’m holding you to the wheelhouse of the topic:

            Neither will your rhetorical slight of hand.

            If you think Biden can win this election, show me the receipts. Otherwise, you can take a seat.

              • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                5 months ago

                Nice rage quit kiddo.

                Like I said, you are more than welcome to come up with alternatives. You can come back when you’ve reconsidered your position. Enjoy the ride home.

                • JimSamtanko@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Rage quit? Dude… you’re the one refusing to answer a simple question. And then trying to pretend you’re on some more high ground?

                  You’re not.

                  If you don’t have an answer, then you have no reason to be telling people who to vote for, or not to vote at all. Simple as that. Well, you do have that right-

                  But no one in their right mind should take you seriously.

                  • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    5 months ago

                    Since I guess you missed your bus, here is a little light reading for you:

                    https://learn.saylor.org/mod/page/view.php?id=64978

                    My argument: President Joe Biden has a diminished chance of winning the 2024 election based on the way his campaign is being conducted and current polling data. He’s unlikely to win if the trends, which have persisted for over 600 days, stay consistent.

                    In response, you introduce an unrelated issue— that I need to posit an alternative candidate otherwise, I support Donald Trump. This is irrelevant to the original argument concerning Biden’s campaign performance and polling.

                    By shifting the discussion to my perceived political preferences and pretending I owe you an alternative, you are diverting attention away from the actual argument about Biden’s campaign. This move aims to sidestep the evaluation of Biden’s campaign effectiveness and polling issues.

                    You are not engaging with or refuting the evidence presented regarding Biden’s campaign strategy and polling numbers. Instead, you are focus on attacking or questioning my political stance, which is not the topic of discussion.

                    The goal of this is to move the conversation away from a factual analysis of Biden’s reelection chances based on objective criteria (campaign strategies and polling) to a subjective and unrelated debate about political allegiances.

                    Your binary thinking implies that not supporting Biden equates to supporting Trump, which is a logical fallacy itself—false dilemma. Neither this, or your previous fallacy are true or relevant to the discussion at hand.