There are indicator words for concessions. Usually, the word stands in opposition to an author's argument or is a qualifier. 

Concessions cut against and oppose an argument that the author is trying to persuade you of. It's almost like stealing your thunder and framing a counter-argument the way the author wants to. Is this a smaller form of steel-manning?

Context is table setting or "other people say". This is not the author's position that their trying to persuade you of.

It is simply a "set-up" in order to provide crucial background info or for the author to agree or disagree with what other people say.

Is this correct?

Many people have wondered how to defend properly against poison gas. In the First World War, gas attacks killed countless people. I have researched and found has found a possible defense. If there was a way to filter the poison before you breathed it in, the chance of survival is much higher. Gas masks are the solution to the problem of poison gas.

First 2 sentences are context. The next 2 are premises. The last sentence is the conclusion.

I'm hugging you because I miss you, therefore you should hug me back tightly. 

This is now made into an argument because I am trying to persuade you to hug me back tightly because I miss you. 

1)

All girls are easy.

Stacy is a girl.

Therefore, Stacy is easy.

Easy girls are fun.

Stacy is fun.

2)

All money is invested.

A $100 bill is money.

Therefore, a $100 bill is invested.

Invested money grows.

A $100 bill grows.