I think I don’t need to listen to an interview with a guy whose Twitter feed is all crying for Hezbollah. I guess there’s one issue that the woke and unwoke agree upon.
I think I don’t need to listen to an interview with a guy whose Twitter feed is all crying for Hezbollah. I guess there’s one issue that the woke and unwoke agree upon.
A quick search definitely didn't find any "crying for Hezbollah." Musa is an exceptionally thoughtful guy from a military family who lost his twin brother to a war in the Middle East. I can't force you to listen to anything, of course, but I highly recommend at least checking out his work.
The pedant in me is obliged to note that this is actually false-- the Nazis launched two big cross-border offensives into France and the Low Countries in late 1944 (the well-known Battle of the Bulge and the almost completely obscure Operation Nordwind).
I'm sure Darryl Cooper could explain that these were merely self-defense, however.
By coincidence, I actually learned the other day that there was a kind of Phase Two to Nordwind (Operation Winter Solstice), in which the Germans actually forced a Rhine crossing and established a bridgehead on the French side-- but unfortunately it took place in January 1945, so technically outside the temporal boundary of the joke tweet above. It achieved some initial success, but was almost immediately canceled after the Soviets launched the Vistula-Oder offensive.
Where was the ad hominem? The fact that I can't take someone who retweets garbage seriously?
So you chose to take that at face value without bothering to check at all and come at me?
This data is from a database that counts an attack as one episode regardless if it's 50 rockets lobbed at Israel indiscriminately or one precision mission drone by Israel. So a 50 rockets lobby that can hit 50 houses (or in a case a soccer field with teens playing that killed 12 Druze children) counts as ONE attack as well as one targeted strike against a Hezbollah munition depot.
I'm trying to be civil but your accusatory tone is really gross and I'm not sure I'm gonna be civil next time you respond because I don't have the patience for this nonsense anymore.
"from a military family who lost his twin brother to a war in the Middle East"
A tragedy in someone's family shouldn't make their ideas immune to critique.
I lost count of the number of times "as a <insert identity marker here>" was wheeled out in the first 25 mins of that interview. At which point I switched off and went back to reading the dozens of articles that have been published in places like the Jacobin, which say the same things but without using the relentless use of one magical identity shield or another
"Americans celebrating the pager/ walkie talky bombings in Lebanon, that injured many civilians and killed a little girl among others -- even if you're the type of person who simply doesn't care about "those people" (and if you are, don't tell me) -- they should recognize this is a major national security issue."
Just for the record, this is not "crying for Hezbollah."
All available evidence points to it being one of the most precise mass strikes on a militia totally embedded in a civilian population.
And a sabotage of a military supply chain has a long history in warfare, though rarely this precise. This isn't some new 'major national security issue' - militaries around the world have incredibly strict vetting around suppliers for this very reason.
Given the obvious lack of critical thought that went into that post its a fair assumption to make that it was driven by an emotional reaction to how successful the operation was at damaging Hezbollah
This was almost the perfect operation. It killed or injured a ton of terrorists with minimal damage to civilians. If this doesn't meet the standards for proportionality than nothing will.
Which, of course, is the point. Israel is supposed to just sit back and take whatever Hezbollah does because.... reasons.
And I don't see how this is a US national security issue. Do we think Israel will be attempting to blow US soldiers?
> Israel is supposed to just sit back and take whatever Hezbollah does because.... reasons.
It's crazy that Jesse bends over backwards to try to be "nuanced" in such a blantely obvious situation.
The Islamic world, with 30% of the world's popuation, who have colonized 50 countries, put forth an upside-down notion that Jews, at 0.2% of the world's population are whiter-than-white people who have colonized "Palestine" to which they have no historic claim because they're really "European".
Even though polls show a solid majority of Americans support the right of Israel to exist, college campuses and elite bubbles like the one Jesse lives in, like to show that white is black and up is down and pretend that this upside-down world is plainly true.
Jesse won't call bullshit to their claims because he likes to be able to go to Princeton alumini events and mingle with their intellectuals. As Katie said several times "the only reason people go to fancy schools is so they can spend the rest of their lives telling people they went there." Being shunned from Princeton social circles would destroy Jesse's core identity.
One thing I'm not sure Jesse grasps is that groups like Hezbollah and Hamas want to kick out or kill every single Israeli. So they can establish an Islamic caliphate. This isn't hyperbole. This is literally their goal. And they have a special hatred of Jews. If Jesse was in Israel they would happily slaughter him.
Sometimes you can't pervert for nuance things. Some people and groups are just dangerous terrorists.
And yeah, I think he really wants to accepted in mainstream PMC journalism circles. Katie no longer cares. But Jesse wants the warm embrace. There's nothing wrong with that but I think it distorts his thinking on subjects like Israel.
Right. You and I both know that they'd kill him just as as fast as they'd kill me with my kippah and tzitzit. He's too foolish to know he's being used. They find these "as-a-Jews" valuable for the time being.
From the perspective of an academic, no, masters are not more prestigious than bachelor degrees. In many instances they are cash cow one year programs and even a reputable one is still less competitive than a PhD or BA program.
Harvard has these "executive" graduate degree programs that they advertise as "being the same degree, from the same college and the same faculty" as their on-campus full-time programs.
It's funny that on his Wikipedia page he doesn't mention his undergrad. (Yes, I know you're not supposed to edit your own wikipedia page, but we all know.)
Naw, APGA's tent is always on campus with the rest...this year it was next to Brown, across the road from Dillon. I was about 90% sure it was him based on all context clues. I didn't want to bother him (it was a total surprise to see him at all!) although my friend did ask him take a photo of our group up by the stage, so he briefly interacted with us, haha. Could've said something, but we were all in a partying zone, so I let it be.
Princeton has a very small graduate program and no professional schools. While they have the resources to start any top-ranked program tomorrow, they choose to focus on undergrad education.
No matter how many degrees you get, you "go to college" only once and that is your primary alma mater. I went to professional school in Ann Arbor but will never truly be a Wolverine.
Let's talk about the over 8,000+ indiscriminate rockets that have been lobbed at Israel since Oct 7th, 2023. Do you want to talk about the indiscriminate killing of 12 Druze children by such rocket in northern Israel or nah?
Edit: finally got to a computer to edit this (when is edit coming to mobile apps?) since ZigZag so gently and calmly pointed out my hastily written comment was lying, of course implying ill-intent. Thanks ZigZag, never change!
This link says that there have been about 20000 rockets fired in the last 10 years, which I guess is consistent with "8000 a day" if you assume that this conflict has been going on since about Friday. Otherwise, it's obviously ludicrous.
ZigZag, your perverted need to pick apart people's sentences is telling me you have a certain neurodivergence which is fine, but your inability to comprehend basic facts that are available everywhere that since Oct 7th, Hezbollah lobbed over 8k+ rockets. Happy now?
Instead of nitpicking why don't you engage with what I had said but you can't because your main goal in life is to be pervert for nuance and harass people. Keep going. You're changing hearts and minds daily.
What you said was that over 8000 rockets were being fired "daily." Observing that that statement is obviously ridiculous is not "nitpicking," it's negating the entire thrust of your argument. I realize that you view a requirement that you not blatantly lie as "harassment" but an objective observer would not agree with that assessment.
I don't particularly even care about the Gaza war; it's not an important issue to me and I despise the leadership on both sides, and frankly the population too to the extent they support those leaders. I do care about people lying about things.
I didn't lie. It was an unintentional typo but your refusal to read what I had written is an indicator that you're an agent for chaos and do not engage in good faith and only wait for your moment to strike with a gotcha.. my argument stands if you had read it only but you chose to pretend that this obvious typo that anyone with a bit of a a thought understood. But no, you and your lawyering ways have to keep hammering regardless whether the person clarified themselves or not. If you think you're doing some public good here, you're not. Your additions are meaningless and your enjoy navel gazing and patting yourself on the back a lot. Keep it up!
Keep paying them money and keep being your wonderful self. Too bad you didn't take that Trump bet you all knowing smarter than anyone alien.
Mossad could have put a lot more explosives in there if they wanted collateral damage. We have no idea how many people who were not Hezzbollah were harmed. We certainly can’t trust their numbers. Harming only someone who is in very close proximity to a Hezzbollah operative is hardly “indiscriminate”.
It’s terrible when innocents are killed. That’s what happens in a war. This is a war. I cannot think of more elegant and targeted way to kill an enemy that embeds itself in a civilian population. Can you?
The discourse around Operation: Pager is a great example of how people spontaneously invent new rules for warfare whenever Israel does anything and which only apply to Israel.
ok maybe it needs to be secured then? What is your point?
And why appeal to our own people? Because they can do no wrong? My "own people" recently invaded Ukraine, and yet I am not retwieeting Tucker or various "voenkors"
If you honestly believe in good faith that the US militaty is buying communications equipment from a tiny company set up in Hungary in 2022 I’ve got a bridge in Brooklyn you might be interested in buying.
But but but its GOOD AND BASED to do this if you aren't a fat blue haired they/them, haven't you heard! It's only cringe when people who we hold in disdain do it!
What about all the missiles the people he loves are firing from southern Lebanon into Israel? It's not wrong to be happy that the terroist group behind thsese missile attacks was weakened.
Not really. Defensive actions may be unpleasant, but not "bad" by any objective reasoning. And if you've never made a peep about the missile bombardment from Southern Lebanon into Israel, frankly I question your motivation.
Im not of the opinion that Israel should do nothing etc. I’m not well informed enough to hold a position about how much force and when and where should be used.
But without knowing anything about the conflict I’m saying that I think the pacifist position is clearly an ethically consistent one. That is if someone is indeed decrying violent actions by all sides then that is a morally consistent point of view.
Obviously it’s fair to disagree and say that pacifism is wrong and counter attacks are essential. But arguing against the attack in itself isn’t anti semetic / pro hezbollah if someone is also arguing that Israel should also not be attacked
"Pacifism always" is morally consistent in the same way that "harassment is bad so we should never talk to anyone" is morally consistent. It's naive to the point of childishness and it's extremely dangerous in the wrong situation. No one can afford to be a pacifist when your door is being smashed in by a group of violent boys. The pacifist father there is a moral monster.
The point is that people don’t even seem to understand that some people genuinely believe that it’s impossible to be against violence committed by all parties in I/P. someone can hate Netanyahu, Hamas, and Hezbollah.
Decrying celebration of violent actions taken by Israel does not make one pro-Islamist terrorism.
>Decrying celebration of violent actions taken by Israel does not make one pro-Islamist terrorism
Sure. Unless they're *only* decrying the celebration of violence taken by Israel and its allies. Then the person's motivations are a hell of a lot more suspect.
By al Gharbi's logic, *all* of Israeli attacks present a major national security issue. Sure, Israel is blowing up Hezbollah munitions depots today, but how would you feel if they blew up US depots, huh?
You think that's not an issue? Maybe you don't care about "those people."
Forget it man, there’s a large chunk of your audience who unfortunately will never listen to anyone from outside their pro-Israel echo chamber. The irony is palpable.
I really hope you guys are thinking about the strange audience capture thing you have going on and the larger problem that your audience just kinda sucks at thinking critically. On the other hand, you could also just start criticizing the left way more and easily double your income. Can't say I'd blame you tbh, the incentives here are really fucked up!
Huh? Audience capture how? This episode would be the exact opposite of that.
I think you have a problem with people not wanting to listen to certain people and therefore they suck at thinking critically. Whereas in fact people evaluated the person's value for themselves and decided that this person isn't someone worth their time. Perhaps you need to engage with a little more critical thinking yourself before accusing a whole swath of listeners of some nefarious wrong think.
On a general note, I haven't seen you around here before so I'm guessing you're new? My advice is to drop the 'tude, this isn't fucking Reddit and being a dickhead for no reason isn't appreciated. Feel free to have the last word.
I'm pretty sure Lana has checked out but here's the quote:
"It would not be a stretch to say that the United States is actually a greater threat to peace and stability in the region than ISIS — not least because U.S. policies in Iraq, Libya and Syria have largely paved the way for ISIS’ emergence as a major regional actor"
That is pretty different to your summary ("ISIS has been better for people in the Middle East than the US") and that's without any of the additional context beyond the literal quote. You can disagree with this argument without distorting it dishonestly.
It’s almost like this is a podcast for people who are willing to listen to the ideas of and have conversations with people they don’t entirely agree with 🧐 Are we, or are we not, “perverts for nuance?”
It’s perfectly fine to judge people’s reasoning based on their takes on major issues. Humans do that every single day. You can see nuance *and* think someone’s talking a load of crap.
Everything else the dude said was pretty bog standard for the "heterodox" (a term I can't fucking stand) community. Might as well focus on the one aspect of him that is kind of interesting.
It can simultaneously be true that al-Gharbi's takes on the Middle Eastern conflicts are misguided or worse, and that he has something useful to offer on the class politics of 21st century America.
Hell, Chomsky's writing on both post-modernism's failures and the limits of large language models still stand strong, even though his foreign policy takes are even worse.
This exactly. I absolutely don’t agree with a lot of what he claims but I appreciated the thoughtful discussion and there were a few lightbulb moments in the ep too.
It's possible to engage with someone's beliefs in one capacity (in this case, the specific topic of his book) while vehemently disagreeing with positions they have on other issues. This is a thing you can do.
I think I don’t need to listen to an interview with a guy whose Twitter feed is all crying for Hezbollah. I guess there’s one issue that the woke and unwoke agree upon.
A quick search definitely didn't find any "crying for Hezbollah." Musa is an exceptionally thoughtful guy from a military family who lost his twin brother to a war in the Middle East. I can't force you to listen to anything, of course, but I highly recommend at least checking out his work.
Before listening and I haven't listened I went to look at his feed to learn a bit more about him. He retweeted this garbage:
https://x.com/jasonhickel/status/1837025861708447779
Not sure what you call but I, personally don't know if I can take a guy like that seriously. Sorry Jesse.
Best response from that thread: "The US perpetrated 100% of the cross-border attacks with Germany in 1944. The Nazis have shown remarkable restraint."
The pedant in me is obliged to note that this is actually false-- the Nazis launched two big cross-border offensives into France and the Low Countries in late 1944 (the well-known Battle of the Bulge and the almost completely obscure Operation Nordwind).
I'm sure Darryl Cooper could explain that these were merely self-defense, however.
Respect for your knowledge of Nordwind. I'm a board wargamer, so that was something I was aware of
By coincidence, I actually learned the other day that there was a kind of Phase Two to Nordwind (Operation Winter Solstice), in which the Germans actually forced a Rhine crossing and established a bridgehead on the French side-- but unfortunately it took place in January 1945, so technically outside the temporal boundary of the joke tweet above. It achieved some initial success, but was almost immediately canceled after the Soviets launched the Vistula-Oder offensive.
Jesus
Do you have some evidence to refute this data or just ad hominem snark?
Where was the ad hominem? The fact that I can't take someone who retweets garbage seriously?
So you chose to take that at face value without bothering to check at all and come at me?
This data is from a database that counts an attack as one episode regardless if it's 50 rockets lobbed at Israel indiscriminately or one precision mission drone by Israel. So a 50 rockets lobby that can hit 50 houses (or in a case a soccer field with teens playing that killed 12 Druze children) counts as ONE attack as well as one targeted strike against a Hezbollah munition depot.
I'm trying to be civil but your accusatory tone is really gross and I'm not sure I'm gonna be civil next time you respond because I don't have the patience for this nonsense anymore.
"from a military family who lost his twin brother to a war in the Middle East"
A tragedy in someone's family shouldn't make their ideas immune to critique.
I lost count of the number of times "as a <insert identity marker here>" was wheeled out in the first 25 mins of that interview. At which point I switched off and went back to reading the dozens of articles that have been published in places like the Jacobin, which say the same things but without using the relentless use of one magical identity shield or another
I didn’t mind the interview, but I definitely did find myself noting that this is stuff non-idpol leftist have been pointing out for almost a decade.
“ I lost count of the number of times "as a <insert identity marker here>" was wheeled out in the first 25 mins of that interview.”
I believe the count was zero- I don’t remember him doing that even one time during the interview.
This seems like an empirical claim that can easily be verified.6
Neither do I, but hey, who needs facts when you have outrage!:
“as a black muslim” I too believe in facts
“as a black muslim” I believe you need to get your hearing check
I have the same reaction when an interviewee drops the name of their elite university when it has no relevance to the topic under discussion.
Listen, my best friend is black. (cracks knuckles)
Hi, Jesse, I looked again and the tweets I saw are alas there. But thank you for your respectful reply. I’m a fan.
https://x.com/Musa_alGharbi/status/1836519862635790410?t=7rHyIPEib8nxVFmhF2loQg&s=19
"Americans celebrating the pager/ walkie talky bombings in Lebanon, that injured many civilians and killed a little girl among others -- even if you're the type of person who simply doesn't care about "those people" (and if you are, don't tell me) -- they should recognize this is a major national security issue."
Just for the record, this is not "crying for Hezbollah."
All available evidence points to it being one of the most precise mass strikes on a militia totally embedded in a civilian population.
And a sabotage of a military supply chain has a long history in warfare, though rarely this precise. This isn't some new 'major national security issue' - militaries around the world have incredibly strict vetting around suppliers for this very reason.
Given the obvious lack of critical thought that went into that post its a fair assumption to make that it was driven by an emotional reaction to how successful the operation was at damaging Hezbollah
This was almost the perfect operation. It killed or injured a ton of terrorists with minimal damage to civilians. If this doesn't meet the standards for proportionality than nothing will.
Which, of course, is the point. Israel is supposed to just sit back and take whatever Hezbollah does because.... reasons.
And I don't see how this is a US national security issue. Do we think Israel will be attempting to blow US soldiers?
> Israel is supposed to just sit back and take whatever Hezbollah does because.... reasons.
It's crazy that Jesse bends over backwards to try to be "nuanced" in such a blantely obvious situation.
The Islamic world, with 30% of the world's popuation, who have colonized 50 countries, put forth an upside-down notion that Jews, at 0.2% of the world's population are whiter-than-white people who have colonized "Palestine" to which they have no historic claim because they're really "European".
Even though polls show a solid majority of Americans support the right of Israel to exist, college campuses and elite bubbles like the one Jesse lives in, like to show that white is black and up is down and pretend that this upside-down world is plainly true.
Jesse won't call bullshit to their claims because he likes to be able to go to Princeton alumini events and mingle with their intellectuals. As Katie said several times "the only reason people go to fancy schools is so they can spend the rest of their lives telling people they went there." Being shunned from Princeton social circles would destroy Jesse's core identity.
One thing I'm not sure Jesse grasps is that groups like Hezbollah and Hamas want to kick out or kill every single Israeli. So they can establish an Islamic caliphate. This isn't hyperbole. This is literally their goal. And they have a special hatred of Jews. If Jesse was in Israel they would happily slaughter him.
Sometimes you can't pervert for nuance things. Some people and groups are just dangerous terrorists.
And yeah, I think he really wants to accepted in mainstream PMC journalism circles. Katie no longer cares. But Jesse wants the warm embrace. There's nothing wrong with that but I think it distorts his thinking on subjects like Israel.
Right. You and I both know that they'd kill him just as as fast as they'd kill me with my kippah and tzitzit. He's too foolish to know he's being used. They find these "as-a-Jews" valuable for the time being.
He's Jewish, he's secular and he's Western. They'd kill him in a heartbeat. Or hold him for ransom.
Katie’s comment is absolutely true, I went to one of those schools, and hell I like telling people I went there. I worked hard to get there.
But, unsurprisingly given my politics, I wasn’t exactly popular with certain people, and I have no desires to bump elbows or go to book parties.
Jesse got a Master's from Princeton. While that makes him a formal alumnus, you have to go there for undergrad to truly be a member of the club.
From the perspective of an academic, no, masters are not more prestigious than bachelor degrees. In many instances they are cash cow one year programs and even a reputable one is still less competitive than a PhD or BA program.
Harvard has these "executive" graduate degree programs that they advertise as "being the same degree, from the same college and the same faculty" as their on-campus full-time programs.
But when Chris Rufo, who has one of these degrees from Harvard, said he had a "Harvard Degree", the Harvard folks then said the quiet part out loud and said "he didn't *really* to to Harvard." See, for example: https://newrepublic.com/article/170647/christopher-rufo-harvard-degree-misleading
It's funny that on his Wikipedia page he doesn't mention his undergrad. (Yes, I know you're not supposed to edit your own wikipedia page, but we all know.)
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Singal
What a pose[u]r! He's trying to erase his U of M undergrad with his Princeton MA
I get the sense Jesse is kind of a late bloomer, and remarks he's made in the past make me think he had a tough time at U of M.
I sat and debated about the proper vs. common spelling for a minute, too. Think I should change it?
I think I saw him partying in the APGA tent at Reunions this year. He was having a great time! (As was I!)
Is that tent at the Grad College campus? I would love to have met Jesse in the flesh.
Naw, APGA's tent is always on campus with the rest...this year it was next to Brown, across the road from Dillon. I was about 90% sure it was him based on all context clues. I didn't want to bother him (it was a total surprise to see him at all!) although my friend did ask him take a photo of our group up by the stage, so he briefly interacted with us, haha. Could've said something, but we were all in a partying zone, so I let it be.
Why is that? Isn't a masters degree more prestigious than a bachelor's degree?
Princeton has a very small graduate program and no professional schools. While they have the resources to start any top-ranked program tomorrow, they choose to focus on undergrad education.
No matter how many degrees you get, you "go to college" only once and that is your primary alma mater. I went to professional school in Ann Arbor but will never truly be a Wolverine.
What about the numerous indiscriminate civilian casualties that accompanied this "precise mass strike"? I'd call that a major national security issue.
Let's talk about the over 8,000+ indiscriminate rockets that have been lobbed at Israel since Oct 7th, 2023. Do you want to talk about the indiscriminate killing of 12 Druze children by such rocket in northern Israel or nah?
Edit: finally got to a computer to edit this (when is edit coming to mobile apps?) since ZigZag so gently and calmly pointed out my hastily written comment was lying, of course implying ill-intent. Thanks ZigZag, never change!
This link says that there have been about 20000 rockets fired in the last 10 years, which I guess is consistent with "8000 a day" if you assume that this conflict has been going on since about Friday. Otherwise, it's obviously ludicrous.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_rocket_attacks_on_Israel
ZigZag, your perverted need to pick apart people's sentences is telling me you have a certain neurodivergence which is fine, but your inability to comprehend basic facts that are available everywhere that since Oct 7th, Hezbollah lobbed over 8k+ rockets. Happy now?
Instead of nitpicking why don't you engage with what I had said but you can't because your main goal in life is to be pervert for nuance and harass people. Keep going. You're changing hearts and minds daily.
What you said was that over 8000 rockets were being fired "daily." Observing that that statement is obviously ridiculous is not "nitpicking," it's negating the entire thrust of your argument. I realize that you view a requirement that you not blatantly lie as "harassment" but an objective observer would not agree with that assessment.
I don't particularly even care about the Gaza war; it's not an important issue to me and I despise the leadership on both sides, and frankly the population too to the extent they support those leaders. I do care about people lying about things.
I didn't lie. It was an unintentional typo but your refusal to read what I had written is an indicator that you're an agent for chaos and do not engage in good faith and only wait for your moment to strike with a gotcha.. my argument stands if you had read it only but you chose to pretend that this obvious typo that anyone with a bit of a a thought understood. But no, you and your lawyering ways have to keep hammering regardless whether the person clarified themselves or not. If you think you're doing some public good here, you're not. Your additions are meaningless and your enjoy navel gazing and patting yourself on the back a lot. Keep it up!
Keep paying them money and keep being your wonderful self. Too bad you didn't take that Trump bet you all knowing smarter than anyone alien.
Whataboutism. Cheap.
Your actually comment literally started with "what about..." JFC
seems kind of relevant
...which is literally the only arrow anti-Israel types have in their quiver.
Mossad could have put a lot more explosives in there if they wanted collateral damage. We have no idea how many people who were not Hezzbollah were harmed. We certainly can’t trust their numbers. Harming only someone who is in very close proximity to a Hezzbollah operative is hardly “indiscriminate”.
It’s terrible when innocents are killed. That’s what happens in a war. This is a war. I cannot think of more elegant and targeted way to kill an enemy that embeds itself in a civilian population. Can you?
Precise is the opposite of indiscriminate.
Zero is not an achievable number when an enemy force is embedded in a civilian population.
If you’re not an absolute pacifist, what ratio of casualties would you find acceptable?
The discourse around Operation: Pager is a great example of how people spontaneously invent new rules for warfare whenever Israel does anything and which only apply to Israel.
Funny how that works, isn't it?
So he is worried Israel (same foreign government) could sabotage US devices? Did i get it right?
ok maybe it needs to be secured then? What is your point?
And why appeal to our own people? Because they can do no wrong? My "own people" recently invaded Ukraine, and yet I am not retwieeting Tucker or various "voenkors"
The person you’re replying is feeding you misinformation, the pagers were made by BAC Consulting which is a company created in Hungary in 2022(!)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cew12r5qe1ro
It’s more like “consider downside XYZ which a child would know is not relevant here”
1) Supply chain sabotage has been a strategy of warfare since year dot. Musa’s characterisation of this as a “new” threat is grossly misleading
2) Supply chain vetting is rigorously enforced in the US Department of Defense, with the process and procedures regularly reviewed and updated. Eg.
https://www.southcom.mil/Portals/7/Documents/Operational%20Contract%20Support/DoD%20Memo_ENHANCED_SECTION_806%20PROCEDURES_FOR_SCRM_ISO_DOD_TRUSTED_SYSTEMS_AND_NETWORKS.pdf?ver=2018-04-05-092946-530
If you honestly believe in good faith that the US militaty is buying communications equipment from a tiny company set up in Hungary in 2022 I’ve got a bridge in Brooklyn you might be interested in buying.
Ok thanks
“Jack Poulson”
Good grief
The pagers were manufactured by BAC Consulting in Hungary. This is a company created in 2022, and are categorically not a supplier to the US military.
The ease with which some of you run with easily debunked information really calls into the question your motivation for doing so…
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cew12r5qe1ro
Lol thx for that "context". It's even more unhinged.
I'm leaving out all of his retweets. But he does like to retweet people who support Hezbollah.
My main issue with the podcast: it was just boring book promotion.
YES so so very booring, Jesse is really terrible in this format
It's not crying for Hezbollah, it's just carrying water for them.
I hate that we have to analyze someone’s politics before we’ll listen to anything else they say - purity police are everywhere
But but but its GOOD AND BASED to do this if you aren't a fat blue haired they/them, haven't you heard! It's only cringe when people who we hold in disdain do it!
I thought it was a mostly good podcast, though I don't agree with his views on the IP conflict.
What about all the missiles the people he loves are firing from southern Lebanon into Israel? It's not wrong to be happy that the terroist group behind thsese missile attacks was weakened.
It’s possible to believe that both the things are bad!
Not really. Defensive actions may be unpleasant, but not "bad" by any objective reasoning. And if you've never made a peep about the missile bombardment from Southern Lebanon into Israel, frankly I question your motivation.
Im not of the opinion that Israel should do nothing etc. I’m not well informed enough to hold a position about how much force and when and where should be used.
But without knowing anything about the conflict I’m saying that I think the pacifist position is clearly an ethically consistent one. That is if someone is indeed decrying violent actions by all sides then that is a morally consistent point of view.
Obviously it’s fair to disagree and say that pacifism is wrong and counter attacks are essential. But arguing against the attack in itself isn’t anti semetic / pro hezbollah if someone is also arguing that Israel should also not be attacked
"Pacifism always" is morally consistent in the same way that "harassment is bad so we should never talk to anyone" is morally consistent. It's naive to the point of childishness and it's extremely dangerous in the wrong situation. No one can afford to be a pacifist when your door is being smashed in by a group of violent boys. The pacifist father there is a moral monster.
The point is that people don’t even seem to understand that some people genuinely believe that it’s impossible to be against violence committed by all parties in I/P. someone can hate Netanyahu, Hamas, and Hezbollah.
Decrying celebration of violent actions taken by Israel does not make one pro-Islamist terrorism.
>Decrying celebration of violent actions taken by Israel does not make one pro-Islamist terrorism
Sure. Unless they're *only* decrying the celebration of violence taken by Israel and its allies. Then the person's motivations are a hell of a lot more suspect.
By al Gharbi's logic, *all* of Israeli attacks present a major national security issue. Sure, Israel is blowing up Hezbollah munitions depots today, but how would you feel if they blew up US depots, huh?
You think that's not an issue? Maybe you don't care about "those people."
Forget it man, there’s a large chunk of your audience who unfortunately will never listen to anyone from outside their pro-Israel echo chamber. The irony is palpable.
I can't take someone seriously when they retweet unscientific unverified terrorist propaganda. Call me biased if you like. And what is the irony?
if there even is pro-Israel echo chamber online, it's really really tiny, that's why this triggers (well, me)
I really hope you guys are thinking about the strange audience capture thing you have going on and the larger problem that your audience just kinda sucks at thinking critically. On the other hand, you could also just start criticizing the left way more and easily double your income. Can't say I'd blame you tbh, the incentives here are really fucked up!
Huh? Audience capture how? This episode would be the exact opposite of that.
I think you have a problem with people not wanting to listen to certain people and therefore they suck at thinking critically. Whereas in fact people evaluated the person's value for themselves and decided that this person isn't someone worth their time. Perhaps you need to engage with a little more critical thinking yourself before accusing a whole swath of listeners of some nefarious wrong think.
I mean I don't think anyone can claim that the US is batting a thousand with their nation-building endeavors in the Mideast.
Okay but is that actually what he said? Because that doesn't seem likely.
I did listen to the episode.
On a general note, I haven't seen you around here before so I'm guessing you're new? My advice is to drop the 'tude, this isn't fucking Reddit and being a dickhead for no reason isn't appreciated. Feel free to have the last word.
Lol I love it. We don’t need another Zag huh? XD
I don't mind Zag, it's useful for people who claim to be free thinkers to have dissent. What I do mind is people who insult instead of engage.
I'm pretty sure Lana has checked out but here's the quote:
"It would not be a stretch to say that the United States is actually a greater threat to peace and stability in the region than ISIS — not least because U.S. policies in Iraq, Libya and Syria have largely paved the way for ISIS’ emergence as a major regional actor"
That is pretty different to your summary ("ISIS has been better for people in the Middle East than the US") and that's without any of the additional context beyond the literal quote. You can disagree with this argument without distorting it dishonestly.
Well, the US stands heads and shoulders above ISIS when it comes to cultural resource management.
It’s almost like this is a podcast for people who are willing to listen to the ideas of and have conversations with people they don’t entirely agree with 🧐 Are we, or are we not, “perverts for nuance?”
There are perverts for nuance here and then there are perspective fetishists.
Other people have to be nuanced, we can take maximalist positions
It’s perfectly fine to judge people’s reasoning based on their takes on major issues. Humans do that every single day. You can see nuance *and* think someone’s talking a load of crap.
Everything else the dude said was pretty bog standard for the "heterodox" (a term I can't fucking stand) community. Might as well focus on the one aspect of him that is kind of interesting.
Thank you.
I fear the ideologues are beginning to outnumber the perverts.
Sometimes it feels that way
It can simultaneously be true that al-Gharbi's takes on the Middle Eastern conflicts are misguided or worse, and that he has something useful to offer on the class politics of 21st century America.
Hell, Chomsky's writing on both post-modernism's failures and the limits of large language models still stand strong, even though his foreign policy takes are even worse.
100% agree.
This exactly. I absolutely don’t agree with a lot of what he claims but I appreciated the thoughtful discussion and there were a few lightbulb moments in the ep too.
I don't know why Jesse feels obligated to to keep one foot in the water with the antisemetic, anti-American, and pro-terrorism Left.
Because "pervert for nuance" is a funny podcaster way of saying "incapable of holding strong beliefs about anything."
This is what happens when you take the pervert for nuance thing too far.
There are plenty of other podcasts you can listen to if you don't like hosts who "keep one foot in the water with the left."
I just hate it when things like this sneak into my safe bubble. I am glad Katie wasn't there
It's possible to engage with someone's beliefs in one capacity (in this case, the specific topic of his book) while vehemently disagreeing with positions they have on other issues. This is a thing you can do.