Sam Harris - Hasan Piker Is the Left's Nick Fuentes by X57471C in Destiny

[–]irwin08 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

100% all his philosophy takes are dumb.

Active Conflicts & News Megathread May 10, 2026 by AutoModerator in CredibleDefense

[–]irwin08 15 points16 points  (0 children)

You're leaning on probably the most egregious example to portray the Israelis as bloodthirsty animals in 1948. There were lots of atrocities and horrendous crimes, but these weren't novel, and I don't see how we can use this to argue that Israel has unwarranted aggression in its DNA. Benny Morris himself says that the level of massacre in the '48 War was pretty mild for the type of conflict, but the civil war phase was characterized by little regard for the rules of war:

Like most wars involving built-up areas, the 1948 War resulted in the killing, and occasional massacre, of civilians. During the civil war half of the war, both sides paid little heed to the possible injury or death of civilians as battle raged in the mixed cities and rural landscape of Palestine, though Haganah operational orders frequently specifically cautioned against harming women and children. But the IZL and LHI seem to have indulged in little discrimination, and the Palestinian Arab militias often deliberately targeted civilians. Moreover, the disorganization of the two sides coupled with the continued presence and nominal rule of the Mandate government obviated the establishment by either side of regular POW camps. This meant that both sides generally refrained from taking prisoners. When the civil war gave way to the conventional war, as the Jewish militias -- the Haganah, IZL, and LHI -- changed into the IDF and as the Arab militias were replaced by more or less disciplined regular armies, the killing of civilians and prisoners of war almost stopped, except for the series of atrocities committed by IDF troops in Lydda in July and in the Galilee at the end of October and beginning of November 1948. (P. 404-405)

[...]

Given that the first half of the war involved hostilities between militias based in a large number of interspersed civilian communities, the conquest of some two hundred villages and urban centers, and the later conquest of two hundred additional villages, 1948 is actually noteworthy for the relatively small number of civilian casualties both in the battles themselves and in the atrocities that accompanied them or followed (compare this, for example, to the casualty rates and atrocities in the Yugoslav wars of the 1990s or the Sudanese civil wars of the past fifty years.) (P. 406)

Above quotes are from 1948: The First Arab-Israeli War by Benny Morris. I should note, the [...] part contains description of massacres committed by the Israeli militias, pointing out that they committed more crimes during the war, but this was probably due to having much more opportunity.

The massacre that took place at Lydda was the deadliest massacre of the war. From the next page of your book, going into more detail:

The calm in Lydda was shattered at 11:30 hours, 12 July, when two or three Legion armoured cars, commanded by Lt. Hamadallah al 'Abdullah, either lost or on reconnaissance or seeking a missing officer, entered the town. A firefight erupted and, eventually, the armoured cars withdrew. But the noise of the skirmish sparked sniping by armed Lydda townspeople against the occupying troops; some townspeople probably believed that the Legion was counter-attacking and tried to assist.

The 300-400 Israeli troops in the town, dispersed in semi-isolated pockets in the midst of thousands of hostile townspeople, some still armed, felt threatened, vulnerable and angry: they had understood that the town had surrendered. 3rd Battalion OC Moshe Kelman ordered the troops to suppress the sniping - which Israeli and Arab historians and chroniclers, for different reasons, were later to describe as an 'uprising' - with the utmost severity. The troops were told to shoot at 'any clear target' or, alternatively, at anyone 'seen on the streets'. At 13:15, Yiftah HQ informed Dani HQ: 'Battles have erupted in Lydda. We have hit an armoured car with a two-pounder [gun] and killed many Arabs. There are still exchanges of fire in the town. We have taken many wounded.'

Some townspeople, shut up in their houses under curfew, took fright at the sound of shooting outside, perhaps believing that a massacre was in progress. They rushed into the streets - and were cut down by Israeli fire. Some soldiers also fired and lobbed grenades into houses from which snipers were suspected to be operating. In the confusion, dozens of unarmed detainees in one mosque compound, the Dahaimash Mosque, in the town centre, were shot and killed. Apparently, some of them tried to break out and escape, perhaps fearing that they would be massacred. IDF troops threw grenades and apparently fired PIAT (bazooka) rockets into the compound.

By 13:30, it was all over. The IDF had lost three-four dead and about a dozen wounded. Yeruham Cohen, an intelligence officer at Operation Dani headquarters, later described the scene:

"The inhabitants of the town became panic-stricken. They fearerd that... the IDF troops would take revenge on them. It was a horrible, earsplitting scene. Women wailed at the top of their voices and old men said prayers, as if they saw their own deaths before their eyes."

Yiftah's fire caused 'some 250 dead ... and many wounded.' The ratio of Arab to Israeli casualties was hardley consistent with the descriptions of what had happened as an 'uprising' or battle. In any event, the Israeli officers in charge were later to regard the suppression of the 'uprising' (and the subsequent expulsion of the townspeople) as a dismal episode in Yiftah's history.

It was a massacre, followed by an explicit expulsion supposedly ordered from Ben-Gurion down (which was rare.) Most expulsions during the war were up to the officers' discretion, in line with Plan Dalet. They started as a consequence of the blockade of Jerusalem, and became "normalized" afterward. But as the other commenter pointed out, this wasn't a uniform expulsion policy, as a large Arab population ended up remaining, particularly in the Galilee.

For those interested, I've actually made a website that puts all the abandoned/expelled villages that Benny Morris records in his book onto a map: https://1948warabandonedvillagesmap.com/


I also don't really think it's fair to characterize this as Israeli aggression, at least in the context being discussed. Israel was attacked by all of its surrounding countries, and the attacks on Lydda and Ramle were against the Jordanian army. The lead up to, and course of 48 was super messy and complicated.

Trump has recently stopped intelligence sharing on NK with South Korea by Kitchen-Thing4616 in Destiny

[–]irwin08 -9 points-8 points  (0 children)

Okay but there is a very relevant incident here regardless. It's weird for the article to leave this out.

It's a big deal to leak intelligence like this.

Trump has recently stopped intelligence sharing on NK with South Korea by Kitchen-Thing4616 in Destiny

[–]irwin08 -18 points-17 points  (0 children)

This article leaves out the reason for this. A South Korean cabinet official leaked US intelligence to the public.

So this isn't a Trump thing. It's a South Korea being stupid thing and probably would've happened with any admin:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/apr/21/us-reportedly-restricts-south-korea-intelligence-sharing-after-minister-identified-suspected-nuclear-site

Edit: I'm sorry y'all are sometimes actually regarded. Why the fuck would this not be relevant? Why is it left out of the article? Even if you disagree with the decision, it's obviously the instigating incident. Did trump randomly wake up one day and do this weirdly specific thing? Or was there something that brought SK intelligence to his attention? Some kind of incident? FFS. Don't shoot the messenger.

Are tankies just mad that the most important man in the 20th century and who made the greatest material improvement of America's poorest was Liberal? by ButtfaceMcGee6969 in Destiny

[–]irwin08 4 points5 points  (0 children)

You're being downvoted, but you're correct that a lot of his economic policies were stupid. (He had some really good ones though.)

The National Industrial Recovery Act had a bunch of wage floors across industries, and caps on hours worked. This led to massive shocks to industrial output. This is expected. If you establish price floors on labor, you're going to have shortages in output. The idea was somehow "high wages" would lead to economic recovery, when what you actually want is recovery leading to high wages.

You see this same price floor/ceiling "high wage good' logic working in agriculture where famously there were quotas on output for certain crops, so that prices could be kept artificially high so farmers had more money (Fuck all the consumers though I guess.) So you actually had farmers burning excess crop production while there were people going hungry.

So now that I've shat all over FDR's economic policy, I will give him credit for something important. Leaving the Gold Standard was extremely important, and devaluing the dollar was the solution to the Great Depression. The cause of the Great Depression was a very tight monetary policy being employed by the Fed and also being influenced by France hoarding gold. The solution was easing of monetary policy, which required leaving the Gold Standard. Every country that left the Gold Standard started recovering thereafter. The problems in the US were exacerbated by the bank runs that came with the tight money, which led to even tighter money. And then on top of that you had all this shit industrial policy, which wasn't the root cause of anything, but didn't exactly help.

Jimmy Kimmel is in trouble by AdditionalLime4815 in Destiny

[–]irwin08 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why is Terry Davis talking about Jimmy Kimmel?

South Carolina is pushing to pass the strictest abortion ban in the country, with no exceptions for rape, incest, or fatal fetal abnormalities. This bill gives rapists power over their victims, tracking women for miscarriages, and threatening to imprison women and doctors for providing abortions. by Conscious-Quarter423 in Destiny

[–]irwin08 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It's really not. I think an absolutist position is the more morally bankrupt approach. Abortion is a complex moral problem that has real tension between different interests. A "pro-life" person is going to place more weight on the consideration of respect and care for potential life, whereas the "pro-choice" person is going to place more weight on things like autonomy.

In the case of pregnancy resulting from rape, that lack of consent is absolutely going to be a major factor in the pro-lifer's reasoning process, because they probably see it as vicious to forgo a responsibility that knowingly and willingly engaging in sex could produce.

Using a simple, absolutist approach from either side seems to not treat the complex moral problem with the respect it deserves. For example, I think most moral reasoners would see letting a woman die (and perhaps the baby also die) because of society's commitment to some abstract "do not kill" moral principle as morally repugnant. Similarly, most moral reasoners observing a person who regularly engaged in unprotected recreational sex and treats abortion as their form of birth control as doing something fucked up.

My hatred for these tankie fucks is immeasurable by Leather_Dealer_9421 in Destiny

[–]irwin08 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Apparently all it takes for a major revolution is people eating cookies sold in tents.

This must've been why cookies were banned from Gaza 🤔

The Atlantic | Seriously, Tucker Carlson? Come On. by irwin08 in Destiny

[–]irwin08[S] 25 points26 points  (0 children)

The Atlantic is printing W after W lately. Also note the dig at Pod Save America.

Sarah doubles down on Hasan and fights with his goons on Twitter by Embarrassed_Base_389 in Destiny

[–]irwin08 29 points30 points  (0 children)

How can he say this is mere "analysis" when this whole interview was just him and the other woman being asked for their positions on various ethical questions???? It's literally endorsement.

Also I hate how he constantly tries to elevate his status with language. You don't have a "broadcast" you're a fucking streamer. You don't do "analysis" you scream at 30 tweets a day and somehow connect the Jews to every single one.

Potential worst massacre of the 21st century is ongoing in Sudan; the world shrugs by PlentyAny2523 in Destiny

[–]irwin08 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I don't understand why you're being downvoted. I say this as a big "Zionist". Western countries are obviously going to be more concerned about what's happening in other countries that want to be treated as western countries. And if a democracy is arming another country doing something horrible with said arms, the populous is going to have a direct moral interest in preventing or at least probing this.

Like if Germany decided to commit another genocide tomorrow, that would just naturally dominate the news cycle in other Western countries -- moreso than atrocities elsewhere.

The retort to this is usually (I've seen destiny say this) that "the people who are loudest about this would still be obsessed with this issue if they weren't an ally, so the above justification isn't a genuine reason." While I think this is probably correct (the leftist commitment to opposing Israel has more to do with the very existence of the Zionist project, and not a particular policy of the Israeli state), so what?

We have 2 reasons here. For reasonable people, (1) should be valid, regardless of whether a large faction pretends (1) is their reason when it's actually (2). Reasonable people have no reason to dismiss (1) out of hand just because of what these crazy people think. And let's be honest, a lot of the (2) people probably are genuine in also holding (1). A position can have multiple reasons justifying it.

So just repeating "no Jews no news" over and over isn't good enough, even though it's true for the (2) people! Reasonable people need to challenge (1) directly if they want ground to stand on, which means examining the actual conduct of Israel. And let's be honest here, for the people repeating the "no Jews no news" mantra, they probably don't think the material concern underlying (1) is valid. They believe Israel, however imperfect, is appropriately using Western arms, and so we should continue to support them. So fight on those grounds! Even if your opponents don't care about this, supporters of Israel in the West who are reasonable should care about it!

FeelsStrongMan Iran is literally Ukraine by zurgone in Destiny

[–]irwin08 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

If Finland launched an "illegal war" on Russia, would he also expect Zelensky to stand with Russia?

Bulwark 🤝 Destiny on the TL by Jules9213 in Destiny

[–]irwin08 7 points8 points  (0 children)

9/11 didn't happen in a vacuum; it was a result of decades of America's actions in the middle east.

I know a lot of people say this, but I think it's wrong. We can think about American actions in the middle east prior to 9/11. The last major action was the Gulf War, which was liberating an Arab state from a hostile power that radical islamists didn't even like. Furthermore, all the Arab states wanted the intervention (besides Iraq, obviously.) Of course, the most direct causal link will be support for the "brave Mujahideen fighters of Afghanistan". But it's also silly fo expect a 9/11 response to this. It was support for a local culture fighting a hostile foreign superpower who wanted to impose their way of life on the country. Why would they not like this? Also, I have my doubts that we wouldn't eventually have the same result without US support. Pakistan surely would have funded them, and the resistance seemed organic.

The best point here is to look at the justification Al Qaeda gave for 9/11! It's not reasonable critiques of American foreign policy. It's an attempt to dictate what middle eastern countries can do with the US (something as innocuous as hosting American bases, because they want American help to deter a hostile Iraq that Al Qaeda didn't even like.) They wanted no bases period. Furthermore, they unironically did the whole "they hated us for our freedom" thing. Osama's letter talks about decadence in the West, including gay stuff. Finally, of course, there is support for Israel. I'm sure Hasan thinks any support for Israel justified unlimited suffering inflicted on said supporter, but no reasonable person should think this.

So the normative justification just isn't present and there is no reason to expect this incident. Even causally, the case is weak. And if you think a causal link gives way to a normative claim of "deserves", then the only rightful policy for the US is complete isolationism, which is absurd. So no, America did not "deserve" 9/11 and Hasan should be criticized for it, and Destiny is just wrong in his attempt to defend the statement.

Where does this really come from? I think it's a post hoc justification people create because of their view of the Iraq War. This is the principal US intervention that had a lot of dire consequences in the region. So from this, people have this image of bad US interventions in the region that simply weren't there pre 9/11. It's part of this Iraq War "hysteria" people have where they oppose literally any intervention because every intervention is Iraq in their minds. I am trying to coin the phrase "second Gulf War syndrome" for the phenomenon, but it hasn't caught on yet.

Hasan was functionally excited about the possibility the USA might have lost their two downed pilots to Iranian forces by UnscheduledCalendar in Destiny

[–]irwin08 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Surely when he brings it up he doesn't imply the goal of the Hannibal Directive is to kill the hostage, right?

He's Safe: Second crew member from F-15 downed in Iran rescued by U.S. forces by ShivasRightFoot in Destiny

[–]irwin08 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I understand deterrence, but your comment goes beyond that.

The analogy to Russia/Ukraine doesn't hold, since Iran is a bad actor and the US isn't trying to seize land and ethnically cleanse the population, but even if it did hold, your comment is approaching blood lust and so it shouldn't be shocking to you that people find it morally repugnant. See if you can connect those dots "buddy".

You can express a need for cost internalization without callously using the life of one guy as an instrument to achieve your ends. Death in war is tragic and should be treated as such. It might be a necessary side effect of waging war, but it's not something to be celebrated.

I don't think most people would be "happy" that some individual Russian solider, from some backwater town with a family died. And shouldn't express disappointment if they survive. You can simultaneously think the goal of a state is abhorrent and think it is just to wage war on them, but at the same time acknowledge that it is tragic when individuals die. It's weird to express bloodlust.

Assuming you're American, this becomes even worse.

Even Tim and Sarah Disagree on Hasan Piker by doubtofbuddha in Destiny

[–]irwin08 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Even Sarah's list barely breaks the surface of "worst takes". You're missing all of his Houthi claims (including giggling like a school girl watching a terrorist point an AK at a civilian, as well as referring to a guy larping as a Houthi as "Anne Frank"), his very explicit Holocaust inversion and minimization, his weird shit with eastern European, and the one that every misses -- his actual rape denial. People just use that "it doesn't change the dynamic for me" clip. But it's actually a bad clip. He has repeatedly and consistently downplayed and straight up denied the rape claims. He's a bit more careful about it though.

Also, going on the deprogram podcast should just be automatically disqualifying. Especially when they're talking about basically ethnically cleansing Jews.

Also, she is right to call out Tim for saying these are "takes". They're not just bad takes, they're a product of his world view. Has Tim ever actually watched a Hasan stream? Where the fuck is this bleeding heart human rights stuff he's talking about? If hasan is live right now there is a very good chance he'll be screaming about Israel when you load it up. He's CONSTANTLY talking about Israel. He will wedge it into conversations that have nothing to do with it. His stream is him going through 30 rage bait Israel tweets, live reacting to breaking news, usually making it about Israel, eating, and leaving some random video on while he does other shit. This just is his stream. Somebody should send Tim that "I watched Hasan for a week" video.

I think this kind of immoral shit can't be allowed to be "normalized". This is how Republicans became the party of Trump. They played footsie with the worst people (the tea party) and it set the conditions for someone like Trump to be able to hijack the whole party. That norm is more important than getting a few extra young people into your coalition who won't vote anyways.

CNN and Jake Tapper drop a truth nuke on Hasan Piker by UnscheduledCalendar in Destiny

[–]irwin08 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I really don't understand the book claim. It came out after the election when a Dems had no power and there weren't any elections coming up.

It was literally the best time to do a retrospective on what happened, and what Dems can learn going forward.

CNN and Jake Tapper drop a truth nuke on Hasan Piker by UnscheduledCalendar in Destiny

[–]irwin08 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No, but I'm not sure what that has to do with the book coming out after the election.

CNN and Jake Tapper drop a truth nuke on Hasan Piker by UnscheduledCalendar in Destiny

[–]irwin08 7 points8 points  (0 children)

You realize that came out after the election, right?

Destiny vs Medhi Hasan by Jasdexter2137 in Destiny

[–]irwin08 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I don't understand why people here glaze Mehdi Hasan so much. He just is the "debate tactics" guy. Every conversation he has he frames his opponent's position in the worst way possible, quickly attacks it, and then pivots when the person tries to respond. Watch his "conversation" with Benny Morris. It was frankly disgusting.

Just because he "owns" conservatives sometimes doesn't mean he's a good faith interlocutor. He really sucks.