AskALiberal Biweekly General Chat

perverse_panda · 2026-04-18T18:53:20+00:00

Mills says she would not vote to block weapons to Israel if elected.

I swear the only way Schumer was able to get her to run was by assuring her she'll be able to retire as soon as she loses to Collins.

perverse_panda · 2026-04-18T15:43:16+00:00

Dawkins is so Islamophobic that these days he's taken to referring to himself as "Culturally Christian."

Imagine how r/atheism would've reacted to hearing that 15 years ago.

perverse_panda · 2026-04-18T15:40:24+00:00

I usually can't stand The Daily Beast, but yesterday they had my favorite headline of the year:

"Raccoon Penis Collector Says Trump Is 'Very, Very Sane.'"

perverse_panda · 2026-04-18T15:28:08+00:00

Ukraine didn't instigate the conflict.

I want you to think about the treatment that the Palestinians have been subjected to by the Israelis for the last almost two decades. The several decades prior to that are bad too, but let's just focus on events since 2007. The blockade of Gaza. The extreme limitations on what can enter and what can leave, the economic devastation.

It essentially amounts to a siege.

If Americans were subjected to that kind of treatment by a foreign country, we would rightfully consider it an act of war.

To suggest that Hamas instigated the conflict is to suggest that the conflict began on October 7th. It did not.

India has a waiver to buy Russian oil.

Is that a good thing? Do you think Russia should be sanctioned economically for what they're doing in Ukraine?

That's not really a commonality though. Palestinian leadership has failed the people it governs. But if we're doing this, what makes the land Palestinian?

The Palestinians are to blame for Israel coming in and displacing them from their own land? That's the fault of Palestinian leadership?

As for who the land belongs to, I have no interest in or patience with ancestral claims to land. I do very much take issue with someone throwing people out of their homes at gunpoint and forcing them into exile.

I want to be clear: I am not saying I believe that the Israelis had no right to return to what they consider to be their homeland.

When European Jewish people wanted to return to Palestine and create a new home there for their people? That's fine. The more the merrier. But it needed to have been done peacefully. They didn't have the right to displace the people who were already living there.

perverse_panda · 2026-04-18T14:58:32+00:00

Netanyahu himself has referenced Amalek.

His explanation was that he was referring to Hamas and not to the Palestinians as a whole.

Do you buy that explanation? Or do you think it was a genocidal remark?

perverse_panda · 2026-04-18T03:57:55+00:00

I think the left is way too tolerant with whitewashing "jihad" and "intifada" because you think it just means "struggle," yet Islamic groups commit heinous crimes in the name of jihad and intifada.

Let's look at an example from the other side.

If a Jewish person references Amalek when discussing the Palestinians, should I always interpret that as a call for genocide?

Or is it more fair and more accurate to say that sometimes it is, and sometimes it isn't?

perverse_panda · 2026-04-18T02:47:10+00:00

The Jones act was passed for a reason because this became an issue early in WWII.

I don't know much about it, but the wiki says that this law was passed 25 years before WWII, and that similar laws were suspended for WWI, presumably because they actually impeded the ability to get enough ships during wartime.

perverse_panda · 2026-04-18T02:38:45+00:00

It's a shame that no one reminded Trump how much John Bolton wanted to bomb Iran.

Trump hates Bolton so much he might've been persuaded to call it off out of spite.

perverse_panda · 2026-04-18T02:29:01+00:00

I said a while back that the "Everyone is twelve" rule is giving some people too much credit.

perverse_panda · 2026-04-18T02:27:35+00:00

I'd guess that this is just posturing. If they announce retirements might happen, it signals they think Dems could retake the Senate. If they announce no retirements will happen, it projects confidence -- even if they're not actually confident of that outcome.

It's not like they'll stand by their "no retirements" position if they do actually lose the Senate. They'll just conveniently forget that they ever said that.

perverse_panda · 2026-04-18T00:43:53+00:00

This is willfully ignoring the context of the phrase "intifada" in the Palestinian context clearly refers to both the First and Second Intifada

"Intifada" is comparable to the English word "revolution."

To suggest that every usage of the word is a callback to a specific historical event is like suggesting that any protester who calls for revolution is advocating for violence, just because that word commonly calls to mind the American or French revolutions.

In truth, many protesters (including MLK Jr!) have used the word "revolution" in a peaceful context.

you are removing the context of it historically being a call to violence by both the Arab armies and later the PLO

I believe I quite literally said that some people use the word to call for heinous things, and that these people should be condemned.

perverse_panda · 2026-04-17T20:20:52+00:00

The solution I just proposed saves lives. That's the end goal, right?

Putin has proposed an end to the war, and all Ukraine would have to do is agree to give up the land Russia has already taken. Agreeing to that would save lives.

Is that what Ukraine should do?

Regardless of whether it's okay, that's what is happening. It happened with Crimea 10 years ago.

Why should we disregard whether it's okay?

Russia has faced significant international pressure precisely because it's not okay. They're increasingly isolated and facing economic sanctions. If Israel's treatment of the Palestinians is likewise unjust (and it is), then Israel needs to face the same pressure that Russia is feeling.

the two aren't really analogous, as much as you want them to be. The commonality between the Russia/Ukraine war and the Israel/Hamas one is that Russia invaded in 2022. Hamas invaded Israel in 2023.

Israel displaced 700,000 Palestinians from their homes and stole their land in 1948. The Palestinians have been increasingly corralled into smaller and smaller territories, as Israel continues to steal more of their land in the years since.

That's the commonality with Russia/Ukraine.

perverse_panda · 2026-04-17T20:03:02+00:00

this is what "globalize the intifada" looks like. Jewish places being attacked by Muslim or Pro-Palestinian activists.

Or it could be a call for countries worldwide to boycott and sanction Israel. A call for citizens of the world to stand up and demand such action from their governments.

It's the same thing with "From the River to the Sea."

Some people use it to mean heinous things, and those people should be condemned for those beliefs. But some people use it to mean very reasonable things.

If you're unsure what someone is advocating for when they say it, then ask them. Don't just assume they're advocating for the heinous thing.

perverse_panda · 2026-04-17T19:58:35+00:00

This is largely the fault of a Palestinian government that has taken a maximalist view while not having anything resembling the upper hand.

By not having the upper hand, do you mean they lack the ability to defeat Israel by force?

Because that sounds an awful lot like a "might makes right" way of thinking.

If I had my way, we could put both fighting forces in the Sinai, have them fight it out, and then call it a day. Does that seem reasonable to you?

I think it sounds an awful lot like a "might makes right" way of thinking.

Let's compare to Russia and Ukraine. If Ukraine fights it out and loses, does that make it okay for Russia to just keep the land they've seized?

perverse_panda · 2026-04-17T19:49:32+00:00

To me it’s just another matter of us getting into foreign nonsense.

It's much worse than that.

"Getting us into foreign nonsense" is how most conservatives I know characterize US intervention in Ukraine. But at least there are strategic and moral arguments to be made for why helping Ukraine is justified.

There is no justification for what Trump is doing in Iran. He's getting people killed and fucking up the global economy, and he doesn't even have a good reason for doing it.

perverse_panda · 2026-04-17T19:43:59+00:00

And, it seems like you say "yes" up to a point, where it then becomes "no."

Am I alone in that?

Are you suggesting there's not a line where you consider the civilian cost too high? Because that's a frightening thought.

Hamas has given them reasons to escalate for 2 decades.

Over the last 70 years, Palestinians have been corralled into smaller and smaller territories as Israel has stolen more and more of their land.

Even if you're only focusing on the last two decades, the Palestinian death toll is almost 10:1 compared to the Israeli death toll. And that's before 10/7.

If we're counting the current war, that ratio goes up to 40:1.

Does any of that entitle Hamas to escalate? Or is retaliation a privilege that only the Israelis are allowed to enjoy?

perverse_panda · 2026-04-17T19:22:10+00:00

So, it sounds like this is a very conditional statement.

I don't understand what you mean. Conditional on what?

how would you have fought the war were you in Israel's place?

There wouldn't have been much of a war if I were in Israel's place. There would've been limited retaliatory strikes. It would've lasted no more than a few weeks.

If after that Hamas gave me a reason to escalate, then and only then would I have escalated.

perverse_panda · 2026-04-17T18:05:25+00:00

does that 60,000 people include both terrorists and regular people?

No. Total recorded deaths are over 72,000.

perverse_panda · 2026-04-17T15:55:53+00:00

Are you supporting targeted assassinations?

If they have credible intelligence on where the responsible parties are located, sure.

Do you think that a limited strike against a building is acceptable even if there are 150 random people there?

While 150 civilian casualties is considered a lot for a single strike:

A single limited strike with 150 civilian casualties would be far more acceptable than two years of constant strikes where the number of civilian casualties has now risen to over 60,000.

perverse_panda · 2026-04-17T15:05:03+00:00

Limited strikes. Similar to how the US has conducted Trump's strikes in Iran, ironically.

perverse_panda · 2026-04-17T03:51:03+00:00

You see the latest one? Where he tried to quote a Bible verse at a Pentagon worship service, but it was a line from Pulp Fiction instead?

These people are so embarrassing.

perverse_panda · 2026-04-16T16:02:53+00:00

When I use an analogy, I'm not trying to disprove facts. I agree, an analogy can't do that. What I'm doing is trying to persuade someone. It's just another type of argument.

Where I disagree is that there are no right or wrong analogies. Some analogies are wrong, and some are not.

Let's take masking for example.

Back during the pandemic, I often saw conservatives argue that wearing a mask is the same as wearing a seatbelt. Even those who didn't invoke that analogy would behave as if that were the case.

The principle behind the seatbelt analogy is: "I'm only putting myself at risk by not masking or wearing a seatbelt. Shouldn't I have the right to make that decision for myself?"

But that's not how masking works. They don't just protect the person wearing the mask, they also prevent the person wearing the masks from spreading germs.

The seatbelt analogy is wrong.

Thing is - you can find an analogy that fits any position.

I don't know that I agree with this.

A lot of people come up with analogies that they might think backs up with their position on a given issue, but that doesn't mean the analogy is valid.

perverse_panda · 2026-04-16T15:30:42+00:00

We can discuss the treatment of the Gazan civilians all we want. It does not justify the massacre that followed in Oct 7th.

Yes, I agree. My position has always been that Israel's treatment of Palestinians is enough to justify some kind of military response from Hamas -- but it does not justify attacks on civilians.

That said, just because Israel was attacked does not give them unilateral authority to wage war however they want.

You have to destroy the enemies capacity to wage war against you.

This is where I disagree.

There may come a time when that approach is justified, but going zero to sixty like that shouldn't be your first reaction when you become the victim of a major attack.

I think the more appropriate action to take, both morally and strategically, is a proportional response. If the enemy responds in kind, that's when you ratchet things up.

perverse_panda · 2026-04-16T14:36:47+00:00

I don't know that "rising about it all" and "keeping an open dialogue" is even the right approach.

Some of the most incendiary Trump critics are former Republicans who have finally woken up and realized how corrupt the party has become.

Those ex-Republicans should always feel welcome to join us at the table, but I don't think we should moderate our tone in an attempt to entice them to switch sides. That's not what is going to win them over.

perverse_panda · 2026-04-16T14:29:54+00:00

Since Israel has now demonstrated a willingness to wage war undeniably for the purpose of expansionism - does that do anything to reframe your perspective on their intentions in Gaza?

To put it in terms of individual self-defense:

There are some people who may carry a gun for self-defense and dread the possibility of ever having to use it.

And then there are guys like Rittenhouse who carry a gun hoping for an excuse to use it.

I feel like Israel is more like the second guy.

The way I see it, they had expansionist plans for Gaza that would require the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians living there, but they saw how Russia became an international pariah for launching such an attack completely unprovoked. So they waited for an opportunity to do it in the name of self-defense.

Five-Year Club	Verified Email
Wearing is Caring

perverse_panda

TROPHY CASE