Trader Joe's Tuesday Treats: Daily Facial Sunscreen

Preemptive Strikes Edition

Trader Joe’s is the truth. Israel’s “defensive” wars of choice are a lie.

When “preemptive” action actually makes sense.

One of the great Zionist lies I was told growing up is that Israel only fights wars of necessity, from a purely defensive posture. Israel is never the aggressor, and when Israel initiates violent conflict, the necessity of “preemptive” strikes is morally and tactically ironclad. But as an adult, with a little historical curiosity and critical thinking, I have come to appreciate that multiple Israeli wars were in fact expansionist efforts framed as existential fights for survival.

Understanding Israel's imperial history and its propaganda narratives makes more sense when you know your American history. Living in Southern California puts one in the uncomfortable position of understanding that you live on stolen land without being able to do much of anything about it. To their credit, some American social studies courses still explain that the Mexican-American War was plainly imperialistic, executed on behalf of a public sold a false bill of goods: that it was a defensive war of necessity when it was truly anything but.

Russian justifications for its imperial pursuit of Ukraine follow the same playbook. These tactics are time-tested, and Israel isn't special. So its current "preemptive" war against Iran is baked on the same flimsy narrative as the catastrophic US war on Iraq after 9/11.

Unless you're in the extraordinarily small minority of diehard dead-enders, everyone understands that our war of choice against Iraq led to profound and immeasurable destruction. Beyond the hundreds of thousands of deaths, quality of life in Iraq has plummeted, the region is significantly less stable, extremism has surged, global migration has increased, and radical political elements have been empowered far beyond Iraq's borders.

Yet despite near universal recognition that invading Iraq proved disastrous for American interests, we are gearing up to make the exact same mistake. Like its genocide in Gaza, Israel wouldn't have started a war with Iran without expecting the United States to back them. And while public polling shows bipartisan majority opposition to US engagement with Iran, there appears to be no way to steer the administration off its path of compliance with Israel's regional aggression.

“I guess you guys aren't ready for that yet. But your kids are gonna love it.”

---

I will never forget my mom asking me, ten years after the US invaded Iraq, "Whatever happened to the oil? I thought we invaded for oil?" Back then, it was subtext. Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 documentary (2004) made waves because it dared to say the thing that we all pretty much suspected, but nobody was willing to actually articulate: Iraq had nothing to do with security, nothing to do with the famously bullshit claim of weapons of mass destruction. It really was about oil.

But now, Israel isn't even pretending. They aren't even hiding the ball. For Israel, and for their American supporters, the stated goal is regime change. Rhetoric that initiated from the premise of national security and denuclearization moved immediately to open admission of attempted regime change. Needless to say, bombing our way to regime change won't actually make Israel any safer, nor will it serve any distinct American national security interest. This path spells unadulterated lunacy.

I'm not telling you anything you don't already know. And I'm not making the case that many others haven't already articulated, more thoroughly and more powerfully, over the last week. I just find it darkly hysterical how fully and completely abused the word "preemptive" has become in service of this Dr. Strangelove-level operation. But preemptive actually means something. It means stopping something before it starts. It implies knowledge, with reasonable confidence, that something will happen if you don't take action.

Preemption is why we use sunscreen, especially here in Southern California. I should've done it when I lived in Minnesota, but now that I benefit from significantly more direct sun, I try and preempt melanoma much more than I ever did before. So I started getting into really good sunscreen, first with Kiehl's, and then with Supergoop. Like anything of high quality, these products do cost a pretty penny. So I was grateful to learn about a Trader Joe's sunscreen that works brilliantly without leaving anything on my clothes, all for a very affordable price.

I recently attended a Substack writers' happy hour mixer, where I met

Karyn Bosnak

, an internet OG who collaborates with her friend and fellow OG

Jen Lancaster

on the MEET THE MESS podcast and Substack. After learning about my serial Trader Joe's Tuesday Treats, she reached into her bag and gifted me a 1.7-ounce tube of Trader Joe's Daily Facial Sunscreen SPF 40. "Everyone's talking about it," she told me. "It's the same thing as Supergoop, but off-brand and much cheaper." Supergoop! I know Supergoop. I use Supergoop, but I hate how much it costs.

Sure enough, this Trader Joe's sunscreen works like a charm. And it is a hell of a lot cheaper than its name-brand alternative. I may be brand-loyal, but when the same exact product is available for less, I'll always choose the cheaper option. Thank you so much Karyn, and thank you Substack for introducing us!

Wherever you are, if you are indigenous or a white guy like me living on stolen land, whether you support reckless wars of choice, or you're fighting against regional destabilization with everything you got, stay hydrated and protect your skin. From Iran to Inglewood, fuck cancer, and to hell with melanoma specifically. Preemptive action does have a place, and sunscreen is a crucial piece of that.

Fair warning: this Tuesday Treat is inedible. It’s a treat for the skin, sickos. Stay tuned for more traditional, edible Tuesday Treats in coming weeks. And like I said, stay hydrated.

---

---

---

ICYMI, check out these related posts:

---

---

---