Sure, framing it as mandatory wholesale support for x,y,z is disengenuous the same way it would be to call someone who is not vehemently against the United States as a concept in its entirety a bigot due to their current persecution of racial and LGBT minorities. Multiple things can be true at once but when you zero in on specific injustices that nearly the entire world exhibited just 2 decades ago and apply the same standard to people experiencing very different conditions (for example, people who have only known conflict for their entire lives and have not had the same opportunities that rich, safe countries have had) then it comes off as dishonest or at the very least just very myopic and ill informed. Should those injustices be criticized: yes. Are the people pointing out the perceived hypocracy doing it because they genuinely care about LGBT people impacted in those countries: no. I don’t agree with all perspectives expressed in the other direction but I understand why they exist when we exist in a space where certain people are painted with broad strokes while others are afforded infinite nuance in their positions.

You’re engaging in bad faith just like the post itself is doing.

Would suggest you skip paying for the DLC here because it’s not as good or as fleshed out as other borderlands DLC

2 things to note: They want to deport him to Syria or Algeria and not to El Salvador so hopefully he remains free at least.

The judge making this assessment is part of the executive branch and not a federal judge and made it on very literal terms (spineless and ethically bankrupt but not the final decision). Secretary of state said hes is a threat to US foreign policy in writing therefore he can be deported as the law states that he can be deported if the secretary of state says he is a threat to US foreign policy.

Yeah, it is a fight but I think you’re misunderstanding the sides involved. A small company with like 5-15 employees (just an example) also has mouths to feed. Larger multinational corporations can and have passed American tariffs costs along to buyers from other countries to “soften the blow” for American buyers and are usually better equipped to weather the storm by taking a hit to profits over the medium term than small businesses. At the end of the day, only business logic applies because the unfortunate reality is that no one cares if you can’t afford food or housing in most countries so benevolence is not an option for most.

I don’t love exploitative companies either (this one seems to be on the smaller side and exploring all avenues) but why would they willingly lose income that they probably rely on to live for some sort of greater good when they can just advertise in different markets especially when they’ve already done the legwork of setting up production in China. Even the most ideologically comitted business owners wouldn’t willingly lose money unless they were doing it for PR (We’re not just talking about losing out on profit at a 104% tariff rate)

If Americans didn’t make their problems everyone else’s we wouldn’t care about or comment on your politics.

Why would they when they can just sell to literally every other country on earth instead

Having to pay for basic online services for games you’ve already purchased for a current gen console is exploitative to begin with

Claimed. Thank you

The reporting in French I saw said “voile integral” which is niqab/burqa and I checked the bill itself and it just said face covering (excluding medical purposes)

I don’t think this law bans all hijab but just the niqab which is the one that also covers the face and is generally seen as fundamentalist in most Muslim countries. The bill itself says face and not head covering. Not to say that this entire bill isn’t driven by some level of xenophobia (Christian symbols and holidays are seen as heritage/culture while non-Christian ones are seen purely as religious etc)

Fascists can’t make good art

18-24 usually gets grouped together for census and survey stuff so you got a good year left in the tank before you’re part of the 25-44 crowd

It refers to either a limited time reward structure where you pay for the ability to earn rewards such as cosmetics or other perks in multiplayer games such Fortnite and Valorant (If you don’t earn the needed XP within the designated timeframe then you may not even get those rewards you paid for) or access to DLC content in general for both single and multiplayer games where some functionality/maps/modes are gated behind a single or recurring payment.

Biden sent $8 billion in weapons immediately before he left office and Trump reversed the pause on 2,000lb bombs and sent $1 billion immediately after taking office

You clearly don’t care about whether or not 2,000lb bombs were available and in use. You just care about whether a performative gesture was made.

And they clearly never ran out of 2,000lb bombs to use. They just happened to need some more now.

Yup, he just sent them at least 14,000 of them before doing that. More than all other bombs combined according to leaks. 2000 pounds bombs were in use in September in Lebanon.

A lot of Dearborn’s Arab population is Palestinian and Lebanese and had/have family at risk of being killed. You know when those 2,000 pound bombs get shipped to Israel they actually get dropped on people and kill them, right?