NXTR

The quote you’re using is from the 2010-2011 peace talks. The reason those broke down is as follows:

Direct talks broke down in late September 2010 when an Israeli partial moratorium on settlement construction in the West Bank expired and Netanyahu refused to extend the freeze unless the Palestinian Authority recognized Israel as a Jewish State, while the Palestinian leadership refused to continue negotiating unless Israel extended the moratorium.[3] The proposal was rejected by the Palestinian leadership, that stressed that the topic on the Jewishness of the state has nothing to do with the building freeze. The decision of Netanyahu on the freeze was criticized by European countries and the United States.

In regards to Oslo and the 2014 peace talks:

2014:

A deadline was set for establishing a broad outline for an agreement by 29 April 2014. On the expiry of the deadline, negotiations collapsed, with the US Special Envoy Indyk reportedly assigning blame mainly to Israel, while the US State Department insisting no one side was to blame but that “both sides did things that were incredibly unhelpful.”

Oslo: Both Oslo accords were signed, however,

the interim process put in place under Oslo had fulfilled neither Israeli nor Palestinian expectations.

This led to the Camp David Accords where the main issues and points seemed to be the following:

the refusal of the Palestinians and Arafat to give up the right of return

Judged from the perspective of Palestinians’ and Israelis’ respective rights under international law, all the concessions at Camp David came from the Palestinian side, none from the Israeli side.

the Palestinians starting position was at the 1967 borders, but they were ready to give up Jewish neighborhoods in East Jerusalem, and parts of the West Bank with Israeli settlements. Further, the Palestinians were willing to implement Right of Return in a way that guaranteed Israel’s demographic interests.

The proposals were, for the most part, verbal. As no agreement was reached and there is no official written record of the proposals, some ambiguity remains over details of the positions of the parties on specific issues.

The talks ultimately failed to reach agreement on the final status issues: Territory, Territorial contiguity, Jerusalem and the Temple Mount, Refugees and Palestinian right of return, Security arrangements, Settlements

To summarize the 2010-11 peace talks broke down due to Israel not abiding by the terms of the negotiation. The 2014 talks are debated with more blame seeming to be placed on Israel. The Oslo accords were signed but left unresolved and unfollowed by Israel leading to the camp David accords where the main issue seems to be the right of return for the hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who were displaced. However, who actually ended the talks is still debated.

Here is the original FDA letter to VPX regarding White Heat. The chemical they are focusing on is 4-Amino-2-Methylpentane Citrate also known as 1,3-Dimethylbutylamine, DMBA, 2-amino-4-methylpentane, AMP citrate, and 4-methyl-2-pentanamine (according to the FDA letter). Upon further research, it seems like, although the structure of the compound is similar to an amphetamine, the actual mechanism of action of these and similar compounds, such as DMAA, still isn’t fully known. So it was a bit inaccurate of me to call it an “amphetamine analogue” since they might not work in a similar manner.

There used to be a product called Redline: White Heat from VPX (same people that make bang with the unhinged CEO). It had to be taken off the market because it had an amphetamine analogue in it called AMP Citrate or DMBA.

One scoop of that stuff made me feel like I was going to die. My friend who took Ritalin at the time told me it was more powerful than any other stimulant he had before.

It’s crazy to think this was openly available at health supplement stores for years before the FDA caught wind.

Something something Celsius 232.8

Have you ever thought about why black people are often criminalized or why so many kids grow up without dads? It’s due to centuries of systemic injustices.

Redlining is probably the biggest example. Redlining practices pushed black communities into areas given barely any resources. These places today have rough living conditions and rarely see revitalization efforts that actually uplift the people living there. This continued the years of generational poverty that came after slavery and the repeated destruction of any attempts for black people to get any crumb of prosperity. With little support from the government, combined with poverty, forces some into crime just to put food on the table. Now, with these areas being over-policed, you’ve got a recipe for high arrest rates.

1: Black men are more often caught in this web. It’s not just about being targeted by the police. It’s about the dire living conditions, the lack of support, and then the heavy policing. All this means more black men end up behind bars, leaving families without fathers. The kids from these broken homes? They’re set up for a hard life from the start and some fall into the same cycle.

2: Pulling your kids from public schools and opting for homeschooling restricts their exposure to diverse viewpoints and backgrounds. This is why many who’ve spent time in cities or universities tend to have less conservative views. It’s not about them being molded by others; it’s genuine exposure to diverse experiences and stories. This broadens understanding and breaks down barriers while leading less people to view different races negatively. I’m sharing this not to change your mind, but hoping you’ll see a different perspective, even if you don’t fully agree. Just as you believe in spreading your viewpoint, I believe in the value of diverse exposure. It’s how we learn and grow.

The BLM movement‘s purpose is to highlight the racial injustices black people face everyday in the United States especially in policing. Black neighborhoods are over-policed, their citizens are harassed and in the worst cases murdered in unprovoked situations by police officers. The fact that many people witness these injustices and either remain indifferent or choose to ignore them suggests that black lives do not matter in this country.

Supporting the movement doesn’t mean you automatically think all white people are racist. All it means is that you recognize the racial injustices in society and support people, legislation and the steps it takes to eliminate as many of these as possible. This is why when someone doesn’t support black lives matter, the implication can be viewed as racist. It implies that they wish to keep these injustices ingrained in society. Highlighting the division that still exists in society is the only way to solve these problems. How can you heal the wound if you “won’t even admit the knife is there”?

Ahhh yes the BLM movement, famously known for lynching thousands of people just like the KKK!

Also, the KKK were only fighting to uphold their racist ideals. This is exactly the same as the BLM movement trying to fight against racism.

No false equivalence here!

This is so incredibly inaccurate. Nazi’s killed communists before coming for other groups. In fact, communists were one of the largest roadblocks to Nazi’s gaining power so they were one of the first groups be be targeted and eliminated. Despite what the name of the National Social German Workers’ Party might have you assume, the Nazi party were very much capitalists. They deregulated, supported business owners, squashed unions and even privatized public industries. All of these are hallmarks of capitalism. The one thing I will agree with is being anti-fascist means being anti-nazi, however this doesn’t work the other way around. Equating communism with either fascism or nazism is asinine. Comparing fascism and nazism to neoliberalism would be much closer to an apt comparison.

Although I would love to see it, as long as DirectX is the de facto graphics API, I don’t see Microsoft fading into irrelevance when it comes to the PC gaming market.

Hopefully Microsoft releases a handheld mode instead of just experimenting with it. Besides the interface, they also really need to optimize for performance. Even though, with the steam deck, proton is converting draw calls it still outperforms the same deck running windows with native driver support. This really shows how the mountains of extra crap running on windows hurts gaming performance on these low power devices.

A lot of consumer’s buying habits for products with inelastic demand is driven by cost. If companies weren’t driven by ever increasing profits then there might be more of an incentive to offer a wider variety of crops to consumers. Certain crops are already subsidized by the government to make it profitable for farmers. If other crops were subsidized then perhaps farmers would be more encouraged to grow them and if people see these at normal prices they might also be more interested in buying them. Of course, this would rely on multiple parts of farming being overhauled. For example, there’s a lot of cost sinks, one I can think of is the locked down maintenance of farming equipment (once again driven by the need for increasing profits via fiduciary duty). Eliminating these and other overheads would not only lead to more cost efficient farming, but also cheaper crops and increased variety offered to consumers.

On the flip side I’m worried about manufacturers realizing that the continuous revenue stream from autonomous vehicles is more profitable than selling vehicles outright thereby increasing the cost of buying a vehicle to the point where ownership becomes functionally obsolete except to the ultra-wealthy. This also makes it much easier to restrict the movement of people. Self driving car companies could easily disable the ability to travel to entire areas either because they say they’re too dangerous or not profitable enough to operate in. I can imagine entire cities and rural areas becoming ghost towns. While personally I think autonomous vehicles, in a vacuum, have the potential to save countless lives, the reality is that in time we will be giving the companies making these vehicles the ability to dictate where we can and cannot go.

What’s interesting about homophobia in Iraq and West Asia in general is that it was originally imported by the British during their colonial rule. Prior to this these countries were much less strict about homosexuality. It was still frowned upon at certain points in time, but not violently persecuted. After these countries gained independence they stuck with the British stance regarding homosexuality. Ironically, western nations becoming more open about same sex relationships made fundamentalists in these former colonies even more homophonic and violent because it had the appearance of going against western hegemony (despite homophobia still being firmly engrained into western society).

The American dream is essentially trying to tell people that the United States is a meritocratic society. The more work you put in the more you get out. However, I’m sure most of us know this isn’t true. Where you were born and what family you were born into is the primary factor in determining someone’s success. So you grow up hearing stories of “hard working” billionaires and think “I can make it there if I work hard” while ignoring your family who worked their asses off and got nowhere. You see more of the lie of meritocracy as you age. People around you work hard and fail, you might succeed with less effort or fail with more. The idiotic decisions of today’s billionaires solidifies the notion that the American dream never existed and was fabricated to get people to work more for less in the hopes that one day they will make it. In reality, it all comes down to the zip code you were born in.

Republicans voters to fantasize about restricting the rights of their fellow citizens but when republican politicians actually implement these into law their voter base tends to be less than enthusiastic. The lack of a “red wave” during the midterms is an example of this. The reality is that most republican voters don’t actually know what republicans stand for. In fact, many republican voters view Medicaid expansion in a favorable light which is in contrast to their legislators who wish to shrink the size of Medicaid.

As republicans pass more laws to restrict the rights and erode away the already rotting social safety nets in this country, the less support they will receive. Unfortunately, this doesn’t hold true when marginalized groups are targeted. Instead, their base tends to solidify their support. If they aren’t directly or indirectly affected then they don’t care.

To answer your question, I think republicans thought they could get away with restricting abortion rights since their rhetoric didn’t scare away voters in the past. However, when they actually implemented it and it directly affected republican voters, the mask came off and their support waned.

Kbin is probably the closest thing to this. There’s a magazine section for lemmy/kbin communities and there’s another section for microblogging which brings in mastodon posts.

Fortunately…or unfortunately depending on how you look at it, the United States would use Japan as a base of operations to attack China and the Philippines is basically considered a giant aircraft carrier by the military. So they would want to keep them around while Taiwan gets sacrificed…though the Philippines would be next. Sad state of affairs all around.

Of course not, but they wouldn’t intervene for the good of the Taiwanese people. It would be because of all the US assets (chip investment) wrapped up in Taiwan. Not to mention war is good for business. So both the US and Chinese populations will be at the whims of their government sending them into a meat grinder all for financial interests.

This is true. The six assurances reaffirms that the United States doesn’t view Taiwan as a sovereign nation under either Taiwanese or Chinese rule. The main points it states is that the US will continue to supply Taiwan with weapons, it will not be involved with negotiations between the PRC and Taiwan, Taiwan is not a sovereign state and China is not recognized as having sovereignty over Taiwan.

So the US doesn’t think China has sovereignty over Taiwan while also saying they do not support Taiwan independence.

Basically it’s another way for the US to feed the military industrial complex while keeping the possibility of war in our back pocket without disrupting relations with our #1 trade partner.

Not according to the US state department:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_China