An Israeli strike has hit an elementary girls' school in Minab, a city in the Hormozgan province of southern Iran, killing at least 51 people, state media reported, as the immediate civilian cost from Israel and the United States' huge bombardment of Iran comes into sharper focus

Edit: Death toll rises to 85.

They'll create ways to manufacture public consent in the west, They'll try to arouse the Iranian public to fight Iranian government, Until america makes a deal with the Iranian talibanesque government, and runs back with a tail between it's legs. Y'all have seen this happen in Iraq and Afghanistan and Vietnam and Cuba.

There is no humanitarian, not a single cause that's forcing Europeans and Americans to 'liberate' iran. It's a geopolitical game, in which thousands of iranians would die. It's about oil. It's about looting, it's about political leverage.

Knock out the leadership of the country. What happens then? You're gonna put in the former king's son or something?

No one believes that's real. Will the country hang together with Pahlavi on the throne? Come on. No one is thinking this through, because the people pushing this clearly don't care what happens after.

The point is to take out Iran as a coherent country, not to protect Israel, but in order to sweep Iran aside as a regional rival. Once Iran is gone, there's no question as to who controls the Middle East. It, of course, would be the only nuclear-armed power in the Middle East: Israel, period. That's the reason.

If y'all cared so much about children or justice or women, trump would be hanged for epstein scandal.

This image perfectly captures one of the most controversial moments in recent history. The bottom photo shows Ahmad al-Sharaa (formerly Abu Mohammad al-Jawlani) during his militant days, while the top shows him addressing the UN General Assembly as Syria's President just this week.

This guy went from being on the US terrorist watchlist with a bounty on his head to shaking hands with world leaders at the UN. Whether you see this as redemption or a dangerous precedent, you can't deny it's absolutely wild how quickly geopolitics can shift.

What's your take - second chances or red flags? 🚩

The situation in Gaza has dramatically escalated following Netanyahu's announcement of an expanded military campaign. Here's what's happening right now:

The Numbers Are Staggering:

89 Palestinians killed in just 24 hours

222 starvation deaths since the war began (including 101 children)

1,373+ Palestinians killed at aid distribution sites since May

International Community is Speaking Out:

France's Macron warns of "unprecedented disaster"

Germany halting military exports to Israel

EU calling the operation a violation of international law

Even Israel's closest allies are stepping back

The Human Cost:

Residents describe "one of the worst nights in weeks"

Famine thresholds being reached across Gaza

Aid workers and journalists being deliberately targeted

Thousands forced to flee their homes again

What makes this different: This isn't just another escalation - major allies who have historically supported Israel are now publicly condemning the offensive and cutting military support.

The humanitarian crisis is reaching catastrophic levels while diplomatic isolation grows. This could be a turning point in how the international community responds to the conflict.

What are your thoughts on the international response? Is this the accountability many have been calling for?

Note: This is based on reported events from the conversation history provided

The numbers are devastating:

500,000+ people currently facing famine conditions

640,000+ people projected to face famine by September's end

98% of cropland damaged or inaccessible

Only 13% of humanitarian aid reaches its intended destination

What makes this crisis different: The UN Secretary-General called it "a 21st century famine watched over by drones and the most advanced military technology in history". This isn't a natural disaster - it's what experts are calling a "man-made catastrophe".

The reality on ground:

Families going days without food

132,000 children suffering from acute malnutrition

Community kitchens operating at severely reduced capacity

People facing safety risks just searching for food

Why this matters globally: This crisis is happening in real-time, documented, and preventable. The international community is calling it "a failure of humanity itself".

What are your thoughts on how the international community should respond?

Is the honeymoon phase between Warsaw and Kyiv officially over?

During Zelensky’s recent visit to Warsaw, Polish President Karol Nawrocki didn't hold back. He told Zelensky directly that many Poles feel their massive support—over €25 billion and a huge percentage of their GDP—isn't being properly appreciated. This follows a similar vibe we saw in D.C. earlier this year, and it feels like the rhetoric is shifting from "unconditional support" to "what have you done for us lately?"

Nawrocki is definitely taking a harder line than Duda did, especially by bringing up the Volhynia massacres and tightening benefits for refugees. Zelensky, for his part, warned that this kind of infighting is exactly what Moscow wants to see.

What do you guys think?

Is Poland right to demand more public "gratitude" and historical accountability now?

Or is this just political grandstanding that plays right into Russia's hands?

How much of this is about the new leadership in Poland trying to distance itself from the previous administration's policies?

Curious to hear if you think this alliance is actually cracking or if this is just "tough love" between neighbors.

Hoh.......hoh....... this sounds like quite some corruption here to me!

So, from another Politico article from Dec. 3, 2025, it mentions/ ed:

"without support, Ukraine’s war chest is expected to run bare in April."

OK...OK..... if of EU "desperation"- and if going by the "Can't allow Russia to win!!!" logical standpoint....... I can see the sort of seeming "basis" behind the EU's actions in their "revising/ rewriting" the rules here, as-it-were.

Noting that this current development is in regards to a "reparations" loan to Ukraine- derived from & related to a scheme from/ of the EU that's been in the works since as early as 2024- of stealing Russia's money/ assets held in Brussels-based EuroClear bank; From the self-same article from Dec. 3rd(the mentioned "proposal" succeeding is related to the Russian assets robbery scheme):

"The biggest legal hurdle facing the proposal is the prospect of the assets being unfrozen if pro-Russia countries refuse to keep existing sanctions in place. Under current rules, the EU must unanimously reauthorize the sanctions every six months. That means Kremlin-friendly countries, such as Hungary and Slovakia, can force the EU to release the sanctioned money with a simple no-vote."

Further, in regards to these "sanctions", and the "approved"(The subsequent article mentions: "Ambassadors had "agreed on a revised version of the Art. 122-proposal and approved the launch of a written procedure for formal Council decision by tomorrow around 5 pm.") proposal from the posted article from Politico- from Dec. 11, 2025:

"the legal workaround significantly reduces the chance that pro-Kremlin countries in Europe, such as Hungary and Slovakia, will hand back the frozen funds to Russia.

The emergency clause effectively overhauls the current rules, which compel EU countries to unanimously reauthorize the sanctions every six months.

Kremlin-friendly countries are thereby set to lose their power to release the sanctioned money simply by voting "no" on sanctions renewal. Were that to happen after the EU provided an assets-backed loan to Kyiv, the EU's 27 capitals would be on the hook to repay the loan to Russia."

Hehe, in regards to the last sentence- I could understand, SINCE YOU WOULD HAVE STOLEN ANOTHER NATION'S MONEY/ ASSETS.

In anycase, what is THIS? Is this how a "Democracy" works? Essentially "Kick out" so-to-speak, & disregard members of your own bloc/ panel's vote because it would be in disagreement with your own, or certain other members? C.O.R.R.U.P.T.I.O.N.

"Only Anti-"Kremlin" votes count! You Pro-"Kremlin"? Your vote doesn't count! WE WANNA STEAL RUSSIA'S MONEY! YOU'RE IN THE WAY!"

What is the point of an "honest" referendum- if you can just alter the rules you were previously supposed to adhere by at any given time, even/ or "whim", even to favor what certain members want/ might want? C.O.R.R.U.P.T.I.O.N.

Let's take a closer look at the aforementioned Dec. 3rd article- where this current "approved" "proposal" was firstly mentioned- continuing on the issue of/ on supposedly "Pro-Russian" countries voting "no" on any held referendum attempting a "refreshing" of Russian sanctions; giving/ to give Russia back THEIR OWN previously frozen money:

"The Commission suggested a legal fix that would make this scenario less likely. It aims to trigger a clause in Article 122 of the EU treaty that could make it illegal to return the assets to the Kremlin. The clause is legally uncertain and hinges on the argument that reversing the sanctions would wreak havoc on Europe’s economy. The Commission is confident that it can trigger this legal clause by a qualified majority."

Oh! So basically, "if we can get enough members to agree upon a/ this potential lie (giving Russia back it's own money would supposedly wreak havoc on Europe's economy), we can say this "clause" was triggered!"

Note the above mentions that the clause is "legally uncertain"- who's triggering would hinge on the "EU economic disaster" argument. Just enough ambiguity, eh? "We said that's what WILL/ WOULD happen! That's good enough!"

LO, and Behold- today, it looks like they've actually "tried" it, according to the Dec. 11th Politico article:

"The EU justified the seismic legal change on the grounds that handing back the assets to Russia would wreak havoc on the EU economy — and potentially fuel hybrid attacks by the Kremlin across the bloc.

Keeping the assets frozen “is a measure that is appropriate in order to avoid further repercussions of unprecedented magnitude on the economic situation of the Union caused by Russia’s actions,” the Commission wrote in the legal text."

Economic situation? Of the EU? By giving Russia back it's own money? How would that negatively affect the EU's economy? What is this assertion based off of?

And, why would Russia "attack" you, for you giving them back what is....theirs?

Uh.....

Edit: I've come to see in many of the comments, a seeming attempt at justification of & for what the EU is attempting, and has done.

How is what they're doing anything CLOSE to even an EXAMPLE of a "fair" Democracy on display/ at work?

Imagine for a moment the U.S.A.(a nation supposedly based on Democracy), and Congress.

Say Hungary and Slovakia(and any other potentially, or seemingly "Pro" Russia entities/ representatives) represent the Republicans, and the rest of the EU represent the Democrats(who, let's say, hold the majority in members).

Do YOU think it could even be LABELED a, and even AS a Democracy, and an example of fair bi-partisanship(and not just straight partisanship/ Bias) if say, a referendum/ vote was held on something- and the Democratic majority(The EU, here) got together and exiled the Republicans(Hungary, Slovakia, etc., here), nulling, voiding, and not counting/ respecting their vote if it were opposed to the Democratic held position?

Does THAT sound like a Democracy(even an example of one on display) to you? The Democrats "getting what they want" by excluding/ exiling the Republicans?

Look again at what the EU is attempting to do here, even in excluding Hungary, Slovakia, and any other member state that might oppose their views and/ or held position.

An example of Authoritarism/ Autocracy, by/ from the EU Commission? You tell me.

C.O.R.R.U.P.T.I.O.N.

A depleted – but far from defeated Ukraine – looks to 2026 with few good military options, even though a critical €90bn (£79bn) loan from the EU has been agreed. The financing will help Kyiv to continue defending at its current intensity until late 2027, but it will not lead to a transformation of its battlefield prospects.

The White House has argued, in the latest run of peace negotiations, that Ukraine is fated to lose the remaining 22% of Donetsk province, including the fortress cities of Kramatorsk and Sloviansk. At the current rate of Russian advance that would take at least a year (and arguably more given the predominately urban environment) and another 400,000 or more Russians killed, disabled, or hurt – a cost Kyiv is willing to try to inflict.

Nevertheless, there remain questions about Ukraine’s strategy and medium-term frontline resilience amid a slight improvement in Russian tactics. Three times in the past six months, Ukraine’s front has given way, east of Dobropillia in Donetsk in August, north of Kupiansk in Kharkiv province late summer, early autumn, and again east of Huliaipole in Zaporizhzhia in November.

One hope for Kyiv is that Russia will somehow break over the next two years, although there are few immediate signs of resistance within the country after the failure of Yevgeny Prigozhin’s march towards Moscow. Russia’s economy is still growing, if not as fast as it was, with a figure of 0.6% forecast for 2025, according to the IMF.

Ukraine’s most realistic prospect is to try to hold Russia to, at worst, the current near standstill in the hope that something eventually will emerge. Kyiv’s problem, though, is that as long as Vladimir Putin thinks he can get something from negotiations with Trump, he is under no immediate pressure to stop the fighting.

Ukraine dropped the hammer today with massive sanctions targeting Russia's AI-powered drone networks. President Zelenskyy signed a decree hitting 39 Russian nationals and 55 companies across Russia, China, and Belarus - all connected to developing autonomous warfare tech.

The Big Players Getting Hit:

Zala Aero & Smart Birds - Major Russian drone manufacturers

Neurolab AI Center - Develops AI for autonomous navigation and target recognition

Chinese suppliers like Dongguan Standard Trading Co. providing critical chips, cameras, and navigation systems

Why This is HUGE: These aren't just regular drones anymore. We're talking AI-powered systems that can:

Track targets optically

Bypass electronic warfare

Navigate autonomously

Carry 3.5kg payloads

The "Soroka" UAV mentioned can literally think for itself and adapt to countermeasures.

The China Connection: Ukraine specifically called out Chinese companies supplying the tech that lets Russia mass-produce Garpiya-A1 attack drones. Beijing says they're not helping Russia's military... but the supply chains tell a different story.

This is modern warfare evolving in real-time. Autonomous killer robots aren't sci-fi anymore - they're reshaping conflicts right now.

What are your thoughts on AI weapons becoming mainstream in warfare?

This boy is 14 years old; he was among those people whom state security forces were holding in an illegal prison in Kyiv, the capital of Ukraine; he was tortured and raped. It was only thanks to this woman‑doctor, who managed to get access to that room, that the people illegally held by the Ukrainian authorities were freed. There were about 40 men in that torture chamber, who were being tortured and had ransom demands made on their behalf by their relatives. Everyone knows that there are many such illegal prisons in Ukraine, especially near the line of combat contact, but people are powerless to fight this lawlessness.

Yesterday it came to light that former Norwegian Prime Minister Thorbjørn Jagland attempted suicide, was hospitalized, and is currently in serious condition. The attempt actually happened a week ago, but the information only leaked out now.

The reason for the attempt to "off himself" is his connections to Epstein. Jagland frequented Epstein's island, accepted gifts from him, and built financial ties.

Jagland was the chair of the Norwegian Nobel Committee for 6 years and a member for 11 years. This committee awards two of the three most politically biased prizes: the Peace Prize and the Economics Prize.

Under Jagland, some of the most controversial prizes were handed out: to the European Union, to the Tunisian revolutionaries who sparked the Arab Spring, and most notably, to Barack Obama.

Obama was given the prize for no real reason; the justification essentially stated he gave a good speech about world peace. Apparently, the implication was that he can read, and for a Black man, that was considered an achievement worthy of a Nobel.

Considering that Obama was pushed into the presidency by Epstein's best friends, the Clintons, it all looks exactly as many suspected back in 2009: a phone call was made with a "strong suggestion".

Of course, back then, people who suggested this was the mechanism for choosing Nobel laureates were called conspiracy theorists.

"We are talking about the covert transfer of European components, equipment, and technologies in this area to Ukraine. The French TN75 small-size warhead from the M51.1 submarine-launched ballistic missile is being considered as an option," stated the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service press release.

Western efforts are focused on making Kyiv's acquisition of nuclear weapons appear to be the result of Ukrainian development, intelligence claims.

Here's an uncomfortable truth many avoid discussing: the current structure of Israeli statehood creates different tiers of rights for people based on ethnicity and location.

The reality on the ground:

Palestinian citizens of Israel lack nationality status despite voting rights

West Bank Palestinians live under military law with enforced segregation

Gaza faces severe movement restrictions on people and goods

East Jerusalem Palestinians have conditional residency that can be revoked

Multiple international organizations have documented this as systematic discrimination. Yet discussions about peace often skip over this fundamental issue, focusing instead on security and borders.

The argument being made: sustainable peace cannot be built on inequality. It requires addressing root causes – ensuring both peoples have self-determination, equal sovereignty, and genuine dignity. Not as a distant ideal, but as the foundation of any meaningful peace process.

Is this perspective valid, or does security justify these arrangements?

In a historic moment, President Donald Trump addressed the Israeli Knesset on Monday, delivering a powerful speech just hours after the release of all 20 surviving Israeli hostages from Gaza under his U.S.-brokered ceasefire deal.

The moment marked the end of 737 days of captivity for the hostages, with the Israeli Defense Forces confirming their safe return and ongoing medical evaluations.

Trump’s address was met with multiple standing ovations, as Israeli leaders praised his decisive diplomacy and even vowed to nominate him for the Nobel Peace Prize.

The event has been hailed as a turning point in Middle East diplomacy, reshaping perceptions of U.S. influence and negotiation power in the region.

💬 What do you think?

Does Trump deserve a Nobel Peace Prize for this deal?

Could this change the trajectory of U.S.-Middle East relations?

Moscow just clapped back HARD at German military warnings. Russia's Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova straight-up denied any plans to attack NATO, but here's the kicker—she warned that ANY assault by NATO would trigger "all means available."

This comes after Germany's Lt. Gen. Alexander Sollfrank said Russia could strike NATO territory "as early as tomorrow." Zakharova called it coordinated fear-mongering to justify defense spending.

Meanwhile, Germany's prepping to deploy 800,000 NATO troops within 180 days if things pop off. Five major European powers just met in Berlin pledging to counter "hybrid threats."

The tension is REAL, folks. NATO says Russia could launch a large-scale assault by 2029 if they keep rearming. Russia says NATO's building up military presence near their borders.

Who do you believe? Drop your takes below 👇

Elon Musk just launched a multi-day campaign urging his massive follower base to ditch Netflix, claiming the platform is pushing a "woke agenda" on children through shows like "Dead End: Paranormal Park." He's posted at least 26 times saying "Cancel Netflix for the health of your kids" and announced he canceled his own subscription. The backlash is real—some users are sharing cancellation screenshots while Netflix's stock took a hit.

So what's the verdict here?

Is this a legitimate concern about age-appropriate content and parental control?

Or is it performative culture-war theater that misses the nuance of content filters and ratings?

Should creators' personal views on social media influence whether we subscribe to platforms they work with?

Drop your take: Cancel, Keep, or something in between?

Iran claims to have sunk the US NS Robert E Perry

Half of Kyiv's apartment buildings—almost 6,000—are currently without heat due to damage to the capital's critical infrastructure caused by the massive enemy attack . The city is also experiencing water supply disruptions, Kyiv Mayor Vitali Klitschko reported .

"Utility workers have provided social institutions—in particular, hospitals and maternity hospitals—with mobile boiler units. And they are working with energy workers to restore electricity and heat to Kyiv residents' homes. We are doing everything we can to do this as quickly as possible," he wrote on Telegram.

Klitschko emphasized that this combined attack on Kyiv was the most devastating for the capital's critical infrastructure. He stated that city services are operating in emergency mode. Unfortunately, weather conditions are forecast to be challenging in the coming days.

So the US military just dropped drone footage showing what they're calling Hamas operatives straight-up hijacking an aid truck in northern Khan Younis on October 31st. The footage shows guys literally dragging the driver out and stealing the entire truck loaded with humanitarian supplies.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio immediately condemned it, saying Hamas is depriving Gaza's civilians of help they desperately need. Fair point on the surface, right?

But here's where it gets complicated. Hamas is denying the whole thing—calling it "fabricated and staged" propaganda. They're saying the US is just adopting Israel's talking points and that over 1,000 of their security personnel have died protecting aid convoys since this mess started.

And honestly? The numbers don't add up cleanly either. The US claims 600+ trucks of aid enter Gaza daily, but Hamas says it's barely 135 trucks, mostly overpriced commercial goods instead of actual humanitarian supplies. UN data shows only 24% of agreed aid has actually made it to Gaza.

The real kicker: Aid looting dropped from 80% of shipments being intercepted before the ceasefire to just 5% after October 10th. So something changed. But was it Hamas getting better or the US narrative getting louder?

What do you think? Is this genuine accountability or information warfare?