World War III ??? Maybe

[dbair1967]

"CNN and MSNBC are scum"

 

[dbair1967]

 

[Creeper]

With everything that has gone on so far in Iran, I firmly believe Israel, the US, or another western ally has a spy highly placed in the Iranian government somewhere. I think Trump was given intel on exactly how Iran would respond to the attack by America on their nuclear sites.

 

[dbair1967]

With everything that has gone on so far in Iran, I firmly believe Israel, the US, or another western ally has a spy highly placed in the Iranian government somewhere. I think Trump was given intel on exactly how Iran would respond to the attack by America on their nuclear sites.

I think they all were it sounds like. Qutar said Iran told them way before it happened too.

They just wanted to pound their chest to placate some of the other hardliners and say "see we responded!"

 

[Doomsday]

They just think it doesn't matter what they've said before. Trump saying the same things makes it automatically wrong.

 

[Creeper]

They just think it doesn't matter what they've said before. Trump saying the same things makes it automatically wrong.

I do not understand people objecting to the strike on Iran. Those like Candace Owens claiming we are fighting Israel's war are either stupid of anti-Semitic. They can decide for themselves what they are. I do think some of them look like it is all about Jew hating based on their own words and rationale for their opinions.

My thoughts are that Israel is a reliable ally. More so than Germany and France, and recently Australia too. America has always been there for our friends. We helped Great Britain in the Falklands, a war that had nothing to do with us. We have been helping Ukraine, a country that is not really an ally. Of course we would help Israel in a war with Iran, also an enemy of the US.

At the same time, America's stated position on Iran has always been they cannot be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. This position is not just about Israel, it is also about the US. If Iran gets nukes it will destabilize the entire region.

The reason Trump bombed Iran, when I am certain he really did not want to is because we have the bunker buster bombs, MOPs, that could penetrate down to the level necessary to destroy Iran's underground facilities. More importantly, only the US has the bombers powerful enough to carry those bombs to Iran to drop them. Israel does not have heavy bombers capable of carrying the 30k pound bombs. And, there was no chance we would hand over the B2 to Israel to do it themselves. It had to be the US.

I have believed for some time that the anti-Israel crowd uses the Israeli government as cover for their anti-Semitism. They hate Jews but can't say it openly, so they criticize Israel when they defend themselves. Candace Owns' latest theory if Netanyahu know about October 7 and did nothing to stop it so he would have a pretext to bomb Gaza - with no proof.

 

[InternetKing]

https://x.com/i/grok/share/4iwSbfFPeZKSGFLGeTglJghdx

Grok's thoughts on the war, Russia vs Ukraine:

who will win ukrane war


Predicting the outcome of the Ukraine-Russia war is complex and uncertain, as it depends on numerous military, political, economic, and diplomatic factors that are still evolving. Below, I’ll outline the current situation and key dynamics based on available information, without speculating beyond what can be reasonably inferred.Current State of the War (as of July 2025):

• Russia’s Position: Russia has made gradual territorial gains, particularly in eastern Ukraine (e.g., Donetsk and Luhansk regions), controlling about 19% of Ukrainian territory, including Crimea and parts of Donbas seized before 2022. Russia’s strategy relies on a war of attrition, leveraging its larger manpower and willingness to sustain high casualties (estimated at over 790,000 killed or injured by April 2025). However, these gains come at a steep cost, with significant equipment losses (e.g., 1,865 tanks since January 2024) and economic strain (23% interest rates, 9%+ inflation, and a weakening ruble). Putin has rejected quick peace deals, insisting on achieving Russia’s maximalist goals, including territorial control and eliminating Ukraine’s sovereignty.
  
  
  
  
  
  
• Ukraine’s Position: Ukraine has faced significant challenges, including manpower shortages, ineffective leadership, and dwindling ammunition supplies, contributing to territorial losses (e.g., Vuhledar, Kurakhove). Despite this, Ukraine has achieved notable asymmetric successes, such as drone strikes on Russian infrastructure (e.g., Operation Spider’s Web, damaging 41 Russian aircraft) and a Kursk incursion capturing 1,250 square kilometers (though progress stalled). Ukraine’s energy infrastructure is severely damaged (80% of thermal capacity lost), and morale is strained due to prolonged fighting and desertions (over 100,000 cases by November 2024). Ukraine relies heavily on Western aid, particularly from the U.S. and Europe, but support is wavering.
  
  
  
  
  
  
• Casualties and Costs: Both sides have suffered immense losses. Estimates suggest Ukraine has 400,000–700,000 casualties (killed or injured), while Russia’s may exceed 1 million by summer 2025. Civilian displacement is massive, with 10.6 million Ukrainians displaced (3.7 million internally, 6.9 million as refugees). The war has cost Russia economically ($1.3 trillion estimated by 2025) and Ukraine its infrastructure and population stability.
  
  
  
  
  
  

Possible Scenarios for the War’s Outcome:Based on analyses from sources like Chatham House, the Lowy Institute, and others, here are the main scenarios for the war’s trajectory in 2025, with no clear “winner” guaranteed:

1. Long War (Protracted Attrition):
   • Likelihood: High (most sources see this as the default path absent major shifts).
   • Description: The war continues as a stalemate, with Russia making slow, costly gains and Ukraine defending fortified positions. Both sides face resource depletion, but Russia’s larger population and authoritarian control give it an edge in sustaining losses. Ukraine’s survival depends on sustained Western aid, particularly U.S. support, which is uncertain under the Trump administration.
     
     
     
     
   • Outcome: No decisive victory; the war drags on, potentially for years, with incremental Russian advances unless Ukraine secures a game-changing influx of aid or technology.
2. Frozen Conflict (Ceasefire or Armistice):
   • Likelihood: Moderate (35% per some analyses, contingent on negotiations).
     
     
   • Description: A ceasefire could stabilize the front line, potentially along current lines (Russia controlling ~19% of Ukraine). This could allow Ukraine to lift martial law, hold elections, and begin reconstruction, but any deal would likely favor Russia, as Putin demands recognition of occupied territories. Past agreements (e.g., Minsk 2014–2015) suggest fragility, with violations likely. Trump’s push for a quick peace deal (rejected by Putin in July 2025) and Zelensky’s resistance to concessions make this challenging.
     
     
     
     
     
     
   • Outcome: Temporary pause, but unresolved territorial issues could reignite conflict unless enforced by robust international guarantees.
3. Victory for Ukraine:
   • Likelihood: Low (deemed unlikely by most sources due to current trends).
     
     
     
     
   • Description: Ukraine would need a significant Western policy shift (e.g., increased military aid, NATO membership, or advanced weapons systems) to push Russia back to pre-2022 lines. Ukraine’s 2022 successes (e.g., Kharkiv counteroffensive) show potential, but current manpower shortages, leadership issues, and reduced U.S. support make this improbable without a major change. Zelensky’s “Victory Plan” (e.g., NATO membership, resource deals) has received lukewarm responses from allies.
     
     
     
     
   • Outcome: Ukraine regains significant territory, possibly with NATO/EU integration, but this requires overcoming Russia’s attritional advantage and Western hesitancy.
4. Defeat for Ukraine:
   • Likelihood: Moderate (increasingly plausible if Western support falters).
     
     
     
     
   • Description: Russia achieves a breakthrough, capturing key cities (e.g., Pokrovsk) or forcing Ukraine to accept terms like demilitarization, neutrality, or territorial concessions. This could result from Ukraine’s exhaustion (manpower, munitions) or a U.S. withdrawal of aid under Trump, who has expressed skepticism about continued support. A Russian victory would likely demoralize and depopulate Ukraine, stall EU integration, and embolden Russian hybrid warfare in Europe.
     
     
     
     
   • Outcome: Russia consolidates control over occupied territories, potentially expanding further, with Ukraine losing sovereignty or becoming a divided state.

Key Influences on the Outcome:

• Western Support: Ukraine’s ability to resist hinges on U.S. and European aid (e.g., air defenses, drones, long-range systems). Trump’s policies are pivotal; while he claims he won’t abandon Ukraine, his push for quick negotiations and criticism of escalatory moves (e.g., U.S. missile use in Russia) suggest reduced aid. Europe is increasing defense spending, but it may not fill the gap if U.S. support wanes.
  
  
  
  
  
  
• Russian Resilience: Russia’s economy is strained but not collapsed, supported by war production and alliances (e.g., Iran, North Korea). Putin’s willingness to absorb losses and avoid mobilization to maintain domestic stability limits Russia’s flexibility but sustains its attritional strategy.
  
  
  
  
• Ukrainian Morale and Resources: Ukraine faces a manpower crisis (recruitment difficulties, desertions) and infrastructure devastation (64% of electricity capacity lost). However, innovations like drone warfare and international partnerships (e.g., Swift Beat for interceptor drones) show resilience. Public support for negotiations is growing (51% in Ukraine, per June 2025 polls).
  
  
  
  
  
  
• Geopolitical Dynamics: Putin’s alliances with China, Iran, and North Korea bolster Russia, while NATO’s hesitancy on Ukraine’s membership limits Kyiv’s leverage. Trump’s focus on China and improving U.S.-Russia ties could pressure Ukraine into concessions.
  
  
  
  

Sentiment on Xosts on X reflect polarized views:

• Some predict a Russian victory due to Ukraine’s resource constraints and NATO’s perceived inefficiencies, arguing Russia’s attritional strategy will prevail.
• Others believe Ukraine could win with sustained Western support, citing Russia’s high losses and economic vulnerabilities.
• A few see a negotiated end or partial Ukrainian victory, with territorial compromises (e.g., Ukraine retaining most land but conceding some areas). These posts are not conclusive but highlight the lack of consensus on the war’s outcome.

Conclusion:No definitive “winner” can be predicted for 2025. The most likely scenario is a continued war of attrition, favoring Russia’s manpower and resource advantage unless Ukraine secures a significant boost in Western aid or achieves a technological/strategic breakthrough. A ceasefire is possible but fragile, given Putin’s maximalist demands and Zelensky’s resistance to concessions. Ukraine’s defeat is a growing risk if U.S. support diminishes, while a Ukrainian victory remains unlikely without a major shift in Western policy. The outcome hinges on Western commitment, Russian endurance, and Ukraine’s ability to address internal challenges.If you want me to dig deeper into a specific aspect (e.g., military tactics, diplomatic efforts, or economic impacts), let me know!

 

[Creeper]

https://x.com/i/grok/share/4iwSbfFPeZKSGFLGeTglJghdx

Grok's thoughts on the war, Russia vs Ukraine:

who will win ukrane war


Predicting the outcome of the Ukraine-Russia war is complex and uncertain, as it depends on numerous military, political, economic, and diplomatic factors that are still evolving. Below, I’ll outline the current situation and key dynamics based on available information, without speculating beyond what can be reasonably inferred.Current State of the War (as of July 2025):

• Russia’s Position: Russia has made gradual territorial gains, particularly in eastern Ukraine (e.g., Donetsk and Luhansk regions), controlling about 19% of Ukrainian territory, including Crimea and parts of Donbas seized before 2022. Russia’s strategy relies on a war of attrition, leveraging its larger manpower and willingness to sustain high casualties (estimated at over 790,000 killed or injured by April 2025). However, these gains come at a steep cost, with significant equipment losses (e.g., 1,865 tanks since January 2024) and economic strain (23% interest rates, 9%+ inflation, and a weakening ruble). Putin has rejected quick peace deals, insisting on achieving Russia’s maximalist goals, including territorial control and eliminating Ukraine’s sovereignty.
  
  View attachment 19019
  
  View attachment 19020
  
  View attachment 19021
• Ukraine’s Position: Ukraine has faced significant challenges, including manpower shortages, ineffective leadership, and dwindling ammunition supplies, contributing to territorial losses (e.g., Vuhledar, Kurakhove). Despite this, Ukraine has achieved notable asymmetric successes, such as drone strikes on Russian infrastructure (e.g., Operation Spider’s Web, damaging 41 Russian aircraft) and a Kursk incursion capturing 1,250 square kilometers (though progress stalled). Ukraine’s energy infrastructure is severely damaged (80% of thermal capacity lost), and morale is strained due to prolonged fighting and desertions (over 100,000 cases by November 2024). Ukraine relies heavily on Western aid, particularly from the U.S. and Europe, but support is wavering.
  
  View attachment 19023
  
  View attachment 19022
  
  View attachment 19026
• Casualties and Costs: Both sides have suffered immense losses. Estimates suggest Ukraine has 400,000–700,000 casualties (killed or injured), while Russia’s may exceed 1 million by summer 2025. Civilian displacement is massive, with 10.6 million Ukrainians displaced (3.7 million internally, 6.9 million as refugees). The war has cost Russia economically ($1.3 trillion estimated by 2025) and Ukraine its infrastructure and population stability.
  
  View attachment 19028
  
  View attachment 19030
  
  View attachment 19029

Possible Scenarios for the War’s Outcome:Based on analyses from sources like Chatham House, the Lowy Institute, and others, here are the main scenarios for the war’s trajectory in 2025, with no clear “winner” guaranteed:
View attachment 19025
View attachment 19024

1. Long War (Protracted Attrition):
   • Likelihood: High (most sources see this as the default path absent major shifts).
   • Description: The war continues as a stalemate, with Russia making slow, costly gains and Ukraine defending fortified positions. Both sides face resource depletion, but Russia’s larger population and authoritarian control give it an edge in sustaining losses. Ukraine’s survival depends on sustained Western aid, particularly U.S. support, which is uncertain under the Trump administration.
     
     View attachment 19027
     
     View attachment 19031
   • Outcome: No decisive victory; the war drags on, potentially for years, with incremental Russian advances unless Ukraine secures a game-changing influx of aid or technology.
2. Frozen Conflict (Ceasefire or Armistice):
   • Likelihood: Moderate (35% per some analyses, contingent on negotiations).
     
     View attachment 19032
   • Description: A ceasefire could stabilize the front line, potentially along current lines (Russia controlling ~19% of Ukraine). This could allow Ukraine to lift martial law, hold elections, and begin reconstruction, but any deal would likely favor Russia, as Putin demands recognition of occupied territories. Past agreements (e.g., Minsk 2014–2015) suggest fragility, with violations likely. Trump’s push for a quick peace deal (rejected by Putin in July 2025) and Zelensky’s resistance to concessions make this challenging.
     
     View attachment 19034
     
     View attachment 19033
     
     View attachment 19036
   • Outcome: Temporary pause, but unresolved territorial issues could reignite conflict unless enforced by robust international guarantees.
3. Victory for Ukraine:
   • Likelihood: Low (deemed unlikely by most sources due to current trends).
     
     View attachment 19035
     
     View attachment 19038
   • Description: Ukraine would need a significant Western policy shift (e.g., increased military aid, NATO membership, or advanced weapons systems) to push Russia back to pre-2022 lines. Ukraine’s 2022 successes (e.g., Kharkiv counteroffensive) show potential, but current manpower shortages, leadership issues, and reduced U.S. support make this improbable without a major change. Zelensky’s “Victory Plan” (e.g., NATO membership, resource deals) has received lukewarm responses from allies.
     
     View attachment 19037
     
     View attachment 19039
   • Outcome: Ukraine regains significant territory, possibly with NATO/EU integration, but this requires overcoming Russia’s attritional advantage and Western hesitancy.
4. Defeat for Ukraine:
   • Likelihood: Moderate (increasingly plausible if Western support falters).
     
     View attachment 19041
     
     View attachment 19040
   • Description: Russia achieves a breakthrough, capturing key cities (e.g., Pokrovsk) or forcing Ukraine to accept terms like demilitarization, neutrality, or territorial concessions. This could result from Ukraine’s exhaustion (manpower, munitions) or a U.S. withdrawal of aid under Trump, who has expressed skepticism about continued support. A Russian victory would likely demoralize and depopulate Ukraine, stall EU integration, and embolden Russian hybrid warfare in Europe.
     
     View attachment 19042
     
     View attachment 19043
   • Outcome: Russia consolidates control over occupied territories, potentially expanding further, with Ukraine losing sovereignty or becoming a divided state.

Key Influences on the Outcome:

• Western Support: Ukraine’s ability to resist hinges on U.S. and European aid (e.g., air defenses, drones, long-range systems). Trump’s policies are pivotal; while he claims he won’t abandon Ukraine, his push for quick negotiations and criticism of escalatory moves (e.g., U.S. missile use in Russia) suggest reduced aid. Europe is increasing defense spending, but it may not fill the gap if U.S. support wanes.
  
  View attachment 19044
  
  View attachment 19046
  
  View attachment 19045
• Russian Resilience: Russia’s economy is strained but not collapsed, supported by war production and alliances (e.g., Iran, North Korea). Putin’s willingness to absorb losses and avoid mobilization to maintain domestic stability limits Russia’s flexibility but sustains its attritional strategy.
  
  View attachment 19049
  
  View attachment 19048
• Ukrainian Morale and Resources: Ukraine faces a manpower crisis (recruitment difficulties, desertions) and infrastructure devastation (64% of electricity capacity lost). However, innovations like drone warfare and international partnerships (e.g., Swift Beat for interceptor drones) show resilience. Public support for negotiations is growing (51% in Ukraine, per June 2025 polls).
  
  View attachment 19047
  
  View attachment 19050
  
  View attachment 19051
• Geopolitical Dynamics: Putin’s alliances with China, Iran, and North Korea bolster Russia, while NATO’s hesitancy on Ukraine’s membership limits Kyiv’s leverage. Trump’s focus on China and improving U.S.-Russia ties could pressure Ukraine into concessions.
  
  View attachment 19052
  
  View attachment 19053

Sentiment on Xosts on X reflect polarized views:

• Some predict a Russian victory due to Ukraine’s resource constraints and NATO’s perceived inefficiencies, arguing Russia’s attritional strategy will prevail.
• Others believe Ukraine could win with sustained Western support, citing Russia’s high losses and economic vulnerabilities.
• A few see a negotiated end or partial Ukrainian victory, with territorial compromises (e.g., Ukraine retaining most land but conceding some areas). These posts are not conclusive but highlight the lack of consensus on the war’s outcome.

Conclusion:No definitive “winner” can be predicted for 2025. The most likely scenario is a continued war of attrition, favoring Russia’s manpower and resource advantage unless Ukraine secures a significant boost in Western aid or achieves a technological/strategic breakthrough. A ceasefire is possible but fragile, given Putin’s maximalist demands and Zelensky’s resistance to concessions. Ukraine’s defeat is a growing risk if U.S. support diminishes, while a Ukrainian victory remains unlikely without a major shift in Western policy. The outcome hinges on Western commitment, Russian endurance, and Ukraine’s ability to address internal challenges.If you want me to dig deeper into a specific aspect (e.g., military tactics, diplomatic efforts, or economic impacts), let me know!

Russia is fighting a half-war. They know they cannot bomb Ukraine the way the US and allies bombed Iraq before sending in ground troops. They have to fight it out the hard way which is costly and time consuming.

Also, modern weapons make war incredibly hard on both sides. No one is safe when missiles can be launched from hundreds of miles away to hit concentrations of power with pin-point accuracy. And it is impossible to hide given satellites and drones using high definition and infrared cameras.

And this is a land battle. At sea the effects of technology would be even worse for both sides.