John

@ThomasBackes8 @ImShahinyan Rxd2+

@ImShahinyan K×g2! V1 K×g2 R×Qa8 Rg3# V2 K×g2 Q×Re3 Q×Rf8#

White mates in 2 Very very tricky 😱

@Onaji_Asobi @xxChessMaster Qg7+

@xxChessMaster Qb3

White to move and checkmate in 2 moves!

@mdpackard @xxChessMaster If Bxd4 then Qb1# If Qxd4 then Qxh7#

@johnmangili @xxChessMaster Doesn't put K in check. Black has Bxd4 and Qxd4

@xxChessMaster Ra8+ 7 times Rb8+ Rc8+ Rd8+ Re8#

GM LEVEL 🔥 White to move. Mate in 11!

@ChessifyMe Qd5 Kc1. Qc4#, Qc5#, or Qc6# (B is pinned) Any B move. Qa2#

Starting the week with a classy one. 🫡 White mates in 2

@GMIgorSmirnov Qe5 or Qh2

Can you solve this tricky puzzle in 60 sec? White Mates In 2 🤔🤔

@ImShahinyan I see 4 solutions. Qe2, Qe3, Qe4, or Bg5 Pxc4 Rxd6# Pxf4. Rxf6# Any d knight move: Pxf5# Any f knight move: Bxd5#

White mates in 2 How quickly can you solve this? 🤔

@offenton72800 @xxChessMaster Pawn to f3

@xxChessMaster 1. Rh3+ (Bishop put King in check) 2. Nf3 3. Qe1+ - CM

White to move! Mate in 2! 🤔🧩

@chessmaster02 Rc1 leads to Rc8# or Rh1#

White to move mate in 2!

@xChessPuzzles Multiple solutions Re7, Re8# Rd7, Rd8# Rc7, Rc8# Rb7, Rb8# Ra7, Ra8#

White to move, mate in 2!

@goodvibesglobl @chess_feed Illegal move black bishop e8+

@chess_feed Qc8# knight is pinned

White to move, mate in 1! Can you find it in 60 seconds?

@KOBURNE1 @ImShahinyan c3?

@ImShahinyan 1 Qf5 a) … bxc4 2 b4# b) … b4 2 axb4# c) … d3 2 Qb4# d) … any move of Qa6 2 Qxb5# 7 options of move only

White mates in 2 Can you solve this in 11 minutes? ⌛

@chess_feed Qc3 e6, e5, or Rxa8: Qxc7# Pc7xd6: Qa5# Pe7xd6: Qf6# Rb8: Qxc7# or Rxb8# Rf8: Rxf8# Rg8: Rxg8# Rxh8: Qxh8#

Mate in 2!

@chess_feed Qh1 or Qe4. Rg8#

White to move, mate in 2!

@RnaudBertrand @DeeploInsoumis Despite it being so narrow, the US does not control the Bering Strait, unless it can disable Russia and China's defense systems. Control of the UK Greenland Gap is much easier given the nearby bases, and the difficulty of Russia maintaining warship escorts.

Effectivement, comme on le voit sur cette carte dans le thread, il y a 2 routes: toutes 2 passent par le détroit de Bering entre l'Alaska et la Russie que les US contrôlent déjà (encore une fois, ça passe par l'Alaska), donc le Groenland ne sert à rien. Ensuite la route du nord-est, à destination de l'Europe, est très éloignée du Groenland donc, là encore, contrôler le Groenland ne sert à rien pour cela. Finalement pour le passage du nord-ouest le Groenland pourrait servir à quelque-chose mais dans la mesure où ce passage est à destination de l'Amérique du Nord on voit mal pourquoi les US voudraient avoir les capacités de se couper les vivres à eux-mêmes 🤷‍♂️

I often agree with Mélenchon's takes on international affairs, but in this instance he's completely wrong. Weirdly, he's unwittingly repeating U.S. propaganda talking points and therefore ironically doing Trump's bidding by saying that Greenland is about China. He is even factually wrong: he says the U.S. want Greenland to counter China "because in the Bering Strait, territorial waters touch". But the Bering Strait is between Alaska and Russia, Greenland is completely on the other side, in the North Atlantic between the U.S. and Europe. Mélenchon is stringing together "Arctic," "China," "shipping routes," and "Bering Strait" into a narrative that sounds strategic but doesn't actually cohere geographically. China on their side officially keeps saying that Greenland has absolutely nothing to do with them: they say that they "oppose" the narrative that it's about them, which they describe as a just "pretext for selfish gains" (english.news.cn/20260122/ac3d1…). That's the irony here: Mélenchon claims to oppose Trump, yet he is effectively legitimizing the very bullshit justification the White House invented to dress up a land grab as defensive necessity. More broadly, this is something a significant proportion of people on the left are wrong about: there is a strange schrödingerian tendency to oppose American empire in theory while insisting on its eternal might in practice. The central dynamic of the day is not, as Mélenchon puts it, the U.S. escalating its confrontation with China but the exact contrary: they're in retreat, contracting on their hemisphere because they can no longer sustain the confrontation. What Trump's antics mask isn't an empire prepping for a titanic showdown with its great rival, but one that is reluctantly coming to terms with the fact it cannot win. Here again, Mélenchon's position - and that of those who think like him - is strangely flattering to American power. It assumes Washington still commands the global chessboard, that every move is calculated grand strategy, that the empire acts rather than reacts. Ironically - even though he positions it as a criticism - the views he is pushing are effectively doing the Pentagon's image work for them - portraying Trump's chaos as cunning strategy. And here again, serious thinkers in China don't see that at all. Take for instance Professor Wu Xinbo, one China's most influential scholars on US-China relations (the Director of Fudan University's Centre for American Studies) whose views I posted about yesterday (x.com/RnaudBertrand/…). In his view we're witnessing a "once in a century" adjustment in US foreign policy, defined by "overall retrenchment" and the gradual realization that "other than long-term peaceful coexistence with China, the United States has no alternative." Or take the views of Mao Keji (arnaudbertrand.substack.com/p/are-we-start…), another very influential young scholar who is an analyst at China’s influential National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), the central organization coordinating China’s economic planning and policymaking. He says that the 2 factors driving Trump behavior today are: 1) structural reality - the actual erosion of relative American power and 2) the associated decline anxiety. As a result, he says, they're pulling back from geopolitical confrontation from China and Russia since it requires sustained investment that the U.S. now fear is accelerating its decline. Mao Keji uses a metaphor which I find excellent: he says that the U.S.’s new approach is to treat “allies” no more as “chess pieces to encircle enemies” but as “blood bags”, in the medical sense of the term whereby a patient in decline requires constant transfusions just to stay alive. Allies aren’t there to help with China or Russia anymore - they’re there to be exploited. The relationship has gone from strategic to parasitic. And that's the final irony with Mélenchon's views: Greenland isn't about China, it's about Europe. Mélenchon is so busy watching the great power contest he imagines is happening that he fails to notice he's the one on the operating table, hooked up to the IV.

@96Stats Is there any incentive for the consumer to be more efficient?

I'm living in -20 degree temperatures here in a tier 3 Chinese city, quite a poor region, yet every home is heated extremely well, and it's super cheap! My heating bill averages out to $32 per month!!! But if you rent, then the city policy is that the landlord must cover it, so mine is completely free and continuously on. Very cosy!

@2006illinifan @ImShahinyan Ugh. Qh2#

@johnmangili @ImShahinyan The pawn is pinned.

One of the hardest mate in 1

@Math_files I'd call the 400 gain 'unearned' income. No real work was performed. This is how some people make/gain money in their sleep.