The Des Moines County, Iowa, Elections website is designed to be a resource for residents looking to learn how to vote, find their elected officials, learn about becoming a candidate, or find past or upcoming election information.
Day: July 3, 2026
🇷🇺🇺🇦🇧🇾 Zelensky’s one-week deadline to Belarus, “kick Russian forces out, or we will do it for you,” was never meant to be a dramatic prelude to all-out war.
Belarus has NEVER been a neutral bystander.
Since the start of the full-scale invasion, it has served as Russia’s most reliable logistical rear base.
When Ukrainian jamming forces Russian drones off course, they often end up in Belarus before being redirected back into the fight.
This is the same pattern Russia has used across its network of proxies.
North Korea sent troops. Iran supplied drones and missiles. Belarus provides territory, logistics, and political cover.
In each case, Moscow treats these actors as disposable extensions of its own power.
Ukraine’s message to Lukashenko is simple: that arrangement is no longer cost-free.
What changed the equation? Ukraine’s expanding long-range drone capability.
6 months ago, credible strikes deep inside Belarus were difficult.
Today, they’re realistic.
The smartest Ukrainian play is not to flatten Belarusian oil infrastructure or drag the country into open war (probably counterproductive).
Instead, the more credible strategy is to borrow Iran’s own playbook vs the U.S.:
Limited but precise strikes against Russian military targets inside Belarus; drone relay stations, storage sites, and forward operating positions.
This is how modern wars are increasingly fought: by pressuring the enablers and logistical networks that keep the aggressor going.
Ukraine’s ultimatum is a recognition of that reality and an attempt to start cutting Russia’s arms off one by one.
Ukraine’s ultimate goal?
To raise the cost of supporting Russia until even its closest partners start questioning whether the price is worth paying.
Source: Kyiv Independent, William Spaniel (YT), ISW / Writer: Claudio
— @MarioNawfal Jul 3, 2026
Summary
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has entered a phase of unprecedented human cost, with casualties now exceeding historical benchmarks like Stalingrad. The conflict is accelerating hybrid warfare tactics, including performance crimes by intelligence services, while deepening economic and geopolitical instability worldwide. These developments suggest a shift toward prolonged, high-intensity warfare with broader strategic implications.
Key Stories
Russia suffers record casualties surpassing Stalingrad levels — New estimates place Russian military losses at over 450,000 since the 2022 invasion, marking the deadliest conflict for Russia since World War II. The scale of casualties may indicate a strategic miscalculation or desperation in Moscow’s war planning.
Performance crime emerges as intelligence warfare tactic — Hostile intelligence services are adopting public, symbolic sabotage acts to communicate strategic messages, blurring traditional lines between crime and espionage. This trend suggests a growing preference for psychological and asymmetric operations over conventional covert methods.
Ukraine strikes deep into Russian territory amid escalation — Recent Ukrainian drone attacks on Crimea and military infrastructure signal a shift toward offensive operations targeting supply chains and command centers. These strikes coincide with reports of internal crises in Russia’s military leadership.
Global economic instability fueled by prolonged conflict — The war’s duration and intensity continue to disrupt energy markets and supply chains, exacerbating inflation and food insecurity worldwide. Analysts warn of long-term structural damage to global trade networks if the conflict persists.
Frontline stalemate masks evolving hybrid warfare tactics — While battlefield maps show limited territorial changes, both sides are accelerating the use of drones, cyberattacks, and disinformation campaigns. This suggests a transition from conventional warfare to a multi-domain conflict with unclear rules of engagement.
🇮🇷🇷🇺 Putin’s envoy Medvedev sat down with Iranian President Pezeshkian on the sidelines of Khamenei’s funeral
Russia and Iran comparing notes on the post-war situation, the MoU’s fragility and what comes next on the nuclear file
Whatever they discussed, it probably wasn’t condolences.
Source: DDGeopolitics on TG / Writer: Oliver
— @MarioNawfal Jul 3, 2026
Summary
Extreme heat advisories intersect with geopolitical developments, including Ukrainian strikes disrupting Crimea’s power grid and emerging alliances in the Middle East. Legal and electoral concerns in the U.S. persist as intelligence assessments on regional threats remain inconclusive. Cultural and historical narratives also gain attention with new publications and events.
Key Stories
Ukrainian strikes trigger power rationing in Crimea — Ukrainian attacks on Crimea’s power grid have led to mandatory energy conservation measures, including rolling blackouts and restrictions on household appliances. The move suggests escalating pressure on Russian-occupied territories amid ongoing conflict.
Emerging defense alliance links Pakistan Iran and Lebanon against Israel — A Pakistani daily reports growing military cooperation between Pakistan, Iran, and Lebanon, framing it as a potential counterbalance to Israel. The development may indicate a shift in regional power dynamics and alliances.
U.S. legal and electoral concerns persist as Trump faces criticism — Special Counsel Jack Smith criticizes Trump for undermining the rule of law and expresses concerns about future elections under his leadership. The statements reflect ongoing tensions over democratic norms and legal accountability.
Extreme heat warnings highlight vulnerability of elderly populations — Public health advisories urge communities to check on elderly individuals as prolonged heatwaves continue. The call underscores the intersection of climate challenges and social resilience.
Intelligence on regional threats remains ambiguous and debated — Sources indicate that current intelligence lacks the clarity of pre-invasion assessments, with skepticism from regional actors like Poland. The uncertainty may complicate strategic responses to potential conflicts.