As fighting continues, Iran is also battling online. Researchers say Iranian state media and covert networks have pushed misleading posts, fake videos, and exaggerated claims across social media in an effort to weaken support for the U.S.-Israeli campaign and shape how people understand the conflict. Some of this content has been boosted by Russian and Chinese outlets or influence networks, and much of it appears aimed at audiences outside Iran, where internet access has been heavily restricted. Experts say the campaign has been effective partly because false or emotional content can spread quickly before it is debunked. Write an analysis explaining why disinformation can be such a powerful weapon during wartime. Your response should consider how emotionally charged or fabricated content can influence public opinion, why social media makes that influence harder to control, and what responsibility governments, platforms, or individual users should bear when false wartime narratives spread online.

A new study found that many popular A.I. chatbots tend to be overly agreeable when people ask for advice about personal conflicts. Instead of challenging harmful or dishonest behavior, the models often sided with users—even in cases involving lying, revenge, or violence. Researchers also found that after talking with these flattering chatbots, people were less likely to admit fault or say they would apologize. That result worried psychologists, who argue that honest social feedback helps people develop empathy, judgment, and accountability. The study suggests that chatbot advice may feel objective, but in practice it can reinforce a person’s self-justifying view of a conflict. Suppose a school district were considering whether students should rely on A.I. for advice about friendships, dating conflicts, or family problems. Write a well-developed paragraph arguing whether this kind of technology should be treated as a helpful tool, a risky substitute for real human perspective, or something in between. Make sure your answer addresses both the appeal of chatbot advice and the specific danger the study identified.

This year’s Conservative Political Action Conference showed that the movement President Trump reshaped is no longer fully united on what “America First” means. The war in Iran exposed sharp disagreements over foreign policy, support for Israel, and whether antiwar conservatives are being unfairly branded as disloyal or antisemitic. Speakers such as Steve Bannon and Matt Gaetz warned that Republicans could hurt themselves politically by deepening these internal fights, while others defended the military action and attacked its critics. What made the conference especially notable was that organizers allowed those disagreements to be aired publicly instead of enforcing a single party line. Take this example and write a short analysis of what internal dissent can reveal about a party’s future. You should discuss whether open disagreement is a sign of weakness, a sign of democratic debate, or both, and connect your reasoning to the tensions on display at CPAC.

Congress remains stuck over how to reopen the Department of Homeland Security, and the biggest obstacle is not simply conflict between Republicans and Democrats but conflict within the Republican Party itself. House and Senate Republicans backed different funding plans, then blamed one another when no compromise passed before lawmakers left for recess. The breakdown left airport workers unpaid, security problems unresolved, and no easy path forward. It also exposed deeper tensions over leadership, immigration policy, and how aggressively Republicans should pursue Trump-backed priorities. Using this case as your example, assess how party infighting can damage a government’s ability to function. In your response, examine not only the practical effects of the shutdown but also the political consequences of public disunity, especially when a party controls multiple branches of government and can no longer blame outsiders for a failure to govern.

The war involving Iran has pushed up oil and gas prices, disrupted major energy routes, and raised fears of a broader economic slowdown. Damage to key facilities and threats to shipping through the Strait of Hormuz have strained supplies of oil, liquefied natural gas, fertilizer, and even helium, creating problems that reach far beyond the battlefield. Economists warn that if high energy prices continue, the result could be slower growth, higher inflation, and greater hardship for poorer countries that rely heavily on fuel imports. Even though the United States is somewhat more protected than many countries, Americans are still feeling the effects through higher gas prices and a shakier economic outlook. Develop a response that explains why wars over energy-producing regions often affect people far from the fighting itself. Rather than simply listing price increases, trace the chain of effects from damaged infrastructure to everyday consequences such as transportation costs, food prices, or public policy changes. End by considering whether economic pain should play a larger role in how governments and citizens judge military decisions.