OF THE
TIMES
Israel trumps that it is not only controlling the US Congress through AIPAC and other deeper mechanisms upon the deep state, such as through banking and through pedophile kompromat, but ostensibly also the Russian Duma.
Through a complex system of information war, Russia is using the very same cordoning off of the internet which the US establishment and deep state are set to complete, to disassemble reality. This virtual walled garden is meant to decelerate and frustrate the otherwise natural tendency of the internet towards the cross-pollination and cross-semination of ideas.
In some sectors of the internet, Russia is promoted as Israel's greatest ally. In others, the 'Axis of Resistance', featuring Iran, Iraq, and Hezbollah of Lebanon, depicts Russia as an important ally. Both are able to point to certain aspects of the conflict in Syria as evidence of this. This belief creation process, especially through new media and the internet, is a critical part of how simulacra are created in the context of 4GW - fourth generation warfare.
Russia has stated publicly that it is interested in both Iran and Israel's strategic interests. Russia is committed to Russia's strategic interests; which do align with the general conception of deconfliction. The idea here is the most balanced compromises that deliver peace as a status quo. Instead of strategic interests, 'security insurance' is a better concept to separate this out from Israel's irredentist goals or Iran's foothold in Lebanon. It is neither a problem nor a criticism to state such.
Russia is aware that both states, Israel and Iran, engage in a form of demagoguery and rhetorically politicize things beyond what may be the real strategic goal.


"I have asked Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to closely study the South Africa land and farm seizures and expropriations and the large scale killing of farmers. South African Government is now seizing land from white farmers," he wrote.The tweet has sparked condemnation from the South African government, who has promised to solve the matter through diplomatic channels.
No one would seriously suppose that he had a fiscal policy if he did not consider together expenditure and revenue, outgo and income, liabilities and assets. But in foreign relations we have habitually in our minds divorced the discussion of our war aims, our peace aims, our ideals, our interests, our commitments, from the discussion of our armaments, our strategic position, our potential allies and our probable enemies. No policy could emerge from such a discussion. For what settles practical controversy is the knowledge that ends and means have to be balanced: an agreement has eventually to be reached when men admit that they must pay for what they want and that they must want only what they are willing to pay for.In 1987, Samuel Huntington wrote an essay in Foreign Affairs called "Coping With the Lippmann Gap." He reiterated that America was incurring commitments abroad that it was not willing to pay for at home. Such warnings have gone largely unheeded.
Comment: This nuanced analysis rings true and speaks to the fact that - though Trump may not exactly be playing 47D chess - he certainly does has some good intentions that, left to follow their course, would have a chance of making the world a better place. But that will not be allowed to happen by those in the US with firm commitments to pursue the world's subjugation through any means possible.