Glad to see Alexander has awakened from his MAGA dream. The 12 day war ended because Israel was faced with running out of interceptors and Iran still had a vast number of missiles. These missiles could not be destroyed by anything short of boots on the ground regime change.
The fawning over Trump at the recent NATO summit was exactly as predicted by Putin.
MAGA has never been anything more than a slogan. I posted this on April 1 in response to an article by Professor Dugan and it bears repeating:
“At some point, we must accept that Trump is grossly incompetent as a national and world leader, has the attention span of a gnat, and sees himself as the leading man in a reality TV series, where keeping people tuning in is the metric of success. He is hopelessly beyond his depth in dealing with geopolitical security issues.”
And as my comrade Feral Finster explains: “Trump is weak, incompetent, and easily manipulated.”
Any one that has been reading Mr Dugin on social media, and understood the real political position of Mr Dugin, wouldn’t be surprised in finding self criticism absent ,as indispensable tool for deep understanding of objective nature of political figures like Trump ,the Harlequin! Mr Dugin had all his “hopes” centred on the Harlequin, staunchly believing that he had found the XXI Century “ Nobel price” winner for “ Peace “. Indeed, we now find ourselves in a truce between Iran and the Watchdog of the Middle East that will accomplish only rearmament et redeployment of the Nazi Zionist International Coalition at an advanced stage for the almost certain regime change in Tehran! A CIA/MOSSAD PROJECT TOWARD AN ESCLUSIVE GLOBAL ELITES’ GOVERNMENT! Very realistic indeed if Russia gets on seeing in Trump someone to make good business with! Russia has , in occupied Palestine , nearly two million Russian Zionists with doble nationality, and many within the Russian Federation! That’s the very reason making Putin perpetually worried of being stabbed on the back! . I Wish Mr Dugin to wake up from it’s self hypnosis, it would be helpful to the Russian Nation!!
You’re right there! I had as neighbours somewhere around the world , d’OC Nazi Zionist,they tried everything, to be friendly at first and, gradually they never lost opportunities to harm my interests. They were ,though, my best teachers to show me the way to pay them back in kind.
We must always recognize who has money and influence over Trump. That has been the Zionists, Rothschild banking system, military industrial complex etc. He will say things that go against this, but he always gets pulled back from doing anything against these globalists. The uniparty and neocons prevail when it comes to foreign policy. The only hopeful difference between Trump 1.0 and Trump 2.0 is that he is concerned about his legacy and wants a Nobel Peace Prize. Also, the base is much more vocal now and is pushing back.
I see MAGA as simply Make America Go Away. Trump is actually seeing to that. Linking his teeny wagon to the accomplished perverts and inbred morons of the Fourth Reich (EU) will help the process along. Dr Meat Carney of the Colony called Canada is doing the same thing.
He has always been on that side, which is the same side as the zionist agenda and Israel-first. Everything else was a ruse. Ukraine, attacks on Russia’s nuclear triad, Gaza genocide, U.N. vetoes, Yemen bombings, Lebanon pager terrorism, Syria HTS, Iran nuclear attack, Armenia Christian slaughter, and more. He supports, enables and owns all of them. It is going to get much, much worse.
Trump will woo back some of his disgruntled and disillusioned followers with more grandiose promises. That would fit Barber's 'political lover' type, though all politicians must seek to maintain a level of public approval. I trust Alexandr Dugin will not succumb to the new promises.
I had problems with Barber's "The Presidential Character" when I first read it, decades ago. Barber's classification system was, and is, woefully inadequate to predict the performance of those who lack character and integrity, or are strongly influenced by supremacist death cults.
It isn't as though we had a real choice, in this toxic binary system, which will lead to our ruin.
It also comes from a balance of power, a balance of assets, and also an imbalance of persons of conscience.
Trump is part of the 5 eyes empire, the last stage of decline of the empire that began with the conquest of England in 1066. In the last stages of empire, when the bank is empty but the cries of the homeland populace are undiminished, you have to observe the rage of the hitherto privileged and their last grasp at the golden egg.
In its millennial duration, the ruling element of "England" found a way to submerge the homeland with theft (Domesday landgrab) and trickery (inception of the Iscariot class) and how, with the native gift of invention, powered their way to domination of the continents under Victoria. Ask any of their captive First Nations communities how it works.
And just for fun figure out how it was that William I was able to fund the creation of the English kingdom. In another blog comment, someone kindly enlightened me of the eternal kindness of the "usuarial suspects" who played a supporting part in much of the Empire's history. The Interest payable taken from taxation of the citizenry, apparently.
Add in the Norman blood that still furnishes the dominant English Class and maybe a picture emerges, one that for its millennial longevity can almost certainly be termed evil.
Finally, as Professor Alexander once mentioned, we still live in that Operating System. I call on all forward thinkers to study closely and carefully the true role of the English and in particular their use of their very deceptive maternal tongue. Beware!
now the insane Dugin says that Trump's followers are abandoning him because they feel cheated and he forgot that he was one of those first cheated and he filled pages of verbiage singing the wonders that Trump and Putin would bring to the new multipolar world order because both were anti-globalist heroes who would bring peace and prosperity - the insane Dugin quickly wipes the slate clean of his simplistic hypotheses and fresh fortune-telling passes, he composes another even crazier one and never gets it right because he doesn't see beyond his nose and in fact doesn't know the Western world. I have blocked him several times but he keeps appearing like a fly in the coffee cup, misguiding people (not me).
The opening line, “I guess EU leaders have acknowledged now Trump’s leadership partly because of his alliance with neo-cons during 12-days war,” sets the tone with ambiguity and vagueness. The use of “I guess” and the unspecified “12-days war” both undermine the assertion’s clarity. What exactly was this war? Is it metaphorical? Is it a reference to Gaza, Iran, or another engagement? The vagueness weakens the argumentative foundation. Moreover, the notion that EU leaders “acknowledge Trump’s leadership” as a direct consequence of his alliance with neoconservatives oversimplifies the complex and often antagonistic relationship between Trump and the EU. Trump’s presidency was marked by harsh criticisms of NATO and the EU, and while certain military actions may have prompted a temporary alignment of interests, the text implies a strategic harmony that is largely wishful and unsubstantiated.
“Then Trump behaved himself not as MAGA but as right-wing globalist.”
Here, the text adopts a quasi-religious framework: “MAGA” is not merely a political slogan but a doctrinal position, a sacred political ontology. To deviate from it is not a matter of political flexibility but a heretical betrayal. Labeling Trump as a “right-wing globalist” is an oxymoronic move, deliberately provocative. It indicates that for the author, globalism is not a policy preference but a metaphysical contamination it cannot coexist with MAGA. This absolutist framing has the rhetorical advantage of interpretive rigidity: every deviation is betrayal, every compromise is submission. However, such rigidity is analytically sterile; it eliminates the possibility of strategic recalibration or situational complexity.
“For EU left-wing globalists it was enough. They don’t want to irritate him anymore.”
This sentence continues the trend of flattening diverse political actors into monolithic caricatures. The idea that “EU left-wing globalists” have unified emotional responses to Trump’s actions namely, to avoid “irritating” him is a psychological projection, not a political analysis. It reduces transatlantic diplomacy to a mood management exercise and erases institutional, bureaucratic, and ideological complexities. No empirical basis is given for this claim. Moreover, it reflects a conspiratorial worldview: “left-wing globalists” are framed not as open political actors but as manipulators acting behind veils of civility.
“It is logical that MAGA-faithfuls now try to present Trump as figure that has already overcome neocons’ influence stopping war.”
The author attempts to rationalize the MAGA movement’s self-preservation by proposing a rhetorical rebranding: to claim that Trump has returned to his anti-war roots after a temporary deviation. This reveals the degree to which political loyalty under MAGA is a matter of narrative management, not consistent behavior. The author is aware of the “ongoing fight of shareholders,” a possibly metaphorical or literal suggestion of power blocs vying for control over Trump’s image. Still, calling it a “momentum” implies that this is fleeting and manipulable a weak tether to ideological truth.
“Now belligerent side of Trump is manifested and can return any moment. Against anybody.”
This is both a warning and an admission: that Trump is volatile, and that his unpredictability is not only tactical but structural. For a MAGA-aligned thinker, this should be a red flag, yet the tone here seems to normalize it. Such rhetorical concessions inadvertently expose the core contradiction of MAGA-Trumpism: it valorizes nationalism and anti-interventionism but is built around a figure addicted to dominance displays, often through militarism. This sentence confesses what the rest of the argument seeks to conceal that Trump is not ideologically stable.
“Trump can start the war any moment with anybody. That time he did that against those who are main enemies of globalists. That is why no kings protests calmed down.”
The logic here is opaque. Is the claim that Trump’s war-like behavior was tolerated because it targeted “enemies of globalists”? What are “kings protests”? Is this a mistranslation or a symbolic term? The passage suffers from lexical incoherence, but the emotional thrust is clear: Trump’s militarism is excused if it aligns with anti-globalist targets. The underlying ethic is situational morality violence is justified not by law, but by which side it serves.
“The consequences for Trump after his attack on Iran will be rather negative in a long term. But right now he seems somehow victorious.”
This recognizes the temporal dissonance between immediate political optics and strategic consequences. It is the most clear-eyed sentence in the passage. Yet it is followed by deeper ideological framing.
“Declining unipolarity leads the war against rising multipolarity in three main fronts: Israel against Resistance in Middle East, collective West against Russia in Ukraine, USA against China in Taiwan and Pacific. Trump agrees in general with the unipolarity.”
Here we see a clear Duginist thesis: the global conflict is not between states but between world orders. The unipolarity of American-led liberal hegemony is contrasted with a sacred multipolar order (Russia, China, Iran, etc.). The author faults Trump not for strategy, but for ontological alignment: he has thrown in his lot with the unipolar forces. This is the ultimate betrayal not of voters, but of the sacred geopolitical destiny.
“MAGA considers unipolarity as globalist Deep State project and appeals to concentrate on domestic issues acknowledging the multipolarity as status quo. Unipolarity interventionism is not MAGA.”
This provides a distilled ideological axiom: MAGA is defined as anti-globalist nationalism, with a preference for non-interventionism and tacit acknowledgment of multipolar geopolitics. The claim is lucid but problematic. Trump’s actual record including assassinations, drone strikes, and escalations does not consistently support this doctrine. The ideology of MAGA is more coherent in theory than in practice.
“In 12 days war Trump marked himself on the side of Deep State interventionism - hence the support of Levin and Graham, never Trump pioneers. Hence reverence of EU leaders during NATO summit.”
This returns to the earlier motif of betrayal. Lindsey Graham and Mark Levin, both hawkish Republicans, are deployed here as markers of globalist contamination. Their support is not taken as political consensus but as damning evidence. The claim that EU reverence during NATO is proof of Trump’s defection is dubious: such “reverence” may simply be strategic courtesy. The narrative again collapses geopolitics into moral theater.
“Trump departed from MAGA and I fear it is irreparable. Exactly as in first term.”
This is a moment of ideological grief. The author concludes that Trump’s betrayal is not an aberration but a repetition. It carries the melancholic tone of a disciple betrayed twice by the same messiah. What’s notable is that this is not merely disappointment it is framed as irreparability, an eschatological fracture.
“Globalists hope to use Trump to achieve the goal that could not achieve with left wing globalism to undermine multipolarity. Trump seemingly goes precisely this way now. US-Israel alliance involves India and tries to oppose it against other multipolar players.”
This is the most conspiratorial claim: that Trump is being deployed not by left-wing elites, but by right-wing globalists, who share the same goals via different means. It suggests that the struggle is not partisan but structural: a systemic conspiracy in which both liberal and conservative wings serve the same master. India’s involvement is framed as another betrayal another wedge in the multipolar resistance.
It appears that Russia (and some others) misread the extent to which Trump will be able to reduce the Deep State stranglehold on US govt affairs. Winning an election is one thing, but he is neither intelligent nor farsighted enough, and is so mercurial a personality that he is incapable of any long range planning. Btw, India maintains close relations with Russia or Israel based on its own interests, and its capacity to preserve its independence as a civilization is far more than China or anybody else.
Trump si è schierato con i globalisti, ha deciso di andare contro il suo elettorato. A lungo termine questo fatto potrà decidere sulle votazioni di medio termine.
Como lo percibo desde el Sur, Alejandro, MAGA implica alejarse de la guerra -la mayor expresión de la estupidez humana- y Trump adora el armamentismo, haciendo alarde de todo lo que rodea a la guerra. Su posición anti guerra sólo será consistente si renuncia al imperialismo como forma de preservar a su país. Simplemente no debe asociarse con criminales como Netanyahu y Zelensky, y QUIENES los manejan. Si, como ha dicho, quiere "que cada quien pelee sus propias guerras", debe retirarse del resto del mundo, poner el esfuerzo en MAGA y recuperar una posición fuerte para su país desde el desarrollo socioeconómico de su gente.
Glad to see Alexander has awakened from his MAGA dream. The 12 day war ended because Israel was faced with running out of interceptors and Iran still had a vast number of missiles. These missiles could not be destroyed by anything short of boots on the ground regime change.
The fawning over Trump at the recent NATO summit was exactly as predicted by Putin.
MAGA has never been anything more than a slogan. I posted this on April 1 in response to an article by Professor Dugan and it bears repeating:
“At some point, we must accept that Trump is grossly incompetent as a national and world leader, has the attention span of a gnat, and sees himself as the leading man in a reality TV series, where keeping people tuning in is the metric of success. He is hopelessly beyond his depth in dealing with geopolitical security issues.”
And as my comrade Feral Finster explains: “Trump is weak, incompetent, and easily manipulated.”
Trump will do as he is told.
Gnat Solicitor is presently composing a case of Defamation.
Any one that has been reading Mr Dugin on social media, and understood the real political position of Mr Dugin, wouldn’t be surprised in finding self criticism absent ,as indispensable tool for deep understanding of objective nature of political figures like Trump ,the Harlequin! Mr Dugin had all his “hopes” centred on the Harlequin, staunchly believing that he had found the XXI Century “ Nobel price” winner for “ Peace “. Indeed, we now find ourselves in a truce between Iran and the Watchdog of the Middle East that will accomplish only rearmament et redeployment of the Nazi Zionist International Coalition at an advanced stage for the almost certain regime change in Tehran! A CIA/MOSSAD PROJECT TOWARD AN ESCLUSIVE GLOBAL ELITES’ GOVERNMENT! Very realistic indeed if Russia gets on seeing in Trump someone to make good business with! Russia has , in occupied Palestine , nearly two million Russian Zionists with doble nationality, and many within the Russian Federation! That’s the very reason making Putin perpetually worried of being stabbed on the back! . I Wish Mr Dugin to wake up from it’s self hypnosis, it would be helpful to the Russian Nation!!
I would not let a Zionist in to clean my toilets, even if surveiled by CCTV camera, let alone to live in my house.
You’re right there! I had as neighbours somewhere around the world , d’OC Nazi Zionist,they tried everything, to be friendly at first and, gradually they never lost opportunities to harm my interests. They were ,though, my best teachers to show me the way to pay them back in kind.
We must always recognize who has money and influence over Trump. That has been the Zionists, Rothschild banking system, military industrial complex etc. He will say things that go against this, but he always gets pulled back from doing anything against these globalists. The uniparty and neocons prevail when it comes to foreign policy. The only hopeful difference between Trump 1.0 and Trump 2.0 is that he is concerned about his legacy and wants a Nobel Peace Prize. Also, the base is much more vocal now and is pushing back.
I see MAGA as simply Make America Go Away. Trump is actually seeing to that. Linking his teeny wagon to the accomplished perverts and inbred morons of the Fourth Reich (EU) will help the process along. Dr Meat Carney of the Colony called Canada is doing the same thing.
He has always been on that side, which is the same side as the zionist agenda and Israel-first. Everything else was a ruse. Ukraine, attacks on Russia’s nuclear triad, Gaza genocide, U.N. vetoes, Yemen bombings, Lebanon pager terrorism, Syria HTS, Iran nuclear attack, Armenia Christian slaughter, and more. He supports, enables and owns all of them. It is going to get much, much worse.
Trump will woo back some of his disgruntled and disillusioned followers with more grandiose promises. That would fit Barber's 'political lover' type, though all politicians must seek to maintain a level of public approval. I trust Alexandr Dugin will not succumb to the new promises.
I had problems with Barber's "The Presidential Character" when I first read it, decades ago. Barber's classification system was, and is, woefully inadequate to predict the performance of those who lack character and integrity, or are strongly influenced by supremacist death cults.
It isn't as though we had a real choice, in this toxic binary system, which will lead to our ruin.
Donald Trump does not understand:
The truth does NOT comes from ultimatums, threats, bribes, innuendos, power, money, militarism, terrorism, NATO/Mossad expansion, censorship.
It comes from Platonic dialogue.
It also comes from a balance of power, a balance of assets, and also an imbalance of persons of conscience.
Trump is part of the 5 eyes empire, the last stage of decline of the empire that began with the conquest of England in 1066. In the last stages of empire, when the bank is empty but the cries of the homeland populace are undiminished, you have to observe the rage of the hitherto privileged and their last grasp at the golden egg.
In its millennial duration, the ruling element of "England" found a way to submerge the homeland with theft (Domesday landgrab) and trickery (inception of the Iscariot class) and how, with the native gift of invention, powered their way to domination of the continents under Victoria. Ask any of their captive First Nations communities how it works.
And just for fun figure out how it was that William I was able to fund the creation of the English kingdom. In another blog comment, someone kindly enlightened me of the eternal kindness of the "usuarial suspects" who played a supporting part in much of the Empire's history. The Interest payable taken from taxation of the citizenry, apparently.
Add in the Norman blood that still furnishes the dominant English Class and maybe a picture emerges, one that for its millennial longevity can almost certainly be termed evil.
Finally, as Professor Alexander once mentioned, we still live in that Operating System. I call on all forward thinkers to study closely and carefully the true role of the English and in particular their use of their very deceptive maternal tongue. Beware!
now the insane Dugin says that Trump's followers are abandoning him because they feel cheated and he forgot that he was one of those first cheated and he filled pages of verbiage singing the wonders that Trump and Putin would bring to the new multipolar world order because both were anti-globalist heroes who would bring peace and prosperity - the insane Dugin quickly wipes the slate clean of his simplistic hypotheses and fresh fortune-telling passes, he composes another even crazier one and never gets it right because he doesn't see beyond his nose and in fact doesn't know the Western world. I have blocked him several times but he keeps appearing like a fly in the coffee cup, misguiding people (not me).
The opening line, “I guess EU leaders have acknowledged now Trump’s leadership partly because of his alliance with neo-cons during 12-days war,” sets the tone with ambiguity and vagueness. The use of “I guess” and the unspecified “12-days war” both undermine the assertion’s clarity. What exactly was this war? Is it metaphorical? Is it a reference to Gaza, Iran, or another engagement? The vagueness weakens the argumentative foundation. Moreover, the notion that EU leaders “acknowledge Trump’s leadership” as a direct consequence of his alliance with neoconservatives oversimplifies the complex and often antagonistic relationship between Trump and the EU. Trump’s presidency was marked by harsh criticisms of NATO and the EU, and while certain military actions may have prompted a temporary alignment of interests, the text implies a strategic harmony that is largely wishful and unsubstantiated.
“Then Trump behaved himself not as MAGA but as right-wing globalist.”
Here, the text adopts a quasi-religious framework: “MAGA” is not merely a political slogan but a doctrinal position, a sacred political ontology. To deviate from it is not a matter of political flexibility but a heretical betrayal. Labeling Trump as a “right-wing globalist” is an oxymoronic move, deliberately provocative. It indicates that for the author, globalism is not a policy preference but a metaphysical contamination it cannot coexist with MAGA. This absolutist framing has the rhetorical advantage of interpretive rigidity: every deviation is betrayal, every compromise is submission. However, such rigidity is analytically sterile; it eliminates the possibility of strategic recalibration or situational complexity.
“For EU left-wing globalists it was enough. They don’t want to irritate him anymore.”
This sentence continues the trend of flattening diverse political actors into monolithic caricatures. The idea that “EU left-wing globalists” have unified emotional responses to Trump’s actions namely, to avoid “irritating” him is a psychological projection, not a political analysis. It reduces transatlantic diplomacy to a mood management exercise and erases institutional, bureaucratic, and ideological complexities. No empirical basis is given for this claim. Moreover, it reflects a conspiratorial worldview: “left-wing globalists” are framed not as open political actors but as manipulators acting behind veils of civility.
“It is logical that MAGA-faithfuls now try to present Trump as figure that has already overcome neocons’ influence stopping war.”
The author attempts to rationalize the MAGA movement’s self-preservation by proposing a rhetorical rebranding: to claim that Trump has returned to his anti-war roots after a temporary deviation. This reveals the degree to which political loyalty under MAGA is a matter of narrative management, not consistent behavior. The author is aware of the “ongoing fight of shareholders,” a possibly metaphorical or literal suggestion of power blocs vying for control over Trump’s image. Still, calling it a “momentum” implies that this is fleeting and manipulable a weak tether to ideological truth.
“Now belligerent side of Trump is manifested and can return any moment. Against anybody.”
This is both a warning and an admission: that Trump is volatile, and that his unpredictability is not only tactical but structural. For a MAGA-aligned thinker, this should be a red flag, yet the tone here seems to normalize it. Such rhetorical concessions inadvertently expose the core contradiction of MAGA-Trumpism: it valorizes nationalism and anti-interventionism but is built around a figure addicted to dominance displays, often through militarism. This sentence confesses what the rest of the argument seeks to conceal that Trump is not ideologically stable.
“Trump can start the war any moment with anybody. That time he did that against those who are main enemies of globalists. That is why no kings protests calmed down.”
The logic here is opaque. Is the claim that Trump’s war-like behavior was tolerated because it targeted “enemies of globalists”? What are “kings protests”? Is this a mistranslation or a symbolic term? The passage suffers from lexical incoherence, but the emotional thrust is clear: Trump’s militarism is excused if it aligns with anti-globalist targets. The underlying ethic is situational morality violence is justified not by law, but by which side it serves.
“The consequences for Trump after his attack on Iran will be rather negative in a long term. But right now he seems somehow victorious.”
This recognizes the temporal dissonance between immediate political optics and strategic consequences. It is the most clear-eyed sentence in the passage. Yet it is followed by deeper ideological framing.
“Declining unipolarity leads the war against rising multipolarity in three main fronts: Israel against Resistance in Middle East, collective West against Russia in Ukraine, USA against China in Taiwan and Pacific. Trump agrees in general with the unipolarity.”
Here we see a clear Duginist thesis: the global conflict is not between states but between world orders. The unipolarity of American-led liberal hegemony is contrasted with a sacred multipolar order (Russia, China, Iran, etc.). The author faults Trump not for strategy, but for ontological alignment: he has thrown in his lot with the unipolar forces. This is the ultimate betrayal not of voters, but of the sacred geopolitical destiny.
“MAGA considers unipolarity as globalist Deep State project and appeals to concentrate on domestic issues acknowledging the multipolarity as status quo. Unipolarity interventionism is not MAGA.”
This provides a distilled ideological axiom: MAGA is defined as anti-globalist nationalism, with a preference for non-interventionism and tacit acknowledgment of multipolar geopolitics. The claim is lucid but problematic. Trump’s actual record including assassinations, drone strikes, and escalations does not consistently support this doctrine. The ideology of MAGA is more coherent in theory than in practice.
“In 12 days war Trump marked himself on the side of Deep State interventionism - hence the support of Levin and Graham, never Trump pioneers. Hence reverence of EU leaders during NATO summit.”
This returns to the earlier motif of betrayal. Lindsey Graham and Mark Levin, both hawkish Republicans, are deployed here as markers of globalist contamination. Their support is not taken as political consensus but as damning evidence. The claim that EU reverence during NATO is proof of Trump’s defection is dubious: such “reverence” may simply be strategic courtesy. The narrative again collapses geopolitics into moral theater.
“Trump departed from MAGA and I fear it is irreparable. Exactly as in first term.”
This is a moment of ideological grief. The author concludes that Trump’s betrayal is not an aberration but a repetition. It carries the melancholic tone of a disciple betrayed twice by the same messiah. What’s notable is that this is not merely disappointment it is framed as irreparability, an eschatological fracture.
“Globalists hope to use Trump to achieve the goal that could not achieve with left wing globalism to undermine multipolarity. Trump seemingly goes precisely this way now. US-Israel alliance involves India and tries to oppose it against other multipolar players.”
This is the most conspiratorial claim: that Trump is being deployed not by left-wing elites, but by right-wing globalists, who share the same goals via different means. It suggests that the struggle is not partisan but structural: a systemic conspiracy in which both liberal and conservative wings serve the same master. India’s involvement is framed as another betrayal another wedge in the multipolar resistance.
It appears that Russia (and some others) misread the extent to which Trump will be able to reduce the Deep State stranglehold on US govt affairs. Winning an election is one thing, but he is neither intelligent nor farsighted enough, and is so mercurial a personality that he is incapable of any long range planning. Btw, India maintains close relations with Russia or Israel based on its own interests, and its capacity to preserve its independence as a civilization is far more than China or anybody else.
Hello,
I often adopt the look of "Trump APPEARS as a Deep State actor", keeping in mind the distinction that it's what we see at the first glance
Between what we see and labelling him, is two steps. I see that you use "mark himself" so it could be the same thing!
Trump si è schierato con i globalisti, ha deciso di andare contro il suo elettorato. A lungo termine questo fatto potrà decidere sulle votazioni di medio termine.
Trump just ended a war. Nice.
Como lo percibo desde el Sur, Alejandro, MAGA implica alejarse de la guerra -la mayor expresión de la estupidez humana- y Trump adora el armamentismo, haciendo alarde de todo lo que rodea a la guerra. Su posición anti guerra sólo será consistente si renuncia al imperialismo como forma de preservar a su país. Simplemente no debe asociarse con criminales como Netanyahu y Zelensky, y QUIENES los manejan. Si, como ha dicho, quiere "que cada quien pelee sus propias guerras", debe retirarse del resto del mundo, poner el esfuerzo en MAGA y recuperar una posición fuerte para su país desde el desarrollo socioeconómico de su gente.