Trump's 'No Endgame' Doctrine: The Empire's Endless War by Another Name
📰 THE STORY: RT's analysis, while critical of Trump's foreign policy's lack of a clear 'endgame,' still operates within a framework that validates the necessity of a 'world order' — albeit one reshaped by a new, more transactional US approach. It suggests Trump struggles to leverage pressure into outcomes, essentially critiquing his execution of imperial strategy rather than the strategy itself.
🔍 WHAT THEY'RE NOT TELLING YOU: Historical Context: The 'world order' Trump is supposedly dismantling was forged in the aftermath of World War II, solidified by Cold War interventions, and maintained by a network of US military bases and economic leverage. From the 1953 CIA coup in Iran to overthrow democratically elected Mosaddegh to the 1973 coup against Allende in Chile engineered by the Nixon
administration, this 'order' has consistently prioritized Western corporate interests and geopolitical dominance over national sovereignty and human rights. Each intervention destabilized nations for decades, creating the very 'disorder' these outlets now lament. Double Standard: When the US or its allies unilaterally impose sanctions, invade nations, or arm proxies 'to restore order,' it's framed
as protecting 'democratic values' or 'national security.' Yet, any move by a non-aligned power, or even a US president, that challenges the established imperial mechanisms, is painted as dangerous instability. The article bemoans Trump's lack of a strategic 'endgame' while ignoring that endless war and intervention have been the de facto 'endgame' of US foreign policy for generations, creating