America vs Globalism
It really is awe inspiring to examine North America's defensive position and ponder how in the world could a foreign nation ever invade and attack the United States, or even Canada or Mexico for that matter. These three nations, together encompass the worlds best defended trinity of nations. And while indeed, Canada, Mexico and the United States do indeed have their differences - especially lately with trade tariff's being imposed - they are still for all intents and purposes, allies.
To be clear, there is really no plausible scenario where any nation, even Russia and China combined, could infiltrate North America on a military scale. The United States are indeed very safe. And this is one of the reasons why the United States have grown into such a global powerhouse after World War II. There is no other nation who can rapidly deploy a reasonable show of force anywhere in the world, other than the United States.
To help accomplish that, the United States has about 600+ military bases (of varying types) spread across 80 countries, all over the globe. These are often established to support alliances, to assist with peacekeeping, and to help defend other nations - but also allow the United States to have a global presence.
Now, sit back and imagine if China, or Russia had an air base within 50 miles of your quiet New Jersey neighborhood? Would that cause you to be concerned? A foreign power with military base larger than your own nation's base, within a 5 minute flight of your neighborhood? This is how a lot of the world views the American presence on foreign soil.
Foreign Goals:
China is the largest force right now which is interested in toppling the United States of America's global economic power. I say economic power, because China doesn't really want to expand beyond its location in East Asia. While sure it might want to claim Taiwan - the last remanent of China before communism - but the Chinese people do not really want to invade places like India, or Africa, or even North America. The culture is too different. The population isn't Chinese.
China's goal is to establish economic and trade dominance, setting its self as a global supplier of both disposable good, and technology. And manufacturing facility. They want to be useful, and to produce all of the items that the world needs. They are indeed decent at this task also. With low wages, a work to live culture, and lower environmental standards than Western nations, they can produce products dirt cheap, and ship them anywhere while still making a profit.
China does have a single foreign military base in Djibouti. the purpose, is to protect trade assets in the Horn of Africa. Anti piracy. This makes sense, and aligns with its global vision.
China also looks to transform the rest of the world to align with Chinese values and interests. This doesn't mean invading and claiming other nations, but it could mean cultural change programs, regime change efforts, and left - socialist - reform policies being pushed by their influencers. They do this through funding academia, science, cultural and social media campaigns.
Similarly, Russia does not wish to a be a Global policeman like the United States. Its interests align more with strengthening and protecting its regional influence. Russia's main concern is to maintain stability and protect its self from destabilization efforts from the West, mostly in the form of EU and NATO expansion closer and closer to its own borders.
Russia is fairly self sufficient as a nation. And its alliances with China, India, Brazil and South Africa (BRICS) do aid its strength and outreach. But while Russia does have some military bases on foreign soil, they are positioned in a defensive and strategic manner to protect the flanks of their nation. Not so much to provide a far reaching presence.
Europe is a modern melting pot of politics and bureaucracy. The EU is so entangled in its own bullcrap, that it rarely has the resources to stretch its arms outside of its own region. This doesn't mean it is completely out of the Global game. But it has its own issues at home which often distract focus. Most of it's international reach in recent history, relied on its alliance with the United States. That being said some of the richest private influencers reside in the EU, and actively engage in regime change efforts against the United States (George Soros).
The Middle East is fragmented and historically tangled in how it views the United States. We all know of the Terror groups originated from there, some of which were even funded by the Americans. But then turned on them. Religious tensions there at high as well as economic tensions. Oil and Gas are huge in that market, and dealing in US Dollars has always been a point of contention.
While indeed some groups do seek to target the United States, most have become valuable allies. Some of which have been pulling their fair share of the deal for a while now.
Personally, I believe that the Gaza Strip and holy land should be an area controlled by a non religious focused internationally run zone (maybe by the UN?). Sure give Israel some land, but the holy lands specifically should be open to all faiths which consider them holy and sacred. Most of the major religions stem from the events that happened there.
Ultimately, the Middle East continues to walk a fine line between reform and instability, tradition and globalization. Its people are diverse, its leaders divided, but many remain committed to peace. If given the space and structure to achieve it.
The United States of America:
America is engaged in a conflict. Not of tanks and missiles, but of influence, culture, and national identity. It's a globalist war, fought through policy, money, and manipulation rather than open combat.
Militarily, no country or alliance could reasonably launch a full-scale invasion of the U.S. mainland. Our homeland is well defended. But that hasn’t stopped adversarial nations and influencers from attempting to weaken us from within. Economically, culturally, and politically.
For decades, America has engaged in a form of international welfare: distributing billions in aid, arms, and training in the hopes of buying influence, ensuring peace, and maintaining global supremacy. Yet, dependency breeds resentment. When funding is withdrawn, some former allies become hostile. The same dynamic plays out at home with domestic programs: dependency can become a way of life. Reversing that trend requires a generational commitment to education and opportunity, not abrupt cuts.
Foreign powers, knowing this, often try to keep their pipelines open by funding organizations or influencing U.S. lawmakers. Many of whom are more focused on fame or finances than national integrity. These interests can be seen at play in conflicts like Ukraine, where meddling and power plays contributed to larger escalation.
In this system, Donald Trump represents a direct threat to those foreign and domestic entities who benefit from the old arrangement. His agenda of fair trade, reduced international policing, and prioritizing American resources for American needs has drawn intense pushback. Not surprisingly, the greatest resistance to his policies has come from places with deep political ties to globalist agendas - like New York and California.
Picture America as the hall monitor in a school full of schemers. For years, others offered bribes or tricked him into doing their bidding. But when he finally stops, crosses his arms, and says "No more," those same people now seek to discredit or remove him. Not because he failed, but because he finally stood firm.
For decades, the United States has played the role of global policeman - projecting power, funding allies, and enforcing order in nearly every corner of the globe. But the cost has been steep. Trillions spent overseas, thousands of lives lost, and at home, an increasingly divided and destabilized nation. While our infrastructure crumbles and our communities struggle, we've propped up foreign regimes, subsidized hostile nations, and allowed our borders to weaken under the weight of globalist policies.
Stepping back from that global policing role isn't weakness - it’s wisdom. It’s the recognition that America cannot lead abroad if it’s broken at home. Real strength comes from a solid foundation: secure borders, a unified national identity, and an economy that works for its citizens, not just for multinational corporations or international interest groups.
This is where Donald Trump’s vision strikes a chord. His America-first policy is not isolationist. In fact it’s restorative. It demands fair trade, defends the border, and seeks to invest in American communities first, not endless foreign entanglements. It doesn’t reject the world, but insists on mutual respect rather than blind submission to global institutions. It’s a return to sovereignty, to the idea that the United States exists for its citizens first, and that charity must begin at home.
In contrast, open-border globalism asks the nation to dissolve its identity, to sacrifice security and economic stability for the illusion of universal harmony. It invites foreign influence into our political system, encourages dependency over independence, and often erodes the very values that made America a beacon of strength in the first place.
The choices America faces are these: A future where America continues to erode under the weight of global expectations. Or one where we reclaim control, secure our values, and lead by example, not obligation. Trump's vision, controversial as it may be, speaks to millions of Americans who are ready to stop apologizing for their homeland—and start rebuilding it.
For Canadians and Other Allies who may be upset:
To the people of nations that have long relied on American funding, military support, or favorable trade deals: the shift in U.S. policy is not a rejection of friendship. It’s a call for fairness.
For too long, America has played the part of benefactor, often at great cost to its own citizens. We’ve sent aid, enforced peace, absorbed trade imbalances, and opened our markets with little asked in return. Many of these actions were well-intentioned. But charity without accountability creates dependence, and dependence can turn into resentment.
This change is not about turning United State of America's backs on the world. It’s about building healthier, more honest relationships. One where every nation stands with dignity, takes responsibility for its own people, and engages in mutually beneficial trade and diplomacy.
The United States invites you to grow stronger with them, not by leaning on them, but by walking beside them. By improving your own economies, investing in your people, and embracing true sovereignty, you will be better positioned to shape your future, not as a client state of America, but as an equal on the world stage.
The door to partnership remains open. But the days of limitless support without shared effort are over. The world is changing. America must change too.
A Respect for Russia’s Regional Vision
While Western narratives often cast Russia in a solely adversarial light, it’s important to acknowledge the unique role Russia plays as a regional power. Russia does not seek global domination in the same way some past empires or modern powers have. Instead, its foreign policy is largely rooted in regional stability, historical influence, and national security, especially in former Soviet territories that it views as within its sphere of interest.
Domestically, Russia has cultivated a deep sense of tradition, with a strong emphasis on conservative values, lawfulness, and public safety. Russian society maintains a cultural focus on Orthodox Christianity, which plays a foundational role in many aspects of life. From holidays to education to moral philosophy. At the same time, Russia is a multicultural federation, home to over 190 ethnic groups, and significant populations of Muslims, particularly in regions like Tatarstan, Chechnya, and Dagestan. Rather than homogenizing these identities, Russia has built a system that, while not perfect, seeks to integrate diversity under a unified national framework.
In this sense, Russia’s model is not about exporting ideology worldwide but about preserving a civilizational identity in an era of rapid cultural transformation. For those who respect sovereignty, tradition, and regional autonomy, there is value in understanding Russia’s position - not as a threat to be demonized by default, but as a distinct civilization charting its own path.
The Battle for Perception
In today’s world, the greatest battles aren’t always fought with bullets. They’re fought with narratives. Social media platforms, entertainment, mainstream news outlets, and even academic institutions have become powerful tools of influence. These channels are often used - intentionally or not - to shape public opinion, redefine national identity, and steer policy debates. Narratives are crafted not always with facts, but with emotional hooks, partial truths, or outright disinformation, amplified by algorithms designed for engagement, not enlightenment.
Foreign influencers, activist billionaires, and political operatives understand this well. By flooding the public with emotionally charged stories, cherry-picked statistics, or identity-driven agendas, they aim to divide, distract, and destabilize. The goal isn’t just to change minds - it’s to weaken national resolve, to make people forget what their country stands for, and to erode the values that once united them.
In this light, Americans are not just participants in a political debate. They are targets in a psychological war. Recognizing this manipulation, questioning media motives, and reclaiming independent thought are essential steps in defending not just a nation, but the soul of a people. America’s strength lies not only in its military or economy, but in its ability to think freely, speak boldly, and act with clarity. That is what must be protected most of all.