It's obvious by now that what happened in the US last year was a version of colour revolution executed in the US soil.
Many analysts wrongly view the colour revolutions -- mass protests and subsequent social turmoil that broke out in Serbia (2000), Georgia (2003), Ukraine (2004), Iraq (2005), Lebanon (2005), Kyrgyzstan (2005), Belarus (2006), Myanmar (2007), Bahrain (2011), Yemen (2011), and Ukraine (2013) -- as insurgent movements being orchestrated by the US and its allied factions to advance their geopolitical ambitions.
However,
once you start researching on which factions have profited from those so called revolutions mentioned above, you'll realize that said view couldn't be more wrong: It's the 'globalist factions without borders' that have been behind the movements.
A hilarious thing is that between 2017 and 2019, during such a short period of time, a chunk of their assets have gone down the drain [1] and their grandiose agenda has been delayed considerably. [2]
This is why they have stopped caring for the optics and also why the current US Secretary of State, not Antony Blinken but the real one, has been super busy lately with doing some serious damage controls.
Expect soon that Iran, a de facto China's Satellite State, would play prominent roles for Israel and China [3], and also that China's semiconductor and telecommunications industry would come back from a near death. [4][5]
SS: in this artilce the thesis is made that bad reporting about trump was not because of domestic politics bias, but because of geopolitics.
What you guys think? You have arguments that support this thesis? Arguments that speak against this thesis? Or do you have an antithesis?
I tend to agree with this. I think the MSM ultimately did not like Trump because of his approach to foreign policy.
It's obvious by now that what happened in the US last year was a version of colour revolution executed in the US soil.
Many analysts wrongly view the colour revolutions -- mass protests and subsequent social turmoil that broke out in Serbia (2000), Georgia (2003), Ukraine (2004), Iraq (2005), Lebanon (2005), Kyrgyzstan (2005), Belarus (2006), Myanmar (2007), Bahrain (2011), Yemen (2011), and Ukraine (2013) -- as insurgent movements being orchestrated by the US and its allied factions to advance their geopolitical ambitions.
However,
once you start researching on which factions have profited from those so called revolutions mentioned above, you'll realize that said view couldn't be more wrong: It's the 'globalist factions without borders' that have been behind the movements.
A hilarious thing is that between 2017 and 2019, during such a short period of time, a chunk of their assets have gone down the drain [1] and their grandiose agenda has been delayed considerably. [2]
This is why they have stopped caring for the optics and also why the current US Secretary of State, not Antony Blinken but the real one, has been super busy lately with doing some serious damage controls.
Expect soon that Iran, a de facto China's Satellite State, would play prominent roles for Israel and China [3], and also that China's semiconductor and telecommunications industry would come back from a near death. [4] [5]