Steven Arrazola de Oñate described Trump's response as interesting and wrote that there was much speculation about the backgrounds of the war. He suggested that the American president might have information that was not public. As a reason to critically examine the official narrative, he referred to previous CIA involvement in regime changes and the destabilization of governments, including in Iran in 1953, Guatemala in 1954, and Chile in the 1970s. According to him, that did not prove anything about the current war in and of itself. Arrazola de Oñate found Trump's wish to end the war even more important. He wrote that thousands of soldiers were dying every month and that preventing more casualties should carry more weight than trying to prove one's own point. At the same time, he stated that a large part of the European political elite depicted Trump as a dangerous dictator, while those same politicians, according to him, insisted on continuing the fight. He wrote that negotiations were framed as weakness and continuing to fight as moral superiority. Finally, he stated that the truth would ultimately come to light. #Trump #oorlog #waarheid (translated)
