In the days immediately preceding his address to Congress on Tuesday night, President Trump took a chain saw to government agencies, initiated a trade war, cut off arms to Ukraine and sided with a brutal authoritarian, President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.

在周二晚向国会发表讲话之前的几天里，特朗普总统大规模裁减了联邦机构，发起了贸易战，停止了向乌克兰提供武器，还站到了俄罗斯总统普京这个残暴威权领导人一边。

But a visitor arriving from a distant planet who listened to Mr. Trump’s address before an audience of enthusiastic Republicans and dejected, powerless and angry Democrats would not have sensed the scale and intensity of the disruption of the past 44 days and the deep concerns it has produced.

然而，要是有一名来自遥远星球的客人，在听取了特朗普在一群热情的共和党人和垂头丧气、无能为力、愤怒的民主党人面前发表的讲话后，是不会对过去44天的颠覆规模和激烈程度，以及由此引发的深切担忧有所感受的。

While Mr. Trump resurrected familiar arguments from his campaign rallies to justify his actions — citing waste and fraud in the federal bureaucracy, the dangers posed by migrants entering the country illegally, the unfairness of the global trading system and the need to bring a bloody war to an end — something was missing.

特朗普重新搬出他在竞选集会上的那些为人熟知的论据为自己的行为辩解，说联邦官僚机构存在浪费和欺骗现象、非法入境的移民带来危险、全球贸易体系存在不公，以及结束血腥战争的必要，但有些东西没有出现在他的讲话里。

He never made the case for why the potential benefits of the disruption he has triggered — “nothing but swift and unrelenting action,” he called it, quite accurately — was worth the very real costs at home and abroad. He never addressed the fears of investors who have been hitting the “sell” button amid an escalating trade war, or of allies reaching for their panic buttons as Washington aligns itself with Moscow. He never talked about why he was inflicting more economic pain on his allies than his adversaries.

他始终没有解释，为何他所引发的混乱（他相当准确地称其为“除了迅速无情，不能用其他词汇描述的行动”）所带来的潜在好处完全值得国内外付出代价。他没有回应那些在贸易战升级之际抛售股票的投资者们的忧虑，也没有回应华盛顿与莫斯科结盟给美国的盟友们带来的恐慌。他始终没有谈及为什么他给盟友带来的经济损失要高于对手们的损失。

“They’ll be a little disturbance,” was the closest he came to acknowledging the reaction to his moves, in that case speaking of his steep tariffs.

“它们会是一点干扰”是他最接近承认自己的种种做法引发了各方反应的表述了，这里指的是他的高额关税。

When he briefly turned to the war in Ukraine toward the end of his more than 100-minute speech, it was chiefly to ask the question: “Do you want to keep it going for another five years?”

在100多分钟的讲话快结束时，他简短地提了俄乌战争，主要是用提问题的方式：“你们想让它再持续五年吗？”

He never addressed the question of what a just peace might look like, or whether America or its European allies would guarantee that Ukraine would remain an independent state. And not once did he suggest that Mr. Putin might have to give up something in return — or what would happen if the Russian leader decided to keep on fighting.

他没有谈及公正的和平会是什么样子，也没有谈及美国或其欧洲盟友是否会保证乌克兰继续作为一个独立国家存在。他一次也没有暗示过普京也许需要放弃某些东西作为停战的回报，或者如果这位俄罗斯领导人决定继续战争的话，会发生什么。

It was, in short, a speech oddly detached from the questions that have been roiling Washington since Mr. Trump began issuing his wave of executive orders, since he insisted that the United States take control of Greenland and the Panama Canal and rebuild Gaza without Palestinians, or since he began suggesting, first as a joke and then in tones more menacing, that Canada would be wise to become the 51st state.

总之，特朗普的这个讲话完全不涉及自从他开始发布一连串行政命令以来，自从他坚称美国应该接管格陵兰岛和巴拿马运河、提出在没有巴勒斯坦人的条件下重建加沙以来，自从他开始只是开玩笑、后来用更恶狠的口吻建议加拿大成为美国的第51州是明智之举以来，一直困扰着华盛顿的各种问题，显出一种奇怪的超然态度。

True, Mr. Trump has never been one to dwell on policy; in his first term, presented with a series of options on dealing with a complex telecommunications issue, he declared, “This is really boring.”

没错，特朗普从来不是一个在政策上纠结的人；在第一个任期内，面对一系列处理复杂电报通讯问题的方案，他宣称，“这真的很无聊。”

But given the gravity of Mr. Trump’s recent actions, it was not unreasonable to look to the speech for insight into where his America First instincts are taking the country and the world, as he seeks to scrap portions of the Western-dominated system of laws and rules that have guided states in NATO or the European Union.

但考虑到特朗普近期行动的严重性，人们指望从他的演讲中了解到，在他试图废除西方主导、指导北约或欧盟国家的法律和规则体系的部分内容时，他的“美国优先”本能将把美国和世界带向何方。人们的这种想法并非毫无道理。

Nothing like that was offered. In some ways this speech was pure Trump, designed more for applause lines than deep examination. And the theater of it all was impressive, down to the removal, at the order of Speaker Mike Johnson, of the 77-year-old Representative Al Green, a Texas Democrat, for standing in protest and shouting “you have no mandate to cut Medicaid.”

他没有谈及这方面的内容。从某些方面来看，这篇演讲是纯粹的特朗普风格，更多是为了博得掌声，而不是深入剖析。整个场面的戏剧性令人印象深刻，包括77岁的得克萨斯州民主党众议员阿尔·格林因为站起来抗议，并且大喊“你没有被授权削减医疗补助计划”，而被议长迈克·约翰逊命令驱逐。

It turned out to be the only discussion for the evening of Medicaid — among the most politically explosive issues facing the administration and the Republican-controlled Congress — and it ended when Mr. Green, waving his cane, was escorted from the floor.

结果，这是当晚唯一一次关于医疗补助的讨论——这是政府和共和党控制的国会面临的最具政治爆炸性的议题之一——当格林挥舞着手杖被护送离开会场时，讨论也结束了。

得克萨斯州民主党众议员阿尔·格林因起立抗议并高喊“你们没有削减医疗补助的授权”而被逐出会场，之后他向记者发表了讲话。

But it was also pure Trump to celebrate disruption he had triggered without describing its long-term objectives, beyond the slogan of advancing what he called a “common-sense revolution.” He did not talk in any detail about how to take on America’s biggest global challenges — such as handling China’s growing reach and expanding nuclear arsenal or a strategy for peeling the Russians and the Chinese away from each other.

但对特朗普来说，仅仅赞美自己所引发的混乱，除了推进他所称的“常识革命”这一口号外，没有阐述自己的长期目标，这也完全符合他的风格。他没有详谈如何应对美国最大的全球挑战，比如如何应对中国日益扩大的影响力和核武库，以及如何将俄罗斯和中国分开的战略。

In fact, he barely mentioned America’s two biggest nuclear-armed superpower competitors at all, much less their work together.

事实上，他几乎没有提及美国这两个最大的拥核超级大国竞争对手，更不用说它们之间的合作了。

Nor did he dwell on his order for a “freeze on all foreign aid,” a step that has had profound human consequences: the inevitable deaths of the world’s poorest, who had been dependent on American food or medicine that was suddenly locked away in warehouses across Africa and the Middle East, or the paralysis of a program to fight AIDS that President George W. Bush says was the crown jewel of his Republican administration, because it saved millions of lives.

他也没有详谈他的“冻结所有对外援助”命令，这一举措已经带来了深远的人道主义影响：世界上最贫穷人口会不可避免地死去，他们一直依赖的美国提供的食品或药品，现在突然被锁进了非洲和中东各地的仓库；一项抗击艾滋病的项目陷入瘫痪了，小布什总统曾说该计划是他的共和党政府皇冠上的宝石，因为它拯救了成百上千万人的生命。

He also did not talk about how the United States planned to replace the role that U.S.A.I.D. played in countering the roots of terrorism, or the risks of hacking away at a little-known part of the Energy Department, the National Nuclear Security Administration, that keeps America’s nuclear stockpile secure.

他也没有谈到计划如何取代美国国际开发署在打击恐怖主义根源方面所发挥的作用，以及对能源部鲜为人知的国家核安全管理局进行裁员的风险。该部门负责保护美国核储备的安全。

周二，密歇根州民主党参议员埃莉萨·斯洛特金在密歇根州怀恩多特排练她对特朗普讲话的回应。

Mr. Trump appeared to welcome an overture from President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine to get back on track with discussions over peace talks and a mineral deal. But Mr. Trump left in place his ban on delivery of further weapons or other major aid to Ukraine.

特朗普似乎对乌克兰总统泽连斯基提出的重返和平谈判和矿产协议谈判轨道的提议表示欢迎。但他没有取消停止向乌克兰提供更多武器或其他重大援助的禁令。

And on trade, he gave no hint that he would back down on the higher tariffs he imposed on Tuesday on China, Canada and Mexico, and he offered a dizzying array of explanations of what he was doing, including forcing a crackdown on fentanyl, protecting American businesses and punishing adversaries.

在贸易方面，他没有暗示他会在周二对中国、加拿大和墨西哥征收更高关税问题上做出让步，他对自己当前的行为给出了一系列令人眼花缭乱的解释，包括强制打击芬太尼、保护美国企业和惩罚对手。

While he said Canada and Mexico must do “much more” to curb the flow of drugs, he didn’t give specifics. However, his commerce secretary, Howard Lutnick, earlier suggested the tariffs might be in large part quickly lifted, to prevent them from turning into a tax on American consumers.

虽然他说加拿大和墨西哥必须采取“更多”措施来遏制毒品流动，但没有给出具体细节。然而，他的商务部长霍华德·卢特尼克早些时候表示，关税可能会在很大程度上被迅速取消，以防它们变成对美国消费者的征税。

But Mr. Trump stuck with his demand for “control” of the Panama Canal, something he is already a step closer to this week with the sale of two of its Chinese ports to an American investment group. He sounded less martial about buying Greenland or taking it by force.

但特朗普坚持要求“控制”巴拿马运河，本周，随着巴拿马运河两个由中国人运营的港口出售给一家美国投资集团，他离这一目标又近了一步。对于购买格陵兰岛或用武力夺取格陵兰岛，他的态度听起来不那么强硬。

All this has zigzagging has understandably left America’s traditional allies confused, angry and suspicious. Canada’s exiting prime minister, Justin Trudeau, who now takes seriously Mr. Trump’s jokes about turning the country into the 51st state, said he believed the intent of the tariffs levied on his country was to hollow out the country.

这其中的种种曲折让美国的传统盟友感到困惑、愤怒和怀疑，这是可以理解的。加拿大即将离任的总理特鲁多现在很认真地对待特朗普关于把加拿大变成第51个州的笑话，他说，他认为对加拿大征收关税的目的是要掏空这个国家。

“What he wants is to see is a total collapse of the Canadian economy, because that’ll make it easier to annex us.” He added: “That’s never going to happen.”

“他想看到加拿大经济的全面崩溃，因为这样就更容易吞并我们了。”他还说：“这永远不会发生。”

Perhaps stunned by what Steve Bannon, the MAGA strategist, calls the “muzzle velocity” of action and orders, Democrats have had a difficult time addressing the disconnect between what Mr. Trump talks about and what they see as workers get fired, tariffs put upward pressure on prices and hold times for tax assistance stretch into hours.

也许是被“让美国再次伟大”策略师史蒂夫·班农所说的行动与命令的“枪弹出膛速度”惊呆了，民主党人一直难以处理特朗普的言论与他们所看到的现实之间的脱节——工人遭到解雇，关税给价格带来上行压力，税收援助的等待时间延长到几个小时。

But in her response to Mr. Trump on Tuesday, Michigan’s newly elected Democratic senator, Elissa Slotkin, started trying to marshal the argument.

但在周二，在密歇根州新当选的民主党参议员埃莉萨·斯洛特金对特朗普的回应中，她开始尝试整理论据进行反驳。

She zeroed in a Trump administration critique on Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, who is central in Mr. Trump’s effort to shrink the federal work force. Mr. Musk watched the president’s address from the House gallery.

她把批评特朗普政府的重点放在世界首富埃隆·马斯克身上，他是特朗普缩减联邦政府雇员的核心人物。马斯克在众议院旁听席上观看了总统的演讲。

“Is there anyone in America who is comfortable with him and his gang of 20-year-olds using their own computer servers to poke through your tax returns, your health information and your bank accounts,” Ms. Slotkin asked, with “no oversight, no protections against cyberattacks, no guardrails?”

斯洛特金问道，“在美国，有谁能接受他和他那帮20多岁的年轻人使用自己的电脑服务器，在没有监督、没有防范网络攻击的保护措施、没有护栏的情况下，窥探你的纳税申报表、健康信息和银行账户？”

Were Americans OK, she said, with “the mindless firing of people who work to protect our nuclear weapons, keep our planes from crashing and conduct the research that finds the cure for cancer, only to rehire them two days later?”

美国人是否能够接受，“那些保护我们的核武器、防止我们的飞机坠毁、从事癌症治疗研究的人被愚蠢地解雇，两天后又被重新雇用？”她问道。

Ms. Slotkin, a former C.I.A. officer and moderate Democrat who was elected in November in a swing state that went for Mr. Trump, sought to flip Mr. Musk’s argument that he is bringing relentless private-sector efficiency into the government.

斯洛特金曾是中情局官员，是温和派民主党人，去年11月在一个曾支持特朗普的摇摆州当选。她试图反驳马斯克关于他正将私营部门的无情效率引入政府的说法。

“No C.E.O. in America could do that without being summarily fired,” she said.

“在美国，没有哪个首席执行官能做到这一点而不被立即解雇，”她说。