"news out of the east and north" is a vauge term. There is no King of the East of West mentioned.
News out of the
east and north is not so vague, when Revelation is taken into consideration.
The Antichrist himself is not mentioned. It takes putting together prophecies of found elsewhere, to identify the king in Daniel 11:36 as the Antichrist-beast.
It does say news of the east troubles him in the text. Daniel 11 is not a stand alone prophecy. It takes the other prophecies to go with it to make the complete picture.
In Zechariah 14, God draws all nations against Jerusalem for battle. Which God Himself takes direct part in the battle. The battles in Daniel 11 are a prelude to Armageddon by drawing the nations into the middle east.
NO the Anitchrist is NOT the King of the West, he's clearly like Israel south of the King of the north and north of the King of the South before his war with them starts. Your reading your desire for him to rise to power in Europe into it. He's revives the Roman Empire, but the Eastern Empire outlasted the West.
Well, it is not a revival of the Roman Empire, but an end times version of it. The word revived, as some use in saying "revived" Roman Empire is misleading because it could be taken to mean the wounded and recovered (revived) head in Revelation 13 is referring to the Roman Empire, which it is not.
The former eastern portion of the Roman Empire, simply does not have the military strength to impose the Antichrist's will. The little horn in Daniel 8 waxes strong to the south and east toward Israel. So the direction he originates from is north and west of Israel. And he comes to Israel in great strength. The former eastern portion of the Roman Empire from that direction, Greece and Turkey perhaps - don't have the military strength to broadly impose the Antichrist-beast's will.
Those Dynasties no longer exist, but Egypt and Syria do. Why does it even begin by Talking about Alexander if to you Alexander's divided Kingodm is irrelevant to the Context?
Because the prophecy covers from the time of the Persian kings, Daniel 11:2, to the end times. Alexander and the resultant divided kingdoms are addressed as part of that overall time period. And even so, only two of the divided kingdoms are spoken of, although there were a total of four.
The two divided kingdoms spoken of, the Ptolemies and the Seleucid's, and the other two not detailed, are relevant to the historic timeframe. When the prophecy gets to the end times in Daniel 11:36, it is the powers from the four directions of the compass
on a global scale that all the end times prophecies supported elsewhere in the bible that must be part of the understanding.
Your idea of a Mahdi Antichrist is not workable because the Muslim are not to worship the Mahdi. Which the Antichrist-beast claiming to be God will be worshiped. You are interpreting the latter passages in Daniel 11 within the paradigm of the Mahdi or a Muslim being the Antichrist, which is a flawed basis.
Doug