It’s impossible to overstate the importance of prophetic geography. Here are some simple questions you can ask people who are looking in Europe for the Antichrist.
IF the Antichrist is European, why is Jesus coming from Bozrah in Edom (Buseirah, Jordan) covered in blood after His return? [Isaiah 63:1-6]
…
IF the Antichrist is European, or even Jewish, why do Micah and Isaiah say he’s Assyrian? [Micah 5; Isaiah 10]
…
IF the Antichrist is European, why does Daniel call him the king of the north whose kingdom includes parts of modern-day Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Iran? [Daniel 11]
…
IF the Antichrist is European, or even Jewish, why does Ezekiel say he’s from Magog (a part of modern-day Turkey)? [Ezekiel 38-39]
…
IF the Antichrist is from Europe, why is a returning Jesus waging war in Moab against the Sons of Sheth (parts of Jordan and Saudi Arabia)? [Numbers 24:14, 17-20]
…
You can surely substitute “American” for “European.”
P2ALM 
I’ll take your word that some say the antichrist will come from Europe, I’ve never heard it, I have always heard that he would come up out of the old Roman Empire of which all the areas you stated were under the Roman government at one time. Please correct me if I’m wrong on that.
I would just say that the Roman Empire came out of Europe.
Actually the ancient Roman empire didn’t rule Babylon which is where Daniel’s vision was referred to. Roman empire just ruled on the peripheral perimeter of Iraq. Daniel says that the people of the prince to come are the ones who destroyed the temple in 70 AD and they were Assyrian but under Roman rule. So people assume that the antichrist will emerge from a revived Roman empire. That is a poor assumption. If the people of the prince that is to come were Roman that would be a logical conclusion but since the region is ancient Babylon or Iraq we mustn’t look to a Roman empire.
I have since learned that he would be Assyrian, thank you for bringing that to mind.