• lurch (he/him)
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    No, it’s the other part, with the meaning, he would throw them to russia. Leaving that part out would have been better.

    • Fizz@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      9 months ago

      You are taking the the quote out of context. Yes he said exactly what was in the quote but the seriousness portrayed by this article was not there.

      Do you honestly think the US and nato would let Russia invade a nato country? Because even the head of Nato doesn’t think that would happen and the article mentions that. The only person saying that would happen is Biden and he is only saying it because it’s great for his election run.

      The article mentions the clear “hardball” approach that trump is taking to try and force nato members to pull their weight. Everyone in this comment section seems to be ignoring that and ignoring the comments from the head of Nato and taking trumps words as a binding contract. It’s already clear from trumps existence that he says unhinged shit, I don’t think we have any disagreements there. The disagreement I have with this article is the hypocrisy of saying Nato is undermined by trumps comments when majority of the members are freeloading with no intentions of meeting the requirements. The majority of nato members being useless has become such an issue that presidential candidates are running on the issue.