609

Trump Is Losing It: It is unclear whether Donald Trump has forgotten the precise nature of NATO or whether he ever fully grasped it in the first place. (www.nytimes.com)

submitted 8 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

98 comments fedilink hide all child comments

What is clear, however, is that Trump — who ostensibly spent four years as president of the United States — has little clue about what NATO is or what NATO does. And when he spoke on the subject at a rally in South Carolina over the weekend, what he said was less a cogent discussion of foreign policy than it was gibberish — the kind of outrageous nonsense that flows without interruption from an empty and unreflective mind.

“One of the presidents of a big country stood up and said, ‘Well, sir, if we don’t pay, and we’re attacked by Russia, will you protect us?’” Trump said, recalling an implausible conversation with an unnamed, presumably European head of state. “‘You didn’t pay? You’re delinquent?’” Trump recounted responding. “‘No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want. You gotta pay. You gotta pay your bills.’”

The former president’s message was clear: If NATO members do not pay up, then he will leave them to the mercy of a continental aggressor who has already plunged one European country into death, destruction and devastation.

Except NATO isn’t a mafia protection racket. NATO, in case anyone needs to be reminded, is a mutual defense organization, formed by treaty in 1949 as tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union hardened into conflict. “The parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all,” states Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty.

Non-paywall link

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] thisbenzingring@lemmy.sdf.org 12 points 8 months ago

Kompromat in the form of the RNC's emails that have not been leaked.

[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 19 points 8 months ago

Emails that WikiLeaks apparently has but said "nah we're not going to release them because there's totes nothing in there trust us".

They could've been neutral and trustworthy. Instead they had an axe to grind against Hillary, and prioritized that over being known for objective truth.

[-] Zipitydew@sh.itjust.works 8 points 8 months ago

At this point I suspect the main damage is done. But the dirt was found out a different way.

The big secret to hide was campaign funding and coordination. But Trump won anyway. Then didn't even get in trouble for it.

And later the Russia>>NRA dark money link was found and reported on. Without the media then going ape shit that the funnel was really Russia>>NRA>>GOP. And without any of the Biden administration cracking down on what happened.

So I suspect it's why they're all even more brazen now. Some of the dirt was found. It didn't amount to any punishment. So why bother trying to hide now?

[-] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 7 points 8 months ago

At this point what could possibly be in those emails that their voters wouldn't just dismiss?

this post was submitted on 14 Feb 2024

609 points (97.4% liked)

politics

19136 readers

3569 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News