Nato leaders have informally agreed not to mention the football World Cup to Donald Trump for fear of irritating the US president at a crucial time for the military alliance.

Further below…

In the first open acknowledgment of the strategy, the Belgian prime minister, Bart De Wever, told reporters in Ankara he would not be discussing his country’s 4-1 win over the US earlier this week.

Look, can everyone please do their best not to annoy the bumbling pedophile? Thank you - your cooperation is appreciated.

  • motruck@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    7 days ago

    If people have to use kid gkoves with you it is because you have the fortitude of a child.

    • FukOui@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      That deranged child diddler is in charge of the the world’s greatest nuclear / military superpower. Anything can happen with him with a literal press of a button

      • betanumerus@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 days ago

        I’d rock his cradle until he tries to. Using that excuse as a lever against his allies would be a great new low for his supporters to think about. Spell it all out donny chump.

  • CAVOK@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    7 days ago

    I think they should be subtle about it.

    “Do you want a soda Mr Trump? I have 1-4 you here”.

  • shweddy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    83
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 days ago

    If they irritate him it might raise his blood pressure and that’s bad for someone so fucking old. Do it

  • Kintarian@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    8 days ago

    Why are all the world’s leaders kissing his ass? Why doesn’t anyone have the balls to tell him no, he’s an idiot?

    • NeilBrü@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      He is the commander-in-chief of the world’s most advanced military and second largest nuclear stockpile on Earth. Despite the United States’ economic woes, he also wields great influence over a massive trade partner with the EU.

      Until the Europeans can successfully deleverage most of their integration with the United States military and economy, the pragmatic thing to do is only pick fights where it’s absolutely necessary.

      Personally, for what it’s worth, I wouldn’t want to cede one millimeter of proverbial ground to what is clearly the worst president of all time. However, I understand the tactical decision being made.

    • 100_kg_90_de_belin@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      8 days ago

      Nuclear bombs.

      Endless military bases sprinkled around Europe.

      The capability for dealing economic damage.

      A cabinet of sycophants.

      A cult-like following.

    • matlag@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      8 days ago

      Why antagonize him while it’s much easier to appeal to him and make him sign stupid deals in your favor he wil call victories?

        • matlag@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 days ago

          If you piss him off, you get an instant tariff or “stop all relations with …” (see Spain). Agreements may not hold well, but at least you have a default way of working when he’s not having a tantrum.

    • jdr@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      7 days ago

      Well you don’t hear about all the times it prevented a world war

    • cynar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 days ago

      Ironically, it actually did its job pre WWII.

      Chamberlain realised he had fucked up. Britain didn’t have the forces to actually resist the Nazis. Appeasement was to buy them time to rearm. When the war actually started, Chamberlain fell on his proverbial sword, to give Churchill a clean slate and a functional military to work with.

      • mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        8 days ago

        the world has to learn to do without the US sooner or later. might as well be sooner.

        if they’re planning on that, then I agree with the play. if they’re not planning on that and want to continue with the US in as big a role as previously, then fuck 'em.

        of course, I don’t know which it is. but it’s obviously the right play to make meaningless moves to appease him.

      • KC_Royalz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        8 days ago

        That’s a him problem not a me problem. Also perhaps that would help getting him impeached