Why does Kurt have this sentence with NATO: Why is he saying it all over again?

In political discourse, often praised populist, Prime Minister Albin Kurti strives for several days, in several sentences, which are the same.

Of course, no one expects the prime minister to invent new English-language expressions, not banned, but other names from before the rilindians from here (the politicians are not having time), but the narrator that the prime minister is building in recent days, citing NATO's intervention in Kosovo, as a tendency to tell the most powerful military Alliance in the world, that he has not been mistaken for intervention in Kosovo, we find it very interesting.

In some of his recent speeches, at meetings in Kosovo and those in Symi, Greece, Kurti's diskurs, is led by HINAKosovo as successful economic stories under its rule, and that Kosovo is worth NATO intervention.

What is the prime minister trying to tell us?

For example, at a meeting today that Prime Minister Albin Kurti had with Some United Kingdom Parliament MPsIt says this:

“23 years later, Kosovo is the double story of success. First, the success of Western intervention and NATO to prevent Serbian genocide. And second, it's evidence that Economic development i n Quality democracy They work side by side”.

And likewise, for my sake, The prime minister spoke at Symi, Greece:

“On one side is story NATO's 1999 intervention success, to stop the Serbian genocide of the Milosevic regime, while on the other hand, it is stories of success in combining economic growth with quality democracy”.

“la is worth the intervention in Kosovo”, says Kurti.

In what situation, hypothetically, would it not have been worth it?

To NATO, there is no tendency to contest what the prime minister says, the less for us to generations that we truly know was worth it. For the success story of the international economic growth with qualitative democracy, we have our dilemmas.

Despite the statistics the government provides, referring to even international finance institutions' reports, the situation on the ground is not so good. The rise in prices, the departure of young people, does not speak of this picture of economic success in our country, that connoisseurs even criticizes Kurt when he mentions, as the increase, says connoisseur, is coming from price hikes.

The attraction of the parallel to a story that permanently changed our history (NATO's intervention) and overcoming the exciting economic development under the Kurtiʹ government, finally seems ridiculous. Especially read the lines above. When in our country, there's only electricity inmarks when the government gives out 100 euros in charities.

Repeating those kind of sentences from the prime minister somehow sounds chaotic. It may have been narrowed down to the dictionary, since besides words, a little more works are now required. /Dafina Demaku/Periscopi/