> From a Greek perspective, he's not wrong. Germany forced Greece's hand and made them take out a loans they could not pay rather then let them default on their loans as many bankrupt countries are wont to do.
That statement is patently wrong in many ways.
Greece asked the EU and the IMF for help as their long accounting con finally blew in the greek state's face.
Greece benefitted from a huge debt pardon which vanished about half of the nation's sovereign debt.
The emergency loans that Greece asked for were well below market rate and, more importantly, were actually accomplishable, as back then no one in the world wanted to loan billions th a bankrupt state.
And finally defaulting on debt would be disastrous to Greece. Greek governments were piling >10% deficits that were financed through loan after loan. If Greece defaulted then their access to credit would be cut immediately as no one in the world would be willing to lend them the billions they needed and risk not getting their money back. That meant Greece would be forced to cut their >10% deficit overnight, including also the effect of a major recession that would eclipse the one they actually had to endure. If the soft multi-year transition to self sustainable spending provided by the IMF/ECB/EU emergency loans and bailout program was harsh, what would a radical spending cut made overnight be?