NATO standardization is pretty impressive TBH, sometimes going beyond what the commercial world has come up with. Things like the NATO common slave receptacle which makes jumper cables obsolete and allows any vehicle in any nato army to jump start any other with a simple plug instead of rummaging around to get vehicle batteries close enough to run jumper cables. Terminology is also huge, the fact that I can listen to a Spanish guy rattle away on a radio and have 0 knowledge of spanish but still understand the format of what he is saying and thus know what he needs is great.
Those were tankettes and very much WWII. WWI tanks have about 10 people inside and guns on the sides. The Poles stuck it to the Germans with tankettes.
I can't wait to see you guys talking about Warsaw pact. And specially I am eager to see your comment of its military actions such as "the friendly visit to Czechoslovakia"
It's pretty interesting that in Thunderball (1965), after SPECTRE stole the two RAF nuclear missiles, although we mostly see the MI6 at work and of course it's their agent James Bond who saves the day, it was officially a plot against the whole of NATO. (ETA: Especially seeing that the threat was that an unknown British or AMERICAN city would be nuked if the ransom wasn't paid. -- and the nearest opportune target as Bond would find out was in fact Miami.)
I enjoyed your video and would like to offer one critique, the continuous short pause to search for the correct.....lets say adjective when describing the state of something appears very artificial and forced. My solution would be just roll the one word descriptions out smoothly and or if you want to continue pausing and then pretending to find a good wholesome word then you should add some emotion and relatable facial expressions to it.
NATO today doesn't include several WP states, it includes ALL former WP states. Not even USSR itself is an exception, as the Baltics - 3 of 16 USSR republics - are in NATO too. Considering that accession to NATO typically happens by referendum this says a thing or two about WP's popularity among its members.
nice video as always guys! fun fact on the side when I was a kid and learnt about NATO I always assumed russia would join soon as this was the time when countries in eastern europe would join/where planning to join and it just seemed logical to get everyone in
After the fall of the USSR in the early 1990's, NATO nations openly communicated with and publicly offered friendship, support and trade agreements to all of the formerly-Soviet nations in Europe. Many Eastern European nations accepted Western invitations to cooperate and established trade partnerships with Western Europe, the US, and Canada. Over the years, more and more formerly-Soviet nations agreed to enter NATO and the EU. Initially, the future looked bright for Eastern Europe because Russia's more moderate and reasonable political groups managed to rest control over the government from the more hardliner, militant, and authoritarian politicians. The new Russian leaders appeared to be open to economic and other friendly cooperation with the West. NATO nations even provided large amounts of financial and other free aid to Russia *without* stipulating the aid on the ceding of Russian territory or control. For a few years it looked like Russia might become increasingly more allied with the West and NATO nations and that a peacefully united Western and Eastern Europe, including an autonomous and democratic Russia, would be achieved. Unfortunately, the Western powers didn't do quite enough to make sure that the new Russian government could maintain the integrity and fairness of its elections and democratic processes. In the extremely economically hard times of the 1990's and early 2000's in Russia, organized criminals would seize control over vast swathes of the former Soviet military arsenal and even infrastructure and sections of the government. Vladimir Putin, a former officer of the KGB, would come to be the head of the FSB (the successor organization to the KGB) which is like a combination of the American FBI, CIA, and NSA, thus with great power and political influence. Through aggressive strong-arm tactics with the resources of the military and police apparatuses of the Russian government, Putin successfully forced most of the organized crime bosses (oligarchs) to answer directly to him, and through election meddling and control over the Russian media, Putin became the President of Russia. In the last two decades, Putin has used criminal methods to alter the Russian Federation's laws to achieve close to absolute power with no clear term limits (essentially king). What happened in Russia in the 1990's to now, has been a disaster for the future prospects of world peace, unified democracies with fair elections, international economic prosperity, and civil rights in Eastern Europe. It is clear at this point that Putin wants to impose a new world order and has very similar goals to the old authoritarian leaders of the USSR, like Stalin.
I think that in the years since the making of this video and the current circumstances we find ourselves in, enough reasons have been shown as to why it still exists
Completely unrelated, but whenever I see that my name's the "V" in the NATO alphabet, I can't help but laugh. Great one as always, happy holidays, folks!
Why insult Winston Churchill that way at 1:43? Criticizing him for imperialism is fair game. But why call him an “elderly baby” after his enormous contribution to defeating the nazis? That seems petty, opinionated, and totally out of place in a historical documentary.
One of the reason Nato was formed,,,was to give the United states total control over the whole of Europe.... And bu god,,,it worked... Europe is the United states puppets... And as long as they remain that way...the United states will be powerful..... But the day Europe comes to its senses,,,it will be the end of the United states... They are only strong,,,because they control Nato... And even country that joins Nato,,,comes under the control of the United states.... And the United states loves that....that why it keep inviting more countries to join... And another thing,,,,the United states becomes richer by each country that joins Nato.... Because they have to spend 2% of their GDP on military weapons......and guess who they buy those weapons from ?
At 7:45, "the standardization of the little things of war". So pistol ammo is 9 mm but the US drags it's feet for about 40 years before switching over from .45 caliber. Leading by example (sic).
pistols are vastly less important than the fact that all rifles and machine guns run 3 types of ammo 5.56X45 7.62X51 .50BMG(12.7x99). And things like the NATO magazine which allows nearly every magazine in NATO to fit in nearly every rifle.
you need some voice editing bro.. ur voice has so much base that at times lot of words get lost in the background music.. increase the high and mid tones in Premiere or whatever studio you edit on.
There was a conflict between two NATO Members: The Cyprus Conflict in 1974 which divides the Island into two states until today. Greece sent about 2.000 soldiers as support for the cyprian troops against the turkish troops. It was against one of the basic rules of the NATO.
@@Chrizz06041980 For military assistance yes but greek militans were already in the island after british withdrawal they started to massacre the local Turks so after that you know what happend. Intresting thing in the event is how America let this. It becuse Greece had a military coup and they were closing to the Soviets. After war military goverment displaced. How the Greeks entered NATO back is much more interesting if Turkey veto the Greece to rejoin they could'nt rejoin. So how is happend after the conflict, Secretary General of Nato promised Turkey to join EU so they accept after that secretary general of nato did retired and when Turks ask about the promise for entering Eu they said it was the Joseph Luns promise and he retired. We cant do anyting about it.
@@sipahihan1 Wow. This is really blatant! I knew that in this case Turkey was the good guy and intervened to prevent further massacres of the population, but I didn't know about the subsequent trickery on the part of the other NATO members. Thank you for this hidden important detail in the story.
@@Chrizz06041980 your welcome there is no good sides in war but it happends. If you want you can find more info about the event in the internet have good day.
Why it still exists? I do not know exactly, but I do know that those standardized arms are constantly being renewed, which keeps weapon manufacturers in business. I also know that when a new member joins the equipment they have is gradually replaced with those standardized arms, so that makes new customers. When Germany reunified a large potion of the East German Soviet designed weaponry was immediately sent to Croatia. That's how they had tanks, small arms, and artillery so quickly in their war against what was left of Yugoslavia. I read that Macron in France is keen on an EU Army. Would that mean the end of NATO? France has always preferred an independent nuclear deterrent etc, so it would not surprise me if they are not so comfortable being in a NATO where the USA is boss. I think Russia is not keen on the EU in step with NATO, but I think an EU independent of it would actually have the Americans concerned more than the Russians, because it would create a political bloc more independent of the USA that could have greater influence in some regions than the EU currently has -- influence that may not coincide with the interests of the USA. I think the Russians might even prefer an EU in that form. It is US actions in the Middle East that have created the greatest threat to the continuation of the EU. Millions of refugees from Libya, Iraq and Syria especially. Open borders within the EU had people concerned that their country within the EU would be flooded with refugees, so opposition to the EU grew. US actions in the Middle East also disrupt Russia and China's project for Eurasia, which is mostly focused on commerce flowing from China to Europe via the new Silk Road etc. Trade that would foster closer political cooperation between participants along the routes, which would reduce US influence in those regions.
This video provides details on events that are not necessarily well informed. Thank you for your time, work and share 👍 Can I put it in a link in a voluntary work on the history of the revolutions in France and in the world since 1789? Cette vidéo apporte des détails sur des événements pas forcément bien renseignés. Merci pour votre temps, votre travail et le partage👍 Puis-je la mettre en lien dans un travail bénévole sur l'histoire des révolutions en France et dans le monde depuis 1789? Merci
Hey this is a great channel but I have a quibble: stop with the crazy angle shots from below-left where he isn't looking at the camera. It doesn't do anything good for the program.
Believe it or not NATO is still relevant in 2020. With a still present Russian and Chinese threat, the need for a collaborative force is vital. Tho some countries put more into it than others when others should take the treaty seriously
There is no Russian threat....that is the United states propaganda to keep western Europe afraid and therefore under its influence and control.....the United states wants to do the very thing it used to accuse the Soviets of wanting to do.. Take over the world.....but the United states cannot do so without the help of nato.... I believe you have enough intellectually to understand that the United states control Nato...Nato does not control the United states... If you don't know that,,,then you are a fool.
We needed Australia in on NATO as well, sad it didn’t happen. Also the HQ should have been in Britain, say Bristol or Liverpool, or in Newfoundland. Def. not in France, later Belgium, that really was a disaster.
Great work, as always. When you say NATO standardized to all use "the same caliber bullets" I can tell you're not thoroughly familiar with firearms - especially ammo. A 7.62x39, 7.62x25, 7.62x51 (.308), 7.62x54r, and a .30-06 are all "30 caliber." So, the Tokarev pistol and PPSH family of SMGs, the AK47/M fighting rifles, the FAL plus SCAR-H and HK91 battle rifles, and the Mosin-Nagant rifle all "use the same caliber bullet." But that doesn't mean they have interchangeable ammo! Even if they they all use the same caliber bullets, they don't use the same round! All 9mm bullets are the same caliber, but they aren't by definition the same round. 9x19mm Luger/Parabellum/NATO is not 9x18mm Makarov. Despite being the "same caliber bullet." The bullet is just the projectile, not the whole bit of ammo. Caliber is just the diameter of the bullet. Many diameters are extremely common. .45 ACP is not .45 GAP, which is not .45 LC, which is not .45-70 Govt. But they're all the same caliber bullet! What you sould would say is NATO "standardized their ammo, they agreed to all use the same round." A round is a complete self-contained cartridge of ammunition. Bullet, casing, powder, and primer. What people used to basically construct inside the gun before every single shot. I know you mean NATO decided on all using the 9x19mm round for pistols and SMGs and the 7.62x51 (.308) round for it's rifles and general purpose MGs. You just say it a way that sounds like "clip" when you mean "magazine," or "come from monkeys" when you mean "common ancestor with chimpanzees." It grates on the ear of someone familiar with these things. And really makes it sound like you don't know what you're talking about to some people (more pedantic than I). Being limited to only FMJ bullets (regardless of caliber) is older than NATO. And it is a practice I have legitimate tactical and terminal ballistics reasons for despising as stupid hypocrisy... I'd also hardly call such things the "small things" of war. IMHO war is decided by countless individual nameless platoons and companies where metal meets the meat, not by planes and tanks. Americans had the best small arms of WW2 and most had good reputations (some are still used today, see Travis Haley on the 1911 for more info), the Japanese had the worst and nearly all their firearms were pretty junky. It made a difference in the Pacific campaign. Ridiculously complicated ammo requirements for all their weapons had a marked impact on their war effort and combat performance. The Japanese just didn't have a strong cultural basis for firearms or understanding of them. They had Nambu as a designer - the US had Browning! And Garand... Watching Japanese soldiers (and those of most nations...) in old WW2 footage, I noticed as a teen that my traditional 4 position shooting positions were far more solid and consistent than theirs. They would never pass the rifle marksmanship qualifications for the US Marines. For more info on how small arms and their ammo being noticeably bad vs. noticeably good affects history: ruclips.net/video/W6peJ0ur4jY/видео.html ruclips.net/video/TlTqZ858Muc/видео.html PS Using Axis and Allies for "joint war gaming" lolz good one
Your point on terminology is spot on. Same with ballistics and ammo use restrictions, which are holier than Swiss cheese and lack significant signatories at any rate. But you are so wrong about the (interwar) 6.5x50mm Arisaka Type 38 short rifle; that thing operates smoothly and doesn't tenderize your shoulder like .30-06 or 7.92x57mm Mauser, having a nice flat trajectory like 6.5x55mm Swedish Mauser and letting you carry more ammo. The 7.7x58mm Arisaka Type 99 made to replace it is similar to Mauser 98k models though; many late-war specimens were crude products of desperation.
Why is NATO still in place? Well, the situation in Europe is pretty unstable still. For a while it wasn't , after the fall of the USSR. Yeltsin's Russia sure came a long way in improving relations with the west, but, no great progress was done in terms of a slow and progressive multilateral nuclear disarmament. So, a dismantlement made no sense. Russia thought keeping a huge nuclear arsenal was paramount to protect her from another Barbarossa, on her huge and open european plains, and the ex-SSRs that were forced into the USSR, like the baltic states thought and still think they are safe from being re-annexed by Russia, under the umbrella of NATO. Militarily weaker smaller countries like Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Romania, saw in NATO membership the possibility of keeping their independence and self determination from foreign aggressors, or forced unholy aliances under autoritarian regimes. What happened recently in the Crimea and the Donbass, surely reaffirms the self preservation and survival instincts of several NATO members in eastern europe, so one can bet that NATO will still be around for a long long time.
Yes, agree - and we need to extend the Alliance to coopt India, but by doing so we risk ending up in a pre WWI scenario, where 2 global blocks are having a stand off.
I've never liked the term, 'capitalist west'. The reason I supported the west rather than the east was not because the west was capitalist but because it was democratic, (sort of). Plenty of socialist democracies were a part of NATO. Now the US was definitely capitalist and it was the driving force behind all of this. And it wasn't purely democratic either, at least prior to the passing of the Civil Rights bill. One can always show undemocratic features of erstwhile democracies. But it was considerably more democratic than any of the member nations of the Warsaw Pact. Otherwise I really like your channel. It's very informative!
Why are you showing World War one footage to talk about European military post world war two.? It seem like a cheap shot, Yes true the British and French need to be rebuilt. But that true for the US ARMY as well.
With Ukraine 2014 I can see why it still exists as they’ve 180 on their opinion of NATO along with EU. Really I think it will always have a place in some form as there will always be a country like Russia.
In all fairness to NATO still existing, recall that they have been rebuffed by Russia in them joining forces. "Great powers don't join coalitions, they create coalitions. Russia considers itself a great power."-Dmitry Rogozin, former Russian Representative to NATO. This post has not been filled I believe since 2018 though the NATO-Russia Council had a meeting October of 2018. Since the 2014 invasion of Ukraine though has strained this relationship almost to the breaking point.
anyone seen the map where NATO complains that Russia has their bases too close to NATOS bases and the map basiclly shows NATO Bases surrounding Russia XD
@@dragosstanciu9866 Map stinks of fake and misleading. Most of those bases aren't anywhere near Russia (seriously how is a NATO base in Somalia a threat to Russia?), nor do they include Russian military bases in those same countries.
![[DOKKAN BATTLE] Worldwide Campaign Announcement Video Part 2!](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/JpT5Voak6WA/mqdefault.jpg)
9:20 A Futurama reference on The Cold War channel? My day is complete.
ah I see
I'm just... h**kers? Really? I've gotta assume that's to frustrate algorithmic demonetization, but yeesh.
Best episode was when Bender became human. Change my mind
Black Jack and hookers!!!
Axis and Allies Global and a Fallout New Vegas reference , well done Cold War Channel.
What Fallout New Vegas reference? I did not see any. Care to illuminate me?
@@nairpic7360 The "blackjack and hookers" comment. It was from a meme about fallout new Vegas from way back when.
I guess it was actually Futurama but it was on a meme for Fallout so that's what i attributed it to.
@@mr.moustachos4701 That is why I did not see it. Because it is a Futurama meme. Or at least its most famous variation is from there.
NATO standardization is pretty impressive TBH, sometimes going beyond what the commercial world has come up with. Things like the NATO common slave receptacle which makes jumper cables obsolete and allows any vehicle in any nato army to jump start any other with a simple plug instead of rummaging around to get vehicle batteries close enough to run jumper cables.
Terminology is also huge, the fact that I can listen to a Spanish guy rattle away on a radio and have 0 knowledge of spanish but still understand the format of what he is saying and thus know what he needs is great.
9:20 Don't forget their glorious commander Zapp Brannigan, uh I mean Georgy Zhukov.
Beautifully written and edited! My 4A senior English class were engaged!
I just realised: Whiskey Tango Foxtrot spells out WTF😂😂
Haha- I have a sweat shirt with GOLF FOXTROT YANKEE. Few get it but the ones that do laugh.
Joe B GFY?
I don’t get it
Loved this video. it was a truly informative one. I loved that. My compliments to all those who made this video a reality.
The World War I tank footage seemed out of place.
I know right? I was like: "What the hell guys?"
Those were tankettes and very much WWII. WWI tanks have about 10 people inside and guns on the sides. The Poles stuck it to the Germans with tankettes.
@@cptrelentless80085 no those were ww1 tanks. The last ones were ft17s.
"so anyways here's the mark IV we've used to scare of the commies from attacking us"
9:20 Bender started a military alliance?
When I listened it was bleeped out. Bite my shiny metal ass!
@@stevepettersen3283 the world must learn of our peaceful ways. By force!
I can't wait to see you guys talking about Warsaw pact. And specially I am eager to see your comment of its military actions such as "the friendly visit to Czechoslovakia"
Happy 2020 David and The Cold War crew.
Last time I was this early, David was mentioning WW2
It's pretty interesting that in Thunderball (1965), after SPECTRE stole the two RAF nuclear missiles, although we mostly see the MI6 at work and of course it's their agent James Bond who saves the day, it was officially a plot against the whole of NATO. (ETA: Especially seeing that the threat was that an unknown British or AMERICAN city would be nuked if the ransom wasn't paid. -- and the nearest opportune target as Bond would find out was in fact Miami.)
8:53 Putin has such a poor seat on that horse. Ah well, at least he's wearing a shirt.
He is manly man who protect Russia, please vote for him, don't worry, you already have.
I enjoyed your video and would like to offer one critique, the continuous short pause to search for the correct.....lets say adjective when describing the state of something appears very artificial and forced.
My solution would be just roll the one word descriptions out smoothly and or if you want to continue pausing and then pretending to find a good wholesome word then you should add some emotion and relatable facial expressions to it.
10:16 - thats a swedish visby class corvette, sweden isnt even a member of nato (officially at least)
3:44 - 4:06 WWI footage
3:44 to 4:05 is footage from WWI lol:)
Can`t wait till you do the Warsaw Pact :-)
Caught up on the Cold War now. Now to wait for upcoming episodes. 👍👍👍
NATO today doesn't include several WP states, it includes ALL former WP states. Not even USSR itself is an exception, as the Baltics - 3 of 16 USSR republics - are in NATO too.
Considering that accession to NATO typically happens by referendum this says a thing or two about WP's popularity among its members.
America and everybody else at this point
Great content as always
You should do Luxembourg or the Benelux countries in the cold war.
@9:20 "...started their own military alliance with blackjack and hookers.." What the heck did I just hear?
nice video as always guys!
fun fact on the side when I was a kid and learnt about NATO I always assumed russia would join soon as this was the time when countries in eastern europe would join/where planning to join and it just seemed logical to get everyone in
After the fall of the USSR in the early 1990's, NATO nations openly communicated with and publicly offered friendship, support and trade agreements to all of the formerly-Soviet nations in Europe. Many Eastern European nations accepted Western invitations to cooperate and established trade partnerships with Western Europe, the US, and Canada. Over the years, more and more formerly-Soviet nations agreed to enter NATO and the EU. Initially, the future looked bright for Eastern Europe because Russia's more moderate and reasonable political groups managed to rest control over the government from the more hardliner, militant, and authoritarian politicians. The new Russian leaders appeared to be open to economic and other friendly cooperation with the West. NATO nations even provided large amounts of financial and other free aid to Russia *without* stipulating the aid on the ceding of Russian territory or control. For a few years it looked like Russia might become increasingly more allied with the West and NATO nations and that a peacefully united Western and Eastern Europe, including an autonomous and democratic Russia, would be achieved.
Unfortunately, the Western powers didn't do quite enough to make sure that the new Russian government could maintain the integrity and fairness of its elections and democratic processes. In the extremely economically hard times of the 1990's and early 2000's in Russia, organized criminals would seize control over vast swathes of the former Soviet military arsenal and even infrastructure and sections of the government.
Vladimir Putin, a former officer of the KGB, would come to be the head of the FSB (the successor organization to the KGB) which is like a combination of the American FBI, CIA, and NSA, thus with great power and political influence. Through aggressive strong-arm tactics with the resources of the military and police apparatuses of the Russian government, Putin successfully forced most of the organized crime bosses (oligarchs) to answer directly to him, and through election meddling and control over the Russian media, Putin became the President of Russia. In the last two decades, Putin has used criminal methods to alter the Russian Federation's laws to achieve close to absolute power with no clear term limits (essentially king). What happened in Russia in the 1990's to now, has been a disaster for the future prospects of world peace, unified democracies with fair elections, international economic prosperity, and civil rights in Eastern Europe. It is clear at this point that Putin wants to impose a new world order and has very similar goals to the old authoritarian leaders of the USSR, like Stalin.
The cold war it's so coplex that we haven't leave de 40's yet 😓, nice video guys 👍🏼
I think that in the years since the making of this video and the current circumstances we find ourselves in, enough reasons have been shown as to why it still exists
Hello, Evil me
That futurama reference though...
You are better than Nydell now
Following this channel from its start, it's amazing, and definitely deserves for subscribers. Thank you for your work.🙏
Completely unrelated, but whenever I see that my name's the "V" in the NATO alphabet, I can't help but laugh.
Great one as always, happy holidays, folks!
Truman should have started with and built up “Five Eyes” as the absolute core of defense. Well it sort of is, but we still miss Australia in NATO.
Why insult Winston Churchill that way at 1:43? Criticizing him for imperialism is fair game. But why call him an “elderly baby” after his enormous contribution to defeating the nazis? That seems petty, opinionated, and totally out of place in a historical documentary.
Agreed. I didn't like that.
Amazing stuff bro
Good stuff - thanks for posting!
Please make a video about Korea!
3:45 why is there footage from WW1 and post WW1 when talking about post WW2? Just thought it looked a little funny. Otherwise great video
Happy New Year everyone!
10:05 - Hey it's 10% of the canadian military
I like that these get less and less formal as the series goes on
One of the reason Nato was formed,,,was to give the United states total control over the whole of Europe....
And bu god,,,it worked...
Europe is the United states puppets...
And as long as they remain that way...the United states will be powerful.....
But the day Europe comes to its senses,,,it will be the end of the United states...
They are only strong,,,because they control Nato...
And even country that joins Nato,,,comes under the control of the United states....
And the United states loves that....that why it keep inviting more countries to join...
And another thing,,,,the United states becomes richer by each country that joins Nato....
Because they have to spend 2% of their GDP on military weapons......and guess who they buy those weapons from ?
At 7:45, "the standardization of the little things of war". So pistol ammo is 9 mm but the US drags it's feet for about 40 years before switching over from .45 caliber. Leading by example (sic).
pistols are vastly less important than the fact that all rifles and machine guns run 3 types of ammo 5.56X45 7.62X51 .50BMG(12.7x99). And things like the NATO magazine which allows nearly every magazine in NATO to fit in nearly every rifle.
@@nilloc93 One example of many NATO needs to work on. I doubt the soldier who is assigned a pistol thinks they are vastly less important.
David I want you to know I said that Futurama reference on my own at the exact same time you did thinking, "Would be cool if they did too." And bam.
Great work
@The Cold War will you update your set (and the leader pictures) as you move on in the timeline of the decades?
We will.
Why do you use the pre WW2 map of Yugoslavia in post WW2 animations?
Can you guys do an episode on de-stalinization
you need some voice editing bro.. ur voice has so much base that at times lot of words get lost in the background music.. increase the high and mid tones in Premiere or whatever studio you edit on.
There was a conflict between two NATO Members: The Cyprus Conflict in 1974 which divides the Island into two states until today. Greece sent about 2.000 soldiers as support for the cyprian troops against the turkish troops. It was against one of the basic rules of the NATO.
Actually that time Greece wasnt in the nato because of the military coup. they rejoin after the conflict
@@sipahihan1 Greece left the NATO specially for the reason that they could counter attack Turkey. You're right.
@@Chrizz06041980 For military assistance yes but greek militans were already in the island after british withdrawal they started to massacre the local Turks so after that you know what happend. Intresting thing in the event is how America let this. It becuse Greece had a military coup and they were closing to the Soviets.
After war military goverment displaced. How the Greeks entered NATO back is much more interesting if Turkey veto the Greece to rejoin they could'nt rejoin. So how is happend after the conflict, Secretary General of Nato promised Turkey to join EU so they accept after that secretary general of nato did retired and when Turks ask about the promise for entering Eu they said it was the Joseph Luns promise and he retired. We cant do anyting about it.
@@sipahihan1 Wow. This is really blatant! I knew that in this case Turkey was the good guy and intervened to prevent further massacres of the population, but I didn't know about the subsequent trickery on the part of the other NATO members. Thank you for this hidden important detail in the story.
@@Chrizz06041980 your welcome there is no good sides in war but it happends. If you want you can find more info about the event in the internet have good day.
Why it still exists? I do not know exactly, but I do know that those standardized arms are constantly being renewed, which keeps weapon manufacturers in business. I also know that when a new member joins the equipment they have is gradually replaced with those standardized arms, so that makes new customers. When Germany reunified a large potion of the East German Soviet designed weaponry was immediately sent to Croatia. That's how they had tanks, small arms, and artillery so quickly in their war against what was left of Yugoslavia.
I read that Macron in France is keen on an EU Army. Would that mean the end of NATO? France has always preferred an independent nuclear deterrent etc, so it would not surprise me if they are not so comfortable being in a NATO where the USA is boss. I think Russia is not keen on the EU in step with NATO, but I think an EU independent of it would actually have the Americans concerned more than the Russians, because it would create a political bloc more independent of the USA that could have greater influence in some regions than the EU currently has -- influence that may not coincide with the interests of the USA. I think the Russians might even prefer an EU in that form.
It is US actions in the Middle East that have created the greatest threat to the continuation of the EU. Millions of refugees from Libya, Iraq and Syria especially. Open borders within the EU had people concerned that their country within the EU would be flooded with refugees, so opposition to the EU grew. US actions in the Middle East also disrupt Russia and China's project for Eurasia, which is mostly focused on commerce flowing from China to Europe via the new Silk Road etc. Trade that would foster closer political cooperation between participants along the routes, which would reduce US influence in those regions.
9:08 - I guess we can drop the “sort of” part now.
what is the name of the song at the end?
This video provides details on events that are not necessarily well informed.
Thank you for your time, work and share 👍
Can I put it in a link in a voluntary work on the history of the revolutions in France and in the world since 1789?
Cette vidéo apporte des détails sur des événements pas forcément bien renseignés.
Merci pour votre temps, votre travail et le partage👍
Puis-je la mettre en lien dans un travail bénévole sur l'histoire des révolutions en France et dans le monde depuis 1789? Merci
Why are they using WW1 footage
Hey this is a great channel but I have a quibble: stop with the crazy angle shots from below-left where he isn't looking at the camera. It doesn't do anything good for the program.
Elderly baby!! 😆😆 This guy's got jokes..
BLACKJACK!!!!
I don’t comment much but this was well deserving. 😊 carry on Cold War team
1:33 What a weird map Soviet Union was Russia . What do you insinuate ?
NATO not invading other countries, wow I always though it was ment to do exactly that.
They just beeped out blackjack but not hookers? Why'd they beep anything out?
Believe it or not NATO is still relevant in 2020. With a still present Russian and Chinese threat, the need for a collaborative force is vital.
Tho some countries put more into it than others when others should take the treaty seriously
There is no Russian threat....that is the United states propaganda to keep western Europe afraid and therefore under its influence and control.....the United states wants to do the very thing it used to accuse the Soviets of wanting to do..
Take over the world.....but the United states cannot do so without the help of nato....
I believe you have enough intellectually to understand that the United states control Nato...Nato does not control the United states...
If you don't know that,,,then you are a fool.
10:05 Oh Canada
Who
What was beeped out????
"Elderly baby and colonization enthusiast" made me laugh.
10:16That’s is a Visby-class corvette of the Swedish 🇸🇪 Royal Navy, Sweden who is NOT an NATO-member!
Its not NATO member BUT its a NATO partner ...
Miroslav Antonín that also
"Why is it still around?" 😅😅
10:20 oh the irony
Talking about NATO and use footage of Swedish Visby-class stealth corvette Karlstad (10:13).
Sweden is not part of NATO.
Can you do a video of US policy in apartheid South Africa during the cold war?
good
Belgium yeah
Good.
Now what about the major Governmental organizations of the two superpowers in the cold war?
We got the CIA, KGB, NASA, and the Soviet Space Program.
What happened to the Philippines after WW2?
Became independent why?
We needed Australia in on NATO as well, sad it didn’t happen. Also the HQ should have been in Britain, say Bristol or Liverpool, or in Newfoundland. Def. not in France, later Belgium, that really was a disaster.
Since the United States created and run NATO. Washington should of been the capital since thats where it started and the power is held.
casus belli for war haha
Great work, as always.
When you say NATO standardized to all use "the same caliber bullets" I can tell you're not thoroughly familiar with firearms - especially ammo. A 7.62x39, 7.62x25, 7.62x51 (.308), 7.62x54r, and a .30-06 are all "30 caliber." So, the Tokarev pistol and PPSH family of SMGs, the AK47/M fighting rifles, the FAL plus SCAR-H and HK91 battle rifles, and the Mosin-Nagant rifle all "use the same caliber bullet." But that doesn't mean they have interchangeable ammo! Even if they they all use the same caliber bullets, they don't use the same round! All 9mm bullets are the same caliber, but they aren't by definition the same round. 9x19mm Luger/Parabellum/NATO is not 9x18mm Makarov. Despite being the "same caliber bullet."
The bullet is just the projectile, not the whole bit of ammo. Caliber is just the diameter of the bullet. Many diameters are extremely common. .45 ACP is not .45 GAP, which is not .45 LC, which is not .45-70 Govt. But they're all the same caliber bullet!
What you sould would say is NATO "standardized their ammo, they agreed to all use the same round." A round is a complete self-contained cartridge of ammunition. Bullet, casing, powder, and primer. What people used to basically construct inside the gun before every single shot.
I know you mean NATO decided on all using the 9x19mm round for pistols and SMGs and the 7.62x51 (.308) round for it's rifles and general purpose MGs. You just say it a way that sounds like "clip" when you mean "magazine," or "come from monkeys" when you mean "common ancestor with chimpanzees." It grates on the ear of someone familiar with these things. And really makes it sound like you don't know what you're talking about to some people (more pedantic than I).
Being limited to only FMJ bullets (regardless of caliber) is older than NATO. And it is a practice I have legitimate tactical and terminal ballistics reasons for despising as stupid hypocrisy...
I'd also hardly call such things the "small things" of war. IMHO war is decided by countless individual nameless platoons and companies where metal meets the meat, not by planes and tanks. Americans had the best small arms of WW2 and most had good reputations (some are still used today, see Travis Haley on the 1911 for more info), the Japanese had the worst and nearly all their firearms were pretty junky. It made a difference in the Pacific campaign. Ridiculously complicated ammo requirements for all their weapons had a marked impact on their war effort and combat performance. The Japanese just didn't have a strong cultural basis for firearms or understanding of them. They had Nambu as a designer - the US had Browning! And Garand...
Watching Japanese soldiers (and those of most nations...) in old WW2 footage, I noticed as a teen that my traditional 4 position shooting positions were far more solid and consistent than theirs. They would never pass the rifle marksmanship qualifications for the US Marines.
For more info on how small arms and their ammo being noticeably bad vs. noticeably good affects history: ruclips.net/video/W6peJ0ur4jY/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/TlTqZ858Muc/видео.html
PS Using Axis and Allies for "joint war gaming" lolz good one
Your point on terminology is spot on. Same with ballistics and ammo use restrictions, which are holier than Swiss cheese and lack significant signatories at any rate.
But you are so wrong about the (interwar) 6.5x50mm Arisaka Type 38 short rifle; that thing operates smoothly and doesn't tenderize your shoulder like .30-06 or 7.92x57mm Mauser, having a nice flat trajectory like 6.5x55mm Swedish Mauser and letting you carry more ammo.
The 7.7x58mm Arisaka Type 99 made to replace it is similar to Mauser 98k models though; many late-war specimens were crude products of desperation.
Putin sure inherited the same paranoia Stalin had
The original treaty included Algeria as part of French territory covered by Article 5.
is this channel part of the great war group?
No, they are part of the kings and generals channel.
Why is NATO still in place? Well, the situation in Europe is pretty unstable still.
For a while it wasn't , after the fall of the USSR. Yeltsin's Russia sure came a long way in improving relations with the west, but, no great progress was done in terms of a slow and progressive multilateral nuclear disarmament. So, a dismantlement made no sense. Russia thought keeping a huge nuclear arsenal was paramount to protect her from another Barbarossa, on her huge and open european plains, and the ex-SSRs that were forced into the USSR, like the baltic states thought and still think they are safe from being re-annexed by Russia, under the umbrella of NATO. Militarily weaker smaller countries like Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Romania, saw in NATO membership the possibility of keeping their independence and self determination from foreign aggressors, or forced unholy aliances under autoritarian regimes. What happened recently in the Crimea and the Donbass, surely reaffirms the self preservation and survival instincts of several NATO members in eastern europe, so one can bet that NATO will still be around for a long long time.
With Russia slowly coming back into prominence and China making alarming expansions NATO is more important now than ever.
The NATO soon will be found in war with the "orient"
Maybe not this decade, but soon the world will feel to a already wanted war
@@dragosstanciu9866 but a war will happen, is just a matter of time
@@dragosstanciu9866 Fighting will definitely be regional, but resources from around the world will be poured into said region.
@@dragosstanciu9866 you may be familiar with the Vietnam and Korean wars
Yes, agree - and we need to extend the Alliance to coopt India, but by doing so we risk ending up in a pre WWI scenario, where 2 global blocks are having a stand off.
Talk about 1948 treaty, show WW1 tanks, wat.
10:23 Russia: *invades Ukraine and annexes Crimea*
NATO and EU: Wut the dog doin?'👀
I've never liked the term, 'capitalist west'. The reason I supported the west rather than the east was not because the west was capitalist but because it was democratic, (sort of). Plenty of socialist democracies were a part of NATO. Now the US was definitely capitalist and it was the driving force behind all of this. And it wasn't purely democratic either, at least prior to the passing of the Civil Rights bill. One can always show undemocratic features of erstwhile democracies. But it was considerably more democratic than any of the member nations of the Warsaw Pact. Otherwise I really like your channel. It's very informative!
Why the elderly baby comment about Churchill? Was it meant to be a joke?
I was named after Dwight D. Eisenhower.
Wrong. You were named after Dwight Schrute.
@@citynightslikethese -- No, but like Schrute I was a helluva salesman before I retired.
@@Dr.Pepper001 FALSE.
Bears
Beets
Battlestar Gallactica
@@citynightslikethese -- Oh well hell, I should have known. You're City Nights.
wait, why wont you tell us why is NATO still arround?
@@res3382 that didn't age well
@@flyingpeter what did he say?
@@darthimperius8057 I think that they were referring to Ukraine.
Why is NATO still around? Because friendship is magic and crap tends to hit the fan right after you stop preparing for it.
Why it still exists? Because it bloody works...
Why are you showing World War one footage to talk about European military post world war two.? It seem like a cheap shot, Yes true the British and French need to be rebuilt. But that true for the US ARMY as well.
Why WOULDNT NATO still be around? The threat is that was present then is present now.
Anyone ever told you to sit on your hands?
“Imagine you’re a capitalist sympathizer-“
You lost me there chief
17 angry russians disliked video
Looks like popular demand is for a video on the Warsaw pact. ( If this is a democracy)
Otherwise you can all pound borscht !
With Ukraine 2014 I can see why it still exists as they’ve 180 on their opinion of NATO along with EU. Really I think it will always have a place in some form as there will always be a country like Russia.
Well this was prescient…
What do you mean by that,,troll ?
In all fairness to NATO still existing, recall that they have been rebuffed by Russia in them joining forces. "Great powers don't join coalitions, they create coalitions. Russia considers itself a great power."-Dmitry Rogozin, former Russian Representative to NATO. This post has not been filled I believe since 2018 though the NATO-Russia Council had a meeting October of 2018. Since the 2014 invasion of Ukraine though has strained this relationship almost to the breaking point.
10:06 🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦
Wooow when you think they gonna speak truth on channel but u get this......... Im speachless
Not quite Kings and Generals quality.
anyone seen the map where NATO complains that Russia has their bases too close to NATOS bases and the map basiclly shows NATO Bases surrounding Russia XD
@@dragosstanciu9866 Map stinks of fake and misleading. Most of those bases aren't anywhere near Russia (seriously how is a NATO base in Somalia a threat to Russia?), nor do they include Russian military bases in those same countries.
Kings and Generals be like: time to rip off every other history channel's format
You can't say hookers?