Pre-NATO Sweden felt it could effectively coordinate its military response with its direct NATO neighbors if it was attacked by Russia. Finland for years ran a delicate diplomatic dance with the Soviet Union having been a former province of Imperial Russia & a member of the Axis in WWII, so wasn’t in NATO or the Warsaw Pact as a compromise and so ran its own military defence policy. Both changed when Russia decided aggressive wars of conquest were back in fashion in 2022. This led to the tripling of Russia’s land border with NATO and a complete lock for NATO on the Baltic Sea and a major restriction of Russia’s military operation in war of 25% of its direct routes to the open Oceans. And that was all Putin’s fault, it was a direct consequence of his invasion of Ukraine where he made Russia’s geopolitical situation worse and he’s been doing it for decades. Putin’s invasion of Ukraine has lost Russia allies in Armenia, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, reversed their position with China, antagonised South Korea, lost the most lucrative gas market on the Russian doorstep in the EU and on, and on. The war has been a really bad deal for Russia and Ukraine joining NATO is now being discussed in detail not just hypothetically as before.
I almost never comment videos. The Johnny video was an exception, and so is this one. As a Finn, living next door to a bad neighbor I have trouble seeing much issues in joining NATO.
@@drmodestoesq Read his comment more closely. He said he has "trouble seeing much issues" with it, which means he is generally in favor. I would have expected stronger words from a Finn, but there's his statement.
You people clearly don't seem to understand that it DOESN'T MATTER how NATO expands. You can sugarcoat it in any volume of bureaucratic procedures as you wish, but what matters in geopolitics is WHAT exists and not WHY it exists. Any military alliance (or security alliance) represents a component of power, which by its mere existence can upset the balance of power in any region. If you would think about the processes that happen within a General Staff of any major country, Generals neither care nor should care whose political will it was to create borders in any particular configuration on the world map. The job of the top brass of Generals is to look at what exists, identify potential future threats to national security, and design plans to counter those threats. It matters as little to Russian Generals why NATO is moving closer to Russian borders, as it would matter little to American Generals why Russia would be placing missiles on Cuba that could reach US major cities within minutes. Neither Russian military elite, nor American military elite would ever allow such imbalance of power on their borders. What matters to Russia, is that the US uses the exact same Realist mindset when it comes to securing USA's mainland via the Monroe Doctrine, but denies Russia the right to establish similar security guarantees for itself - by playing on "open door policy" manipulative maneuvering. This puts Russia at a further (and unfair) disadvantage against its main overseas adversary, by creating a window for the Americans to enjoy unbalanced deterrence against Russia on Russia's borders. The US perfectly understands that it is at fault for the war in Ukraine, but it will do everything it can to shift the blame towards Russia - because doing so fits well into the US policy of aggressive posturing towards Russia and China. (playing dangerous games within their neighbourhoods)
It's easy to hate all russians with what's going on but I still feel sorry for those who know the truth and who are trapped and oppressed by Putin. They must feel like the rest of the world is against them eventhough they are with the rest of the world. Stay strong and do what you can to spread the truth without putting yourself too much in danger
I’d get out, man. Go to Europe or the U.S. if you can. You could try arguing you’re a refugee since you’re against the Russian government (thus your life might be in danger).
Central European countries. See the Vistula and Danube watersheds; not the Don and Volga. To continue referring to them as Eastern confirms a containing Kremlin overlordship
You people clearly don't seem to understand that it DOESN'T MATTER how NATO expands. You can sugarcoat it in any volume of bureaucratic procedures as you wish, but what matters in geopolitics is WHAT exists and not WHY it exists. Any military alliance (or security alliance) represents a component of power, which by its mere existence can upset the balance of power in any region. If you would think about the processes that happen within a General Staff of any major country, Generals neither care nor should care whose political will it was to create borders in any particular configuration on the world map. The job of the top brass of Generals is to look at what exists, identify potential future threats to national security, and design plans to counter those threats. It matters as little to Russian Generals why NATO is moving closer to Russian borders, as it would matter little to American Generals why Russia would be placing missiles on Cuba that could reach US major cities within minutes. Neither Russian military elite, nor American military elite would ever allow such imbalance of power on their borders. What matters to Russia, is that the US uses the exact same Realist mindset when it comes to securing USA's mainland via the Monroe Doctrine, but denies Russia the right to establish similar security guarantees for itself - by playing on "open door policy" manipulative maneuvering. This puts Russia at a further (and unfair) disadvantage against its main overseas adversary, by creating a window for the Americans to enjoy unbalanced deterrence against Russia on Russia's borders. The US perfectly understands that it is at fault for the war in Ukraine, but it will do everything it can to shift the blame towards Russia - because doing so fits well into the US policy of aggressive posturing towards Russia and China. (playing dangerous games within their neighbourhoods)
@@anti_1984 nonsense. If the encroachment of NATO was such a threat to the security of Russia, why was there zero reaction when Finland was accepted? The only reason they and Sweden APPLIED for membership in the first place was to join a joint protection alliance against the only potential adversary who attacked Ukraine. Are you so dense as to point the finger at the US for being the catalyst for Russian aggression against Ukraine? Do the people of Ukraine not have a say in this and with whom they wish to build alliances? Ukrainians have not had a happy relationship with their former masters and are fighting for their very existence. They gave up their nukes in 1994 and had a tiny military, posing no threat whatsoever to anyone. The Budapest Memorandum required Ukraine to denuclearize and in return get assurances of territorial integrity by Russia. The US nor anyone else was installing missiles in Ukraine pointed at Moscow, so your Cuba reference makes no sense. At this point and going forward Ukraine will do everything possible to join NATO, maintain a robust military capability and even restore nuclear capability. You also seem fixated on painting this as a Russia vs US geopolitical battle and have completely missed mentioning European nations which have Russia on THEIR doorstep. Do they not appear on your map? If Russia were to annex Poland, would this again be the fault of the US?
Thank you so much for making this video! Johnny Harris has been grifting for a while now. I was born in Dagestan (now US citizen) and my parents watch Russian news and the amount of complete and utter lies Russian media spreads about Europe and the US is just unbelievable. It feels cartoony but it’s real. Western progressives (I am one but critical of my own) think it’s cool to go against the grain and blame the US for every major problem and while the US certainly made its mistakes geopolitically, Russia is an empire interested in further expansion and it imposes its will on weaker countries that cannot stand up to it. Russian citizens live poorly, and the Russian government hordes money to Putin and his oligarchs. Instead of running a government for its people, the Russian government exports all Russian problems to the US and blames anyone but themselves. They are some of the richest people in the world, hoarding wealth and sending indigenous minorities to war to kill Ukrainians.
well said! Russian politicians/propagandists spread lies about the West, meanwhile open bank accounts abroad to keep their corrupt money in USD & EUR, go on vacations in Southern Europe and send their children to study in the Western Universities....god level of hypocrisy
Thank you for this! It's shameful to excuse any of Russia's aggression with appealing to a NATO expansion argument. Every single nation that joined NATO wanted to join and did so enthusiastically. They also did so to protect themselves from the very situation that Ukraine finds itself in today. Saying the US expanding NATO removed the agency of each of those countries who did so for extremely rational reasons. There was never an agreement to not expand NATO eastward, there was an agreement to keep NATO forces out of what was formerly East Germany and that has been upheld.
Tried explaining this to the right wing conspiracy theorists at my job site here in Canada, literally nothing I said to them changed their minds. Russian propaganda is so effective and strong it’s scary.
@@walktherockies-withzach.3125 and here I was hoping that people in Canada were all normal, rational thinkers. Trumpthink has infiltrated every country now. :(
@@walktherockies-withzach.3125 Jake Broe has an excellent 30 min video that completely explains the full historic context with maps and visuals dispelling "the NATO Expansion is a lie" (title of segment) highly recommend for anyone that is at all open to learn.
Johnny saw his fault, pulled down the video, apologized and he's plannig to redo the video with a broadwr perspective. Your critic is valuable and will definately help greatly i making this story much informative.
@@RIP212I meant his general attitude. Today he publisheda clip with CIA's secret prisons. I never saw him speaking about russians or chinese secret prisons and all their atrocities.
@@DoctorCipmaybe because nobody is as good at it as the US? Secret prisons in other countries where they torture citizens of other countries with NOTHING to do with the US. China and Russia do horrible things, but nowhere near the US’ level
As someone born on the unfortunate side of the iron curtain the thing that irks me the most is the notion that NATO somehow expanded East. All of us former subjects of the soviet empire ran West. And not just NATO, EU as well. Russia was weak it was our chance. We took it. And even back then there was understanding that the clock was ticking. This is not a USA story this is a European story.
Good summary of US-Russia history. Too often things are framed as the US expanding and Russia being forced to react. It's an argument Russians and Pro Russia Americans like but why is it okay to essentially sacrifice Eastern Europe to an openly hostile neighbour that operates in bad faith and has been dedicated to screwing with every Western country as much as it could get away with for over a decade now. There was a time when Russia was in the G8 and most would argue that a lot of countries including Germany bought into/depended on Russian energy far longer than they should have given the behaviour. Even America until Biden has been very lenient to Russia. Obama famously dismissed Romney considering them a threat in 2012 and Trump was desperate to be Putin's friend. Putin brought the backlash on himself.
Right! Democrats laughed at George W and Romney when each at one point mentioned Russia as an adversary and accused them of still living in the cold war.
@@MikeChats-v9r Didn't George W Bush say he looked Putin in the eye and saw he was trustworthy? Granted, that was at a press conference with Putin beside him, but still... I thought W was pro Putin. But yeah, Romney was laughed at when he said Russia was a threat.
@@banditski Bush actually visited my country and at the very least was very pro us getting closer to Europe and joining NATO (grand majority of population wants to join EU and get away from Kremlin sphere of influence, that’s true today as well). Especially after our color revolution. If I’m not wrong, we named a street after him too (since- not many people necessarily care/acknowledge us) Obama and Merkel on the other hand… and later western politicians like Trump? *Who the devil thought it was a good idea to be best buds with Russia and sacrifice three countries for the sake of “peace” and trade of which neither exist anymore*
You people clearly don't seem to understand that it DOESN'T MATTER how NATO expands. You can sugarcoat it in any volume of bureaucratic procedures as you wish, but what matters in geopolitics is WHAT exists and not WHY it exists. Any military alliance (or security alliance) represents a component of power, which by its mere existence can upset the balance of power in any region. If you would think about the processes that happen within a General Staff of any major country, Generals neither care nor should care whose political will it was to create borders in any particular configuration on the world map. The job of the top brass of Generals is to look at what exists, identify potential future threats to national security, and design plans to counter those threats. It matters as little to Russian Generals why NATO is moving closer to Russian borders, as it would matter little to American Generals why Russia would be placing missiles on Cuba that could reach US major cities within minutes. Neither Russian military elite, nor American military elite would ever allow such imbalance of power on their borders. What matters to Russia, is that the US uses the exact same Realist mindset when it comes to securing USA's mainland via the Monroe Doctrine, but denies Russia the right to establish similar security guarantees for itself - by playing on "open door policy" manipulative maneuvering. This puts Russia at a further (and unfair) disadvantage against its main overseas adversary, by creating a window for the Americans to enjoy unbalanced deterrence against Russia on Russia's borders. The US perfectly understands that it is at fault for the war in Ukraine, but it will do everything it can to shift the blame towards Russia - because doing so fits well into the US policy of aggressive posturing towards Russia and China. (playing dangerous games within their neighbourhoods)
As a Ukrainian, I agree. Johnny did extremely misunderstand a bunch of important things. There are things I wis the world was comfortable hearing and knowing about "russia" and "russians".
Amazingly well delivered video here! This is exactly what most of us understand about the whole thing. I have no idea what’s going on in a Johnny Harris’s head sometimes…. Baffling.
Thanks for sharing your views - someone who can talk from both the US and the European experience is probably something that is needed in this conversation. Also, Jake Broe sent me to your channel 👍
Anyone who seriously believes or simply knowingly pushes the lie that "Russia feels thretened by NATO expansion" has to explain these things: 1) Why almost every neighbouring country with USSR/Russia and every country that had direct experience with USSR/Russia rushed to join NATO as soon as it was possible and did so VOLUNTARILY? 2) Why is Ukraine joining NATO a problem, but Sweden and Finland not (Putin directly stated that on camera)? Sweden and Finland combined have far more powerful army than Ukraine. 3) Why after Finland joining NATO, doubling (!!!) the NATO border with Russia, Russian units were pulled from the border somewhere else (there is direct satellite imagery evidence of this)? The effect should have been exact opposite. 4) What happened to all the other "reasons" that Kremlin pumped out to confuse gullible people? Minority under attack, naahtsees, biolabs etc? Which one is it then? Why is there a reason for anyone who wants to believe one? 5) Why is "criminal felt threatened by police" taken as a serious argument to pretend like the criminal has any point? All Eastern European and Baltic countries joined NATO to literally get protection from Soviet/Russian imperialism, which has already manifested on them before, sometimes even repeatedly.
You people clearly don't seem to understand that it DOESN'T MATTER how NATO expands. You can sugarcoat it in any volume of bureaucratic procedures as you wish, but what matters in geopolitics is WHAT exists and not WHY it exists. Any military alliance (or security alliance) represents a component of power, which by its mere existence can upset the balance of power in any region. If you would think about the processes that happen within a General Staff of any major country, Generals neither care nor should care whose political will it was to create borders in any particular configuration on the world map. The job of the top brass of Generals is to look at what exists, identify potential future threats to national security, and design plans to counter those threats. It matters as little to Russian Generals why NATO is moving closer to Russian borders, as it would matter little to American Generals why Russia would be placing missiles on Cuba that could reach US major cities within minutes. Neither Russian military elite, nor American military elite would ever allow such imbalance of power on their borders. What matters to Russia, is that the US uses the exact same Realist mindset when it comes to securing USA's mainland via the Monroe Doctrine, but denies Russia the right to establish similar security guarantees for itself - by playing on "open door policy" manipulative maneuvering. This puts Russia at a further (and unfair) disadvantage against its main overseas adversary, by creating a window for the Americans to enjoy unbalanced deterrence against Russia on Russia's borders. The US perfectly understands that it is at fault for the war in Ukraine, but it will do everything it can to shift the blame towards Russia - because doing so fits well into the US policy of aggressive posturing towards Russia and China. (playing dangerous games within their neighbourhoods)
1) Because the international system is based on an anarchic order of states, and every state (small or big) will always rush to maximize its own power, because the more powerful you are the more safe you become. All of Russia's neighbours cannot compete with Russia in terms of power (they're just too small), but they can compete with Russia if they join a foreign military alliance. However, what is important to understand here: they are motivated by exact same interests as Russia is. Politics work the same for every country, no matter how big or small it is. 2) It is clear that you can't do math: Finland's army - 22,000 soldiers Sweden's army - 25,000 soldiers Ukraine's army - 1,260,000 soldiers But army size isn't the only important factor in why Ukraine joining NATO is a bad idea. 3) Because Finland's population is small, its cities are small, and its army is small. For now Finland has no ability to threaten Russia in anyway. 4) Biolabs were confirmed by US itself. Minorities were under attack, and attacking minorities was part of the political transition for Ukraine to rid itself of Russian political influence. 5) Just as you blame Russia for being aggressive and expansionistic, it is clear to me that you have never opened a history book in your life. Russia has a history of being invaded by its neighbours too. And sometimes those invasions were extremely costly and almost deleted the Russian statehood from the map. I suggest you start by studying geopolitics and history, instead of being terminally online.
@@anti_1984 yapping yapping. Ruski propaganda. Lmao. The only at fault for this war is Russia and Russia alone. There was no threat to a nuclear country. Everything you said was bullshit.
Terrifically cogent summary/rebuttal!! Johnny Harris frequently utters butthead narratives about history and geopolitics, so good on you for calling him out on his "NATO" expansion diatribe.
Thanks for making this video. You really summarized very well the main point. NATO is a defensive alliance and as you said countries make a voluntary petition to join and go through an approval process. So Nato expansion as casus belli is simply put a big lie
I agree with all your arguments - I'm Bulgarian, and I'm immensely relieved that we joined NATO 20 years ago. We are too close to Russia, and many of their propagandists still claim that we should be in their sphere of influence and control.
Thanks to Jake Broe for pointing out your channel to us. Being of polish and czech descent and having grown up just outside the Iron curtain these subjects are of outmost interest to me. Thank you for sharing your point of view.
Mike, never heard of this Johnny guy before your video. He sounds very confused. Thanks for bringing his confusion to a broader audience. Keep up the good work and keep the faith Bro!! On Edit: Get some sleep, you have the Jake Broe army marching with you!!
So so good, on point. Perfect and clear. Sick to see so many disinfo message of this invented justification of an agresion that was not real by any means. Thanks for been so right and to contribute to debunk evil madness.
Before JH posted that video about Russia and nato, I thought his videos was great source of information! Now I will never listen again! I don’t trust him anymore! And I’m from Latvia and that video was full of misinformation and lies!
I saw this video on my feed, decided not to watch, but then came back when i also saw jake bro recommending. I'm glad he gave me the 2nd nudge i needed.
Thank you for explaining it in such agood, clear way. A friend of mine always cites Mearshheimer who also says that Russia feels threaten by the "NATO-expansion".. I will send him your exlanation since it is better and clearer tnan my attempts. By the way I came from Jake Bro and he is right. All the best!
I'm afraid sending something like this to someone who's landed in Sachs-Chomsky-Mearsheimer bubble is a waste of time . He will respond with the question: how do you know it's not a part of diabolic NATO /Western /MSM propaganda? If I want to convince someone I just ask him to visit Russian Media Monitor and look for himself what Russians have to tell. Original statements, original sound, English subtitles. Makes wonders.
Johnny Harris proved that time is crucial and essential when researching or studing, otherwise you’ll fail to distinguish connotations from propaganda. For me personally any analyst that simplifies world conflicts down to primitive impulses and paraphrases spotsmen like lingo - ’was humiliated’, ’responded with’, ’angered by’ etc. - is probably an echo chamber then a person capable of individual thought. You can see it a lot in the media - echos of a sociopathic worldview. And Johnny Harris fell for it.
Not to mention, the most efficient way to do so (studying and speaking in the moment) necessarily involves repeating talking points which could be questionable (and likely later proven false). And if you don't understand the context, you will NOT spot when propaganda is disguised as fact.
Johnny Harris has taken down his video after getting feedback. This is not the first time he’s done that, admitting he needed to do some more research. I think we should applaud his taking the constructive criticism and re-evaluating his perspective and saying he’ll do better in the future. If only others would do the same.
He has already earned a good bit of money on it, so I am kinda over him doing "oops, apologies, I'm pulling it down" when he does the extremely flawed and often backed by questionable sources vids. If he actually puts one up where he clearly adresses all these things and how he could miss those being such a good investigative journo, I am not really stunned at his "bravery". I wish this hadn't become such a pattern for him, but all I have for him by now is bombastic side-eye.
Great video. Thank you for this perspective. just an FYI Johnny Harris took down that video and put up a video explaining that he took it down because it wasn't accurate and he admitted to having a blind spot in his reporting.
But then he had been publishing some bizarre stuff before about Nato as a military alliance - ruclips.net/user/shortsvJS-tBTK2WA -- note: the comment there already that they all don't like Russia genuinely wasn't always true and isn't really a good general description of Nato.
If someone posts a video like Johnny’s in the first place, they are either receiving some Russian money or they are a useful idiot for Russia. There is no other option. Compromised.
Thank you for your informed reaction and good analysis. And by standing up against one of the nastiest challenges of democracies in these times: mis/disinformation. I thank @jakebroe to for suggesting your video who brought me here in the first place.
Sweden here. Great points. was relieved when Sweden finally joined(took 2 years bc !). However after seeing how US politics and German politics has hampered and dealyed deliveries to Ukraine my faith in NATO at times is low. NATO often follows a political logic rather than clear military priorities. With an increasing number of members, finding consensus will take time. And living near Russia time can mean loss of our men. And im not all happy if a wired semi state of oligargh US will micromanaging things in NATO next few yesrs. My hope is that we get an entire new command structure in NATO, with Nordic and Polish and Baltic reps on top! And more European domination in the matters, as we see clearly even many literate Americans like journalist Harris who so easily missed basic European history. Imagine the basic knowledge some top selected US politicians have.😮
I watched one of his videos so long ago I don't even remember the topic, but I was so annoyed by how bad his take on it was that I remembered his name as somebody NOT to watch again.
Hello from London 👋 🇬🇧 I liked your video and your accurate description of what's really going on, between NATO and Russia. Looking forward to hearing more. 👍 Glory To Ukraine 🇺🇦
Thank you for this video. It was a fantastic, uncomplicated, factual account of Russia's relationship with NATO. I wish everyone who watched Johnny's video would watch this.
If Russia had been afraid of NATO expansion it would have prolonged or renewed the Warsaw Pact. But it didn't. And it doesn't matter if it was unable or unwilling to do so: If you were unwilling, blame yourself for NATO expansion. If you were uncapable because you have p*ssed off a lot of East European countries as leader of the Warsaw Pact, blame yourself for NATO expansion.
Such an excellent video, that should have millions of views and instead has just a few thousands. As usual, most of people seem to prefer slanders and aggressive insults over balanced reasoning rooted in reality and actual events that anyone can verify.
That’s the point I always mention to Americans when they say “it’s not our job to police the world”. USA made it their job and didn’t want another buildup of troops and armies in Europe to avoid another war. Nothing good long term will come from the buildup of bigger militaries in Europe again.
All great points. I remember celebrating the Czech Republic being accepted to NATO. I remember being anxious about the process, my family was talking about it uneasily (if the proces took too long, Russia might do something). At the time, the risk wasn't really there yet but their gut feeling was right - about Ukraine.
This was spot on. This war was resource driven & “Slav ruski” population integration as the Russian’s ethic Slavs have been on a downward trajectory. Occam’s Razor.
@@ginniemess Can’t edit my previous comment, so I’ll add one more: Putin is afraid that democracy and prosperity will spread so much so that Russians themselves will demand the same.
@@christopherellis2663 True but the Kremlin attempted coercion financially and militarily after the 1948 split, which Tito skillfully addressed by seeking more cooperation with Western Nations. Tito survived several assassination attempts and internal subversion. Stalin also seriously considered military invasion and ordered Soviet military buildups along Yugoslavia's border.
Excellent points. Russia was getting a pass on almost every issue in the last 30 years. No longer accepting these things from Russia is not a provocation. It's a necessary change of attitude by Europe.
The violation of the Budapest Memorandum was one in a long line of treaty violations. You can only keep Russia in line if there is a significant force behind it. As you stated correctly, countries have to apply for NATO membership. And the point is: those countries knew treaties with Russia weren't worth the paper they were written on, unless there was force behind it. That's why they applied. There is another myth about Baker being involved in a "gentleman's agreement" about NATO not expanding. There is no historical evidence this ever happened. If there was such an agreement, it would have been on paper. There was such an article on the Germany treatment - and to this day, there are only German military on the former GDR territory.
I think I understood the angle where Johnny came from. We can see the NATO expansion from two angles, and the angle Johnny gave was more or less the Russian angle. That angle is also valuable for us to understand the tensions between the major powers. Two sides of the same coin. Therefore I believe the backlash Johnny is experiencing right now is maybe because people understood the message wrong. Or it might be that I got it wrong 🙂 I am a Finn, if mentioning that makes my argument more valid.
Johnny Harris has always just made sensationalism videos to get clicks and views and create an interesting storyline, like an action movie somehow, if you want to actually understand what happened everyone should watch Jake Broe's response.
Sometimes, JH has a point but his sources can also be dubious. The exact same style of sources he used for his latest CIA video could also be used to support that the US has definitely dissected real aliens, though I believe this particular video to be generally on point. But Jake Broe's response to the NATO video is definitely good! He focuses on the old historical sources arguments so it's a bit of a different take, but also a great perspective.
I really appreciated the YT algorithm recommending your video to me. Great job in laying out this important perspective in such a clear way and the history to go with it. I’m normally a huge fan of Johnny’s videos but on this topic a firm reality check was really needed. Thank you
I totally agree with your take. I am curious what your view is on the German position on this war: it seems to be very resistant to really opposing Putin in practice. Germany was very slow with supplying weapons or allowing third countries to supply their german weapons to Ukraine, now Germany is still reluctant to supply long distance missiles, and in Germany there seems to be a lot of reluctance to cut off Russian energy.
Germany, and many other european countries tied themselves too tightly with Russia : they are far too dependables on their energy importations from PutinLand. But Europe as a whole wanted to believe that the Cold War and the US / Russia antagonism was a thing of the past. We, as a people, really wanted to believe that Russians "have their way but they are on our side now", so much so that we completely ignored everything Russia did after the fall of USSR, though our media did their job in reporting the events and we definitely could see for ourselves ! The proof of that is the consistent shrinking of our defense busgets and our politicians saying that "NATO is basically braindead on life support", meaning that it served no purpose in modern times...
I touched on this a little bit in the "how strongly will Europe defend Ukraine" video but specifically the Germany-Russia-Ukraine triangle definitely merits a short video and I'll try to summarize my thoughts on it when I have a chance.
Personally I find this argument that "nono, of course NATO didn't mean to threaten russia, it has other purposes too" a little annoying. Not wrong, but annoying. Because it surely was created with ussr as one of original ww2 aggressors and as a potential one in mind! there's no need to deny it. What I heard in my actual experience talking to russians, is genuine offence to this notion. Even as USSR proceeded to be an aggressor, as russia proceeded to be an aggressor, NATOs cautious existence offends them as.. a reminder of that? It's the same energy as pointing out to a righteous asshole that they caused an inconvenience, and may therefore be not perfect. Immediate outrage in return. So no, NATO existed and exercised it's right to expand as a natural responce to a mad and unstable neighbour. What the neighbour chose to do (an act of aggression unimaginably disproportionate to that) is entirely on them. If anything, NATO was wrong in not being a strong enough weight to offset that.
Putin has been the best recruiter for NATO. Sweden and Finland didn’t want to join until Putin invaded Ukraine.
Indeed! NAFO didn't call him "NATO salesman of the year" for nothin'! 😅👍
@@VoicesEnEspanol indeed. and more nations clamouring for membership just from watching Russia's behaviour
And Norwegians feel so much safer with Sweden and Finland on board!
he's also been the best recruiter of western Fascists and mentally incompetent traitors in our countries, making them show their colors too
Pre-NATO Sweden felt it could effectively coordinate its military response with its direct NATO neighbors if it was attacked by Russia. Finland for years ran a delicate diplomatic dance with the Soviet Union having been a former province of Imperial Russia & a member of the Axis in WWII, so wasn’t in NATO or the Warsaw Pact as a compromise and so ran its own military defence policy. Both changed when Russia decided aggressive wars of conquest were back in fashion in 2022. This led to the tripling of Russia’s land border with NATO and a complete lock for NATO on the Baltic Sea and a major restriction of Russia’s military operation in war of 25% of its direct routes to the open Oceans. And that was all Putin’s fault, it was a direct consequence of his invasion of Ukraine where he made Russia’s geopolitical situation worse and he’s been doing it for decades. Putin’s invasion of Ukraine has lost Russia allies in Armenia, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, reversed their position with China, antagonised South Korea, lost the most lucrative gas market on the Russian doorstep in the EU and on, and on. The war has been a really bad deal for Russia and Ukraine joining NATO is now being discussed in detail not just hypothetically as before.
I almost never comment videos. The Johnny video was an exception, and so is this one. As a Finn, living next door to a bad neighbor I have trouble seeing much issues in joining NATO.
Russia NATO argument is so laughable. If Russia took over Ukraine, they’d have a long border with multiple other NATO members.
So..... on balance...were you in favour of joining the NATO or opposed. Because the great majority of Finns were in favour.
@@drmodestoesq Read his comment more closely. He said he has "trouble seeing much issues" with it, which means he is generally in favor. I would have expected stronger words from a Finn, but there's his statement.
@@drmodestoesq Finnish understatement, I believe. He’s in favour 😊
Same here. Fantastic information!
Great video! You are right on all points!
True. He should have more followers. I follow him now. Thanks for your recommendation.
Hey Jake, came here to subscribe.
Excellent Up and comer RUclipsr spotting Jake! TY!
You people clearly don't seem to understand that it DOESN'T MATTER how NATO expands. You can sugarcoat it in any volume of bureaucratic procedures as you wish, but what matters in geopolitics is WHAT exists and not WHY it exists. Any military alliance (or security alliance) represents a component of power, which by its mere existence can upset the balance of power in any region. If you would think about the processes that happen within a General Staff of any major country, Generals neither care nor should care whose political will it was to create borders in any particular configuration on the world map. The job of the top brass of Generals is to look at what exists, identify potential future threats to national security, and design plans to counter those threats. It matters as little to Russian Generals why NATO is moving closer to Russian borders, as it would matter little to American Generals why Russia would be placing missiles on Cuba that could reach US major cities within minutes. Neither Russian military elite, nor American military elite would ever allow such imbalance of power on their borders.
What matters to Russia, is that the US uses the exact same Realist mindset when it comes to securing USA's mainland via the Monroe Doctrine, but denies Russia the right to establish similar security guarantees for itself - by playing on "open door policy" manipulative maneuvering. This puts Russia at a further (and unfair) disadvantage against its main overseas adversary, by creating a window for the Americans to enjoy unbalanced deterrence against Russia on Russia's borders. The US perfectly understands that it is at fault for the war in Ukraine, but it will do everything it can to shift the blame towards Russia - because doing so fits well into the US policy of aggressive posturing towards Russia and China. (playing dangerous games within their neighbourhoods)
@anti_1984 😂😂😂 thanks Boris.
I'm an ordinary Russian, and I feel more threatened by FSB than by NATO
It's easy to hate all russians with what's going on but I still feel sorry for those who know the truth and who are trapped and oppressed by Putin. They must feel like the rest of the world is against them eventhough they are with the rest of the world. Stay strong and do what you can to spread the truth without putting yourself too much in danger
I’d get out, man. Go to Europe or the U.S. if you can. You could try arguing you’re a refugee since you’re against the Russian government (thus your life might be in danger).
What exactly is an "ordinary" Russian?
@@Curt_Randalleveryone outside of Moscow and SPB
@@Curt_Randall The ones you can't call extraordinary, no?
I'm Estonian and I approve this message 🇪🇪
Eastern European countries asked to join NATO, and NATO agreed. These are facts, I live in on these countries
Yes. Fix this misinformation!
Central European countries. See the Vistula and Danube watersheds; not the Don and Volga. To continue referring to them as Eastern confirms a containing Kremlin overlordship
@@christopherellis2663 good point
NATO could say no.
@@aresnir2725 nobody ever said no in the history of the world
As a Latvian, I can say a very nice video, Mike! I enjoyed it a lot. JakeBroe also made an excellent response
Vai ne!
Jake Broe sent me.
And thank you for this video
Same here. Jake Broe sent me!
Same
You people clearly don't seem to understand that it DOESN'T MATTER how NATO expands. You can sugarcoat it in any volume of bureaucratic procedures as you wish, but what matters in geopolitics is WHAT exists and not WHY it exists. Any military alliance (or security alliance) represents a component of power, which by its mere existence can upset the balance of power in any region. If you would think about the processes that happen within a General Staff of any major country, Generals neither care nor should care whose political will it was to create borders in any particular configuration on the world map. The job of the top brass of Generals is to look at what exists, identify potential future threats to national security, and design plans to counter those threats. It matters as little to Russian Generals why NATO is moving closer to Russian borders, as it would matter little to American Generals why Russia would be placing missiles on Cuba that could reach US major cities within minutes. Neither Russian military elite, nor American military elite would ever allow such imbalance of power on their borders.
What matters to Russia, is that the US uses the exact same Realist mindset when it comes to securing USA's mainland via the Monroe Doctrine, but denies Russia the right to establish similar security guarantees for itself - by playing on "open door policy" manipulative maneuvering. This puts Russia at a further (and unfair) disadvantage against its main overseas adversary, by creating a window for the Americans to enjoy unbalanced deterrence against Russia on Russia's borders. The US perfectly understands that it is at fault for the war in Ukraine, but it will do everything it can to shift the blame towards Russia - because doing so fits well into the US policy of aggressive posturing towards Russia and China. (playing dangerous games within their neighbourhoods)
@@anti_1984 nonsense. If the encroachment of NATO was such a threat to the security of Russia, why was there zero reaction when Finland was accepted? The only reason they and Sweden APPLIED for membership in the first place was to join a joint protection alliance against the only potential adversary who attacked Ukraine. Are you so dense as to point the finger at the US for being the catalyst for Russian aggression against Ukraine? Do the people of Ukraine not have a say in this and with whom they wish to build alliances? Ukrainians have not had a happy relationship with their former masters and are fighting for their very existence. They gave up their nukes in 1994 and had a tiny military, posing no threat whatsoever to anyone. The Budapest Memorandum required Ukraine to denuclearize and in return get assurances of territorial integrity by Russia. The US nor anyone else was installing missiles in Ukraine pointed at Moscow, so your Cuba reference makes no sense. At this point and going forward Ukraine will do everything possible to join NATO, maintain a robust military capability and even restore nuclear capability. You also seem fixated on painting this as a Russia vs US geopolitical battle and have completely missed mentioning European nations which have Russia on THEIR doorstep. Do they not appear on your map? If Russia were to annex Poland, would this again be the fault of the US?
Same
Thank you so much for making this video! Johnny Harris has been grifting for a while now. I was born in Dagestan (now US citizen) and my parents watch Russian news and the amount of complete and utter lies Russian media spreads about Europe and the US is just unbelievable. It feels cartoony but it’s real. Western progressives (I am one but critical of my own) think it’s cool to go against the grain and blame the US for every major problem and while the US certainly made its mistakes geopolitically, Russia is an empire interested in further expansion and it imposes its will on weaker countries that cannot stand up to it. Russian citizens live poorly, and the Russian government hordes money to Putin and his oligarchs. Instead of running a government for its people, the Russian government exports all Russian problems to the US and blames anyone but themselves. They are some of the richest people in the world, hoarding wealth and sending indigenous minorities to war to kill Ukrainians.
Every antihuman regime to blame US of all tjeir problems
Well said 👍👋
none of what you said is real though
Thanks for sharing your valuable insights
well said! Russian politicians/propagandists spread lies about the West, meanwhile open bank accounts abroad to keep their corrupt money in USD & EUR, go on vacations in Southern Europe and send their children to study in the Western Universities....god level of hypocrisy
Thank you for this! It's shameful to excuse any of Russia's aggression with appealing to a NATO expansion argument. Every single nation that joined NATO wanted to join and did so enthusiastically. They also did so to protect themselves from the very situation that Ukraine finds itself in today. Saying the US expanding NATO removed the agency of each of those countries who did so for extremely rational reasons. There was never an agreement to not expand NATO eastward, there was an agreement to keep NATO forces out of what was formerly East Germany and that has been upheld.
Tried explaining this to the right wing conspiracy theorists at my job site here in Canada, literally nothing I said to them changed their minds. Russian propaganda is so effective and strong it’s scary.
@@walktherockies-withzach.3125people love simple explanations and simple solutions
@@walktherockies-withzach.3125 and here I was hoping that people in Canada were all normal, rational thinkers. Trumpthink has infiltrated every country now. :(
@@walktherockies-withzach.3125 Jake Broe has an excellent 30 min video that completely explains the full historic context with maps and visuals dispelling "the NATO Expansion is a lie" (title of segment) highly recommend for anyone that is at all open to learn.
Russian propaganda is crude and stupid. It works on midwits.
Outstanding take. Jake Broe recommended, I watched, and I thoroughly agree. Subscribed.
Johnny needs to juxtapose a photo of a nation joining NATO with a photo of a nation "joining" the russian federation. He'll get it.
bsky.app/profile/darthputinkgb.bsky.social/post/3l5r2acdr2s2c
@MikeChats-v9r Awesome.
Johnny saw his fault, pulled down the video, apologized and he's plannig to redo the video with a broadwr perspective. Your critic is valuable and will definately help greatly i making this story much informative.
Hard solid summary on the NATO fallacy...
Greetings from Jake... 🎉
there's no fallacy lad XD
NATO is in Ukraine.
Its like CSAT being in Canada and invading michigan.
Like cmon bro....
In an earlier era Johnny Harris would be promoting Lebensraum.
100% agree! Harris is always criticising US and is not critic at China or Russia.
One of the most obvious clues someone is being directly paid to spread propaganda or grifting based on the spread of it.
Harris actually posted a follow up video telling that he'll fix his mistakes.
@@RIP212I meant his general attitude. Today he publisheda clip with CIA's secret prisons. I never saw him speaking about russians or chinese secret prisons and all their atrocities.
I don't watch him anymore
@@DoctorCipmaybe because nobody is as good at it as the US? Secret prisons in other countries where they torture citizens of other countries with NOTHING to do with the US. China and Russia do horrible things, but nowhere near the US’ level
As someone born on the unfortunate side of the iron curtain the thing that irks me the most is the notion that NATO somehow expanded East. All of us former subjects of the soviet empire ran West. And not just NATO, EU as well.
Russia was weak it was our chance. We took it. And even back then there was understanding that the clock was ticking.
This is not a USA story this is a European story.
Well said!
You just made more friends 😂
Amazing vid, Mike! Danke!
Good summary of US-Russia history. Too often things are framed as the US expanding and Russia being forced to react. It's an argument Russians and Pro Russia Americans like but why is it okay to essentially sacrifice Eastern Europe to an openly hostile neighbour that operates in bad faith and has been dedicated to screwing with every Western country as much as it could get away with for over a decade now. There was a time when Russia was in the G8 and most would argue that a lot of countries including Germany bought into/depended on Russian energy far longer than they should have given the behaviour. Even America until Biden has been very lenient to Russia. Obama famously dismissed Romney considering them a threat in 2012 and Trump was desperate to be Putin's friend. Putin brought the backlash on himself.
Right! Democrats laughed at George W and Romney when each at one point mentioned Russia as an adversary and accused them of still living in the cold war.
@@MikeChats-v9r Didn't George W Bush say he looked Putin in the eye and saw he was trustworthy? Granted, that was at a press conference with Putin beside him, but still... I thought W was pro Putin. But yeah, Romney was laughed at when he said Russia was a threat.
@@banditski Bush actually visited my country and at the very least was very pro us getting closer to Europe and joining NATO (grand majority of population wants to join EU and get away from Kremlin sphere of influence, that’s true today as well). Especially after our color revolution. If I’m not wrong, we named a street after him too (since- not many people necessarily care/acknowledge us)
Obama and Merkel on the other hand… and later western politicians like Trump? *Who the devil thought it was a good idea to be best buds with Russia and sacrifice three countries for the sake of “peace” and trade of which neither exist anymore*
You people clearly don't seem to understand that it DOESN'T MATTER how NATO expands. You can sugarcoat it in any volume of bureaucratic procedures as you wish, but what matters in geopolitics is WHAT exists and not WHY it exists. Any military alliance (or security alliance) represents a component of power, which by its mere existence can upset the balance of power in any region. If you would think about the processes that happen within a General Staff of any major country, Generals neither care nor should care whose political will it was to create borders in any particular configuration on the world map. The job of the top brass of Generals is to look at what exists, identify potential future threats to national security, and design plans to counter those threats. It matters as little to Russian Generals why NATO is moving closer to Russian borders, as it would matter little to American Generals why Russia would be placing missiles on Cuba that could reach US major cities within minutes. Neither Russian military elite, nor American military elite would ever allow such imbalance of power on their borders.
What matters to Russia, is that the US uses the exact same Realist mindset when it comes to securing USA's mainland via the Monroe Doctrine, but denies Russia the right to establish similar security guarantees for itself - by playing on "open door policy" manipulative maneuvering. This puts Russia at a further (and unfair) disadvantage against its main overseas adversary, by creating a window for the Americans to enjoy unbalanced deterrence against Russia on Russia's borders. The US perfectly understands that it is at fault for the war in Ukraine, but it will do everything it can to shift the blame towards Russia - because doing so fits well into the US policy of aggressive posturing towards Russia and China. (playing dangerous games within their neighbourhoods)
@@anti_1984 Spam spam spam sapm..
As a Lithuanian. Good video
As a Ukrainian, I agree. Johnny did extremely misunderstand a bunch of important things. There are things I wis the world was comfortable hearing and knowing about "russia" and "russians".
Excellent debunking of the NATO expansion myth
Amazingly well delivered video here! This is exactly what most of us understand about the whole thing. I have no idea what’s going on in a Johnny Harris’s head sometimes…. Baffling.
I wish this would go super viral!
Hit like on all comments. And post more comments 👍😊
Thanks for the great analysis!!
New subscriber. Sent here by Jake Broe. I wish you the best on your YT journey.
you seems like a smart man. new subscriber from Sweden
Thank you. Excellent video and a very much needed response to Johnny Harris' ridiculous marketing of Kremlin propaganda.
Short and factual.
This is solidarity works!Well spotted Jake..FROM AUSTRALIA 🇦🇺 SLAVA UKRAINE 🇺🇦!
You explain this very well. I listened to this because Jake Broe directed his audience to have a look and subscribe. I’ve subscribed.
You just broke the accuracy scale! Great video!
Thanks!
Yep, you've got another mate here Mike.
Also here because Jake recommended your channel and it’s good to hear another voice of reason 👍
Awesome! Thank you!
Thanks for sharing your views - someone who can talk from both the US and the European experience is probably something that is needed in this conversation.
Also, Jake Broe sent me to your channel 👍
Anyone who seriously believes or simply knowingly pushes the lie that "Russia feels thretened by NATO expansion" has to explain these things:
1) Why almost every neighbouring country with USSR/Russia and every country that had direct experience with USSR/Russia rushed to join NATO as soon as it was possible and did so VOLUNTARILY?
2) Why is Ukraine joining NATO a problem, but Sweden and Finland not (Putin directly stated that on camera)? Sweden and Finland combined have far more powerful army than Ukraine.
3) Why after Finland joining NATO, doubling (!!!) the NATO border with Russia, Russian units were pulled from the border somewhere else (there is direct satellite imagery evidence of this)? The effect should have been exact opposite.
4) What happened to all the other "reasons" that Kremlin pumped out to confuse gullible people? Minority under attack, naahtsees, biolabs etc? Which one is it then? Why is there a reason for anyone who wants to believe one?
5) Why is "criminal felt threatened by police" taken as a serious argument to pretend like the criminal has any point? All Eastern European and Baltic countries joined NATO to literally get protection from Soviet/Russian imperialism, which has already manifested on them before, sometimes even repeatedly.
Fuckin Yes!!! super good comment!
You people clearly don't seem to understand that it DOESN'T MATTER how NATO expands. You can sugarcoat it in any volume of bureaucratic procedures as you wish, but what matters in geopolitics is WHAT exists and not WHY it exists. Any military alliance (or security alliance) represents a component of power, which by its mere existence can upset the balance of power in any region. If you would think about the processes that happen within a General Staff of any major country, Generals neither care nor should care whose political will it was to create borders in any particular configuration on the world map. The job of the top brass of Generals is to look at what exists, identify potential future threats to national security, and design plans to counter those threats. It matters as little to Russian Generals why NATO is moving closer to Russian borders, as it would matter little to American Generals why Russia would be placing missiles on Cuba that could reach US major cities within minutes. Neither Russian military elite, nor American military elite would ever allow such imbalance of power on their borders.
What matters to Russia, is that the US uses the exact same Realist mindset when it comes to securing USA's mainland via the Monroe Doctrine, but denies Russia the right to establish similar security guarantees for itself - by playing on "open door policy" manipulative maneuvering. This puts Russia at a further (and unfair) disadvantage against its main overseas adversary, by creating a window for the Americans to enjoy unbalanced deterrence against Russia on Russia's borders. The US perfectly understands that it is at fault for the war in Ukraine, but it will do everything it can to shift the blame towards Russia - because doing so fits well into the US policy of aggressive posturing towards Russia and China. (playing dangerous games within their neighbourhoods)
1) Because the international system is based on an anarchic order of states, and every state (small or big) will always rush to maximize its own power, because the more powerful you are the more safe you become. All of Russia's neighbours cannot compete with Russia in terms of power (they're just too small), but they can compete with Russia if they join a foreign military alliance. However, what is important to understand here: they are motivated by exact same interests as Russia is. Politics work the same for every country, no matter how big or small it is.
2) It is clear that you can't do math:
Finland's army - 22,000 soldiers
Sweden's army - 25,000 soldiers
Ukraine's army - 1,260,000 soldiers
But army size isn't the only important factor in why Ukraine joining NATO is a bad idea.
3) Because Finland's population is small, its cities are small, and its army is small. For now Finland has no ability to threaten Russia in anyway.
4) Biolabs were confirmed by US itself. Minorities were under attack, and attacking minorities was part of the political transition for Ukraine to rid itself of Russian political influence.
5) Just as you blame Russia for being aggressive and expansionistic, it is clear to me that you have never opened a history book in your life. Russia has a history of being invaded by its neighbours too. And sometimes those invasions were extremely costly and almost deleted the Russian statehood from the map. I suggest you start by studying geopolitics and history, instead of being terminally online.
@@anti_1984 yapping yapping. Ruski propaganda. Lmao. The only at fault for this war is Russia and Russia alone. There was no threat to a nuclear country. Everything you said was bullshit.
💯 exactly 💯
Thank you for being another intelligent sane voice for the world it is so important.
Terrifically cogent summary/rebuttal!! Johnny Harris frequently utters butthead narratives about history and geopolitics, so good on you for calling him out on his "NATO" expansion diatribe.
Thanks for making this video. You really summarized very well the main point. NATO is a defensive alliance and as you said countries make a voluntary petition to join and go through an approval process. So Nato expansion as casus belli is simply put a big lie
Commenting for the algorithm. Great video!
I agree with all your arguments - I'm Bulgarian, and I'm immensely relieved that we joined NATO 20 years ago. We are too close to Russia, and many of their propagandists still claim that we should be in their sphere of influence and control.
Thank you for the analysis and thanks to Jake for suggesting your channel.
Too polite. Johhny was deliberately dishonest and it was a psyop piece to me.
Yeah, my first thought was, “So Johnny’s straight up taking ruzzian money now, huh?”
I don't think it was for psyop, at least I hope not. But it was misleading click bait which is also dangerous.
Thanks to Jake Broe for pointing out your channel to us. Being of polish and czech descent and having grown up just outside the Iron curtain these subjects are of outmost interest to me. Thank you for sharing your point of view.
Australia here. Jake sent me. Thanks to Jake finding me another channel worth watching ! Thanks Mike- I,m in.
Mike, never heard of this Johnny guy before your video. He sounds very confused. Thanks for bringing his confusion to a broader audience. Keep up the good work and keep the faith Bro!! On Edit: Get some sleep, you have the Jake Broe army marching with you!!
Jake broe brought me here
Me too
So so good, on point. Perfect and clear. Sick to see so many disinfo message of this invented justification of an agresion that was not real by any means. Thanks for been so right and to contribute to debunk evil madness.
Before JH posted that video about Russia and nato, I thought his videos was great source of information! Now I will never listen again! I don’t trust him anymore! And I’m from Latvia and that video was full of misinformation and lies!
Coming from Jake Broe. Very accurate summary. Let's hope more people see and understand this.
I saw this video on my feed, decided not to watch, but then came back when i also saw jake bro recommending.
I'm glad he gave me the 2nd nudge i needed.
Thank you for explaining it in such agood, clear way. A friend of mine always cites Mearshheimer who also says that Russia feels threaten by the "NATO-expansion".. I will send him your exlanation since it is better and clearer tnan my attempts. By the way I came from Jake Bro and he is right.
All the best!
I'm afraid sending something like this to someone who's landed in Sachs-Chomsky-Mearsheimer bubble is a waste of time . He will respond with the question: how do you know it's not a part of diabolic NATO /Western /MSM propaganda?
If I want to convince someone I just ask him to visit Russian Media Monitor and look for himself what Russians have to tell. Original statements, original sound, English subtitles. Makes wonders.
Johnny Harris proved that time is crucial and essential when researching or studing, otherwise you’ll fail to distinguish connotations from propaganda. For me personally any analyst that simplifies world conflicts down to primitive impulses and paraphrases spotsmen like lingo - ’was humiliated’, ’responded with’, ’angered by’ etc. - is probably an echo chamber then a person capable of individual thought. You can see it a lot in the media - echos of a sociopathic worldview. And Johnny Harris fell for it.
Not to mention, the most efficient way to do so (studying and speaking in the moment) necessarily involves repeating talking points which could be questionable (and likely later proven false). And if you don't understand the context, you will NOT spot when propaganda is disguised as fact.
Johnny Harris has taken down his video after getting feedback. This is not the first time he’s done that, admitting he needed to do some more research. I think we should applaud his taking the constructive criticism and re-evaluating his perspective and saying he’ll do better in the future. If only others would do the same.
I actually encouraged him to leave it up specifically so that it could be referenced in rebuttals. Would have been braver.
He has already earned a good bit of money on it, so I am kinda over him doing "oops, apologies, I'm pulling it down" when he does the extremely flawed and often backed by questionable sources vids.
If he actually puts one up where he clearly adresses all these things and how he could miss those being such a good investigative journo, I am not really stunned at his "bravery".
I wish this hadn't become such a pattern for him, but all I have for him by now is bombastic side-eye.
@@FinkeldinkenI wanna see more bunnies, though I embarrassingly misread the title of your first video at first glance.
Great video. Thank you for this perspective. just an FYI Johnny Harris took down that video and put up a video explaining that he took it down because it wasn't accurate and he admitted to having a blind spot in his reporting.
But then he had been publishing some bizarre stuff before about Nato as a military alliance - ruclips.net/user/shortsvJS-tBTK2WA -- note: the comment there already that they all don't like Russia genuinely wasn't always true and isn't really a good general description of Nato.
If someone posts a video like Johnny’s in the first place, they are either receiving some Russian money or they are a useful idiot for Russia.
There is no other option. Compromised.
Johnny went off the rails awhile ago but That video made me unsubscribe instead of just ignoring the notification. 💙💛💪
Excellent and succinct rebuttal. Thank you for your effort to inform, even when if feels like no one is listening
Thank you for your informed reaction and good analysis. And by standing up against one of the nastiest challenges of democracies in these times: mis/disinformation.
I thank @jakebroe to for suggesting your video who brought me here in the first place.
Sharp and to the point, great job thanks!
Sweden here. Great points. was relieved when Sweden finally joined(took 2 years bc !).
However after seeing how US politics and German politics has hampered and dealyed deliveries to Ukraine my faith in NATO at times is low. NATO often follows a political logic rather than clear military priorities. With an increasing number of members, finding consensus will take time. And living near Russia time can mean loss of our men. And im not all happy if a wired semi state of oligargh US will micromanaging things in NATO next few yesrs. My hope is that we get an entire new command structure in NATO, with Nordic and Polish and Baltic reps on top! And more European domination in the matters, as we see clearly even many literate Americans like journalist Harris who so easily missed basic European history. Imagine the basic knowledge some top selected US politicians have.😮
Clear, Spot on. Very informative. Kinda makes sense.
Hi from Ohio, 🇺🇸 Wishing you luck in your future endeavors.
Thank you for bringing light to this issue!
This is a very accurate perspective
Jake Bro sent me, thank you for your spot on analysis and clear communication
I appreciate that!
Johnny lost me for good a few years ago. The grift has been apparent for a while now. Thank you for this commentary.
I watched one of his videos so long ago I don't even remember the topic, but I was so annoyed by how bad his take on it was that I remembered his name as somebody NOT to watch again.
Hello from London 👋 🇬🇧
I liked your video and your accurate description of what's really going on, between NATO and Russia.
Looking forward to hearing more. 👍
Glory To Ukraine 🇺🇦
Factually correct. Thank you for taking the time to state the oblivious for those that don't pay attention.
All the best!
Thank you for this video. It was a fantastic, uncomplicated, factual account of Russia's relationship with NATO. I wish everyone who watched Johnny's video would watch this.
If Russia had been afraid of NATO expansion it would have prolonged or renewed the Warsaw Pact. But it didn't.
And it doesn't matter if it was unable or unwilling to do so: If you were unwilling, blame yourself for NATO expansion. If you were uncapable because you have p*ssed off a lot of East European countries as leader of the Warsaw Pact, blame yourself for NATO expansion.
Such an excellent video, that should have millions of views and instead has just a few thousands. As usual, most of people seem to prefer slanders and aggressive insults over balanced reasoning rooted in reality and actual events that anyone can verify.
Hit like on all comments and leave more comments for the algorithm 👍😊
That’s the point I always mention to Americans when they say “it’s not our job to police the world”. USA made it their job and didn’t want another buildup of troops and armies in Europe to avoid another war.
Nothing good long term will come from the buildup of bigger militaries in Europe again.
All great points. I remember celebrating the Czech Republic being accepted to NATO. I remember being anxious about the process, my family was talking about it uneasily (if the proces took too long, Russia might do something).
At the time, the risk wasn't really there yet but their gut feeling was right - about Ukraine.
I remember it too. Watching the process from Norway, hoping you would be ok. And you are 👍
Well said!
I love how critiquing Johnny Harris is whole genre of content
Glad to help your channel get to that vital first 1000 subscribers, came from Jake Broe and will be eager to see more
Jake is great and I want to help more Ukraine supporters!
Hope a lot of people see this, thank you!
This was spot on.
This war was resource driven & “Slav ruski” population integration as the Russian’s ethic Slavs have been on a downward trajectory.
Occam’s Razor.
Resource is just the bonus, ideology is why it's happening.
@@ginniemess I agree
@@ginniemess Can’t edit my previous comment, so I’ll add one more: Putin is afraid that democracy and prosperity will spread so much so that Russians themselves will demand the same.
Right on point 👍 Facts over fame 🖖🦘 Great job Mate 💯
Great video, Jake Broe did us a service to see your channel. Look forward to seeing more whenever you’re ready to share.👍
3:01 Jugoslavija was not a member of the Soviet block
@@christopherellis2663 True but the Kremlin attempted coercion financially and militarily after the 1948 split, which Tito skillfully addressed by seeking more cooperation with Western Nations. Tito survived several assassination attempts and internal subversion. Stalin also seriously considered military invasion and ordered Soviet military buildups along Yugoslavia's border.
Excellent points. Russia was getting a pass on almost every issue in the last 30 years. No longer accepting these things from Russia is not a provocation. It's a necessary change of attitude by Europe.
Jake Broe sent me, subscriber from Australia- great work mate
Thanks for the sub!
Thank you! Great analysis, subscribed!!!👏🏻👍🏻💪🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇬🇧
The violation of the Budapest Memorandum was one in a long line of treaty violations. You can only keep Russia in line if there is a significant force behind it. As you stated correctly, countries have to apply for NATO membership. And the point is: those countries knew treaties with Russia weren't worth the paper they were written on, unless there was force behind it. That's why they applied. There is another myth about Baker being involved in a "gentleman's agreement" about NATO not expanding. There is no historical evidence this ever happened. If there was such an agreement, it would have been on paper. There was such an article on the Germany treatment - and to this day, there are only German military on the former GDR territory.
Very well said
Criminals usually blame others for their bad behavior.
I think I understood the angle where Johnny came from. We can see the NATO expansion from two angles, and the angle Johnny gave was more or less the Russian angle. That angle is also valuable for us to understand the tensions between the major powers. Two sides of the same coin.
Therefore I believe the backlash Johnny is experiencing right now is maybe because people understood the message wrong. Or it might be that I got it wrong 🙂
I am a Finn, if mentioning that makes my argument more valid.
Russia makes up many excuses for their invasion of Ukraine a d NATO expansion is just one lie.
Johnny Harris has always just made sensationalism videos to get clicks and views and create an interesting storyline, like an action movie somehow, if you want to actually understand what happened everyone should watch Jake Broe's response.
Sometimes, JH has a point but his sources can also be dubious. The exact same style of sources he used for his latest CIA video could also be used to support that the US has definitely dissected real aliens, though I believe this particular video to be generally on point.
But Jake Broe's response to the NATO video is definitely good! He focuses on the old historical sources arguments so it's a bit of a different take, but also a great perspective.
Yes. You are correct. The Russian perspective is that of a narcissistic bully.
I really appreciated the YT algorithm recommending your video to me. Great job in laying out this important perspective in such a clear way and the history to go with it. I’m normally a huge fan of Johnny’s videos but on this topic a firm reality check was really needed. Thank you
We trade time for knowledge, this is knowledge. Take my time!
Good one👍😊
Excellent analysis and takedown of JH’s pro-Russian lies.
🇺🇦✌️
Damn, good video brother! You hit the nail on the head, amazing!
I totally agree with your take.
I am curious what your view is on the German position on this war: it seems to be very resistant to really opposing Putin in practice. Germany was very slow with supplying weapons or allowing third countries to supply their german weapons to Ukraine, now Germany is still reluctant to supply long distance missiles, and in Germany there seems to be a lot of reluctance to cut off Russian energy.
Germany, and many other european countries tied themselves too tightly with Russia : they are far too dependables on their energy importations from PutinLand. But Europe as a whole wanted to believe that the Cold War and the US / Russia antagonism was a thing of the past. We, as a people, really wanted to believe that Russians "have their way but they are on our side now", so much so that we completely ignored everything Russia did after the fall of USSR, though our media did their job in reporting the events and we definitely could see for ourselves ! The proof of that is the consistent shrinking of our defense busgets and our politicians saying that "NATO is basically braindead on life support", meaning that it served no purpose in modern times...
I touched on this a little bit in the "how strongly will Europe defend Ukraine" video but specifically the Germany-Russia-Ukraine triangle definitely merits a short video and I'll try to summarize my thoughts on it when I have a chance.
Johnny Harris has deleted the video
Thanks, great video!
Harris knows what kind of story he wants to tell, then tells kt
Personally I find this argument that "nono, of course NATO didn't mean to threaten russia, it has other purposes too" a little annoying. Not wrong, but annoying.
Because it surely was created with ussr as one of original ww2 aggressors and as a potential one in mind! there's no need to deny it. What I heard in my actual experience talking to russians, is genuine offence to this notion. Even as USSR proceeded to be an aggressor, as russia proceeded to be an aggressor, NATOs cautious existence offends them as.. a reminder of that? It's the same energy as pointing out to a righteous asshole that they caused an inconvenience, and may therefore be not perfect. Immediate outrage in return.
So no, NATO existed and exercised it's right to expand as a natural responce to a mad and unstable neighbour. What the neighbour chose to do (an act of aggression unimaginably disproportionate to that) is entirely on them. If anything, NATO was wrong in not being a strong enough weight to offset that.
Thank you so much from Poland. Really thank you
Great seeing more people who have brains speaking up.