Why These 5 Countries Aren't In NATO

My Patreon:
/ nalf
My Main Channel:
/ nalfvlogs
Like the music in my videos? 30 Day Free Trial To Epidemic Sound:
share.epidemicsound.com/nalf
My Instagram:
nalfamale?...

[@WyomingTraveler]

Austria, Finland, and Ireland may not be NATO members, but they are members of the NATO Partners for Peace and have a representative at NATO HQ. Now Finland and Sweden are thinking about NATO membership

[@paulpozi4601]

Yeah, but the Partnership for Peace program doesn't say much nowadays, because Russia is in it aswell.

[@WyomingTraveler]

@@paulpozi4601 True there are many nations in the PIP, but not all are active or I think really serious. The three I mentioned did, 6 years ago, have representatives at SHAPE.

[@DeanFWilson]

Ireland also now has a majority in favour of joining.

[@nitish523]

Then Russia should also be included in NATO as Russia is also a western power. Fun fact: NATO was formed to stop the advances of Communism but 1990's saw the fall of the Soviet Union and Communism, hence it defeats it's purpose.

[@WyomingTraveler]

@@DeanFWilson Several of the small, neutral, countries in Europe are looking to join NATO

[@dereklambe]

Ireland has been militarily neutral since it won its independence in 1922. However, it has always participated in UN peacekeeping missions, and is the country with the longest unbroken record of peacekeeping, having had troops on peacekeeping missions continuously since 1958.

[@holger_p]

Sounds like they would be sad, if peacekeeping missions aren't necessary any more.

[@tempersteel2523]

@@holger_p yes we would be sad....what is your point?

[@holger_p]

@@tempersteel2523 If you don't get it. Ireland would be sad, if there would be only peace in the world, cause there would be nothing left to do for their miltary. It's a very cynical record, to be proud there are conflicts in the world. You underline, they help in conflicts, but they fail to end them, cause ending them would be bad for the statistics of "continous missions". I know you probably don't mean it this way, but this is what your words say.

[@jimmyryan5880]

@@holger_p what are you trying to say. If you think the irish army did something say it.

[@holger_p]

@@jimmyryan5880 Didn't I say enough ? Somebody said they are proud to have something to do. An army or a country should rather be proud, if it's army has nothing to do. Don't you think so ? If an army needs war to feel useful, one could get the idea they would raise a war to justify their existance. In US, you already get the idea "we have such a nice army, let's go and use it" sometimes. So think twice on what you are proud of. It's more like with the fire fighters. You are glad, if they stay in their garage. But it's a mental problem for some, to consider them "heros" just for doing nothing.

[@peregreena9046]

While Switzerland was neutral as a nation, their main export article was ... mercenaries. Most notable, they provided troops for France in the Napoleonic wars. This led to the Congress of Vienna to forbid Swiss nationals to fight outside the Swiss borders, with the exception of the Vatican guards. Switzerland was also forbidden to join any military alliances. In turn, the victors of the Napoleonic wars have pleaded protection to the country as long as they stay neutral. And the Swiss have turned this "punishment" into a national asset.

[@starseed8087]

Switzerland has never been truly neutral, they merely use self-declared neutrality to their advantage as needed

[@frankmaeder4358]

@@starseed8087 What a one-sided and stupid comment! probably a trumper troll.... As stated in Anja Murmanns comment, it was not just self-declared, but octroyed upon the Swiss by the Vienna congress, and already existed since the peace of west phalia. and this neutrality means in terms of not engaging in military fight activities anywhere. and in this core sense of it, the Swiss very neutral very well all the time. You would bring forward now of course the acceptance of Nazi Gold in WW 2, which indeed was a black spot in the history of the Swiss. which, though, they worked up seriously, unlike orther countries like the US and many others, who hide behind book burnings and hiding history. furthermore, it must be said, that Switzerland was the banker of BOTH side, not just the Nazis, but also the Allied forces. so to say Switzerland just uses neutrality as a commodity to their advantage as needed is plain idiotic.

[@kaik.9497]

the more you know. thanks mate

[@vanyadolly]

@Urs More like pro stolen Nazi gold. It's really useful to be neutral so everyone deposits their money in your banks, especially when those people can't come back to claim it.

[@iam5085]

The location of Finland is near the strategic points of Russia, this is the main reason of "neutrality", look what happened in Ukraine, Russians would panic if Finland were to join the alliance. Formerly, the Finnish and Swedish goverments have tried to keep the region stable by avoiding sides, now it seems difficult due to Russian aggression in Ukraine.

[@lukaskovac6778]

Actually the Finland and Sweden could be example for Ukraine

[@easytiger9064]

Forced aggression btw. The US dont want peace with russia they want to control and dominate them

[@gardoomforge8273]

@@easytiger9064 Exactly, they have started it when SSSR collapse in 1991. Then there was no point of having NATO and they even kept expanding towards east. My opinion after 1991 EU should have its own military alliance not in NATO. US wants to control the whole world , sanction which ever country it wants and slaughter civilians and kids in the middle east without any consequences. They are always portrait as heroes because they control also the biggest social media.

[@dEenzt]

@@gardoomforge8273 and now we see why we need nato

[@gardoomforge8273]

@@dEenzt If there was no NATO this would not be happening

[@DenUitvreter]

The situation with Finland during the cold war was actually quite complicated, I wrote a paper on that in high school. The Finnish government felt the need to consult and inform the Soviet Union on many stances in international politics and the media did self censorship, 'The Gulag Archipelago' by Solzjenitsin didn't get translated for example. It was somewhat pejoratively called 'Finlandisation', described by a Finnish cartoonist as the art of bowing to the East without mooning to the West.

[@Mayagick]

Re Finland this might explain s.th Spiegel 12.2.22 DAVOR »Putin war plötzlich sehr, sehr entschlossen« DIPLOMATIE Kaum ein Westpolitiker kennt Russlands Staatschef besser als der finnische Präsident Sauli Niinistö. Er sagt: Die Russen seien bereit, hohe Preise für das zu zahlen, was ihnen wichtig ist. Irgendwann fragte Putin mich: Warum ist Finnland so erpicht darauf, Nato-Mitglied zu werden? SPIEGEL: Finnland teilt 1340 Kilometer Grenze mit Russland. Sieht man die gegenwärtige Krise da anders als der Rest Europas? SPIEGEL: Möchte Russland einen Nato-Beitritt Finnlands ausschließen? Niinistö: In der Liste von Russlands Forderungen an den Westen steht: keine Nato-Erweiterung an die Grenzen Russlands. Andererseits hat Außenminister Sergej Lawrow öffentlich gesagt, sollten Schweden und Finnland der Nato beitreten, werde sich Russlands Verhalten ihnen gegenüber verändern - das heißt, er hat diesen Beitritt nicht ausgeschlossen. Ich glaube, die Situation ist dieselbe wie im Jahr 2016. Damals sagte Putin auf die Frage eines finnischen Journalisten: Wenn wir derzeit über die Grenze schauen, sehen wir auf der anderen Seite einen Finnen. Wenn Finnland der Nato beitritt, sehen wir auf der anderen Seite einen Feind. Das war sehr eindeutig. www.spiegel.de/ausland/finnland-praesident-sauli-niinistoe-putin-war-ploetzlich-sehr-sehr-entschlossen-a-292fdb72-38dc-475b-8d6c-a641a1514704

[@Mayagick]

Or: from Finn to Foe!

[@kmeanxneth]

​@@Mayagick can you speak English or Finnish?

[@Mayagick]

@@kmeanxneth try English, German or Spanish

[@mitro72]

@@Mayagick Es liegt nur an Handlungen von Herrn Putin.

[@quo33]

Strange how few people know that Austria is neutral. In US popculture it's only ever Switzerland that gets mentioned. But then most Americans would probably not be able to find them on a map either so..

[@mojojim6458]

Australia has never been neutral.

[@Nightey]

And I always thought it was well known. During the Cold War Vienna was internationally known as the city of spies because the East and West could meet without problems and of course everyone took advantage of that. Also Vienna is one of only four UN Headquarters as well as seat of the OPEC and IAEA among many others. A diplomatic hotspot.

[@kurtpunchesthings2411]

dude most Americans think Andorra is in Africa lmao

[@gayshay]

@@kurtpunchesthings2411 Andorra is +/- equal to the size of St. Joseph, Missouri. Can you locate St. Joseph, Missouri on a map? I’m glad you’re so knowledgeable about the geographic location of a micro state though..

[@angb4ng]

@@mojojim6458 No one is talking about Australia. Did you even watch the video? We're talking about Austria. The country in Europe. One of the most important countries in European History.

[@ekszentrik]

"Austria is culturally similar to Germany" **bonk sound effect** this just cost you 1000 Viennese Social Credit points.

[@ronandubh4766]

Your right, Austria's culture is German

[@Neclony]

Similar to Germany is misleading, Hungary similarities can be found everywhere. In general many good things from the South/East.

[@mikekelly5869]

@@Neclony Makes sense. The Austro-Hungarian Empire.

[@davedavids57]

I think a good way of seeing the difference between Austria and Germany is going to a gun shop. Then realising that they don't have licences for most guns (cat c anyway) in Austria and the system for those is just like the USA (background check - three day wait).

[@thetruth7633]

People tend generalization, the Helvetian people are nothing like Germans, totally different kind of mindset. But I understand the confusion.

[@Joelina456]

awesome video, so relevant for our current time we live in and a question I have also asked myself a lot. Thanks 🙂

[@Ancient_Hoplite]

The reason for Ireland's neutrality stems more from traditional policy of neutrality rather than refusal to recognise NI. Ireland was neutral during ww2 referring to it at the time as 'the emergency ' rather than world war. Realistically Ireland did not have the military or economic capacity to participate. It had suffered two major conflicts prior to ww2, the war for independence and the subsequent civil war. That is the context where Irish neutrality comes from. It's more of a guiding principle that allows the government some flexibility. UN peacekeeping is allowed or the transfer of aircraft and soldiers through Irish territory but not direct conflict.

[@paulmidsussex3409]

Ireland also recognised that Norther Ireland was part of the UK in 1999 after an Irish government declaration giving effect to parts of the 19th amendment to the constitution.

[@sineamhac]

It's also worth noting Ireland was only half neutral in WW2 (if that exists). We provided intel to the allies and any allies that crashed/landed in Ireland were moved across the border to NI, whereas Axis soldiers were imprisoned until the end of the war. So, not exactly out on the beaches, but still showing an obvious bias. I've heard it said that the bombing of Dublin was a warning by the Germans to stop assisting the allies and maintain true neutrality, but I don't know if that's just hearsay or not.

@@paulmidsussex3409 Not quite. The GFA provides for a peaceful reunification which will be happening probably inside a decade.

[@paulmidsussex3409]

@ The GFA required Ireland to change their constitution so that it recognised that the Republic of Ireland borders were the same as those of its predecessor, the Irish Free State and more than a decade has already passed.

[@demonic_myst4503]

this os half true Britain also was a founding member of nato alongside america and as ww2 went if brutain joins somthibg ireland will refuse

[@InspektorDreyfus]

And the UK Great Britain confusion goes on.

[@holger_p]

Nobody is confused, except the Britains. For anybody else it synonymous (and don't give me a lesson it's not).

[@InspektorDreyfus]

@@holger_p I don't give lessons. I'm just receiving the confusion. 🤪

[@holger_p]

@@InspektorDreyfus Thought you are going to nitpick. Who feels confused here ? People hardly talk about the island, in 99.9% of cases they talk about the country and in colloquial language they refer to the "united kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Island" as "Great Britain". Although "United Kingdom" is more officially accepted.

[@DaChaGee]

Yeah but he's done a video where he explains the difference, so I guess he just mis spoke.

[@CrystalClearWith8BE]

Great Britain is that big island of the British Isles. The UK has Great Britain, it's nearby islands and Northern Ireland.

[@rebekasomogyi2695]

Thank you so much! I was wondering about this literally this morning but haven't had the time to look it up. Thank you, again! :)

[@holger_p]

Why this is becoming a topic these days ? None of these countries actually needs help, and every country is allowed and welcomed to support the NATO if they want to. NATO is just a contract for counterwise help on defense.

[@mightymagnus]

Sweden should be the least surprise since it actually have had the longest peace in the world, since 1815 when Napoleon was defeated (which also included to cut off Norway from Denmark since Denmark was an ally of Napoleon). After that Sweden declared not neutrality but non alignment to alliances (this is one of the largest misconceptions)... Also the Swedish king was not Gustav but Charles XIV John

[@nettcologne9186]

Note on the displayed map: North Macedonia + Montenegro are also members of NATO

[@scarymoose4141]

Been looking for a comment on that

[@alice73322]

I was just wondering this exact thing! Great timing , thanks 🙏🏻kinda wanted to know about Ukraine though 😕

[@gigibenea3529]

Thank you very much...I did not know ..except Swiss..always you help us find news.

[@bi0530]

Great piece of education. I am sure many people living in European NATO countries do not know exactly who is on the team. And, like Buddy mentioned in his comment an interesting member of NATO is certainly Iceland, having no armed forces of their own. BTW, another interesting topic would be the confusing membership status of the Scandinavian countries in the different European institutions: NATO, EU, Schengen agreement, EURO zone. I researched this a while ago - it's a patchwork!

[@robstar6667]

Iceland got the Mountain. That's enough!

[@lucasfoster1471]

@@andreag983 To understand the situation you might want to read about the history -> I fully agree with you. By the way, who is telling the truth? Boris Yeltsin? About N4t0 not expand one inch eastwards?

[@David-cb1ct]

@@lucasfoster1471 The agreement NATO made with Yelstin was in relation to east Germany not the rest of the former eastern block, contrary to Putin's propaganda, NATO never promised Poland or Romania or Latvia or any of the others couldn't join NATO.

[@lucasfoster1471]

@@David-cb1ct What Yeltsin has said, Putin holds it strong. Since 2008, in the International Security meetings or council. Putin has asked so many times to NATO not to expand eastwards. And so many times Putin was ignored when he asked those questions. Now NATO moved eastwards, and 30 US biolabs for biological weapons (funded by Pentagon) were found. If China and Mexico team-up together to build strong military infrastucture near US borders as well as biolabs, near US borders too, do you think US will just sit pretty, watch Netflix and do nothing? Why leaders ignored Putin since 2008? So many times Putin has tried to discuss this to solve the problem. And he was just ignored? Really?? The problem is in NATO.

[@David-cb1ct]

@@lucasfoster1471 WILL YOU STOP LISTENING PROPAGANDA. There are no bio labs. Oh and for the record, the only ones to use bio and chemical weapons in recent years are Russia in Syria. As for what Russia wants? What Putin wants? Let me be perfectly clear on this, Russia Does NOT have the right to tell any sovereign country what they can or cannot do. Russia does NOT get to decide who Ukraine chooses to work with. That is not how the world works. The idea that Russia or anyone can dictate what another country can or cannot do is laughable in the extreme. Wake up and stop drinking the cool aid. Putin wants Russias empire back, Putin wants the 19th century to return. It cannot and it will not. Russia cannot win this war, look at the US and Soviet wars in afghanistan, the US war in Vietnam, the Nazis war in the Soviet Union. It cannot be done. You blame NATO for Putins deliberate calculated lies for his invasion of a democratic country? No doubt you blame Poland for Nazi invasion too. Wake Up!

[@stephenmurphy2212]

Finland just officially joined NATO two days ago, ending its policy of neutrality after 75 years.

[@ChillHarmonies98]

Sweden techically does no longer have a neutrality as the government took away that in the 1990s if I remember correctly. So the neutrallity is more a mindset in Sweden rather than a governmental stance. The reason that Sweden has not joined is more complicated. Sweden does not have a large military, they have been reluctant due to NATOs clause of everyone support if someone is attacked and Sweden does not want to push Russia. If Finland were to join NATO the chance is high that Sweden would do the same. Though the Swedish people that I have talked to are mostly for it but reluctant due to not wanting to join something in a crisis which can force us to do things we normally would not do or similar things. The Swedes have also recognized that if Russia decide to attack a more western country Sweden is a very good target. We do not have a strong army and we are not part of NATO. Luckily we have very nice neighbours who have said that if Sweden is attacked they will step in. Finland, Norway and Denmark have all said something along those lines.

[@Alex-tr1ml]

The same thing goes for Finland, if Sweden joins Nato then we will join as well. Personally, I hope we can stay out of Nato as long as possible.

[@arvindjaq9343]

@@Alex-tr1ml exactly, dont fall for it. Vote next year for an Anti-NATO party

[@fonziebulldog5786]

@Petri Jokinen 😀❤️👍

[@norwegianboyee]

I mean Sweden didn't join in when Norway and Denmark got invaded by Nazi Germany, and Sweden also did not join Finland when the Soviets attacked them in winter war soooo... I highly doubt if Russia attacked Sweden for real that other scandinavian countries would commit their national forces. Volunteers and weapon supports yes, but there is no obligation to do anything. Most people don't want their country to join in a war, not even for an just cause. There needs to be some form of guarantees put in place if mutual defense is to be assured. Otherwise i could easily see an world where Putin's Russia moves into Sweden, and Norway sends troops to guard their own borders and Russia avoids incursing into the Norwegian border due to NATO threat, but other than that nothing really happens and Sweden becomes an Russian vassal state. I think Sweden would be smart to join NATO here. But that's up to them...

[@alterbr33d]

When I was in Sweden, and they're much better at explaining this, but basically they don't want to have to do what the US says when it comes to invading other countries. If its going to make another country worse, involve killing civilians, or for taking another country's resources while causing bloodshed, they want no part in it. That was my ex-girlfriends' family. Plural grammar intended. However not all Swedes are the same. My Swedish cousin back in 2015 was saying that Sweden needs to do an airstrike on Putin. It was the first thing he said to me at the dinner table since coming back. That wouldn't have been a good idea back then as it would have made the west look like the instigators, but in light of recent events, now I can see why he felt that way, its starting to look like an option, if nuclear retaliation wasn't a thing. Norway and Denmark helping Sweden might be seen in Putin's eyes as an attack from NATO, even though its just the Nordic Council teaming up.

[@thats_guip]

Great video!

[@jenselstner5527]

Very educational Nonsens. I appreciate it. Thank you.

[@yasminesteinbauer8565]

Finland and Sweden are thinking about becoming members of NATO because of the current situation.

[@kmeanxneth]

Finland thinking about becoming members of NATO for more than ~30 year

[@asicdathens]

@@kmeanxneth 100000+ Finns signed a petition so that the issue can be discussed in the parliament. NATO is the best guarantee that you will not be liberated / denazified by Russian madmen

[@scruffy7760]

As for Sweden, it's neutrality and 200 years of peace... Like 90% of countries in WW2, we tried to stay out of the war. Unlike most others, we managed to not get attacked, even if Germany did draw up invasion plans in 1943. That said, 8000-9000 swedes did fight with the Finns in 1939 against Russia. Sweden being neutral in WW2 is debatable, since we sold iron ore to Germany to a void being invaded, but supported the allies with information because we wanted to, not because we had to (we warned the Russians of the Germans plans to attack them to name one thing, sadly they did not believe it). In the 1960s, Sweden deployed 6000 troops, later supported by strike aircraft, to the Congo in the UNs conflict with the Katanga rebels (this was an all out war, make no mistake about it and the UN considered using napalm and even attacking civilian aircraft in order to secure victory. Fortunately, this didn't happen). In the early 1980s, Russian warships crossed the Baltic Sea to rescue a Soviet submarine (armed with nukes) stranded in Swedish waters. The prime minister at the time gave the swedish armed forces one command: "Hold the border". When the Russian warships neared swedish territory, swedish wartime radar systems were activated and shortly after the Russian warships came to a full stop. At the height of the Cold War, Sweden was prepared to sink Soviet warships. In the 90s, the Nordic mission to now former Yugoslavia, mainly made up with swedish troops, was nicknamed Shootbat (official name Nordbat) since the troops tendency to return fire, often and alot of it. In Afghanistan, Swedish troops have been deployed for years and seen there fair share of combat. So has Sweden officially not been at war for since 1814? Yes. Has Swedish troops actually fought in wars since 1814? Yes.

[@Happy26301]

Also never forget Raul Wallenberg who saved countless Jews from the Nazis

[@eduedu267]

Short videos, great explanation.👍

[@gigibenea3529]

Romanian President Klaus Iohannis had a phone call with his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelensky to discuss the recent worrying developments in the Black Sea region, but also the future cooperation between the two countries. During the call, which marked 30 years of diplomatic relations between the two states, Iohannis said Romania firmly supports Ukraine’s sovereignty, territorial integrity, and European and North-Atlantic aspirations. The two presidents also had a broad talk regarding the rights of the Romanian minority in southern Ukraine. Ukraine’s adoption of legislation that blocks education in the Romanian language has damaged relations between Bucharest and Kyiv. Romanians form the third largest ethnic group in Ukraine, after Ukrainians and Russians, according to the Romanian foreign ministry, which considers the split in Romanians and Moldavians as “artificial.”

[@leondillon8723]

1:19)When Switzerland joined the UN, they had to start using a rectangular flag. 3:23)Occupied Ireland. After 1,000+ years of limey invasions, why would they join? 1155 the limey Pope Adrian IV approved another invasion for limey King Henri II. Nicholas Breakspear (Adrian IV)also made Henri II the Lord Protector of Ireland. I am waiting to hear if the edict has been rescinded.

[@homoerectus6953]

cause potatoes cant grow themselves.

[@ddandymann]

Are you Irish? And I mean actually Irish rather than American with some distant Irish ancestry.

[@ddandymann]

@@leondillon8723 In that case I recommend you learn more about just how complicated the situation in Northern Ireland is before calling it occupied. If you think it's just the big bad UK oppressing the poor Irish who just want to reunite their country then you're sorely mistaken. In the last 2 years there have been large Unionist riots just because of the Northern Ireland protocol, introduced because of Brexit, which introduced customs checks between NI and the UK.

[@setyeva0]

@@ddandymann and the most laughable thing about that is the DUP voted for the protocol. As for _" large Unionist riots"_ that's a joke and a half. They managed to get a few kids out on the streets to burn a bus or two in their own area. These days they're to busy making money selling drugs to their neighbours kids.

[@itsROMPERS...]

Who says "limey" anymore?

[@David-cb1ct]

Ok lets correct a few things here, Ireland is a militarily neutral country just like switzerland, it is in our Constitution, our constitution cannot be ammended without a referendum, no government can seek to join NATO without the will of the people. Ireland has never sought to join the alliance. The points you raised were in relation to a bilateral defence agreement between the US and Britain that the US wanted Ireland to join.

[@vanyadolly]

I'm not Irish but I can't see any reason for Ireland to join these kinds of agreements now that the English have finally stopped attacking you.

[@darrencorr5903]

Ireland has a long standing policy of non nuclear, both in weapons and in energy. We believe nuclear weapons shouldn’t ever be used or in existence. 3 NATO members are nuclear powers, it simply doesn’t fit us as a country to participate in NATO.

[@itsjonathanbitch]

We’ve had enough conflict and strife in our own country, we never want that inflicted on anyone else. Reason Ireland is so vocal against all wars, Afghan, Israel, Ukraine, Yemen etc. It’s always been that way here, and our Constitution is one of the worlds strongest, the people have a say in everything. How it should be.

[@KyleInOklahoma]

@@darrencorr5903 Who's "we?" No doubt Irish people would accept nuclear energy if it saved us/them a few quid. I know I would & most people I know. People realize it's not as dangerous as it has been made out to be. I do agree it doesn't suit us. Those of us who left Ireland [to make living that's nothing to laugh at] & all of NATO would be forced to protect that small island for free.🤦‍♂️

[@seankavanagh7625]

@@KyleInOklahoma The cost and time it takes to build a nuclear power plant it what makes it unattractive. It's just as easy to go the offshore wind route and no risk of meltdowns.

[@spreadlove1974]

Great video

[@Andi_mit_E]

Thank you!

[@JUMALATION1]

The Finnish military has been using NATO compatible equipment for ages now. While I'm personally of the opinion that Finland shouldn't frantically rush to join right now, it is totally possible to do in the future without much hassle. I also have a bit of insight on Swedish-Finnish bilateral relations (because of my previous employment), and these two countries keep up a very transparent dialogue about military cooperation.

[@MegaWunna]

Same with my country of Sweden, we even create Nato compatible weapons. We create millitary equitment that Nato members buy. I don't know why the socialdemokraterna (Social Democrats) always opposed joining Nato even though they at the same to time wants to team up with nato all the time. When I say always I mean like multiply times a year they want to have millitary exercise together.

[@herrakaarme]

I'm also of the opinion that you shouldn't get a house insurance before your house is already on fire. You will waste a massive amount of money paying for nothing for many years otherwise, maybe even your whole time living in the house, which could be decades. Also, get a car insurance only when you have crashed (if you are still conscious). The money wasted is not necessarily that much behind your house insurance. You'd drive many a kilometer with the money saved by not getting an insurance prematurely. Am I not right?

[@123bkthayer]

@@herrakaarme Excellent sentiment, by all means wait until other countries have spent money, time, and blood to protect European countries from Russian aggression. Arriving late to the party is much more fashionable. I believe if ALL of the European countries had stood together, Russian could have been kept in check; but of course we will never know.

[@herrakaarme]

@@123bkthayer It's only Ukraine that's spending blood to stop the Russian aggression. Other countries have been spending time and money to support Ukraine, within NATO and without NATO. Four months ago I'd have said Russia wouldn't use nukes if NATO got involved. Now I wouldn't be so sure of it. If Putin is indeed dying of cancer, he wouldn't be above taking the rest of the world with him. And nobody else's opinion matters in Russia, by the looks of it.

[@S-V-E-N-1-9-7-8]

Dear Nick, actually I'm not petty, but now you've challenged me as a native of Osnabrück. The Peace of Westphalia was concluded in 1648 after 3 years of negotiations in Münster and Osnabrück. I would like to show you my home town but you persistently refuse to go north 😉

[@mojojim6458]

There are too many Fischbroetchen in the North for comfort.

[@S-V-E-N-1-9-7-8]

@@mojojim6458 Meanwhile, the perverted captain also sells fish fingers without fish. Maybe that would be an option for "The Nalf"

[@hannahanna649]

@@mojojim6458 Münster and Osnabrück aren't specially known for their Fischbrötchen, lol.

[@mojojim6458]

@@hannahanna649 That's the result of a campaign waged over many years by Sven to ban them.

[@CediEntertainment]

Last time he lost his camera in Hamburg

I thought you would talk about Andorra, Monaco, San Marino, Liechtenstein and Vatican City! I am kidding! Interesting video as usual!

[@sirBrouwer]

Liechtenstein is to powerful. last time they did join they brought back more soldiers home then they took off with.

[@ThomasVanderWal]

Thank you! I was about to look this up as I heard Sweden is looking at joining NATO immediately after Russian attacking the Ukraine unprovoked. I didn’t realize Austria wasn’t a member and heard something about their neutrality on the news (pretty much watching DW and France24 as my only tv source to keep up with the Russian invasion).

[@swanpride]

Sweden joining is unlikely...they currently have pretty much advantages of a member without any of the downsides. I mean, who would attack Sweden, they are practically surrounded by NATO countries.

[@HuSanNiang]

Look up the state treaty of May 1955 Austrian and the 4 allied occupation - you are welcomed

[@johnclements6614]

The western suburbs of Vienna are only about 65 km along the west bank of Danube from what is now Slovakia. In a war with the old Warsaw Pact Vienna would likely have been cut off in two or three days, before NATO could help.

[@natviolen4021]

@@swanpride "who would attack Sweden"? Somebody having an eye on Gotland. You wouldn't need the entire country. Just that island. Ringing a bell?

[@sisuguillam5109]

@@swanpride who would threaten Sweden and Finland... surrounded by NATO? Oh, Russia did.

[@astridchladek1927]

Thanks for another very good video, although the peace treaty you are referring to - the “Westfählischer Frieden“, that ended the 30 years war in Europe, was reached 1648, not 1640… the war going on from 1618-1648. Sorry for my historic pedantry, I blame my history teacher in high school who used to test us on dates like this each year.. over and over again… 😉 In Austria, the „everlasting neutrality“, as is its official name, has become an important part of the Austrian identity I think. For me it also feels fitting for a country that started WW1 and was highly involved in WW2… seems right to bind oneself to everlasting pacifism. 🙏

[@lolowfi]

Neutrality has indeed become an important part of Austrian identity, but they didn't start WW1. Germany started both World Wars.

[@astridchladek1927]

@@lolowfi As far as I know WW1 started when the Austrian-Hungarian Empire declared war against Serbia on the 28th of July 1914, following the assassination of the Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife in Sarajevo on the 28th of June of that year and the July Crisis. At this point the Habsburg Empire had already been separated from the Holy Roman Empire for over 100 years, Emperor Franz II/I changing the long tradition of Habsburgs being elected Roman Emperors to creating an Austrian Empire in 1804- although he also stayed Roman Emperor until his death in 1806.

[@lolowfi]

@@astridchladek1927 The Treaty of Versailles assigned the sole responsibility for the war to Germany. Germans didn't agree with that (Diktatsfrieden und so..) but that's history.

[@astridchladek1927]

@@lolowfi True, but having put the blame and responsibility on you by the countries who won the war is not the same as having started it in the first place. The Versailles Treaty states, that the Germans made the Austrians declare war on Serbia, knowing this could not stay regional. The blame was also put on Germany, because it did not participate in efforts for peace, as for example the Austrian Emperor Charles did. Of course the first use of gas in a war and war crimes while invading Belgium also added to the list. So Germany got the blame. But Austria started it. I’m not proud of that, it all is very tragic and sad. But the Austrian Emperor declared war on Serbia, not the German Kaiser.

[@DaeLh]

There are a lot of talk the last couple of weeks about joining NATO in both Finnish and Swedish parliaments. Even the historically anti-nato party the Social Democrats (who is usually in charge in Sweden) have opened up on the possibility.

[@higuk999]

the right wing party in ireland is trying to push nato membership now but there is no appetite in joining with the public

[@kaik.9497]

I mean technicly these treatys are about 80 years old. Alot of treaties dont last this long ... heck the USSR doesnt even exist anymore. To be frank, I dont believe neutral states in between russia/warshau pact and nato will exist indefinetly unless their neutrality has been garantueed by both forces, which is unlikely. It would be nice for all these countries citizens but I dont think politics work that way ...

[@kaik.9497]

@@higuk999 it is astonishing that such a nonsensical cultural and geological border could last this long. As shown in the middle east such borders only harbour conflict in the long run. I realy await the day ireland can be united. There is no sense in delaying it any further except for some tacmoney from the british side. Its almost like their last colonial holding in my oppinion. And that ireland keep this as a condition makes absolut sense to me.

[@erikengheim1106]

I could add that Russia tried to impose the same deal on Norway as on Finland. They got furious when Norway joined NATO, but we made a compromise, but making it public policy that Norway would never be used to for storage of American nuclear missiles or to host any American bases. Base neutrality has been a pillar of Norwegian foreign policy for many decades, but the US has long pressured Norway to accept American bases and our previous conservative government finally gave in. Personally I don't like it. I am mostly okay with being in NATO, but being right on the border with Russia I would not want to antagonize them more than necessary. I think we should have kept our base neutrality policy. Norway despite being a NATO member long tried to have a good relation with the USSR during the cold war. The Red Army had after all liberated Northern Norway. The Norwegian prime minister in the post war years for nearly 20 years, Einar Gerhardsen was also originally a communist and had gone to the Soviet Union to celebrate Lenin when they had won the civil war and established the Soviet Union. However he became disillusioned when he later saw the Soviet oppression. Gerhardsen was a peaceful man and he embraced democratic socialism. Democratic socialists ruled Norway for much of the post war years, which made the balance between the US and Soviet tricky. On one end the Soviet union pursued socialism which they wanted, but doing so through oppression rather than democratic reforms like socialists in Norway. The US on the other hand embraced capitalism which Norwegian leadership was against, but they were democratic which is what they wanted. In the end democracy matter more to Norwegian socialists than socialism. But it was a contentious issue. It fractured the Norwegian social democratic party. Just thought it might be of interest how difficult these questions have been for many countries in Europe, not just those who stayed out of NATO.

[@grandadmiralthrawn3164]

We had a kind of simillar situation in Sweden as you probably know with the Social Democrats ´, however since we were not part of the second world war we never became part of the military alliance of the allies.

[@mikekelly5869]

Very interesting comment. Thank you for teaching me something I didn't know.

[@erikengheim1106]

@@grandadmiralthrawn3164 Yeah I can imagine that totally changed the Swedish perspective. Norway was traditionally very into the whole neutrality thing, but the Nazi invasion just shattered the illusion that you can stay out of wars. A bit unfortunate that Nordic countries could not come up with some kind of alliance. I know Sweden and Norway discussed defense cooperation after WW2. There was even a joint project on developing nuclear weapons. That projected ended when Norway joined NATO.

[@LoveMyPeople04]

@Erik Engheim you really don’t make no sense lol. U can’t pick and choose. If u join a group for safety, everyone has to give up and or do something they may not want to do. Can’t expect other countries to do all the hard work than u benefit from it…if there needs to be bases in a current country that’ll help, than so be it. What do you mean “you’re for joining but not for bases?

[@erikengheim1106]

@@LoveMyPeople04 You don't seem to get what NATO is about. There is no requirement for NATO members to have American bases. The US does not have German or Norwegian bases. The US doesn't own NATO. However as allies the US can of course propose to put a base in your country. The host country has to consider whether they think that is an advantage or not. Many countries want American bases. But not all countries think it is a good idea. Other countries are benefitting just as much from Norway being member as we are benefitting from being members. Norwegian NATO membership gives NATO access to strategically important coastline. Why do you think Germany invaded Norway? Because it was very important strategically. Norway got asked to join NATO, we didn't beg to join. In fact Norway and Sweden was busy developing nuclear weapons as an alternative when we got asked to join NATO. The US did not want us to develop nukes and suggested NATO was a better solution. We agreed, and the rest is history.

[@mooglemy3813]

Your presentation is only 4 months old but is out of date by later and more current events. Was a good overview at the time.

[@lal12]

I only was surprised about Austria (when I looked it up lately) I knew the other. But after thinking about the history it makes sense. I want to add that the war in Ukrain has almost nothing to do with NATO, but instead with Putins fear for his power due to western political/cultural influence not it's military influence. Also he has some kind of fantasy of restoring the former "glorious" soviet union.

[@SledgeFox]

please take a look at history or at least Wikipedia. "Enlargement of NATO" would be a first tiny step.

[@lal12]

@@SledgeFox I am well aware of the historical eastwards expansion of NATO. But you apparently not aware of recent political developments and speeches of Putin. I don't blame you for the most part until a week ago everyone probably would have discussed about NATO eastward expansion. But the speeches by Putin justifying this war did not talk about NATO, but instead about a historical right of Russia to the Ukraine territory and was justified by a fight against a Nazi government in Ukraine. Putin even said a few years ago he doesn't consider NATO a threat. And realistically it isn't in the recent years. NATO was very divided and it is extremly unlikely that they could get behind a common goal (beyond defense) let alone a common goal to attack something. Putin is not worried about western military influence or aggression. Even from a Russian perspective (they can see all our politics and internal debates just on TV) this would be unreasonable. Putin is afraid of western influence in terms of politics, economics and culture. It is not a coincidence that he invaded Crimea right after protests kicked out their old (secretly) pro Russian president, because they wanted to join the EU (not the NATO). This is about Putins understanding of former soviet glory and fear for his influence and power should western economics help Ukrain to become wealthier, which would have a huge influence on Russia, since both have strong bonds on personal levels (families and friends). Yes the view about this topic was mostly about NATO until basically last week and it does not seem to be that present in the US media, but in European media this conflict and its emergence are investigated very closely and constantly since for the last week. Many speeches of Putin were shown and investigated and it is kind of alarming how clear the start of this war and Putins justification and "philosophy" are on this topic, while never being noticed by the western public. Eastern Europeans country viewed that very differently for years. They did join NATO because they knew there is a risk of Russian occupation, but not really any more of a provocation to Russia than not following the old soviet ways. So no this isn't about eastward expansion of NATO, but about the reforms and democratization of eastern European countries, which were in large part started by themselves. And additionally some growing internal issues and conflicts in Russia itself.

[@mantea3481]

no he doesnt thats blatan western propaganda

[@lal12]

@@mantea3481 just read/watch his speeches writings. His reasoning for the war is for one the historical Russian claims to Ukraine, and that Ukraine isn't really a country at all and secondly the Ukraine government are Nazis. So how does NATO has any influence in one or the other?

[@12tanuha21]

He don't want the soviet union back, only the old russian empire.

[@SledgeFox]

NATO: „to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down“ Hastings Ismay ------> can be found in Wikipedia

[@akramkhan270511]

Big up Island my brothers 💯

[@edwardblair4096]

Ireland, like Switzerland and Sweden, remained officially neutral in WW2. On the other hand, Turkey was also neutral but DID join NATO, so that is not the only factor deciding whether a country wants to join.

[@markusgrunewald4748]

Ukraine is a developing example that democracy can flourish in an ex USSR country including peaceful transfer of power from one leader to another. Belarus is the example Putin wants to see. Despite their poll - called election - won by the opposition Lukaschenko decided to stay in power and did. There is an interesting YT MSNBC contribution by Rachel Maddow. For Sweden & Finland we nee to recheck next year what their position towards NATO will be.

[@juliettpapa]

I guess Iceland was accepted because of its strategic position for the US and Canada.

[@holger_p]

Who did apply and was not accepted ? And why the "strategic position for US" should matter ? Did Canada Join due to a strategic position for the Europeans ?

[@apolloniapythia9141]

Iceland had been part of Danemark till 1918 and had then a status like Greenland now. It was the first base for US forces in Europe and had a big part in the fight of the North Atlantic. In 1945 it became independent and the US troops remaind with bases there. AS NATO was formed Iceland joined because of it importance and got granted the same rights as other members without to have the military forces.

[@TMD3453]

Great. I had no idea Austria. Cheers

[@poppinpatty2507]

Great video! Very interesting. I was a little surprised about Austria. Is Northern Ireland technically a member of NATO?

[@mikekelly5869]

N.I. is part of the UK and the UK is a member of NATO.

[@ICHBinCOOLERalsJeman]

I just wanna say that Austria is legally bound to be neutral to the soviet union, which no longer exist so it is more reasonable ot say austria wants to be neutral like its neighbhour switzerland rather than it is simply forced to be

[@Kameliius]

True but not true. The treaty that guaranteed Austrias independence back in 55’ also declares that Austria never ever has to be part of an alliance, including militarily and politically. Due to the fact that Austria is a part of the EU since 1995, Austria shouldn’t even exist, since it only allowed the country to independent on these terms

[@Neclony]

@@Kameliius Also true but not true. It was never literally mentioned to be politically neutral, Austria chose to be military and permanently neutral. This is true to this day. One of the 4 big powers that signed the Austrian State Treaty does technically not exit anymore, France and UK at that time were in the EU themself. The Duchy of Austria existed long before the US or UK and was a big part of the Holy Roman Empire. There is no reasen why "it should not even exist".

[@Kameliius]

@@Neclony Well, what I mentioned was what we learned at school here in Austria, word by word

[@Neclony]

@@Kameliius same ;D

[@hansspiegl8684]

@@Kameliius so you have learned nonsense in school. As an Austrian: we want to be militarily neutral, the law of everlasting neutrality is an Austrian law, not a Russian law. But we are not political neutral, and never will be!

[@gabrieldoherty1095]

Ireland was a non belligerent in World War II (though its policy was implemented in a fashion sympathetic to the Allies), so its neutrality predates the foundation of NATO by several years. The state had urged multilateralism via the League of Nations as a way of forestalling aggression (notably from the fascist states) in the early 1930s, but found that the militarily powerful democracies such as the UK and France did not (USA of course was not a member of the LoN), and when war broke out in 1939 opted for neutrality.

[@welfiblablabla]

Switzerland is no surprise to me, but Austria and Irland I thought they'd be part 😅

[@AManAndHisKebab]

Not particularly sure where you got the whole thing about Ireland from tbh. Britain already recognized Ireland as an independent country when we got out independence. Add that to the fact that we applied to join the EU at the same time as them in the 70s plus the RAF have access to our airspace, Anglo-Irish relations weren’t nearly bad enough that we’d refuse to join an organization just cause they were in it, maybe initially but afterwards no

[@Keilahoro]

As a Finn and active reservist, I see our neutrality more important than Nato membership. Our Defence forces are modern, well equipped and highly motivated. We have one of the biggest armys and the largest artillery on europe. We are not afraid or Russia. Our woodlands, swaps and lakelands are nightmare for invading forces. We are well prepared for war if that would ever come.

[@rivality100]

Finland has never been neutral, especially in the next few years. Everyone knows that

[@x_mau9355]

Bless you for your wise words. Here people think to International Relationship and military issues in a "puberal" way. Or maybe they just think to movies or videogames.

[@rivality100]

@@x_mau9355 After the war, I see no point in neutrality. It is quite clear that Finland can no longer bow to Putin and Russia. Russia has also shown that it is a danger to Finland. Russia has also threatened Finland. If I think about the best in Finland, then NATO may be our only option. I would not have originally wanted NATO. But now its time has come. Otherwise, we will have to go to war. Russia has shown that they are not interested in the independence of its border neighbors. After Ukraine, Russia attacks either Finland, Moldova or Georgia. Russia will not attack NATO countries because it does not dare to do so because the whole world would be destroyed. Finland no longer has any options with this. Sure, if we want to be like Belarus, that is, we would be slaves to Russia, but I personally do not accept that, and not many others. At least I respect Western values, democracy.

[@x_mau9355]

@@rivality100 Finland looking at a NATO membership is like go searching for new problems where there aren't. Rethink carefully, neutrality is a plus. LOL What? Where did you people find this BS? They just want a buffer.. If you put "potentially hostile" military bases in Mexico, what do you think would happen ?

[@rivality100]

@@x_mau9355 I should have guessed you were a Putin fan. It is pointless for you to say that Russia is not a threat to its neighbors. You just want Russia to be able to rule Finland. That is what this is about. You think that Russia has the right to decide other countries. However, that is not true. It is up to each country to decide whether it wants NATO. By the way, have you ever wondered why so many former Soviet countries want NATO? Is it hard to guess? There is no neutrality today. Either it is in NATO or Russia is dictating what happens. Then come to terms when you own the 1,340-kilometer border with Russia. You don’t have any realistic picture of what being a neighbor is. There was no real reason for Russia to attack Ukraine. It may very well attack Finland because Russia realizes that we do not want to be part of Russia and their policy. No one believed that Russia was attacking Ukraine. Now we have seen the truth. Now we see what Russia really is and now is not the time to escape. And avoid responsibility

[@James--Parker]

1:08 this map is outdated. It doesn't included Macedonia or Montenegro.

[@vekuboi]

i dont see liechtenstein either

[@scarymoose4141]

@@vekuboi Liechtenstein isn't a nato member

[@vekuboi]

@@scarymoose4141 did i say it was?

[@scarymoose4141]

@@vekuboi well micro nations are expected to be left out. Monaco, San Mariano, and Vatican City aren't on the map

[@vekuboi]

@@scarymoose4141 or they could do a dot on the position the country is in

[@mitro72]

A Finn here. As a result o Biden & Niinistö meeting just some minutes ago wouldn´t hold my breath for Finns not joining for Nato.

[@BigMamaDaveX]

😎 I came, I saw, I liked, and SUBBED! 👍

[@despudelskern4146]

Neutrality comes mainly from culture. All this country do not want anymore war and decided take care own country problems than tell others what they have to do . It has to do with toleranz and empathy with others... And that means same in family community or country. That is the deep meaning why they are not in NATO. And this country listen what their people want....

[@ilyamiskov]

It's far more complicated than that. Look at Switzerland in WWII. To be neutral when they were surrounded by nazis, they had to blow up main roads and bridges at the borders so that the German army wouldn't be physically able to enter the country, and they had a plan to invade Switzerland despite of it's neutrality. The Swiss advantage however is geography. It's a very mountainous region which makes it extremely difficult to invade. Nazi Germany would have probably been successful at doing so but in order to do that they would have to spend too much money and resources, which was not a wise option. Still the amount of bunkers in Switzerland and cannons ready to fire at their own bridges in order to remain neutral speaks for itself. You can't just say "We're not interested in war" and do nothing. Someone will take advantage of you and invade, so neutrality comes at a cost of being able to defend that neutrality, losing lives, losing resources, destroying infrastructure, all to keep yourself out of it.

[@despudelskern4146]

@@ilyamiskov I agree

[@SuperLeica1]

One lesson learnt from the outbreak of WW I, was that wide spread alliances are twain-edged. It feels safe having the support of allies, but the flopside is that if just one of your co-allies gets into a war, you have to go all-in to support and protect them. Whether you like it or not.

[@kurtpunchesthings2411]

yea this is the main reason for Irish Neutrality " our people will never again be forced into a Foreign war by a foreign power "

[@nirfz]

@@kurtpunchesthings2411 Jadotville? so your part in "" needs the addition "if we can avoid it" (in my opinion).

[@kurtpunchesthings2411]

@@nirfz * UN Peacekeeping Mission

[@nirfz]

@@kurtpunchesthings2411 Yes, and still the irish soldiers there got "forced into a foreign war by a foreign power" when they got attacked. My point is, that their attackers chose to force them into a "war" (or battle). -> By their own intentions, they would have avoided being part of fighting but they could not. In general i would say: If someone attacks a neutral nation this attacker ends the countries neutrality and chooses the side for the former neutral nation.

[@kurtpunchesthings2411]

@@nirfz I mean it's kind of an old Irish joke we are neutral but on the low key not for example the military Strip at Shannon Airport for many years used by American war planes to refuel on route to bombing Muslims in the middle East

[@cris8989]

where are you from? what you studied at school?

[@austrianslav496]

Well, austria is in the nato peace program. And we also have missions in country's like kosovo, bosnia etc. We also train and go on missions with nato countries like germany

[@nirfz]

That's called Partnership for peace, and switzerland is (as far as i remember) also part of this program, as was russia. Under President Trump austria and other countries were "kicked out" of this program or the program got stopped, not sure. Anway, there is no hinderance for nuetral nations to train with nations that are not neutral. Both are not part of a military conflict. NATO nations pay money to get mountain warfare training, in austria and switzerland, same for apline flying training for helicopter pilots... The missions in kosovo and Bosnia were (if i remember correct) only able to be carried out because they are peacekeeping missions and not actual fighting missions. (I don't remember if there was a UN madate for it, not needing the blue headgear.)

[@libby9433]

Great timely video, you explained it really well and concisely and I’m now educated ! Although I don’t think the invasion of Ukraine by Russia is solely about NATO membership. It’s also about preventing EU membership which will raise the standard of living (GDP) in Ukraine and provide a sharp counterpoint to the failures of the Russian economy for ordinary citizens.

[@lucasfoster1471]

Mr. Putin had worked for KGB service intelligence for 16 years! Plus, now he is a President and has power. He knows what he is doing right now. Plan A, plan B, plan C, etc. Support from China, from N.K0R3A, etc. I believe he knows what he is doing.

[@madrooky1398]

​@@lucasfoster1471 I think Putin has cut himself off of important critical input and so created his own echo chamber and now he cant make good judgements anymore. This Ukraine war will be the last chapter of Putins tale... And it will not end well for him. One week or maybe two and Russia will have a new leader and retreat its forces from Ukraine. Until then i hope not too many people die in this madness of a "special military operation"...

[@lucasfoster1471]

@@madrooky1398 I agree with you and I also hate that innocent people are the victims of the war. But why didn't someone think? What's the reason behind Putin's attack? Maybe because NATO has lied. Maybe because Ukraine who was neutral is building US military infrastructure around the Russian's borders. Maybe because USA (with the help of UK) illegally invaded iraq and cause million of deaths, and the world is okaying that. Maybe because of this Maybe because of that Anyway, you are aware of history, right? during German reunification. If no, then i suggest you try to google : "German reunification 1990, NATO, Not even expand one inch eastwards, Boris Yeltsin, Russia, agreement" or try to google : "Summit 2007, Putin asked many times why USA invaded iraq, united nations, UK, unproved accusation" Anyway, I don't stand with Putin. I stand with the TRUTH. Fact is : NATO lied.

[@madrooky1398]

@@lucasfoster1471 I am aware of history. No the promise made about the NATO not moving eastwards was made in the context of the german reunification. Remember, the Soviet Union still existet at this time. Very important for context! That means all nations who have joined NATO after the SU dissolved were part of the Soviet Union. Nobody promised anything to the SU like "Well if you cease to exist we wont gather up your remains". That just did not happen. On the other hand it is absolute right and it frustrates me a lot that nobody is stepping up against US wars and other "criminal activities" around the world. The media is ignoring the fact that this whole "war on terror" thing was a big lie and produced more problems and suffering than any other recent military operation. Hell even the IS could only form up because of this stupid war in Iraq and the support for rebels in Syria. Nobody talks about in seriousness how the support of dictators around the world to limit socialist movements has created so many death and chaos in countries that were actually on their way up. Even Iran once was not an islamic hell hole but there is history and some external interferance how Iran became what it is today. Still, we should not allow Russia to do the same just because we cant prevent the US from doing it. We should help Ukraine remain independent And think about how we can keep our closest friends from repeating the same stupid shit over and over. As you can see it even encurages other leaders acting this way too. If the most powerful country in this time cant act reasonable what kind of signal are they sending to the rest of the world? I am absolute for sanctions for anybody who is invading other countries, even the US. Its just not as easy as it may seem...

[@lucasfoster1471]

Exactly! I also agree with you, that US invasion to Iraq who violated human rights and other criminal activities, nobody seemed to care about it! I feel your frustration. Now, let's reverse the situation, if you're an American and you're inside the US President's administration/team, then China and Mexico are teaming-up for a strong military alliance in the borders (near Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California), are you going to keep silent? MAYBE this situation also triggered, why Mr.Put1n is doing so. And I agree with you, Kyiv should remain neutral/independent. Then now, can somebody here explain why Ukraine (who is not a member of NATO) building a very good military infrastructure near the Russian border? Can somebody explain why the military system in Ukraine is already integrated with that of NATO's? P.S: 1. Just because one eats bread and drink milk as breakfast, it doesn't mean that other people who live at the other side of the world who eat rice as breakfast should follow to eat bread. Just because one's country is a democracy country, it doesn't mean that other countries, who are communists, should follow to be democracy. They have their own internal policies, history, and cultures. 2. I hate innocent people are victims of wars that sacrifice lives. I stand with the TRUTH, not with Putin. My question now is ... did NATO lie?

[@RoboFuryMan]

It would be completely reasonable to return northern Ireland in exchange for joining NATO.

[@_TeXoN_]

1:08 In the map Montenegro is missing.

[@jazzthrowout265]

Switzerland's neutrality was recognized in the Peace of Westphalia in 1648. But Switzerland has been neutral ever since 1515 (when it lost the Battle of Marignano in the Italian Wars against the French).

[@invidusspectator3920]

Serbia also has a interesting reason for not joining NATO. It doesn't apporve of the allied NATO intervention in Yugoslavia in 1999. and subsequent bombing as it was done in spite of international law. Thus joining the alliance would mean a open acknowledgement of the approval of such actions, which is very publicly unpopular. It would also give way to recognition of Kosovo's secession and independence which was originally supported by NATO. Bosnia has similar, but even more complicated reasons for not joining, they mainly lie with the entity of Republika Srpska, which was also forced into peace negotiations due to a NATO intervention in 1995.

[@alterbr33d]

When I was in Sweden, and they're much better at explaining this, but basically they don't want to have to do what the US says when it comes to invading other countries. If its going to make another country worse, involve killing civilians, or for taking another country's resources while causing bloodshed, they want no part in it. That was my ex-girlfriends' family. Plural grammar intended. However not all Swedes are the same. My Swedish cousin back in 2015 was saying that Sweden needs to do an airstrike on Putin. It was the first thing he said to me at the dinner table since coming back. That wouldn't have been a good idea back then as it would have made the west look like the instigators, but in light of recent events, now I can see why he felt that way, its starting to look like an option, if nuclear retaliation wasn't a thing.

[@demonic_myst4503]

So their ignorant?? Nato os a defence policy you join if one is invaded Nato isnt a hey lets ho invade iraq alliance

[@mikaelnilsson7313]

If Sweden would have joined NATO back in 50-60 the pressure from the Soviets on Finland would have been much harder. They had a thing called the VSB pact (friendship and aid). That could have forced Finland in to the Soviet block in worst case scenario if Sweden would have joined NATO.

[@herrakaarme]

NATO doesn't make the members do anything in case of another member invading a third country. Only a member getting attacked causes the unified response. However, guess what? Sweden isn't even a member, yet it was still operating in Libya, Iraq, and Afghanistan. So, what's the difference?

[@davidseto169]

Spot on about Irleand, Finalnd, Austria, Sweden and Switzerland. Please add Cyprus and Malta, who are also membes fo NATO's Partnership for Peace.

[@Eppu_Paranormaali]

Question I, as a Finn, keep asking daily.

[@asicdathens]

Now that the going gets tough both Sweden and Finland are reconsidering their neutrality, especially since they were openly threatened by Russians. They even participated in the emergency NATO head of states meeting.

[@MerimaTropoja]

Sweden is often invited to NATO meetings, they collaborate with NATO even though they are not members.

[@lucasfoster1471]

@@MerimaTropoja What about Australia? Is Australia the member of NAT0? Coz Australia often team up with NAT0. I don't know why.

[@dutchman7623]

@@lucasfoster1471 Civilization? Culture? Freedom? Both Australia and New Zealand often place themselves on the honorable side in history. Voluntary... Without eternal commitment, and in freedom. Compliments to both!

[@lucasfoster1471]

@@dutchman7623 In NATO, what do the first two letters "NA" stand for, please? What is the meaning of "Terra Australis"?

[@blackshirtsocialist1457]

@@lucasfoster1471 they former SEATO so yeah that why

[@matfhju]

Sweden also alloved germany to pass troups thrugh when they inveided Norway too. Takk så mycket søta bror

[@ajeettv]

ikke noe problem

[@CediEntertainment]

During WWII there were several internment camps in sweden. These camps were used for internment of, among others, suspected criminals, German refugees, anarchists and Swedish communists. Military personnel from both sides in the war, if they entered Sweden without prior agreement, were also often subject to internment.

[@thehoogard]

No they didn't. The invasion of Norway was already complete when this happened.

[@Honken55]

More like we accepted them to go from Norway to Finland to help Finland and Germany against Russia....

[@cynic7049]

No they did not.

[@derecktbear6478]

That Will certainly change in the short term,Like very short.. Not years likely in weeks..

[@whitneylynn9915]

Irelands reason is not surprising at all. Anything with Great Britain involved especially in that time. I was least surprised by Switzerland and Ireland. But great video I had questions abt the other three countries!

[@kurtpunchesthings2411]

despite what many people think our Neutrality in wars is not even at all related to the UK anymore " our people will never again be forced into a Foreign war by a Foreign Power " idc if that's the EU the UK or the US they can go F*** themselves if they think theycan demand us fight some foreign war the US and UK ? yea no thx we don't want to bomb poor people in the Middle East NATO ? sorry we don't want to bomb Serbians

[@rhythmicmusicswap4173]

Swtizerland being not part of NATO is not weir d,it's Austria not being part of it that it's strange

[@catherinewilkins2760]

Republic of Ireland has been neutral prio to NATO, was neutral during WW2. Ireland has relied on UK for protection of its Sovereign state. UK has patrolled its boarders all through the cold War. Their standing military is small. You don't seem to have an understanding of UK ROI relationship.

[@mojojim6458]

He's in among a very, very large crowd of people...a host...who do not understand the UK-ROI relationship. ;)

[@TomasHledik]

Nobody outside UK and ROI can understand this relationship. In matter of fact, i am not sure if people in UK and ROI understand it....

[@annfrancoole34]

@@mojojim6458 a lot of American youtubers watch the "Difference between England/GB/UK" and they still call the "island" of GB England, one even said that he did not know the England (he meant GB) was an island.

[@mojojim6458]

@@annfrancoole34 All my life I have used the word England for Great Britain or the UK. We understand that Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are part of the UK, but we very seldom say United Kingdom. Or even Great Britain.

[@dereklambe]

Ireland does not rely on the UK for the ‘protection of its sovereign state’ and the UK has never patrolled Ireland’s borders.

[@jimmyryan5880]

Ireland isnt in Nato because it has neutrality written into the constitution. The movement that led to independence was an anti conscription movement during WW1 with the slogan "we serve neither king nor kaiser, but Ireland". Its a bit more complicated but this is a youtube comment.

[@limerick5931]

That’s not correct. There is no mention of neutrality at all in the Irish Constitution.

[@kurtpunchesthings2411]

that last Quote is so powerful what a shame in 78 we didn't remember that

[@fonziebulldog5786]

!?

[@mikekelly5869]

@@kurtpunchesthings2411 What happened in 78?

[@yelbouayadi]

Great vid... but your map was a tiny bit outdated, with Montenegro and North Macedonia having joined NATO in 2017 and 2020 respectively. Also the Ireland thing did not fully explain why they would join the EU together with Great Britain later on in 1973... in that they needed to accept the de facto border in Ireland too, at least in a practical sense. But I see some reactions here clarifying the situation that Ireland has in its constitution never to join a military alliance. Same way like Austria, except in the case of Austria it was kind of forced upon them. Interestingly Finland and Sweden have no such thing in their constitution. Although Finland was also 'forced' into neutrality, they could join NATO if they wish to. Ireland and Austria would first need to amend their constitution to do that. Also good to note; you can see how important it was for Finland, Sweden and Austria to retain full neutrality in the cold war in the fact that they refrained even from joining the EU before 1995...

[@sunnywintermorning1941]

Youssef, there is nothing in the Constitution of Ireland that requires Ireland to be neutral. The Constitution is silent on the topic. Joining an international military alliance would probably require a referendum to amend the Constitution to permit Ireland to be a member of such an alliance. A subtle difference. Ireland didn’t join NATO in the 1940s because of Ireland’s then opposition to United Kingdom administration of Northern Ireland. That opposition is no longer an issue as Ireland formally accepted United Kingdom administration of Northern Ireland in 1999. However after a policy of neutrality during World War II and for so many decades after, joining a military alliance would be highly controversial. With all that said, the real reason Ireland is neutral is because of its geography. Who would invade Ireland?

[@coldshadow2533]

Finland and Sweden enter NATO chat

[@buddy1155]

And the weirdest country in NATO must be Iceland as they have no army.

[@markschattefor6997]

Well at least it is in the North Atlantic, and many members don't have that connection, why isn't that weird?

[@Cowboy-in-a-Pink-Stetson]

@@markschattefor6997 I guess they just heard "North Atlantic" and went "ooo oooo ooo, that's us! We're in!!

[@zoom5024]

I dont think you can classify Sweden as neutral anymore. I mean it sent over 5000 AT-4 to Ukraine, among 5000 kevlar helmets, and 5000 body kevlar & 135K MRE's. And also 100M euros. I guess Russia wouldnt see that as neutral atleast. 😂

[@stpftw1]

Finland also sent some stuff :D

[@nirfz]

The referee on a football field is (officially) neutral too, does that mean no team gets a freekick and no player gets a red card? I know, neutral countries are not referees, but this is the closest analogy that i can think of. As these nations are militarily neutrall, but not economically. There can be a distinction. (And in case for austria and finnland, the soviet demand was for militarily neutral as far as i remember.) Militarily neutral means that their forces do not join the fighting on either side of a conflict, and that their armed forces sole purpose is defense of the own country. So no attacks of other countries. That is not the case for NATO, Russia, or blockfree countries (that term was used for non neutral nations that were not part of NATO or the waszaw pact) Peacekeeping is allowed, if it's under UN mandate, as these troops are like referees in the middle between conflict groups trying to keep them apart.

[@PastramiStaven]

Also during WW2 why Sweden were Neutral and let Nazi troops through was because, what could we do, Sweden also spied and gave info and the grounded the CIA for example, also Sweden still have to this day in their railway bridges in some places things you can open up to put in explosives to blow up bridges to stop enemy trains for example, also all our mines we had (because Germans wanted the steel) we prepped to blow up incase of an invasion, which was one of the things that kept Germany from taking us over, so there's a lot more to it than.. yeah what you say, but good points. ciao.

[@waterfallfarm5408]

Another thing about Ireland is that in the event of a war We wouldn’t have enough soldiers to fill even a single boat! And since the Irish are incapable of uniting there isn’t much hope for that to change.

[@bubach85]

I’m glad that Sweden stays out of it, the USA isn’t even considered a full democracy and not exactly known for their peaceful ways either. Someone has to be the adult in the room and keep the children apart. :P

[@Yuki-qh9kg]

There are no democracy’s, even Western European countries are republics

[@bubach85]

@Massimo Hack Nope, support has grown no doubt. But still below 50 percent. Thankfully. We host neutral peace talks which would be impossible if aligned. Also, we were never part of the Soviet Union. So the risk of invasion is basically zero. Besides, considering what we have seen of their army capacity… we’d kick their asses. Again. For like the fifth time.

[@ristusnotta1653]

Finns arent in NATO because we got good defense forces so we don't really need to be, the biggest reason tho is that Finns before the things in Ukraine didn't want to join, most were against NATO and membership, mostly because we don't wan't to be involved in West's conflicts and it also makes the situation worse in Finnish-Russian border which is over thousand kilometers of land border and if we join NATO it would become NATO-Russia border aka more Russian and western troops concentrated in that area

[@lucasfoster1471]

Smart country! Clever, that you don't want to be involved with West's conflicts. 👍👍👍

[@sancholife9451]

​@@lucasfoster1471 Agree! Clever, that you don't want to be involved with West's conflicts. NATO in Finland can destroy silence in scandinavian region.

[@blackcoffeebeans6100]

Now most of the finns want to join NATO. The recent statistics tell that. The same with Sweden.

[@ristusnotta1653]

@@blackcoffeebeans6100 yep

[@lucasfoster1471]

@@blackcoffeebeans6100 Poor you. You are the victim of western media. Poor the finns. They are fed only with the western media, which has their own agenda. FAIR is : when you look at both sides' argumentation. Not only one side, and then you are blind not seeing other side's point of view. Statistically they want to join NATO? No wonder. Because media has fed them to do so. S'il vous plait. It's their right. Poor them.

[@USStateOfSiberiaGHWBush1992]

The three countries that would qualify for joining NATO and I would never expect them to join NATO, besides Russia of course, are Belarus, Serbia and Mexico. Not that Mexico is too far south, since it isn't.

[@andreasschlager9154]

Why do you pronounce it Nado not Nato ?

[@mojojim6458]

Here we are again, listening to this guy's nonsense. Sigh © TSGO

[@nexialist5050]

I really wish Germany would have agreed to the Soviet offer of a neutral and unified Germany in the 50th. We would be off so much better now, like Switzerland, Sweden, Norway, etc. But our Government never had the balls to stand on their own, always just carving for some us shoulder-patting, ...and we are dragged in another european war (after Yugoslavia), and countless out-of-area-Actions; all amoral und just furthering US interests.

[@wizzilegal]

100%

[@TheCarloza]

How old are you?

[@armandagsagani4500]

And it is important to to you if they join or not

[@christopherkaas6470]

Without watching the video Sweden&Switzerland, Neutral tradition Austria&Finland, By agreement with USSR and the west they was forced to be neutral Ireland, Issues with UK

[@helenaholmberg1987]

They're called "buffer states": exist to prevent war btw two opposing blocs

[@prplt]

the other 4 countries don't really need it cause there's no threat for them, however we (Finland) should join ASAP as we have a long border with Russia 💩

[@lyrigageforge3259]

I just hope they don't drag their feet too long about that one given the situation and the fact that this war with Ukraine is not about to blow over - nor will it take just 'half a year' to join Nato. It is complicated enough internally and even from the side of Nato, never mind the preparedness. All that really matters to me is that when I see Finnish military intelligence, retired, expert who teaches his stuff at a university and other similar experts say that we need to join - that then we must.

[@hanoianboy9562]

It's the opposite actually, Finland should stay neutral like it has been for so long, joining NATO would not make you safe and in fact will make Russia more worried and more likely to invade Finland. In the past decades after WW2 Finland has always been neutral towards Russia. Look at what happened to Ukraine, Finland joining NATO would npot help.

[@lyrigageforge3259]

@@hanoianboy9562 Being without allies is a literal invitation to be attacked.

[@prplt]

@@hanoianboy9562 that's bs, just look at Ukraine that isn't in NATO and compare to the Baltics who are

[@HL.208]

Montenegro and North Macedonia are also NATO members. This map is before 2018.

You should check out the reason why there are no NATO bases in France. It sheds some light on why no one should be in NATO.

[@tuomastukiainen9925]

why Russia cant join Nato? they ask it in 90s? because nato need have some enemy? See how much Usa make money after they war around a world.

[@fireiron369]

Russia refused to join NATO after Putin took charge (because Putin is comparatively far right) but they were always on the fence. NATO basically rips a nation’s army from them and replaces it with a NATO army and Russia wanted to keep its military independent, that’s why they didn’t join in the end.

[@lexus8018]

Ireland just doesn't want to be in any aliance with Brittain

[@ivanmeno]

wanted to watch this video, then saw the publish date

[@kmcc1980]

Ireland is also militarily neutral (Read: we do not spend “enough” on military and could not fulfil the military needs of being in NATO at moment.)

[@mitro72]

Must say that Swedes have said many times that they will keep fighting until the last Finn. So, basically we have strenghten our army to survive without aid from Sweden. No hard feelings though, because we are so much better in icehockey...=)

[@Pubbehey1]

Swedes dont protest very often, but if that ever happend. You can be damn sure that we would force our government to get involved. 1 time of failure to do anythingt to help is enough. This time we WILL help.

[@veronicadredd22]

He really has a poor understanding of Irish neutrality. There are powerful strategic and political arguments in favour of Irish neutrality. As de Valera argued at the time when small states involve themselves in major wars they put at risk their very existence, and they control neither the course of the war nor the peace that follows. when WWII broke out It was less than 17 years since Ireland fought the war of Independence to leave the UK, which was followed by a divisive civil war, the country was young and still wounded and poor after the economic war in the 30s against the UK. Neutrality during WWII was a statement of Independence, Ireland spilt enough blood fighting British wars, You could hardly expect Ireland to join an alliance with an army that was killing Irish nationalists in NI.

[@brianbyrne3003]

Very well written.

[@aseemguru]

why do most youtubers leave Montenegro and North Macedonia from NATO

[@FormerlyEpicjcat]

Well atleashed england has to deal with a huge piece of land on there maps that is half of ireland

[@patriot52realfinn22]

Finnish army is now so strong that we are joining NATO what ever Putin says. Soviet era was good for our trade and stable. Sweden is a little bit trusting Finnish army. I am a Finn and I know exatly what I am talking about. Our relationship to Russia is unstable. our president is the best person knowing Putin who is now war crriminal. Our Winter war a disaster fornSoviets cause in 105 days they lost at leas 200000 men. We lost 23000 and 45000 was injured. Finland was not a nazi ally, what ever says. We had no treament with Germany and we bought weapons from Göring and Veltjens. Without german weapons and flight sqdrn Kuhlmey we might be defeated...?? Finnish artillery is one of biggest in Eurupe. Our peacetime army in total is 280000 men and wartime reserve 870000 men.

[@5Andysalive]

Most surprised by Finland. They really should know better. Historically crazy world conquering madmen only respected neutrality if some big mountains and a pretty serious army were in the way.

[@Mustanaamio7]

Neutrality has worked very well for us. We have been living in peace about 80 years now.

[@sampohonkala4195]

Finland with 900 000 troops has a pretty serious army. The rule of thumb in Finnish forest - lake terrain is that the invader in conventional war needs about a 3:1 superiority to be succesfull - Russia would have a hard time finding 2,7 million men for the campaign.

[@5Andysalive]

@@sampohonkala4195 Very true. That said, crazy world conquering madmen don't always make logical decisions. Although the german one never attempted anything against Switzerland. Which has big mountains and also a serious army. While Belgium had neither. That's my point :) But Nato or not, Finland seems to have defintely prepared for it.

[@christopher4589]

What aout Australia and New Zeland?

[@Dai_Abdurrahman]

I am Austrian bruder|brate and I can tell you. I am proud we are not in Nato or with Russia. We are with love and peace and human rights. Grüße aus dem Süden Österreichs

[@Pidalin]

You are same close to Russia as Poland or Czechia, Russian agression is even your problem. I hope you have at least some defense agreements with other countries because your 10 hunters with shotgun and Kommisar Rex will not stop Russians.

[@Dai_Abdurrahman]

@@Pidalin brate 🇷🇺 je moj narod. Ja sam iz Avstrija ampak jaz imam malo slovenski krv i çe$ki. Russia will not attack Austria. They are just interested in Kiev the mothercity for all russians. Even belaeussians say kiev is the mothercity. Kiever Rus. Austrija is a small country which is neutral brate. And josip jelacic was half $vabo. And kommisar rex i give a fugggg about rhis $vabo. I dont care about the geeman languge nor the german nation i am from Austrija brate hvala lepa iz Gradec $tajerska Avstrija

[@Dai_Abdurrahman]

Ps my surename is czech sooo. Like prohaska which is a famous AUSTRIJan name or Novak Nowak Horwath Horvath Horvat Pariasek Sokol Vrava Varva $a$ek and what else half of vienna has a serbian or czech name

[@Dai_Abdurrahman]

@@Pidalin look where Dr Karl Renner or Bertha von Suttner was born. Karel Schwarzenberg is Austrijan and bene$ is a traitor to humanity.

[@Dai_Abdurrahman]

@@Pidalin placky is Austrijan and malo $vabo kak ludjevit $tur or ludjevit gay all of them have german austrijan blood. Look where theodor korner is born. Look who Klaus Johannis is. He is also austrijan. Look at south tyrol or boehmia marovia i silesia 3 provinces and now they are a country? We were together for a thousand years and now....look at Rudolf Meister he is also a traitor. Carinthians they stood with AUSTRIJA despite their Slovene mothertounge like we in $tajerska did. Only maribor was stolen