This man lost me on, start trying to negotiate now....No you dont negotiate and appease a tyrannical dictator who is already on a war path. You put him down.
@@voldemarvaglaots6690 neither will happen Vatnik, what will happen is a conflict Russia cannot hope to win and the ruin of the Russian federation if it dares.
Gorbachev said there was never an agreement about countries joining NATO. Russia has broken every agreement they have ever signed including with neutral Ukraine. This guy is a russian apologist.
There was no signed agreement over it, but there was a verbal agreement. The meeting note is out now and can be found in writing there is what was talked about in the meeting. The meeting note is declassified now and available in the National Security Archive. Not once, but three times, Baker tried out the “not one inch eastward” formula with Gorbachev in the February 9, 1990, meeting. He agreed with Gorbachev’s statement in response to the assurances that “NATO expansion is unacceptable.” Baker assured Gorbachev that “neither the President nor I intend to extract any unilateral advantages from the processes that are taking place,” and that the Americans understood that “not only for the Soviet Union but for other European countries as well it is important to have guarantees that if the United States keeps its presence in Germany within the framework of NATO, not an inch of NATO’s present military jurisdiction will spread in an eastern direction.” due to lots of comment here I would like to add that please read other comments of me here before writing any comment to me as I can't repeat my words for every individual 😅
@@rouz0 I have PERSONALLY saw Gorbachev on Russia TV 1, months before he died, saying there was NO discussion on any NATO expansion. My question to you : HOW could that have happened when ALL former Warsaw Pact were still part of it up until March 1991 ?! That's Putin's repeated lie ! He tells russians what he knows they like to hear.
Eastern Europe did not invade Russia. Nato dd not invade Russia. Russia invaded Ukraine in order to annex it and Nato is bs excuse only. @@humphreybradley3060
Did anyone invade Russia? Russia did invade Ukraine. Putin wants to annex Ukraine. It has nothing to do with Nato. Ukraine had no chance tojoin. It had no will to joine before 2014. @@damianmcgowan3614
All the Eastern European countries that joined NATO joined willingly because they knew how aggressive russia can be. Also no promise was made to the russians that NATO would not be expanded.
It really baffles me that someone intelligent like Mr Sixsmiths cannot see, or sufficently appreciate, that Russia is not ruled by ordinary politicians, but by a small gang of gangsters. What good would it have done to try to "understand" Al Capone and take his "security interests" seriously?
A bulletproof automobile 🚘 to protect President Franklin Delano Roosevelt en route to the joint session of the United States Congress to declare war upon the Empire of Japan 🗾 after the sneaky attack on Pearl Harbor.
@@johndoe-vc1we ....It has nothing to do with the security of Russia with Putin. It's about empire building and all these pesky countries in NATO are getting in his way.
Wrong Vatnik. Soviet troops were on the ground and occupying those countries of Eastern Europe, and unless the British and Americans wanted to start a new war to expel the Soviets (As George S. Patton wanted to do) then there was nothing to do except to try to stop further invasion and communist subversion into countries such as Greece and Italy. Even all throughout the existence of the USSR, the U.S. never even recognized the illegal occupation of the Baltic countries and all 3 maintained embassies in Washington until the USSR officially died.@@rouz0
I agree that listening and trying to understand what an opposing/enemy country wants is a very good idea (approximately 2:45 into the interview), however I want to point out that Ukraine gave up it's Nuclear Arms in exchange for it's independence and security. Then Russia invaded them.
Ukraine didn't have any control over those Nuclear Arms and their independence and security were guaranteed provided that it is not part of a military alliance like Austria
@@margelatu79 Since the nuclear weapons were on Ukrainian soil, they had control over them. And the Budapest agreement contains no words regarding Ukrainian neutrality (the agreement can be read on the internet). But only that Russia, the US and the UK promised to respect the borders and sovereignty of Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan in exchange for Russia being allowed to take over the nuclear weapons from Ukraine. I recommend you read the agreement and not guess what it contains.
@@Kavala76 The only coup that happened in 2014 was when Russian soldiers (little green men) without national designations annexed Crimea (which Putin has acknowledged), and when Igor Girkin with Russian soldiers and weapons revolted the people of Donbas.
The "mistake" by NATO/EU was to not react firmly/physically to the 2014 invasion for annexation of parts of Ukraine. Doing nothing to that or the shooting down of the Malaysian airliner created an open invitation to Putin for an opportunity to raise his profile at home and abroad. Result is that all EU countries are now urgently expanding their defence budgets. We'll be paying for the lack of response to the 2014 invasion for a long time....
This is EXACTLY right! Force only recognizes force! The opportunity, in fact the REQUIREMENT by The West, in 2014, was to FORCEFULLY STOP RUSSIA...THEN!
A lot of people will be caught off guard when Russia begins attacking other countries particularly to countries that are not prepared in west and Africa, Egypt. Same as when putin invaded Ukraine, many were surprised and unprepared ☹️
According to George Robertson who was head of NATO from 1999-2003. Putin asked Robertson in 2000 “When are you going to invite us to join NATO?’ Robertson replied: “ We don’t invite people to join NATO, they have to apply to join NATO.” Putin replied, ‘Well, we’re not standing in line with a lot of countries that don’t matter.’” This has been backed up during an interview on BBC by David Frost with Putin.
Estonian here and like we have said since regaining our independence and even before that.. there is no negotiation with Russia. Russians have and always will be imperialistic and believing that they have some sort of right to go over and beyound international laws. You can never believe any treaties with Russian leaders and should always prepare for the worst. And as you probably see, eastern European countries are really doing that. Have been doing that already since 1991.. slowly but steadily. Only western Europeans for some reason still don't want to understand what we have been telling you all the time. Right now here in east it is feeling like westerners felt before first two world wars. Just feeling the air of dread and danger and yet understanding that if it comes to that we would go and fight for freedom and order.. even if alone and doomed to certain failure
Some ignorants still think Putin's paranoia and greed is more important than Eastern Europe's freedom, will, voice and agenda. That is pathetic and scary.
you know what you are talking about from hard won experience. The "Captive Nations" as they were then known were freed when the Iron Wall fell due to exceptional leadership from President Ronald Reagan. RR was the greatest President of them all.
I watched a documentary on Estonia's experience of Russia - was eye-opening and upsetting. I realised how invasive Russia is, like a cancer. I can only imagine how Estonians, Latvians, Lithuanians and Poles are feeling right now and I'm so pleased to see the generosity of those countries in their support of Ukrainians.
What is NATO’s incentive to negotiate with Russia? Russia has acted in bad faith and is untrustworthy. NATO has taken no territory by force. Russia cannot say the same. NATO has not encroached on Russia but Russia has intimidated its neighbors to join NATO. Negotiations are illogical and if Russia chooses to attack NATO then it knows the outcome. I highly doubt that is an option for Russia.
@@Kavala76 Let's start with the first pont. Where I can read about this NATO expansion agreement. Which relationship it regulate and between which parties? Who have signed it?
Nato has invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, bombed Libya and serbia illegally. Even the sanction against Russia are not legal. They would have to be sanctioned by the UN security council. Considering the US , the leader of NAto , they permanently try regime change(even democraticly elected governemnt) in some country, wich is against the charta of the UN
Putin b4 America invasion in iraq was a different persona. After he was something else. That is why he wanted a second phase at presidency. You cannot sight external factors for his views. May be an external factor could be china closer relationship to Rissia's ideas than b4. The less dictatorial leaders couldn't encourage him with his wild ideas, therefore limiting his military and political space. Nato expansion was a pretext not the reason for a war.
well, they had left over 30 years ago, without much ado... so yes, it is proven, de facto, shown, demonstrated, clear, and not some wild dream nor delusion. Or are you the deluded one for not seeing that?
‼Pay attention to his intellectual slight of hand. While denying being a putin apologist, he weaves in little comments that are designed to subconsciously make you sympathise with the russian narrative. Just one example, 1) Putin accuses Lithuania [ooh bad putin] of denying civil rights to those who don't speak Lithuanian [oh wait Lithuania is bad too]; 2) "speaking fluent Lithuanian is pretty hard for anybody to do" [of course, how can those poor russians be expected to learn it?]. Well it's not for someone who tries to learn it, especially after living in Lithuania for 25 years. Some politicians and journalists use this method, beware of it!
so Lithuanian ARE pushing out Russophone that were BORN there ! As a Quebecois, I hear you talk like those anglo-saxon Canadian.. and you are as despicable !
Those countries who turn against ethnic Russians in their countries, like Ukraine did extensively, talk themselves into being afraid they'll become the next Ukraine. The hate these pansies think they feel is totally unnecessary but is encouraged by the west.
This guy conviently forgets that all those former Eastern block nations practically begged to become part of NATO, because they knew first hand about Russian imperialist aggression. He has such a bad take on the situation that's pretty much " let's appease the tyrant and hope he goes away " attitude.
The thing I think is ignorant about this line of thinking, that NATO membership for Ukraine means missiles can be stationed 10 minutes from Moscow, is that it ignores the fact that missiles are already stationed 10 minutes from Moscow. SLBM are an integral part of the nuclear triad, possessed by both Russia and NATO, making that a substantively bankrupt way of thinking and objecting to the expansion of NATO membership.
@@livingtribunal4110 NOT MINUTES FROM MOSCOW. LETS REMEMBER THAT RUSSIA MOVED NUKES AND WEAPINS TO BELARUS. SOOOO??? IT WILL BE A VERY .VERY BAD MOVE ON PUKINS PART TO TARGET A NATO STATE...RUSSIA CAN NOT HANDLE A WAR WITH UKRAINE..THE WEST..NATO WILL SHRED RUSSIA.. WHICH...I HATE WAR...HOWEVER..I THINK THERE ARE RETALITIRY STANCES THAT MUST BE FAST..FURIOUS AND END AGGRESSION..PERIOD.. RUSSIA ALSO LOST THEIR RIGHT TO INTEGRITY..TERRITORY...SOVEREIGNTY WHEN THEY ENTERED UKRAINE AS TERRORIST COMMITTING GENOCIDE....
Martin Sixsmith made some good points but I have to pick him up on his assertion that the West should take some blame at their failure to listen to Russia's concerns just prior to the Feb 2022 invasion. He conveniently forgets that Russia invaded Crimea in 2014 and by not responding, the West in effect gave a signal to Moscow that it didn't care about the rest of Ukraine either and the light was green for further attack. The rest, as Martin might say, is history.
Russia has no concerns. Russia needs excuses to annex. Putin does not want Ukraine to exist and he blames his victims for asking for help. Russia is not Ukraine's master.Russia is not a special need baby and Eastenr Europe is not russian backyard anymore.
He also says we don't know what Putin wants which is false. He want's all those former Soviet states to fall under Russias sphere of influence, not the west's. The problem is all those countries that Putin wants to control want to control their own destiny instead of being a buffer zone in between them. They want to be part of the EU and can't do that unless they join NATO for security reasons.
Russia has expressed its first concerns since about 1991. Not hearing concerns once is possible, not hearing concerns for 30 years is a deliberate strategy.
Say what you like but it was Russia that invaded Hungary and Czechoslovakia in the 50s. Nato certainly didn't invade anyone. My father was an artillery officer in BAOR Germany at that time and many of their exercises were based on resisting a Russian invasion of western Europe along the fast autobahns because entire Russian tank regiments were already lined up along them ready to go.
This guy is saying we should listen to Russian concerns and negotiate to avoid direct conflict with NATO. He doesn't seem to consider that directly challenging article 5 is exactly what Putin wants as he doesn't believe the US, UK etc. Will risk nuclear war to defend the Baltic states. The interviewee talks about Russia wanting guarantees that Ukraine would not join NATO, ignoring the fact that the occupation of Crimea meant Ukraine was incapable of meeting the criteria of joining. He talks about the 'not one inch east' myth one moment, then mentions how Russia had at one point considered during NATO itself. What an inconsistency. How can Russians feel they could join NATO but also believe the one inch myth. Last time I checked, Russia is as east as you can get in Europe.
This guy is an appalling Russian apologist. NATO expansion is a Kremlin talking point and nothing more. Ukraine and other ex-soviet countries have every right to choose their own path, it not up to Russia.
Putin has always known that NATO is not a military threat to Russia. The west had become strategically reliant on Russian hydrocarbons, the US had withdrawn most of its military. European countries has run down their military to the extent that the US does not regard the UK military a capable ally and the Germans had almost disbanded its military. NATO had not stationed troops in Eastern Europe until Russia started to stage incidents in the Baltic states. Russia does consider the EU a massive threat to his regime as the Russians can see how wealthy countries like Poland have got, the freedoms we have, the lack of corruption etc. This guy just fails to have even the basic understanding of what Putin is about. As for Ukraine joining NATO that was never going to happen as their membership was rejected long ago, which was a massive mistake but before the start of the war there was not chance of Ukraine joining.
"Putin has always known that NATO is not a military threat to Russia. " Are you aware of the countless times since 2008 Russia made it clear that it DID view NATO as a threat? Are you aware of the 2008 memo sent by William Burns (US ambassador to Russia) to Condoleezza Rice titled "Niet means Niet" It doesn't matter what you or I think of NATO. It does however matter what Russia thinks of NATO, and to learn that you must listen
Militarily Russia is down in the cellar right now, and they dig themselves deeper every day they stay in Ukraine. Any subsequent stockpiling of military hardware will be watched with eagle eyes by Russia´s assumed enemies, if it becomes alarming, it will be more than matched.
@@jamesgreen1116 Yes, Russia made a big mistake invading Ukraine, and they compounded that mistake by not leaving 18 months ago. Now they will pay for that mistake, Ukraine will destroy the russian oil depots and Russia will have to leave Ukraine. 8 months at the most and Russia will not have enough tanks to defend itself, never mind advancing, this war is already lost by Russia.
Apparently not, they'll have more trained men at the end of the war than at the beginning. Whilst the UK is shrinking it army to just 50,000. Madness. We've already lost world war three before it began
Russian paranoia is and has long been a threat to all countries unfortunate enough to have Russia as a neighbour. It should not be an excuse for denying independent, democratic states the right to ally for their mutual defence.
The idea that the countries that were invaded and occupied by Russia for decades should prioritise Russia’s security sensitivities over their own is obscene.
Your statement is absolutely correct - and highlights the narcissistic flavour of Russians towards its neighbours - Russia is important, no one else is.
What are you learning from history ? On many occasions negotiations have prevented a war. Just because it did not work one time (I assume you talk of 1938/Munich) no reason not to try it
@@markusdittrich7000 Russia has pretty much broken every agreement they have ever signed. Also you can't negotiate with an aggressive country like Russia, this is why appeasing the Germans went so badly and in the end the allies had to go to war with them regardless. If you give an inch they will take a mile. When you try to appease the aggressor and give them power to negotiate they will take a mile and it will only ever show that they can do more in the future to gain more. Stopping them now in Ukraine and not giving them what they want is the only way to send the message that they can’t get away with this. Shutting them down now will show that what they are doing will not be tolerated in any capacity
@@ZenXIV Appeasement did not work in 1938. I give you that. Conclusion is do not talk to each other? Talkin did not work in 1938, but there are many occasions when talking did help. It is a manipulation by our media that 1938 is taken as a referral. I suggest you start thinking yourself. My apologies, I do not want to insult you, but I believe you did not think this through
NATO doesn’t go around asking countries to join the alliance… countries want to join because they don’t believe Putin, and many Russian politicians can be trusted. The Baltic states are very well aware of what it’s like to live within the sphere of Russian control. Six smith is delusional
13:06 "unless they speak fluent Lithuanian, which is pretty hard for anyone to do." If you claim to be a citizen who has lived in a country all your life, being expected to make the effort to learn the national language seems reasonable. Not doing so leads to separate communities and all the problems that brings.
Prior to 2022,NATO would not have accepted Ukraine (out of geopolitical considerations). Now it is a different matter. Russia is materialising its own security paranoia.
Ukraine was one of the founding members of the United Nations when it joined in 1945 as the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, after the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, the independent Ukraine retained its seat. NATO was founded in 1949, how could NATO or "the West" enter into agreements on behalf of Ukraine?
@@MrThartofwaror Romanian, Poland, German defence... invading New York, Toronto, Rio... We must have big prices and our governments have to spend abroad, we should never attempt minding own business, own people and problems because.... Russia is a treath😂😂😂😂 Russia will invade world😂😂😂 Give more money to Biden's employees in Ukraine so that the world (and universe) can be safe 😂😂😂😂 What is worse than anything...they consider us to be complete idiots since media and governments, often in the same day, say that Russia have collapsed and balancing fear right after it by saying they can conquer everyone easily. Unbelievable. I don't believe anything anymore except that we will have less money, less rights and more problems
3:33 He repeats Putin’s excuse that if Ukraine joins NATO rockets could reach Moscow in 5 minutes. Well, if Finland joins NATO (as it did) rockets will reach StPetersbug in 20 seconds. According to this man’s logic Putin should invade Finland now. Finns clearly had some other logic.
Sixsmith is blinded by his love of Russian culture in particular literature. We can love and admire these things as we may admire the diverse and interesting cultural history of Ukraine and its separate and distinct language and literature - while at the same time denouncing the barbarity of Russian government and politics. We witness daily with our own eyes the disregard and cruelty with which they treat their soldiers and subjects. At this stage unless putin steps back, and the burden is on him as the invader, then we are locked into the inevitable. We can not back down now because to do so would show democracies as weak and unable or disinclined to protect the very thing that sets us apart from the invader.
The risk of a Nato allied nation being attacked by Russia depends in large part on whether or not Vladimir Putin is still around in a few years, and whether or not Donald Trump is allowed to further his political career...
@@steveturner6770 Not sure which of the two despises Nato more... I guess I would start there... So far as worry goes, both seem to have a number of worries... Thanks
@@lsd8497 In a way it is unfolding right now... If I were the king of the world, tell you what I'd do... Provide Ukraine with any assistance they need to stop Russian Aggression... A threat to freedom and liberty anywhere is a threat to freedom and liberty everywhere... Thanks
I listened carefully to this, and i disagree with his main points. The collective "West", (liberal democracies, NATO, the atlanticist military hegemony) won the Cold War. It was a real war: we won it. Of course there are consequences. Minus the vulgarities about how the West allegedly spoke with Russia, I do hope our side never lost track of the central fact. Like all victors, we were within our rights to welcome in alliance those countries choosing a transition to western-style democracy. I cannot imagine a counter logic to that. NATO has an open-door policy which dovetails with it, and we now have newer members who fled the likelihood of future Russian invasion. Nor did we pursue those members recklessly; even Poland was made to apply, then wait 7 years to join. So what is his argument? That Russia did not like it? Oh well. Perhaps Russia should have kept their empire. On that point, we see the revanchist Russian empire marching on Georgia, the Caucuses, Crimea, and especially Ukraine making an argument for "deference" to Russia an obscenity. The oft repeated "history" of secret Western promises to halt NATO expansion are fake according to primary sources. Where is the record of such promise, or a treaty? There is none. Meanwhile Russia signed at least 4 agreements which promise Ukrainian sovereignty.
These guys absolutely have no idea what they are talking about. Sure let's give Russia Half of the world just so they can feel happy. No that's not how this works 😂
Within 6 weeks of the Russian attack on Ukraine a peace treaty has been drafted, and was ready to be signed. It was the west (Boris Johnson/USA ) that wanted the fight to continue. So I would say the west can not be stopped by words
No... The US and allies will not live under the thumb of Russia or tolerate any kind of discomfort from Russia while Russia celebrates victory. The US and NATO will defend each other against Russia if things get serious.
@@k.sullivan6303 Don"t worry , Russia will not attack, therefore nobody has to live under the thumb of Russia. Though the US has a history of leaving allies behind.
NATO didn't move into Eastern Europe ; they begged to be part of NATO. Should we have refused abd say , you belong tot the Russian influence sphere ? In the negotiations they said not moving into Eastern Europe, but after a while (collaps SSSR) in the drafts no mention of it !!
If our aim was to prevent war with Russia, then strategically speaking it was idiotic to allow NATO to Occupy all the countries which could otherwise have acted as a buffer zone between the West and Russia. Would you like a potential Opponent to be stood 20 meters away or squared right up to you with their face pressed against yours?
Because it never applied and never meet the criteria. It never wanted to be Nato member like every other and this s not how it works. @@voldemarvaglaots6690
Russia wants to regain its empire and control. So its feels like a big IAM again. Power!! Revenge. Thats all this war is as bout. Theres nothing in the past, and no excuses or misunderstandings. That truely justifies the savagery there inflicting on Ukraine. Plus if the roles were reversed. And they had won the cold war. As if Russia would of been humble and kind. And not acted in there own interests. Really as if they would have told states or neighbours they could not of joined there institutions. If the roles were reversed. So why does the west berate themselves. When Russia would of done what was right for them as the west did. We constantly make excuses for Russia. Its not like they even have a history of keeping there promises. Or behaving well with there neighbours either.
You can’t negotiate with terrorists…. Russia is a dictatorship & trying to undermine their intentions , is the wrong approach. I disagree a lot with this guy.
Aww! Poor NATO states. How did NATO end up on the Russian border? The West knows EXACTLY what Russia's concerns are and they've known them since 1990 but, they have deliberately and determinedly flaunted those concerns. The West has been covetous of Rusdian territories and resources. More importantly, NATO has been adversarial to Russia and in recent years, NATO has been repurposed as an offensive body - Serbia, Kosovo, Libya, Iraq, etc. Russia would be foolish to tolerate such things because, as we know, the West's word and promises isn't worth anything.
Do you know WHY so many former Warsaw pact members joined Nato as quicly as they could? To be secured from russian agression. Do you care about their concerns and freedom? Does it matter to you? Are they independent countries or russian backyard to you?
@@Blanka1100 That makes no sense! Russia hasn't attacked or invaded a nation since 1990. The only instances involved US/NATO meddling in Chechnya (part of Russia), Georgia and now Ukraine. Meanwhile, NATO and the US have attacked a succession of nations almost every year since 1990. Nowhere in the world from Africa to the Middle East to Asia or the Americas does any developing nations go to sleep contemplating the possibility of a Russian attack. It is the ravenous, resource bereft nations of NATO who need such conflicts in order to access and control resources which they do not have.
Nato does not invade to annex while every country in Eastern Europe knows Russia simply has a break and comes back to invade and annex more because this is what Russia ever does. Russia is always the same. Nobody is sorry for Osama, Saddam, Assad or Milosevic but even if...it is still no justification for Russian crimes. Who does Russia think it is? Russia is not even super power anymore. Russians still think they are entitled to be a super power while they are anything but. It is funny, pathetic and scary at the same time. Nato is not a reason for Putin to invade Ukraine. It is an excuse to justify Putin's sick idea to annex Ukraine. Putin does not wants Ukraine to exist. Nato has nothing to do with Putin's state of mind and his greed. Putin wants new world order as well as he wants Ukraine to be a part of Russia. @@Titoscudd
At times the arguments are colorable, but ultimately he undermines them all when admitting negotiating with Putin is pointless. Russia always ever was an imperialist, militaristic state, and the only thing they understand is force. Sometimes a cigar really is just a cigar.
Can I just say something about these Russian feelings? Russians didn’t have these feelings until they invaded Ukraine, Finland and Sweden didn’t join nato until Russia invaded Ukraine and Poland did not spend 6% of it’s gpd on military until Russia invaded Ukraine perhaps if Russia stopped invading Ukraine and went back to there own country they would stop feeling like the west is getting ready to defend against there invasion.
This man is clearly talking out of his ess. Bush sr never made such a promise (15:40) . Never. Moreover; it would haven been totally misplaced if he had. It's not for the US president to decide what the Polish, the Tjechs, the Romanian should do, or prefer. This man seems to be forgotten that Russia was granted to take the seat of the USSR in the UNSC,.. was invited to become member of the G7, and that Russia was allowed membership of the Council of Europe.
Some people still think Eastern Europeans have no voice, no agenda and no right to be secured and its safety is less important than French, German or American. We are not a ping pong ball and Russia is neither our master nor a special need baby. Russia is cheap gas station which can not stand its time of glory is over. Nato is not a reason for Putin to invade Ukraine. It is just another excuse for Russia to annex somebody else's land. Putin says Ukrainians are just little Russians. Nato has nothing to do with Putin's greed.
Your disability to hear something opposite of your belief and the cognitive dissonance that his words caused for you is very interesting 😅 he anyway didn't say anything that a man who is a man of book and study didn't know. Instead of wasting time here go read more to understand geopolitics and how our world functions. We don't make decisions by belief but by facts
@@Michiel_de_Jongit's well documented that there was no agreement. That there may have been discussions about one doesn't change that fact. Gorbachev and his FM, Eduardo Schevardnadze (later Georgian president) said as much.
It's not a fear of western aggression. It's a fear of democracy working close enough to its borders so that Russians could easily see the comparable difference between how they live and how a country, like for instance Ukraine, would benefit and pull ahead of Russia.
100% correct. Many people blame the West for the Ukraine war, and the main argument is NATO expansion. But I wondered why many Western Europe and former USSR states wanted to join NATO rather than live peacefully with Russia. From my point of view, many countries choose to go with NATO because if anyone knows how Putin became the wealthiest individual in Russia and if anyone joins him, he should be a crock as Putin and has to have loyal crooks surrounding him and protect them from the general public. Many people will follow them, and as a result, the country is always poor, and the majority of people suffer. The funniest thing is that Putin blames the West for his failures. Putin likes people, and people who have no sense of relative freedom or idea of liberty hate democracy; democracy is not without any issues, and that is the reason many free people choose democracy. Anyhow, my argument is there is no prosperous nation with dictatorships, and always endless wars are the answers to all of the issues that dictator morrons face. Many people argue that Putin only wanted to liberate two ethnically Russian-majority Ukrainian states, and if anyone follows this Ukrainian war, Russians want to invade the entire Ukrainian. They marched to the outskirts of the Ukrainian Capitol and kicked back to where they are now. I am not with Zelenaski's politics either, yet I believe that Ukrainian people have the right to defend themselves if there is any chance for a peaceful resolution to the issue and if both countries agree to end the killing of each other, it would be more beneficial for the whole world.
Being right in America is not being wrong. Far right as he calls it is just ordinary people who don't compromise with people trying to weaken our society. Bullying of the straight headed majority by control freaks is not democracy.
@user-ii9nv6dm7h if this is true, then absolutely we should stop. I’m sick of how us in the west have helped Putin for the past 20+ years. We should be really ashamed of ourselves and some of the blood is on our hands. So yes, of course the UK should stop supporting Belarus. If that’s happening that is, but I haven’t heard this before so I’ll have to look it up.
So basically, we turned them down, we lied about assurances, we treated them badly, and told them no to the EU and NATO. In the meantime, we've invaded and toppled multiple countries all the while brushing up against their borders all like "trust me bro" and last but not least this guy admits we have and would have react the same if not worse. This was the softest and most politically correct way of saying "Russia's reaction is reasonable".
You're so full of gosh darned poopie that you are very likely a ruzzian agent, despite having an older YT channel. 1. NATO was founded _because of_ ruzzian sovietism, and ruzzia remains the primary reason NATO needs to exist - and you had to be consciously aware of this when you posted. 2. The words "not one inch eastward" was never a signed or otherwise formalized agreement; it was mere words from an appeaser. You had to be consciously aware of this when you posted. 3. You did not specify any factual way in which "we" have treated ruzzia badly. 4. "We" invade only _dictatorships_ and then _we leave._ We do not claim them as territory at any point in the process. You had to be consciously aware of this when you posted. 5. "We" and NATO did _not_ "brush up against" ruzzia's borders. Check the NATO map. Observe that ruzzia's attempted annexation of Ukraine would have resulted in ruzzia bordering _more_ NATO countries than if they had stayed home. And this is before Finland. _DO IT._ Observe the NATO map and tell us what you see. 6. It is not morally or strategically equivalent to say that the West would react as ruzzia did if ruzzia had put missiles near us. ruzzia is known _throughout history_ as a consistent aggressor nation who invades its neighbors and does _not_ leave - and in less than 20 years ruzzia has done this in Ukraine _twice,_ in Chechnya, and in Georgia. They are still there claiming all those regions as ruzzian territory - and you were consciously aware of these facts when you posted. 7. Due to the above and much more which I can point out at any time, there is _zero_ that is reasonable about the ruzzian regime or anything they have done or threatened to do. Thus there is _zero_ that is reasonable about its apologists, agents and trolls. 8. I can't prove this last one, but since you posted so many things you had to consciously know were false or non-equivalent, it's very likely that you side with ruzzia simply because you don't like LGBT. Bigotry is literally _the appeal_ that Putrid is using to attract Western support and to fascistically create the new mythology for 'his' ruzzia. Even the ruzzian agent in the video knows what Putrid is trying to do. I suspect you're a tool who fell for it.
So start negotiating with Russia now ? Where would we start 1 Withdraw from U.N recognised Ukrainian territory 2 Hand over Your criminals to the ICC 3 pay reparations to Ukraine.. Sorry i am not a diplomat but these must be key to any talks with Russia
"maybe start negotiating now rather than"..... Video ended right there for me. This is no time for more western weakness. We've seen plenty of that already! Times Radio, do better!
@@mrsam0496 it's shown weakness in supporting Ukraine so far. 21 times the GDP and we're still trickling in aid. Especially the USA who's too busy playing political games. We need to do more, now, and quit acting like Poo-tin apologists. The west isn't weak, we're just acting like it. And that's costing Ukrainian lives. We need to be stronger!
All the people that I know who lived in the former Warsaw Pact countries absolutely despised the Russians at that time. Is it not completely understandable that they rushed to join NATO?...and that they were admitted as members?
Same old BS about Russia's "need for security" seemingly at the expense of the "need for security" of all the people on Russia's fringe. The paranoia is not something others can "fix". New issues will always arise so power needs to meet power.
what a lot of ignorant nonsense from Mr Sixmith he seems to have spent too much time in Moscow it is not for USA and Russia to decide future of Poles, Ukrainians, Lithuanians, Latvians, Estonians, Fins
Are you silly? Don't you see how Russia and the US eventually do decide the future of these countries? Russia currently decides on Ukraine. And if the US become more isolationist, then Russia will next decide on Moldova, Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia.
Your disability to hear something opposite of your belief and the cognitive dissonance that his words caused for you is very interesting 😅 he anyway didn't say anything that a man who is a man of book and study didn't know. Instead of wasting time here go read more to understand geopolitics and how our world functions. We don't make decisions by belief but by facts
This guest claims not to be an apologist for Putin, and yet he suggests we should speak to Russia and negotiate with them... seriously, mate? Russia has proven time and again that it cannot be trusted under this leadership, and any act of rapprochement is just appeasement all over again, and we know how that went. We are better served in presenting a united and strong collective defence. Props to the presenter for pushing back, and at least this guest had a hint of nuance in the talking points (credit when due, it wasn't just copy-paste RT), but I hope that you won't keep inviting apologists in the future As for the dead horse of "Muh NATO expansion", show me the treaty! There is none, and the Eastern countries that joined did so of their own will and drive for self preservation (as mentioned by the host). They know exactly what Russia does to its subjects, for they just were. If Russia doesn't want a NATO, it should behave in a way that makes the alliance pointless, not by showing it is the only logical approach at every single step
oh wow this guy actually thinks Russia was afraid of Europe invading Russia lol.. that was just an excuse for invading Ukraine my guy. "Negotiating" and showing "understanding" is precisely what led to this mess.
IT is not the Wests job to condemn eastern European nations to Russian barbarism, if the free peoples of the east wish to move toward the almost civilised West, then the opinions of despots must be ignored. We do not need an ongoing sellout to despots. We are not wanting a repeat of the Stalinist post war period, I had thought we were past all that..This applies to Iran and Russia.
Negotiations with russia are worthless, russia will always break any agreements they make and then they'll use negotiation if they need time to rebuild so they can attack you again. Yes, listen to what your enemy is saying, but don't believe you can use words and pleasantries to stop them.
Putin is trying to put the old USSR back together and that is unacceptable. It is especially true with China posing an even greater threat. We can't allow Russia to pose as a threat on the flank. Merkel made a huge mistake in dealing with the Russians for their gas. It only serves to increase Putin's resources and Merkel had very good alternatives. We are making a big mistake by increasing the price of oil by restricting our production. We must increase our military readiness while insisting on accountability for the assets which we gave Ukraine.
Mr. Sixsmith talks about Eastern Europe and states desperate to get out of Russia's influence as if he were talking about potatoes at the market. Embarrassing. Tell your Russian friends that we live in the twenty-first century. We don't want empires and dictatorships anymore. We no longer want business under the table at the expense of small states. We are no longer in the mood for communism or the KGB. We wanted to join NATO and we are entitled to that. I'm tired of these minds running on the same mold as 40 years ago.
This seems to be a slightly more "realistic" version of the Mearsheimer position. When what the Russians believe is contrary to reality it is not other countries' responsibility to fall in line with it, but to hold the line against it. There should be no Munich agreement and no Molotov-Ribbentrop agreement, that will actually make a future war more certain, not less.
If we assume this promise was made to Gorbachew (things agreed to is written down on paper, so where is it), it was a promise to The Soviet Union. The Soviet Union consisted of 15 republics, then it dissolved, and some of those members then sought membership of EU and Nato. Didn't they have a right to do that? Out of the original 15 members, only 1 has complained... the rest have not said a word. But Ukraine is not a Nato member - so Russia should have attacked a Nato country then, not Ukraine - shouldn't they?
There was no signed agreement over it, but there was a verbal agreement. The meeting note is out now and can be find in written there is what was talk in the meeting. The meeting note is declasified now and available in National Security Archive. Not once, but three times, Baker tried out the “not one inch eastward” formula with Gorbachev in the February 9, 1990, meeting. He agreed with Gorbachev’s statement in response to the assurances that “NATO expansion is unacceptable.” Baker assured Gorbachev that “neither the President nor I intend to extract any unilateral advantages from the processes that are taking place,” and that the Americans understood that “not only for the Soviet Union but for other European countries as well it is important to have guarantees that if the United States keeps its presence in Germany within the framework of NATO, not an inch of NATO’s present military jurisdiction will spread in an eastern direction.”
Russia broke every written agreement with Ukraine (Budapest Memorandum for example) and Russia is the one which can not stop complaining about some bs small talk and call it "broke promise"? Nato is just another excuse for russian greed and Eastern Europe is not russian backyard anymore. Deal with it. Putin wants to annex Ukraine and it is not about Nato. It is like blaming a victim for calling the police! @@rouz0
Gorbachev himself stated several times there was no such promise, just that NATO had no intention. But the former Warsaw pact countries and former Soviet Republics thought otherwise.
The Soviets would have demanded it in writing if they believed there was a promise, and Gorbachev denied that there was any agreement with him, though other Soviet leaders at the meeting may not have agreed with his position or lack thereof. The only agreement was about what could go on in the old DDR. Soviet Foreign Minister, Eduard Shevardnadze, later president of Georgia, concurred, when asked about Gorbachev's position on freedom of association.
NATO has already shirked a moral duty to intervene directly to the defense of Ukraine. An attack on a NATO member would only force NATO to do what it should have already done.
Isn't it clear from what Putin early said about the tragedy of the Soviet collapse, and who his heroes are (imperial czars and Ivan Ilyin), that when he might have been friendly towards the West was when he thought the West might support an exclusive Russian sphere of influence in Eastern Europe? Then the West did not acknowledge an exclusive Russian aphere of influence. And maybe that was right in ways? But now here we are with a disapointed, angry Putin trying to take a sphere of influence by military might.
This guy is very much mistaken. Not one inch to the east was regarding the reunification of 🇩🇪. USSR and Warsaw Pact was still very much in tact at that point. There was no available territory for NATO to expand into. Also, there are no former Warsaw Pact countries that are nuclear hosting. Or have a mass build up of NATO troops in them for the exception of their own armies. This guy is a Russian apologist.
Russian President Vladimir Putin expects that NATO will invade Russia because autocrats have no other choice than to identify or create an external boogeyman.
It's not so much that NATO has forgotten about past pledges as much as Poland and the Baltic States remember how the Soviet Union and Imperial Russia treated them. The U.S. or any other NATO country didn't have to run some kind of subversion campaign to get those governments to join NATO. They saw where their best interests lay and anyone else can recognize that keeping Russia boxed in makes the rest of Europe safer and probably the world in general, as well.
If you instal a home security system should that be described as the security company marching into your home with the intent of eventually breaking into the homes of criminals? No, because even a five year old would understand how ridiculous that is.
Martin Sixsmith is being disingenuous on so many levels. He misrepresents the WMD crisis for Iraq and the so-called expansion of NATO agreements. NATO, as Sixsmith well-knows, is a purely defensive organisation. The 'advance' of NATO is simply an excuse for Russian aggression and was, in fact, a reaction to Russian militarism.
First, sounds to me like this guy is talking Putin’s playbook, not sure why..? Second, NATO didnt expand to some “vacuum” this fella is mentioning, the Eastern Europe countries understood that Russia would come for them again as soon as it recovers, do they BEGGED for NATO membership (and they were damn right as we could see in Feb 2022!). Third, it is impossible to negotiate with Russia- they lie all the time and agreements don‘t mean anything to them (and rule Nr.1-you don’t negotiate with terrorists…). Russia understands only one thing-big punch in the face, and then will be quiet for another decade or two..
Independent democratic countries in Eastern Europe have to make their own choice. Democracies cannot be constrained by authoritarian autocracies! Deterrence is the only sensible way forward as one cannot trust any agreement with Russia no matter who is in control there.
Exactly. It does not matter what West did or did not do. Putin uses Nato expansion as an excuse. He wants to annex Ukraine. He says Ukraine is not even a real country. He wants russian empire back and Nato has othing to do with Putin''s greed.
The statement "not one inch" is based on what US Secretary of State James Baker said to Gorbachev in a meeting in the Kremlin in February 1990, which however only applied to East Germany. In September 1990 (7 months later) the Treaty of Moscow, also known as the Two Plus Four Treaty, was then signed. Article 6 of the Treaty stated that the unified Germany will have the right to decide to which international alliances it will belong to, meaning the Soviet Union will not oppose its NATO membership. Yeltsin, and then Putin, have since falsely assumed that Baker's statement would apply to all Eastern European countries when in fact the statement only applied to East Germany, who when the Treaty of Moscow was signed, the Soviet Union agreed that a united whole Germany has the right to decide its own alliances.
Martin take a very Russian stance here in taking verbal agreements as treaties when Russia has taken an aggressive stance towards their Western boarder states. Even if the US and other Western countries did not actively coax nations into NATO, the fact that countries would choose to join NATO *because* of Russia. Also, listening to Russia, they want boarders to return to pre-WWI lines. I'm sure that's going to go over well to every country that would be erased for those boarders to work.
Negotiations? Whose negotiations? Putin's? NATO countries should be seeking to help Ukraine win the war, not negotiating on behalf of Putin and his whims. Negotiations without Russia's defeat in Ukraine is mere appeasement.
![[UNCUT] The Loyal Pin ปิ่นภักดิ์ EP.15 (1/4)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/TLBjiHvkKtE/mqdefault.jpg)
This man lost me on, start trying to negotiate now....No you dont negotiate and appease a tyrannical dictator who is already on a war path. You put him down.
You can never negotiate with terrorists
@@wlaffen, that's why Russia is expecting you to surrender or to die!
@@voldemarvaglaots6690 sorry to disappoint Vlad P. 😂
@@wlaffenThe Russian state is the worlds largest terrorist entity.
@@voldemarvaglaots6690 neither will happen Vatnik, what will happen is a conflict Russia cannot hope to win and the ruin of the Russian federation if it dares.
Gorbachev said there was never an agreement about countries joining NATO. Russia has broken every agreement they have ever signed including with neutral Ukraine. This guy is a russian apologist.
Nonsense. Nato are cowardly fks for using Ukraine as cannon fodder.
Yes this guy is still promoting the false Russian narrative and lies.
USA not Russia is problem NO. 1 on the globe, China will tell you soon after Taiwan invasion. What will you do ?
There was no signed agreement over it, but there was a verbal agreement. The meeting note is out now and can be found in writing there is what was talked about in the meeting. The meeting note is declassified now and available in the National Security Archive.
Not once, but three times, Baker tried out the “not one inch eastward” formula with Gorbachev in the
February 9, 1990, meeting. He agreed with Gorbachev’s statement in response to the assurances that
“NATO expansion is unacceptable.” Baker assured Gorbachev that “neither the President nor I intend to
extract any unilateral advantages from the processes that are taking place,” and that the Americans understood that “not only for the Soviet Union but for other European countries as well it is important to have guarantees that if the United States keeps its presence in Germany within the framework of NATO, not an inch of NATO’s present military jurisdiction will spread in an eastern direction.” due to lots of comment here I would like to add that please read other comments of me here before writing any comment to me as I can't repeat my words for every individual 😅
@@rouz0 I have PERSONALLY saw Gorbachev on Russia TV 1, months before he died, saying there was NO discussion on any NATO expansion. My question to you : HOW could that have happened when ALL former Warsaw Pact were still part of it up until March 1991 ?! That's Putin's repeated lie ! He tells russians what he knows they like to hear.
Independent countries have a right to seek protection against a hostile neighbor.
Not by invading them they don’t!!
Eastern Europe did not invade Russia. Nato dd not invade Russia. Russia invaded Ukraine in order to annex it and Nato is bs excuse only. @@humphreybradley3060
Did anyone invade Russia? Russia did invade Ukraine. Putin wants to annex Ukraine. It has nothing to do with Nato. Ukraine had no chance tojoin. It had no will to joine before 2014. @@damianmcgowan3614
?
@@damianmcgowan3614 Spot on
All the Eastern European countries that joined NATO joined willingly because they knew how aggressive russia can be. Also no promise was made to the russians that NATO would not be expanded.
Correct on the former. Wrong on the latter !
@@khankrum1 Please provide a source for that. I haven't seen anything supporting that being the case.
It really baffles me that someone intelligent like Mr Sixsmiths cannot see, or sufficently appreciate, that Russia is not ruled by ordinary politicians, but by a small gang of gangsters. What good would it have done to try to "understand" Al Capone and take his "security interests" seriously?
Peace in Europe for the next half century as the question of the common security of Europe would have been addressed.
Yes, i believe Mr. Sixmith is a joke.
A bulletproof automobile 🚘 to protect President Franklin Delano Roosevelt en route to the joint session of the United States Congress to declare war upon the Empire of Japan 🗾 after the sneaky attack on Pearl Harbor.
@@johndoe-vc1we ....It has nothing to do with the security of Russia with Putin. It's about empire building and all these pesky countries in NATO are getting in his way.
100% agree!
What a disgusting imperialist view. Complete disregard for the sovereign decisions of eastern european countries.
Absolutely. This guy makes me sick.
Absolutely condemning and true.
😂 really? U need to read more history. What about the US and UK gave all of Eastern Europe to Stalin in the Yalta conference
@@rouz0 What's your point?
Wrong Vatnik. Soviet troops were on the ground and occupying those countries of Eastern Europe, and unless the British and Americans wanted to start a new war to expel the Soviets (As George S. Patton wanted to do) then there was nothing to do except to try to stop further invasion and communist subversion into countries such as Greece and Italy. Even all throughout the existence of the USSR, the U.S. never even recognized the illegal occupation of the Baltic countries and all 3 maintained embassies in Washington until the USSR officially died.@@rouz0
I agree that listening and trying to understand what an opposing/enemy country wants is a very good idea (approximately 2:45 into the interview), however I want to point out that Ukraine gave up it's Nuclear Arms in exchange for it's independence and security. Then Russia invaded them.
Ukraine didn't have any control over those Nuclear Arms and their independence and security were guaranteed provided that it is not part of a military alliance like Austria
Exactly
@@margelatu79 Since the nuclear weapons were on Ukrainian soil, they had control over them. And the Budapest agreement contains no words regarding Ukrainian neutrality (the agreement can be read on the internet). But only that Russia, the US and the UK promised to respect the borders and sovereignty of Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan in exchange for Russia being allowed to take over the nuclear weapons from Ukraine. I recommend you read the agreement and not guess what it contains.
@@margelatu79 Yeah right, that worked out well didn't it ?
@@Kavala76 The only coup that happened in 2014 was when Russian soldiers (little green men) without national designations annexed Crimea (which Putin has acknowledged), and when Igor Girkin with Russian soldiers and weapons revolted the people of Donbas.
The "mistake" by NATO/EU was to not react firmly/physically to the 2014 invasion for annexation of parts of Ukraine. Doing nothing to that or the shooting down of the Malaysian airliner created an open invitation to Putin for an opportunity to raise his profile at home and abroad. Result is that all EU countries are now urgently expanding their defence budgets. We'll be paying for the lack of response to the 2014 invasion for a long time....
Agree
what an BS!
before that it was invasion and occupation of Abhazia where west did nothing
This is EXACTLY right! Force only recognizes force! The opportunity, in fact the REQUIREMENT by The West, in 2014, was to FORCEFULLY STOP RUSSIA...THEN!
A lot of people will be caught off guard when Russia begins attacking other countries particularly to countries that are not prepared in west and Africa, Egypt. Same as when putin invaded Ukraine, many were surprised and unprepared ☹️
According to George Robertson who was head of NATO from 1999-2003. Putin asked Robertson in 2000 “When are you going to invite us to join NATO?’ Robertson replied: “ We don’t invite people to join NATO, they have to apply to join NATO.” Putin replied, ‘Well, we’re not standing in line with a lot of countries that don’t matter.’” This has been backed up during an interview on BBC by David Frost with Putin.
I'd like the Russians to be our friends I like there people
@@danielbarnes6873 Sure. But until their political system is destroyed and remade, they can never be our friends.
Estonian here and like we have said since regaining our independence and even before that.. there is no negotiation with Russia. Russians have and always will be imperialistic and believing that they have some sort of right to go over and beyound international laws. You can never believe any treaties with Russian leaders and should always prepare for the worst. And as you probably see, eastern European countries are really doing that. Have been doing that already since 1991.. slowly but steadily. Only western Europeans for some reason still don't want to understand what we have been telling you all the time. Right now here in east it is feeling like westerners felt before first two world wars. Just feeling the air of dread and danger and yet understanding that if it comes to that we would go and fight for freedom and order.. even if alone and doomed to certain failure
Some ignorants still think Putin's paranoia and greed is more important than Eastern Europe's freedom, will, voice and agenda. That is pathetic and scary.
you know what you are talking about from hard won experience. The "Captive Nations" as they were then known were freed when the Iron Wall fell due to exceptional leadership from President Ronald Reagan. RR was the greatest President of them all.
I watched a documentary on Estonia's experience of Russia - was eye-opening and upsetting. I realised how invasive Russia is, like a cancer. I can only imagine how Estonians, Latvians, Lithuanians and Poles are feeling right now and I'm so pleased to see the generosity of those countries in their support of Ukrainians.
What is NATO’s incentive to negotiate with Russia? Russia has acted in bad faith and is untrustworthy. NATO has taken no territory by force. Russia cannot say the same. NATO has not encroached on Russia but Russia has intimidated its neighbors to join NATO.
Negotiations are illogical and if Russia chooses to attack NATO then it knows the outcome. I highly doubt that is an option for Russia.
😂😂😂
Russia did negotiate MANY treaty, ALL BROKEN BY THE WEST !
Utter unqualified trash.
@@Kavala76 Let's start with the first pont. Where I can read about this NATO expansion agreement. Which relationship it regulate and between which parties? Who have signed it?
Nato has invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, bombed Libya and serbia illegally. Even the sanction against Russia are not legal. They would have to be sanctioned by the UN security council. Considering the US , the leader of NAto , they permanently try regime change(even democraticly elected governemnt) in some country, wich is against the charta of the UN
Lol does he really think Russia would just be nice to Latvia if it wasn’t in NATo
You are correct. It would be a repeat of June 1942 and the start of WW2.
Putin b4 America invasion in iraq was a different persona. After he was something else. That is why he wanted a second phase at presidency. You cannot sight external factors for his views. May be an external factor could be china closer relationship to Rissia's ideas than b4. The less dictatorial leaders
couldn't encourage him with his wild ideas, therefore limiting his military and political space. Nato expansion was a pretext not the reason for a war.
He’s obviously bought by putin
well, they had left over 30 years ago, without much ado... so yes, it is proven, de facto, shown, demonstrated, clear, and not some wild dream nor delusion. Or are you the deluded one for not seeing that?
A pretext plain and NOT so simple!@@chrismatemba556 Why does Transilvania Moldova Exist??
‼Pay attention to his intellectual slight of hand. While denying being a putin apologist, he weaves in little comments that are designed to subconsciously make you sympathise with the russian narrative. Just one example, 1) Putin accuses Lithuania [ooh bad putin] of denying civil rights to those who don't speak Lithuanian [oh wait Lithuania is bad too]; 2) "speaking fluent Lithuanian is pretty hard for anybody to do" [of course, how can those poor russians be expected to learn it?]. Well it's not for someone who tries to learn it, especially after living in Lithuania for 25 years.
Some politicians and journalists use this method, beware of it!
so Lithuanian ARE pushing out Russophone that were BORN there !
As a Quebecois, I hear you talk like those anglo-saxon Canadian.. and you are as despicable !
@@rouz0 is identified as a russian bot account
Absolutely correct
You'd do better attending to your own rhetorical slight of hands, all of them distorted, contorted to fit with your own bigotry and prejudice,
Those countries who turn against ethnic Russians in their countries, like Ukraine did extensively, talk themselves into being afraid they'll become the next Ukraine.
The hate these pansies think they feel is totally unnecessary but is encouraged by the west.
This guy conviently forgets that all those former Eastern block nations practically begged to become part of NATO, because they knew first hand about Russian imperialist aggression.
He has such a bad take on the situation that's pretty much " let's appease the tyrant and hope he goes away " attitude.
I stopped listening the second he said negotiate with Russia. FOOL
This guy is batting for a cold-blooded murderer
Fully agree . He is a supporter.
The thing I think is ignorant about this line of thinking, that NATO membership for Ukraine means missiles can be stationed 10 minutes from Moscow, is that it ignores the fact that missiles are already stationed 10 minutes from Moscow. SLBM are an integral part of the nuclear triad, possessed by both Russia and NATO, making that a substantively bankrupt way of thinking and objecting to the expansion of NATO membership.
Exactly. Imo everything just boils down to land grab. Putin has the biggest inhabited real estate on Earth. Apparently that's not enough.
Where are these missiles stationed currently?
Err you thought NATO would have cottoned on that it's their bases encroaching nearer and nearer to Russia
@@livingtribunal4110 In submarines that are well within short striking distance. Nowhere is far enough away from a nuclear sub
@@livingtribunal4110
NOT MINUTES FROM MOSCOW.
LETS REMEMBER THAT RUSSIA MOVED NUKES AND WEAPINS TO BELARUS. SOOOO??? IT WILL BE A VERY
.VERY BAD MOVE ON PUKINS PART TO TARGET A NATO STATE...RUSSIA CAN NOT HANDLE A WAR WITH UKRAINE..THE WEST..NATO WILL SHRED RUSSIA.. WHICH...I HATE WAR...HOWEVER..I THINK THERE ARE RETALITIRY STANCES THAT MUST BE FAST..FURIOUS AND END AGGRESSION..PERIOD.. RUSSIA ALSO LOST THEIR RIGHT TO INTEGRITY..TERRITORY...SOVEREIGNTY WHEN THEY ENTERED UKRAINE AS TERRORIST COMMITTING GENOCIDE....
Martin Sixsmith made some good points but I have to pick him up on his assertion that the West should take some blame at their failure to listen to Russia's concerns just prior to the Feb 2022 invasion. He conveniently forgets that Russia invaded Crimea in 2014 and by not responding, the West in effect gave a signal to Moscow that it didn't care about the rest of Ukraine either and the light was green for further attack. The rest, as Martin might say, is history.
Go back to school.
Russia has no concerns. Russia needs excuses to annex. Putin does not want Ukraine to exist and he blames his victims for asking for help. Russia is not Ukraine's master.Russia is not a special need baby and Eastenr Europe is not russian backyard anymore.
Agreed 100%.
He also says we don't know what Putin wants which is false. He want's all those former Soviet states to fall under Russias sphere of influence, not the west's. The problem is all those countries that Putin wants to control want to control their own destiny instead of being a buffer zone in between them. They want to be part of the EU and can't do that unless they join NATO for security reasons.
Russia has expressed its first concerns since about 1991. Not hearing concerns once is possible, not hearing concerns for 30 years is a deliberate strategy.
Say what you like but it was Russia that invaded Hungary and Czechoslovakia in the 50s. Nato certainly didn't invade anyone.
My father was an artillery officer in BAOR Germany at that time and many of their exercises were based on resisting a Russian invasion of western Europe along the fast autobahns because entire Russian tank regiments were already lined up along them ready to go.
This guy is saying we should listen to Russian concerns and negotiate to avoid direct conflict with NATO. He doesn't seem to consider that directly challenging article 5 is exactly what Putin wants as he doesn't believe the US, UK etc. Will risk nuclear war to defend the Baltic states.
The interviewee talks about Russia wanting guarantees that Ukraine would not join NATO, ignoring the fact that the occupation of Crimea meant Ukraine was incapable of meeting the criteria of joining.
He talks about the 'not one inch east' myth one moment, then mentions how Russia had at one point considered during NATO itself. What an inconsistency. How can Russians feel they could join NATO but also believe the one inch myth. Last time I checked, Russia is as east as you can get in Europe.
This guy is an appalling Russian apologist. NATO expansion is a Kremlin talking point and nothing more. Ukraine and other ex-soviet countries have every right to choose their own path, it not up to Russia.
To deny NATO expension with dry eyes is a skill. You perfected it. 👍 (idiot)
Putin has always known that NATO is not a military threat to Russia. The west had become strategically reliant on Russian hydrocarbons, the US had withdrawn most of its military. European countries has run down their military to the extent that the US does not regard the UK military a capable ally and the Germans had almost disbanded its military. NATO had not stationed troops in Eastern Europe until Russia started to stage incidents in the Baltic states. Russia does consider the EU a massive threat to his regime as the Russians can see how wealthy countries like Poland have got, the freedoms we have, the lack of corruption etc. This guy just fails to have even the basic understanding of what Putin is about. As for Ukraine joining NATO that was never going to happen as their membership was rejected long ago, which was a massive mistake but before the start of the war there was not chance of Ukraine joining.
Spot on. Sad so many people still do not understand Russia always needs excuses to annex.
US is still in Germany weasel!
It all comes from America anyway
"Putin has always known that NATO is not a military threat to Russia. "
Are you aware of the countless times since 2008 Russia made it clear that it DID view NATO as a threat?
Are you aware of the 2008 memo sent by William Burns (US ambassador to Russia) to Condoleezza Rice titled "Niet means Niet"
It doesn't matter what you or I think of NATO. It does however matter what Russia thinks of NATO, and to learn that you must listen
@@Kavala76 and ask Serbian what they think of NATO 'defensive' ... or Iraq and Libya
Militarily Russia is down in the cellar right now, and they dig themselves deeper every day they stay in Ukraine. Any subsequent stockpiling of military hardware will be watched with eagle eyes by Russia´s assumed enemies, if it becomes alarming, it will be more than matched.
Do you seriously believe this nonsense? 😂
@@jamesgreen1116 Yes, Russia made a big mistake invading Ukraine, and they compounded that mistake by not leaving 18 months ago. Now they will pay for that mistake, Ukraine will destroy the russian oil depots and Russia will have to leave Ukraine. 8 months at the most and Russia will not have enough tanks to defend itself, never mind advancing, this war is already lost by Russia.
Apparently not, they'll have more trained men at the end of the war than at the beginning. Whilst the UK is shrinking it army to just 50,000. Madness. We've already lost world war three before it began
Don't interrupt
Juvenile
Russian paranoia is and has long been a threat to all countries unfortunate enough to have Russia as a neighbour. It should not be an excuse for denying independent, democratic states the right to ally for their mutual defence.
The idea that the countries that were invaded and occupied by Russia for decades should prioritise Russia’s security sensitivities over their own is obscene.
Your statement is absolutely correct - and highlights the narcissistic flavour of Russians towards its neighbours - Russia is important, no one else is.
Learn from History, or be condemned to repeat. DO NOT APPEASE
That's right! Stop appeasing US imperialism, NOW!
These guys have absolutely no clue
What are you learning from history ? On many occasions negotiations have prevented a war. Just because it did not work one time (I assume you talk of 1938/Munich) no reason not to try it
@@markusdittrich7000 Russia has pretty much broken every agreement they have ever signed. Also you can't negotiate with an aggressive country like Russia, this is why appeasing the Germans went so badly and in the end the allies had to go to war with them regardless. If you give an inch they will take a mile. When you try to appease the aggressor and give them power to negotiate they will take a mile and it will only ever show that they can do more in the future to gain more.
Stopping them now in Ukraine and not giving them what they want is the only way to send the message that they can’t get away with this. Shutting them down now will show that what they are doing will not be tolerated in any capacity
@@ZenXIV Appeasement did not work in 1938. I give you that. Conclusion is do not talk to each other? Talkin did not work in 1938, but there are many occasions when talking did help. It is a manipulation by our media that 1938 is taken as a referral. I suggest you start thinking yourself. My apologies, I do not want to insult you, but I believe you did not think this through
Thing is if you're a sh.tty neighbor you can't be surprised by your neighbors looking for security elsewhere.
NATO doesn’t go around asking countries to join the alliance… countries want to join because they don’t believe Putin, and many Russian politicians can be trusted. The Baltic states are very well aware of what it’s like to live within the sphere of Russian control.
Six smith is delusional
Russians can't be trusted. FFS can you think of any examples where NATO based politicians have lied their arses off?
And u can say no because u gave a promise 😂
Read NATOs own constitution, NATO has to invite new members,
@@rouz0except none was given. Gorbachev and his FM Schevardnadze said as much.
No, NATO bribes their governments like they did to Romania for example, to follow their agenda
13:06 "unless they speak fluent Lithuanian, which is pretty hard for anyone to do." If you claim to be a citizen who has lived in a country all your life, being expected to make the effort to learn the national language seems reasonable. Not doing so leads to separate communities and all the problems that brings.
Prior to 2022,NATO would not have accepted Ukraine (out of geopolitical considerations). Now it is a different matter. Russia is materialising its own security paranoia.
Nato should be ready....
Fantasy Island UK 🇬🇧 checking in
How long will it take to deconvince, Putin is not enacting the will of God
@@des_smith7658 Des did you know there are 31 countries in Nato...Its not just the UK.
Yes, so its waiting for nato then
that will take a lot of money that Europe does not have, and the US economy is going to collapse soon (3 trillion new debt in the last 3 months)
Ukraine was one of the founding members of the United Nations when it joined in 1945 as the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, after the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, the independent Ukraine retained its seat. NATO was founded in 1949, how could NATO or "the West" enter into agreements on behalf of Ukraine?
Only an idiot shows weakness by trying to negotiate. The rules are clear for many years.
Ok so will be right up at the frontline 😂
Remember that when Russia breaks through Ukrainian defence lines :)
@@MrThartofwaror Romanian, Poland, German defence... invading New York, Toronto, Rio...
We must have big prices and our governments have to spend abroad, we should never attempt minding own business, own people and problems because.... Russia is a treath😂😂😂😂
Russia will invade world😂😂😂
Give more money to Biden's employees in Ukraine so that the world (and universe) can be safe
😂😂😂😂
What is worse than anything...they consider us to be complete idiots since media and governments, often in the same day, say that Russia have collapsed and balancing fear right after it by saying they can conquer everyone easily.
Unbelievable.
I don't believe anything anymore except that we will have less money, less rights and more problems
Not true. Negotiations are a strength ! Honet negotiations in good faith and integrity.
@@PrettyGoodLookin You don't negotiate with terrorists, ever.
3:33 He repeats Putin’s excuse that if Ukraine joins NATO rockets could reach Moscow in 5 minutes. Well, if Finland joins NATO (as it did) rockets will reach StPetersbug in 20 seconds. According to this man’s logic Putin should invade Finland now. Finns clearly had some other logic.
Sixsmith is blinded by his love of Russian culture in particular literature. We can love and admire these things as we may admire the diverse and interesting cultural history of Ukraine and its separate and distinct language and literature - while at the same time denouncing the barbarity of Russian government and politics. We witness daily with our own eyes the disregard and cruelty with which they treat their soldiers and subjects.
At this stage unless putin steps back, and the burden is on him as the invader, then we are locked into the inevitable. We can not back down now because to do so would show democracies as weak and unable or disinclined to protect the very thing that sets us apart from the invader.
BBC? The Times has been calling some highly questionable clowns on recently.
Thank you Ivan now just jog on!!!
@@humphreybradley3060 is identified as a russian bot account
The risk of a Nato allied nation being attacked by Russia depends in large part on whether or not Vladimir Putin is still around in a few years, and whether or not Donald Trump is allowed to further his political career...
What impact do you think Trump would have, do you think his election would worry Putin? Or would Putin welcome him?
@@steveturner6770 Not sure which of the two despises Nato more... I guess I would start there... So far as worry goes, both seem to have a number of worries... Thanks
This is not "a few years" matter. It's this year or the next one latest.
@@lsd8497 In a way it is unfolding right now... If I were the king of the world, tell you what I'd do... Provide Ukraine with any assistance they need to stop Russian Aggression... A threat to freedom and liberty anywhere is a threat to freedom and liberty everywhere... Thanks
@@steveturner6770Putin would definitely welcome the election of his poodle.
He isn’t going to stop until someone stops him
He seems to be stopping himself just fine.
I listened carefully to this, and i disagree with his main points. The collective "West", (liberal democracies, NATO, the atlanticist military hegemony) won the Cold War. It was a real war: we won it. Of course there are consequences. Minus the vulgarities about how the West allegedly spoke with Russia, I do hope our side never lost track of the central fact. Like all victors, we were within our rights to welcome in alliance those countries choosing a transition to western-style democracy. I cannot imagine a counter logic to that. NATO has an open-door policy which dovetails with it, and we now have newer members who fled the likelihood of future Russian invasion. Nor did we pursue those members recklessly; even Poland was made to apply, then wait 7 years to join. So what is his argument? That Russia did not like it? Oh well. Perhaps Russia should have kept their empire. On that point, we see the revanchist Russian empire marching on Georgia, the Caucuses, Crimea, and especially Ukraine making an argument for "deference" to Russia an obscenity. The oft repeated "history" of secret Western promises to halt NATO expansion are fake according to primary sources. Where is the record of such promise, or a treaty? There is none. Meanwhile Russia signed at least 4 agreements which promise Ukrainian sovereignty.
It's cute he thinks Russia can be stopped with words.
These guys absolutely have no idea what they are talking about.
Sure let's give Russia Half of the world just so they can feel happy.
No that's not how this works 😂
Within 6 weeks of the Russian attack on Ukraine a peace treaty has been drafted, and was ready to be signed. It was the west (Boris Johnson/USA ) that wanted the fight to continue. So I would say the west can not be stopped by words
No... The US and allies will not live under the thumb of Russia or tolerate any kind of discomfort from Russia while Russia celebrates victory. The US and NATO will defend each other against Russia if things get serious.
@@k.sullivan6303 Don"t worry , Russia will not attack, therefore nobody has to live under the thumb of Russia. Though the US has a history of leaving allies behind.
Russia is in trouble with Ukraine. Imagine facing the Allied Forces!
The country of W.Churchill should know that you can only negotiate with statesmen, but not with criminals.!
Winston Churchill was a criminal!
Churchill was a high criminal, Knight of the garter, devious soul, it was he that rejected peace with Germany and started WWII...
Total nonsense in my opinion.@@timkelly5602
It's criminals all round today cupcake!
NATO didn't move into Eastern Europe ; they begged to be part of NATO. Should we have refused abd say , you belong tot the Russian influence sphere ? In the negotiations they said not moving into Eastern Europe, but after a while (collaps SSSR) in the drafts no mention of it !!
Russia begged too... Can you say why Russia was not accepted?
If our aim was to prevent war with Russia, then strategically speaking it was idiotic to allow NATO to Occupy all the countries which could otherwise have acted as a buffer zone between the West and Russia. Would you like a potential Opponent to be stood 20 meters away or squared right up to you with their face pressed against yours?
Because it never applied and never meet the criteria. It never wanted to be Nato member like every other and this s not how it works. @@voldemarvaglaots6690
Russia wants to regain its empire and control. So its feels like a big IAM again. Power!! Revenge. Thats all this war is as bout. Theres nothing in the past, and no excuses or misunderstandings. That truely justifies the savagery there inflicting on Ukraine. Plus if the roles were reversed. And they had won the cold war. As if Russia would of been humble and kind. And not acted in there own interests. Really as if they would have told states or neighbours they could not of joined there institutions. If the roles were reversed. So why does the west berate themselves. When Russia would of done what was right for them as the west did. We constantly make excuses for Russia. Its not like they even have a history of keeping there promises. Or behaving well with there neighbours either.
Ruzzia was a NATO partner and unilaterally withdrew. Putler is an indicted war criminal and he will face justice one day.@@voldemarvaglaots6690
Yaaawn…another Kremlin apologist: eighty odd years ago he would have been dribbling on about Herr Hitler’s understandable need for lebensraum
Did he hurt your feelings
Times Radio, why are you giving air to a Putin apologist?
You can’t negotiate with terrorists…. Russia is a dictatorship & trying to undermine their intentions , is the wrong approach. I disagree a lot with this guy.
"And when they come - do not rely on an agreement signed by you... They are not worth the paper it is written. " Otto von Bismarck Quote
And so it was with the Minsk agreements.
Aww! Poor NATO states. How did NATO end up on the Russian border?
The West knows EXACTLY what Russia's concerns are and they've known them since 1990 but, they have deliberately and determinedly flaunted those concerns.
The West has been covetous of Rusdian territories and resources. More importantly, NATO has been adversarial to Russia and in recent years, NATO has been repurposed as an offensive body - Serbia, Kosovo, Libya, Iraq, etc.
Russia would be foolish to tolerate such things because, as we know, the West's word and promises isn't worth anything.
Do you know WHY so many former Warsaw pact members joined Nato as quicly as they could? To be secured from russian agression. Do you care about their concerns and freedom? Does it matter to you? Are they independent countries or russian backyard to you?
@@Blanka1100 That makes no sense! Russia hasn't attacked or invaded a nation since 1990. The only instances involved US/NATO meddling in Chechnya (part of Russia), Georgia and now Ukraine. Meanwhile, NATO and the US have attacked a succession of nations almost every year since 1990.
Nowhere in the world from Africa to the Middle East to Asia or the Americas does any developing nations go to sleep contemplating the possibility of a Russian attack.
It is the ravenous, resource bereft nations of NATO who need such conflicts in order to access and control resources which they do not have.
Nato does not invade to annex while every country in Eastern Europe knows Russia simply has a break and comes back to invade and annex more because this is what Russia ever does. Russia is always the same. Nobody is sorry for Osama, Saddam, Assad or Milosevic but even if...it is still no justification for Russian crimes. Who does Russia think it is? Russia is not even super power anymore. Russians still think they are entitled to be a super power while they are anything but. It is funny, pathetic and scary at the same time. Nato is not a reason for Putin to invade Ukraine. It is an excuse to justify Putin's sick idea to annex Ukraine. Putin does not wants Ukraine to exist. Nato has nothing to do with Putin's state of mind and his greed. Putin wants new world order as well as he wants Ukraine to be a part of Russia. @@Titoscudd
At times the arguments are colorable, but ultimately he undermines them all when admitting negotiating with Putin is pointless. Russia always ever was an imperialist, militaristic state, and the only thing they understand is force. Sometimes a cigar really is just a cigar.
Can I just say something about these Russian feelings? Russians didn’t have these feelings until they invaded Ukraine, Finland and Sweden didn’t join nato until Russia invaded Ukraine and Poland did not spend 6% of it’s gpd on military until Russia invaded Ukraine perhaps if Russia stopped invading Ukraine and went back to there own country they would stop feeling like the west is getting ready to defend against there invasion.
Finally somebody who thinks..
This man is clearly talking out of his ess.
Bush sr never made such a promise (15:40) . Never.
Moreover; it would haven been totally misplaced if he had. It's not for the US president to decide what the Polish, the Tjechs, the Romanian should do, or prefer.
This man seems to be forgotten that Russia was granted to take the seat of the USSR in the UNSC,.. was invited to become member of the G7, and that Russia was allowed membership of the Council of Europe.
Some people still think Eastern Europeans have no voice, no agenda and no right to be secured and its safety is less important than French, German or American. We are not a ping pong ball and Russia is neither our master nor a special need baby. Russia is cheap gas station which can not stand its time of glory is over. Nato is not a reason for Putin to invade Ukraine. It is just another excuse for Russia to annex somebody else's land. Putin says Ukrainians are just little Russians. Nato has nothing to do with Putin's greed.
Your disability to hear something opposite of your belief and the cognitive dissonance that his words caused for you is very interesting 😅 he anyway didn't say anything that a man who is a man of book and study didn't know. Instead of wasting time here go read more to understand geopolitics and how our world functions. We don't make decisions by belief but by facts
@@rouz0exactly such a dunce
@@rouz0 | Please, be more specific.
@@Michiel_de_Jongit's well documented that there was no agreement. That there may have been discussions about one doesn't change that fact. Gorbachev and his FM, Eduardo Schevardnadze (later Georgian president) said as much.
Fearful of the aggression from the west?? 😂😂😂 You can definitely tell how fearful the ruzis are by their barren border with NATO Finland 😂 What a tool
It's not a fear of western aggression. It's a fear of democracy working close enough to its borders so that Russians could easily see the comparable difference between how they live and how a country, like for instance Ukraine, would benefit and pull ahead of Russia.
East and West Germany as examples....as soon as the Berlin wall came down..there was much more soup in East Germany
100% correct. Many people blame the West for the Ukraine war, and the main argument is NATO expansion. But I wondered why many Western Europe and former USSR states wanted to join NATO rather than live peacefully with Russia. From my point of view, many countries choose to go with NATO because if anyone knows how Putin became the wealthiest individual in Russia and if anyone joins him, he should be a crock as Putin and has to have loyal crooks surrounding him and protect them from the general public. Many people will follow them, and as a result, the country is always poor, and the majority of people suffer. The funniest thing is that Putin blames the West for his failures. Putin likes people, and people who have no sense of relative freedom or idea of liberty hate democracy; democracy is not without any issues, and that is the reason many free people choose democracy. Anyhow, my argument is there is no prosperous nation with dictatorships, and always endless wars are the answers to all of the issues that dictator morrons face.
Many people argue that Putin only wanted to liberate two ethnically Russian-majority Ukrainian states, and if anyone follows this Ukrainian war, Russians want to invade the entire Ukrainian. They marched to the outskirts of the Ukrainian Capitol and kicked back to where they are now. I am not with Zelenaski's politics either, yet I believe that Ukrainian people have the right to defend themselves if there is any chance for a peaceful resolution to the issue and if both countries agree to end the killing of each other, it would be more beneficial for the whole world.
You have no idea what you are talking about, and your vision of how Russians live can only come from an overdose of western media !!
Being right in America is not being wrong. Far right as he calls it is just ordinary people who don't compromise with people trying to weaken our society. Bullying of the straight headed majority by control freaks is not democracy.
Negotiation with Putin. Okay, Neville. 😂😂😂😂😂😂
We shouldn't waste time to discuss what peter the great wants. We should instead invest this time to discuss how we can defeat him.
Thank God this guy is not in charge of anything or we would all be speaking Russian!
Exactly
I am so beyond glad that when I opened the comments and I saw people were also writing this guy off. He’s clearly not getting the situation.
@user-ii9nv6dm7h if this is true, then absolutely we should stop. I’m sick of how us in the west have helped Putin for the past 20+ years. We should be really ashamed of ourselves and some of the blood is on our hands. So yes, of course the UK should stop supporting Belarus. If that’s happening that is, but I haven’t heard this before so I’ll have to look it up.
So basically, we turned them down, we lied about assurances, we treated them badly, and told them no to the EU and NATO. In the meantime, we've invaded and toppled multiple countries all the while brushing up against their borders all like "trust me bro" and last but not least this guy admits we have and would have react the same if not worse. This was the softest and most politically correct way of saying "Russia's reaction is reasonable".
You're so full of gosh darned poopie that you are very likely a ruzzian agent, despite having an older YT channel.
1. NATO was founded _because of_ ruzzian sovietism, and ruzzia remains the primary reason NATO needs to exist - and you had to be consciously aware of this when you posted.
2. The words "not one inch eastward" was never a signed or otherwise formalized agreement; it was mere words from an appeaser. You had to be consciously aware of this when you posted.
3. You did not specify any factual way in which "we" have treated ruzzia badly.
4. "We" invade only _dictatorships_ and then _we leave._ We do not claim them as territory at any point in the process. You had to be consciously aware of this when you posted.
5. "We" and NATO did _not_ "brush up against" ruzzia's borders. Check the NATO map. Observe that ruzzia's attempted annexation of Ukraine would have resulted in ruzzia bordering _more_ NATO countries than if they had stayed home. And this is before Finland. _DO IT._ Observe the NATO map and tell us what you see.
6. It is not morally or strategically equivalent to say that the West would react as ruzzia did if ruzzia had put missiles near us. ruzzia is known _throughout history_ as a consistent aggressor nation who invades its neighbors and does _not_ leave - and in less than 20 years ruzzia has done this in Ukraine _twice,_ in Chechnya, and in Georgia. They are still there claiming all those regions as ruzzian territory - and you were consciously aware of these facts when you posted.
7. Due to the above and much more which I can point out at any time, there is _zero_ that is reasonable about the ruzzian regime or anything they have done or threatened to do. Thus there is _zero_ that is reasonable about its apologists, agents and trolls.
8. I can't prove this last one, but since you posted so many things you had to consciously know were false or non-equivalent, it's very likely that you side with ruzzia simply because you don't like LGBT. Bigotry is literally _the appeal_ that Putrid is using to attract Western support and to fascistically create the new mythology for 'his' ruzzia. Even the ruzzian agent in the video knows what Putrid is trying to do. I suspect you're a tool who fell for it.
You can’t negotiate anything with Putin
So start negotiating with Russia now ? Where would we start 1 Withdraw from U.N recognised Ukrainian territory 2 Hand over Your criminals to the ICC 3 pay reparations to Ukraine.. Sorry i am not a diplomat but these must be key to any talks with Russia
"maybe start negotiating now rather than"..... Video ended right there for me. This is no time for more western weakness. We've seen plenty of that already!
Times Radio, do better!
The western world has never shown weakness at anytime in the last 50 years
@@mrsam0496 it's shown weakness in supporting Ukraine so far. 21 times the GDP and we're still trickling in aid. Especially the USA who's too busy playing political games. We need to do more, now, and quit acting like Poo-tin apologists.
The west isn't weak, we're just acting like it. And that's costing Ukrainian lives.
We need to be stronger!
Here's a peace proposal for Russia: Pull all troops back to internationally recognized borders.
All the people that I know who lived in the former Warsaw Pact countries absolutely despised the Russians at that time. Is it not completely understandable that they rushed to join NATO?...and that they were admitted as members?
Same old BS about Russia's "need for security" seemingly at the expense of the "need for security" of all the people on Russia's fringe. The paranoia is not something others can "fix". New issues will always arise so power needs to meet power.
Nato did not move into eastern europe. Russia should never have had its mucky paws on Eastern Europe in the first place.
Plus, seizing Ukraine (Belarus next) would place Ruscia's borders up against NATO. His arguments are unmitigated codswallop.
NATO did not move into eastern Europe ???. Have you been living on another planet, or what ?? Do you know where eastern Europe is ? Look it up.
@@GreenIsland38 he's probably american and doesn't know european geography
what a lot of ignorant nonsense from Mr Sixmith
he seems to have spent too much time in Moscow
it is not for USA and Russia to decide future of Poles, Ukrainians, Lithuanians, Latvians, Estonians, Fins
Are you silly? Don't you see how Russia and the US eventually do decide the future of these countries? Russia currently decides on Ukraine. And if the US become more isolationist, then Russia will next decide on Moldova, Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia.
Your disability to hear something opposite of your belief and the cognitive dissonance that his words caused for you is very interesting 😅 he anyway didn't say anything that a man who is a man of book and study didn't know. Instead of wasting time here go read more to understand geopolitics and how our world functions. We don't make decisions by belief but by facts
This guest claims not to be an apologist for Putin, and yet he suggests we should speak to Russia and negotiate with them... seriously, mate? Russia has proven time and again that it cannot be trusted under this leadership, and any act of rapprochement is just appeasement all over again, and we know how that went. We are better served in presenting a united and strong collective defence. Props to the presenter for pushing back, and at least this guest had a hint of nuance in the talking points (credit when due, it wasn't just copy-paste RT), but I hope that you won't keep inviting apologists in the future
As for the dead horse of "Muh NATO expansion", show me the treaty! There is none, and the Eastern countries that joined did so of their own will and drive for self preservation (as mentioned by the host). They know exactly what Russia does to its subjects, for they just were. If Russia doesn't want a NATO, it should behave in a way that makes the alliance pointless, not by showing it is the only logical approach at every single step
oh wow this guy actually thinks Russia was afraid of Europe invading Russia lol.. that was just an excuse for invading Ukraine my guy. "Negotiating" and showing "understanding" is precisely what led to this mess.
IT is not the Wests job to condemn eastern European nations to Russian barbarism, if the free peoples of the east wish to move toward the almost civilised West, then the opinions of despots must be ignored.
We do not need an ongoing sellout to despots. We are not wanting a repeat of the Stalinist post war period, I had thought we were past all that..This applies to Iran and Russia.
Negotiations with russia are worthless, russia will always break any agreements they make and then they'll use negotiation if they need time to rebuild so they can attack you again. Yes, listen to what your enemy is saying, but don't believe you can use words and pleasantries to stop them.
Putin is trying to put the old USSR back together and that is unacceptable. It is especially true with China posing an even greater threat. We can't allow Russia to pose as a threat on the flank. Merkel made a huge mistake in dealing with the Russians for their gas. It only serves to increase Putin's resources and Merkel had very good alternatives. We are making a big mistake by increasing the price of oil by restricting our production. We must increase our military readiness while insisting on accountability for the assets which we gave Ukraine.
Contradicts himself blaming NATO then admitting Putin needed a foreign war to divert attention from crumbling Russian economy
@@honeybadger9425 it was clearly his own opinion too
@@honeybadger9425bullshit ! he's just trying to flog his book
Every Russia hater has his or her own reason they ascribe to Putin. It's pretty pathetic.
We need better leaders, these people are putting the whole planet in danger of extinction.
We need to understand Russia has always been a terrible neighbour, with or without Putin or Nato.
Mr. Sixsmith talks about Eastern Europe and states desperate to get out of Russia's influence as if he were talking about potatoes at the market. Embarrassing. Tell your Russian friends that we live in the twenty-first century. We don't want empires and dictatorships anymore. We no longer want business under the table at the expense of small states. We are no longer in the mood for communism or the KGB. We wanted to join NATO and we are entitled to that. I'm tired of these minds running on the same mold as 40 years ago.
This seems to be a slightly more "realistic" version of the Mearsheimer position. When what the Russians believe is contrary to reality it is not other countries' responsibility to fall in line with it, but to hold the line against it. There should be no Munich agreement and no Molotov-Ribbentrop agreement, that will actually make a future war more certain, not less.
Well said
Like the merschiemer position it's full of half truths and falsehoods in favourable leanings towards Putin
PRECISELY! so basic, so stark!
If we assume this promise was made to Gorbachew (things agreed to is written down on paper, so where is it), it was a promise to The Soviet Union. The Soviet Union consisted of 15 republics, then it dissolved, and some of those members then sought membership of EU and Nato. Didn't they have a right to do that?
Out of the original 15 members, only 1 has complained... the rest have not said a word.
But Ukraine is not a Nato member - so Russia should have attacked a Nato country then, not Ukraine - shouldn't they?
There was no written agreement and Eastenr Europe is not soviet backyard anymore. We owe Russia nothing.
There was no signed agreement over it, but there was a verbal agreement. The meeting note is out now and can be find in written there is what was talk in the meeting. The meeting note is declasified now and available in National Security Archive.
Not once, but three times, Baker tried out the “not one inch eastward” formula with Gorbachev in the
February 9, 1990, meeting. He agreed with Gorbachev’s statement in response to the assurances that
“NATO expansion is unacceptable.” Baker assured Gorbachev that “neither the President nor I intend to
extract any unilateral advantages from the processes that are taking place,” and that the Americans understood that “not only for the Soviet Union but for other European countries as well it is important to have guarantees that if the United States keeps its presence in Germany within the framework of NATO, not an inch of NATO’s present military jurisdiction will spread in an eastern direction.”
Russia broke every written agreement with Ukraine (Budapest Memorandum for example) and Russia is the one which can not stop complaining about some bs small talk and call it "broke promise"? Nato is just another excuse for russian greed and Eastern Europe is not russian backyard anymore. Deal with it. Putin wants to annex Ukraine and it is not about Nato. It is like blaming a victim for calling the police! @@rouz0
Gorbachev himself stated several times there was no such promise, just that NATO had no intention.
But the former Warsaw pact countries and former Soviet Republics thought otherwise.
The Soviets would have demanded it in writing if they believed there was a promise, and Gorbachev denied that there was any agreement with him, though other Soviet leaders at the meeting may not have agreed with his position or lack thereof. The only agreement was about what could go on in the old DDR. Soviet Foreign Minister, Eduard Shevardnadze, later president of Georgia, concurred, when asked about Gorbachev's position on freedom of association.
NATO has already shirked a moral duty to intervene directly to the defense of Ukraine. An attack on a NATO member would only force NATO to do what it should have already done.
Yea. Back off, dont help nazis.
Russia is the biggest Eastern Europe's criminal @@Olc32
What sort of negotiations could actually create a deal that Russia would not immediately dishonor? Wake up!
Isn't it clear from what Putin early said about the tragedy of the Soviet collapse, and who his heroes are (imperial czars and Ivan Ilyin), that when he might have been friendly towards the West was when he thought the West might support an exclusive Russian sphere of influence in Eastern Europe? Then the West did not acknowledge an exclusive Russian aphere of influence. And maybe that was right in ways? But now here we are with a disapointed, angry Putin trying to take a sphere of influence by military might.
This guy is very much mistaken. Not one inch to the east was regarding the reunification of 🇩🇪. USSR and Warsaw Pact was still very much in tact at that point. There was no available territory for NATO to expand into. Also, there are no former Warsaw Pact countries that are nuclear hosting. Or have a mass build up of NATO troops in them for the exception of their own armies. This guy is a Russian apologist.
Russian President Vladimir Putin expects that NATO will invade Russia because autocrats have no other choice than to identify or create an external boogeyman.
Every dictator needs excuses to invade and annex. Putin is no different.
What is NATO then?
Why isn't the interviewer challenging this guest, who is wrong about several things?
he forgot to mention that agreement was made with soviet union not russia and soviet union not exist anymore.
there is no paper signed.
Correction, NATO did not move in...Its those countries that requested to be member as an assurance for peace
I have never heard of a law that people need to speak fluent lithuanian in order to vote. That is not true, you have to be a citizen to vote.
It's not so much that NATO has forgotten about past pledges as much as Poland and the Baltic States remember how the Soviet Union and Imperial Russia treated them. The U.S. or any other NATO country didn't have to run some kind of subversion campaign to get those governments to join NATO. They saw where their best interests lay and anyone else can recognize that keeping Russia boxed in makes the rest of Europe safer and probably the world in general, as well.
If you instal a home security system should that be described as the security company marching into your home with the intent of eventually breaking into the homes of criminals? No, because even a five year old would understand how ridiculous that is.
Great comparison
Pathetic. If he believes this stuff he's a simpleton, more likely just a coward.
Martin Sixsmith is being disingenuous on so many levels. He misrepresents the WMD crisis for Iraq and the so-called expansion of NATO agreements. NATO, as Sixsmith well-knows, is a purely defensive organisation. The 'advance' of NATO is simply an excuse for Russian aggression and was, in fact, a reaction to Russian militarism.
First, sounds to me like this guy is talking Putin’s playbook, not sure why..? Second, NATO didnt expand to some “vacuum” this fella is mentioning, the Eastern Europe countries understood that Russia would come for them again as soon as it recovers, do they BEGGED for NATO membership (and they were damn right as we could see in Feb 2022!). Third, it is impossible to negotiate with Russia- they lie all the time and agreements don‘t mean anything to them (and rule Nr.1-you don’t negotiate with terrorists…). Russia understands only one thing-big punch in the face, and then will be quiet for another decade or two..
Negotiation? Are you kidding?
Independent democratic countries in Eastern Europe have to make their own choice. Democracies cannot be constrained by authoritarian autocracies! Deterrence is the only sensible way forward as one cannot trust any agreement with Russia no matter who is in control there.
You can't negotiate with liars.
Negotiate with Putin ? Why bother ? He never honors his contract. So, your a fool if you believe that Russia can keep their word. SLAVA UKRAINE 🇺🇦
There was never a written agreement. Some suggestions were made but never ratified into a legally binding agreement.
Exactly. It does not matter what West did or did not do. Putin uses Nato expansion as an excuse. He wants to annex Ukraine. He says Ukraine is not even a real country. He wants russian empire back and Nato has othing to do with Putin''s greed.
And if anyone thinks the Soviets wouldn't have demanded it if there was a question, they're delusional.
But it was a verbal agreement which means the Western words and treaties are worthless
@@anthonykaiser974 Exactly. They would've jumped at the change of locking in such a treaty.
The statement "not one inch" is based on what US Secretary of State James Baker said to Gorbachev in a meeting in the Kremlin in February 1990, which however only applied to East Germany. In September 1990 (7 months later) the Treaty of Moscow, also known as the Two Plus Four Treaty, was then signed. Article 6 of the Treaty stated that the unified Germany will have the right to decide to which international alliances it will belong to, meaning the Soviet Union will not oppose its NATO membership. Yeltsin, and then Putin, have since falsely assumed that Baker's statement would apply to all Eastern European countries when in fact the statement only applied to East Germany, who when the Treaty of Moscow was signed, the Soviet Union agreed that a united whole Germany has the right to decide its own alliances.
Martin take a very Russian stance here in taking verbal agreements as treaties when Russia has taken an aggressive stance towards their Western boarder states. Even if the US and other Western countries did not actively coax nations into NATO, the fact that countries would choose to join NATO *because* of Russia.
Also, listening to Russia, they want boarders to return to pre-WWI lines. I'm sure that's going to go over well to every country that would be erased for those boarders to work.
Finland companies selling western technology to Russia indirectly need to have executives sent to Ukraine.
May be you should go to Ukraine
What technology?
Perhaps Russia should consider demilitarizing Kaliningrad before making demands on NATO.
Negotiations? Whose negotiations? Putin's? NATO countries should be seeking to help Ukraine win the war, not negotiating on behalf of Putin and his whims. Negotiations without Russia's defeat in Ukraine is mere appeasement.