Note: I should clarify that it wasn't NATO that led the forces against North Korea in the Korean War, it was the UN. However, many NATO member countries participated to fight against North Korea in the war. Now, what do you think? Should NATO still exist today?
Average Joe Europe should find their own way to stay together, and build their militaries without America paying for the world's largest military special ed program.
In my opinion, it is misleading to say that NATO was involved in the Korean war, because the organization had no role in it. After all, we don't call the Suez invasion a NATO operation, either, even though two-thirds of the invaders in the Suez crisis of 1956 were (and are) NATO members. But a nice video otherwise.
Hi Mr. Beat thank you for retracting the part about NATO's involvement in the Korean War. However, there was another mistake you need to correct. NATO did not attack Yugoslavia in 1999 because there was no longer a Yugoslavian state. NATO attacked Serbia. I think this was is an acceptable video but there were some loose screws that detract from all of the hard work you put into this. Also, to answer your question, yes I think NATO should still exist today.
Fun fact, before the Warsaw Pact the USSR tried to join NATO, as they didn't have much to lose. They say yes, the USSR has influence in this huge international organization. They say no, it's a clear threat to their power and the soviets were justified in making their own group. They knew that NATO was going to say no, so they used the situation to their advantage to make the Warsaw Pact.
@@jorge6207 Utopian thinking at best. Capitalism and the capitalist classes are based in nation states world market and resource competitions is driven by the greed of each ruling class there are no common military interests among groups of capitalist thieves only war preparations to defend their private property. .
Fact Checking: at the founding of NATO, in 1949, there wasn't only democratic countries. Portugal, which was at the time under Salazarist regime, was a founding member.
@@Isaac-hd1im Ya its an anri communist Imperialist military allaince. The widow dressing of Democratic Imperialism reveals itself when dealing with the form colonies and neocolonialist power. American Imperialism drops the Democratic facade when dealing with rebellion in the colonies. Bombing, military invasion and CIA terror become the methods to advance investors interests.
There was an election in 1949 - one that was deemed rather flawed - so as NATO was founded they could pretend it was democratic but it is the year that democracy ended in Portugal.
Just a small addition: in 1949 Portugal wasn't a democracy but had been under the authoritarian (and, according to some historians & political scientists, fascist) Estado Novo regime for 16 years, and it would continue to be under Estado Novo rule until 1979.
NATO should stay, but maybe change focus when there are not possible threats from Russia, Korea, or the middle East. We're getting more globally minded all the time in trade, culture, and other ways. It's good to have a globally minded force to help us with that.
joaohumbg While Finland is technically not a member of NATO, it sorta kinda is. Thing is Finland is in the EU, and the EU has it's own defensive pact, the CSDP. Which means that, if, for instance, Russia invaded Finland, all the other EU countries are automatically at war with Russia. And since most of the other EU member states are NATO members, NATO is at war with Russia too. So you can say that Finland, Sweden, Austria, Ireland, Cyprus, and of course the military might that is Malta do have the defensive protection from NATO without actually having any responsability to NATO. Pleace don't tell that to Trump, though...
I'm American, and could give a fuck if NATO is good for stupid Norway. AFAIC, you get in trouble with Russia, you can fight them by yourself, treaties be damned (just like with Indians or ABM's etc.) That goes triple for the retard countries in East Europe, and tenfold for the damned Baltics.
NATO is an extension of America's arrogant foreign policy. In fact American imperialism has never ended, which is why most American/NATO interventions have failed or simply result in a stalemate.
No, NATO is also a defensive alliance between democracies, some of which haven't been very good democracies, and can only act as an alliance with all members when a country is attacked offensively. NATO is what keeps Poland, Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania independent and democratic, and while member states "interventions" need to be critiscised the alliance as a whole is what keeps the peace in Europe.
For all those who still say that NATO is irrelevant today, I urge you to think about what Ukraine, Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Sweden, and Finland may have to say about that.
Russia is not near in the position to defeat any of these countries solely as we can see in Ukraine. Nato has just become an enticer and it is mostly irrelevant post Cold War except for fighting ragtag groups and expanding.
@@JackInDaBox25 First of all I’m not going to insult you. But it's embarrassing that u are asking this question. USA and NATO are the ones that are starting all wars. For example, Afganistan. 11.9- Inside Job did by the USA government so they can have a fake reason to attack. They terrorise middle east countries, if u take arms up against them u will be presented as "terrorist". After the war they take all the oil from the country. Then Ukraine. They were promoting Vladimir Zelensky for years, and set him as Ukraine leader so they can control him like their puppet. Ukraine is full of Nuclear power plants, and if Ukraine joined NATO, NATO would have their basses and Nuclear weapons and missiles on Russian border, which would start much worse war. They knew Russia couldn't let that happen so they feud Russia and Ukraine into a war, so they can profit(selling weapons). They did the same thing before WW2, arming Hitler and Germany and making a profit from a war they created. We can also look at their War Crimes. 1999s when Albanians were terrorizing innocent Serbs on Kosovo, USA and NATO made a plan with Albania. They faked an banishment of Albanians from Kosovo, that were attacked by " Serbian Military ". They brought their CBC and BBC news recording " attacked" "poor" Albanians. Then when they had a fake reason, they started agression on Serbia. They used depleted uranium for bombing schools, hospitals, maternity hospital, homes, civilian institutions.... And Yes they called those " military objects". They also hid all of that as well as the Albanian genocide over Serbs. Next, we have Iraq. I think I don’t even need to talk about this, because it would take me around 100 hours. The genocide they committed against Iraqi people is speechless crime. Then lets have a look at their " democracy" that u mentioned. Is democracy to seize private property from hundreds of Russians living in Europe just because they are Russians during this war? Is democracy to support genocide and then hid another?
@@aleksababic9967 What you’re talking about sounds more like conspiracy theories than actual facts. Putin has already killed many ppl in his own country let alone in other countries. Not to mention, how do U equate diplomacy with “starting” a war. How does NATO & the US TALKING to a country about joining them “cause a war”. Did Putin HAVE to invade Georgia? Crimea? Ukrain? What also makes no sense about your comment is there are millions of ppl trying to leave Ukrain right now bc they don’t want to be under Putin’s reign. If Ukrainians don’t like democracy then why have we never heard of them revolting against the country. Why aren’t they welcoming Putin into the country with open arms? GTFOH
It'd be awesome to replace NATO with the UN peacekeeping force but the sad fact is that they're not as effective and the UN allows themselves to get stepped on too often for my taste.
How about a history of SEATO, which existed in the 1950s to the 1970s, which was a reason that Australia, New Zealand, Thailand and South Kaorea were sucked into the Vietnam conflict. Also Australia, New Zealand,Ethiopia and India were not part of NATO but still committed forces to the Korean War
Pretty crazy because I remember in 2018 there was a lot of talk about the lifetime of nato and how it wasn’t needed any more. Skip 4 years later and nato grew even larger pulling in Sweden and Finland, and nato getting juiced up over the war in Ukraine 🇺🇦 proving why nato should still be skipping around.
I was saying back then that it was a naive belief. There's a reason why NATO has been around for so long and smart people would realize that you should never abolish a defense treaty at all
Mr. Beat, most of your videos are great: informative, fun, accurate and succinct. This one missed the mark and was far to American making the Soviets out to be the bad guys. The Soviets were no more aggressive in spreading their ideology than the US. In fact the US was much more active in shaping the world post WW2.
I’m not so sure its “international cop” role doesn’t sometimes do more harm than good. Plus, communism doesn’t always equal totalitarianism, and market economies don’t always involve respect for human rights-and through much of the Cold War, I don’t think NATO always distinguished between countries that were actually choosing communism or heavily socialistic governments and those that were having communism, or whatever that was the USSR was doing, forced upon them. I’m not a raging post-Cold War paranoiac, but I also think that a European-North American alliance acts as something of a deterrent to Russian aggression. And I think that where NATO differs from some other past alliances is that it’s a union of countries that, in their various permutations, had previously, outside of their numerous colonial conquests, done much of their fighting with each other. Even if the US is bearing more than a “fair share” of the financial burden of NATO, I think it still comes cheap at the price, considering what the costs of a far less stable and more vulnerable Europe would be. I think that a diminished role or no role for the US in NATO, would be a big problem, but if NATO can’t survive, I would rather see a united European military than see every European nation that can separately arm itself to the teeth do so. In the past, that hasn’t worked out so well. Just imagine what all those separate nations arming on a large scale would do to economies. And the last thing the world needs is more intense regional rivalries. All of these risks become a bit more probable every time confidence in the US commitment to NATO becomes shaky, which isn’t to say that the complications of forming a European military wouldn’t also be kind of mind-boggling and risky.
Simply n nice explanation Mr Beat.. I was just wondering, why did NATO get involved in the Korean war when South Korea was not a signatory state to NATO?
As much I’m against imperialism, NATO being allied keeps the peace in some cases, also North Macedonia joined in 2020 so now it has 30 member Nations. I personally think we should keep NATO to keep Russia in check and keep the U.S. and Europe friendly and close but the U.S. and NATO should definitely reduce military intervention as it’s not good.
NATO is a blessing and a curse. One of the huge issues with NATO is that it has antagonized other nations, and more recently the US backed by NATO had more failures that have made situations far worse than it has helped. This is why some countries are thinking of backing out of the treaty. This is what Russia and the rest of the world is seeing. NATO was built in response to keep Russia in check; however, until recently, Russia has worked alongside with NATO--until it decided to build up around its borders and start conducting exercises. This lies in opposition to the agreement Reagan and Gorbachev made, when Gorbachev decided to give up the DDR--and since the 1990s, Russia has drawn so many red lines, and the US and NATO continued to cross them. So the so-called Russian "aggression" is more reactivism. Ukraine IS the biggest red line. It would be like Russia influencing Canada or Mexico. Believe it or not, Russia has their own "Monroe Doctrine." If we aren't more careful and willing to work things out with Russia (another detente, not appeasement), they will become more of a threat to NATO countries. And Russia is still working towards Western interests--so far, whether most of us choose to see it or not. They are just not happy about NATO choosing to be world police--especially when there is so much hypocrisy happening in their foreign policy. HOWEVER, China is a potential threat and NATO can be an asset against China--and if we are not more careful with maintaining our allies, especially with the Trump administration, we may end up losing some allies to China.
I believe that NATO makes the world less safe as any tiny act of aggression against any one of the member states would instantly escalate into worldwide nuclear war. As mentioned in the video, a big reason WWI happened was because of military alliances - because of this a Europe-wide war started from a simple assassination. In addition not all the countries in NATO are run by desirable or trustworthy regimes, such as the increasingly authoritarian Islamic government of Turkey. It would be terrible if American and Western European countries were dragged into a catastrophic war to defend such a regime.
Nato is essentially an agreement where -Members rush to the aid of other members, to the best of their ability. So the US risks war with Russia to defend latvia . In exchange for this huge risk, the upside is, should the US and china clash, Latvia will contribute both its tanks. Insignificant counties get all the benefit while the US assumes all the risk to defend areas that are often unknown to the US tax payer or those who will die in the effort.
This is a great video for explaining the history of NATO, what it does, and some reasons why it exists. However, I'm surprised you didn't include the requirements for being part of NATO and the possible plans for NATO in the future. Also, I'm personally in favor of NATO. There are still some factions in the world that would bring about "the perfect world" with the death and punishment of millions if not billions of people, and NATO is the force that can stand against them.
Yeah, I thought about going into that but ultimately wanted to keep the video more simplified, as I am showing my high school students in real life this video next week. Thanks for sharing your opinion. Are you open to NATO and the UN joining forces?
Mr. Beat Those High School students sure do have a great privilege. The one I got is really good though. Quite frankly, I'm against the UN as it is now, I see it as pretty corrupt and needing of some changes. The idea of it is still good though. I'd prefer if NATO changed it's name and expanded. I'd say some good potential candidates are in Asia with Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan, perhaps also the Philippines or even Vietnam since our relationship has improved with them a fair bit since the war.
@@iammrbeat I've changed my mind a bit since then. The UN, corrupt as it can be, is still a good option to consider at times. Responsibilities are more spread out, and I suppose i'm warming up to the principle of "do not fire unless fired upon".
@@CoolcleverstoneCoolcleverstone and what about the members of nato who go into countries and steels their resources/seals weapons and lets them fight "u no who I'm talking about"! and that countre fights back, then that is bad?
Great video, I guess I found what I was looking for, plus my exact question was why U.S or Nato serves as the world police? Answer was UN does that, but it does not make sense if those who had power to make decisions are only superpower countries which can only support what benefits them and oppose anyone whom may seem like their competitor in any form, military, economically or technolocally wise. I think we do need world organizations like Nato but that should not be driven by rich countries as somehow it does not look fair enough, they are capable of control but they can not remove all the wars in other countries as they mostly go there when there is something to benefit them other than freedom or democracy of the local people. example: they can not win wars in Africa due to that, talking about UN.
@@ezequiel717 Yes, 6,33% last general elections, but even so miles ahead of any traditional communist party in Western Europe. (Also 10% of the local government as of 2017)
A good source to truly understand how and why NATO works well and why it is so very much different from any alliance before 1945 is a book called “Why NATO Endures” by Wallace J. Thies Highly recommended reading
I'm curious about your opinion on how much should the US contribute to the NATO budget, in comparison to the other countries? I can understand the US having the responsibility to contribute the largest percentage of the budget. The US has the largest military contingent, provides the nuclear weapons, and selects the officer who serves as Supreme Commander. However, I think that other countries, such as Luxembourg or Estonia, should provide a higher percentage to the NATO budget, since they can't provide matching manpower to the US. If the US provides the funds for about 25 to 30 percent of the Budget, I'm ok with that...but I'm thinking it's probably closer to 60 percent or more...
Letting the same people who governed the USSR take control of Russia was the mistake, and now here we are with a modern day hitler creating a war because one sovereign country wants to be allies with others.
This is a very bad video with massive oversimplifications and downright falsehoods and should be taken down. NATO is not meant to act as a "world police"; this is not the intention of the alliance and not the way the alliance acts, although certain member states want it to. It exists on the fundamental principle an attack on one is an attack on all which allows smaller and medium sized countries to pool their resources to improve their collective defence. Talking about the USSR and US standoff without mentioning WW2 and how it created the situations for NATO and the Warsaw pact to be created is a massive error, and highlights how you shouldn't try and force complex topics to be simpler than necessary to fit within 10 minutes. I had a good opinion of this guy, but considering how flawed this video was makes me question whether I can trust his other content.
As of July 20, 2022, 30 countries are part of NATO. North Macedonia is the newest NATO country, joining in 2020. Finland and Sweden are attempting to join NATO.
@@imtyler99yearsago90 Indeed, Finland became the 31st country to join NATO on April 4, 2023, which was the 74th anniversary of the establishment of NATO.
Hey Mr. Beats. I have a suggestion. Do a video on all the times Presidents bucked their own party and sided with opposition party. Like when GW Bush signed the corporate bailouts and Clinton supported NAFTA and the line item veto.
I'm not a big fan of NATO existing now, primarily because the USA is the one doing most of the heavy lifting. After WW2, it made sense that the USA invested the most resources as most of Europe had been severely damaged, but it's been almost a century. The USA has a large debt problem right now and needs to reduce spending. NATO is a positive force, I just see it as something that either the other member nations need to contribute more to or the USA needs to reduce investment into it.
China and Russia also agree with you. Sorry mate but if you want USA to be Nº1 you gotta pay the cost or let China take the lead, they don't care about spending $$ for influence nor do they care about democracy or any of those rights in the US constitution or something US citizen love .... privacy, free speech, guns .. so it really does not matter if ur a Dem or Rep really if u like ur "American Way" you gotta put the $$$
France actually only left military structures of NATO, never left political structures. In 2009, under the presidency of Sarkozy France rejoin NATO's military structures.
Now that Russia is showing its true colors by its attack on Ukraine, and by the many changes to it’s internal policies that SEEM to be returning it to being the USSR, it looks just like the unfriendly threat it was in 1945. NATO remains the police force in the world dedicated to protect the freedom of neighboring countries from Russia. This also goes for weaker countries the world over. Freedom is important, just ask the post-Russian Occupation people in Ukraine. Slava Ukraine! 🇱🇷❤️🙏🙏🙏
this only proves how uneducated about how all this really works or how and WHY the ukraine war initiated. Had Obama and biden NOT barged into the ukraine more than 9 years ago to illegally overthrow ukraine's democratically elected government to instill one of THEIR preference just because THEY didn't like it, then the civil war in ukraine would have NEVER started. What they did in ukraine was a REAL insurrection where people were burned alive while the others chanted to the Ukrainian anthem, NOT what happened here on Jan 6. Can't imagine Russia coming to do that to a neighboring country to usa and not expecting usa to do anything, yet EVEN THEN! Putin did nothing other than ask for peace repeatedly for more than 8 years MINSK II MINSK II, ignored ignored, peace peace, ignored ignored, people being bombed in the east for 8 years and nobody cared, it took putin 8 full years to finally say enough! as all peaceful ways to stop this was ignored even when so many years ago it was agreed NOT ONE INCH to the EAST! yet Nato still expanded with Russia not reacting until ukraine because how many people had to be bombed to provoke Russia into finally going in to return the bombs??? Seriously people like you is why so many support the bombings of innocent people. Do you even have an idea how many little children lived in fear all these years in basements and those who died along with their entire families by bombs which were sent BY US! with no media to expose it to us until Putin went in to post everywhere as "UNPROVOKED"... it's just sick ignorance among most who only know what propaganda is fed to us. What business did Biden have in provoking all this when under obama. just a sick old man with power behind the mass media to portray his evil doing as someone else's and portray him and us the usa as the hero when we started this massacreBECAUSE Of hiM! To get out of debt he had to kill how many Ukrainians and make it look like it's all russias fault. so sick. really.
Neither, it does not do either it simply protects the public interests of the affiliated countries by bonding together they become a stronger force. Play-dough bought in a store is not edible but if you make homemade play dough it's almost always edible and quite delicious a little salty but it won't kill you. Very good video thank you Suzanne.
"12 democratic countries signed the agreement", saying that while Portugal was under severe dictatorship until 1975, not a democracy at all. Check you facts mate.
+Tiago Mendes If you go back and watch again, that's not what I said. I said 29 democratic countries TODAY. The defintion was not for when it was founded.
This video has been out for 5 years as of this is being sent, In 2020 Macedonia which is now called NORTH macedonia was given premission to join NATO from greece and it did, And only April 4th 2023 Finland a country that shares a 802 kilometer border with Russia joined NATO. And Sweden is expected to join by december 2024, Have a good day everyone
@The King Russia never said it was for Denazification, Ukraine got warned many times for their idea to join nato. And they didn't take that warning seriously so look at them now. Stop saying delusional CNN bullshit
@@vushment i don't understand Russia's goals. NATO's goal is not to nuke Russia, it's there to protect it's members. All Russia has to do is not attacking countries.
The importance of NATO and its power has increased by $ 1.3 Billion. This is the amount that the member countries and the USA have invested into the organization that is supposed to defend the 31 member countries against enemies. The entire amount of $ 1.3 Billion is now invested into a new HQ building. The looks of it is monumental. It must scare any potential enemies away. Hopefully, since there was no money left for soldiers not to talk about weapons.
Note: This video was outdated 4 years ago. North Macedonia joined 2 years ago, and it's their most recent member. Ukraine, Finland & Sweden asked to join, but we're not sure...
