Well, howdy there internet people? It's Bowe again. So today we are going to talk about Switzerland

and Finland and what they can teach us about Ukraine and Russia,

because there is a trend that people seem to be kind of falling into,

and people, a lot of people genuinely may believe something that's a little off.

And when they explore the roots of why they believe that, they may not like the answers.

So, here's a message.

You say the war is lost for Russia and act like it's a good thing.

By your own definitions, Russia had a national interest in invading Ukraine.

Ukraine was becoming too friendly with NATO and Russia and Russia had to act to protect

their interests. NATO cannot exist on Russia's borders. You also say Russia has lost some wider geological, I'm assuming

that means geopolitical war, but would never dare to specify how. Okay, so that wider thing, I have entire videos on this, but just to recap, as stated in your

message, the pretext that Russia used was too close to NATO, can't have NATO on our borders, right?

When the invasion happened, a bunch of countries particularly Finland

for the sake of this conversation are wanting to join NATO

Finland shares a huge border with Russia. It backfired. The Russian

aggression caused countries that are close to it in like miles to warm to NATO,

countries that would never have considered it before.

That's losing the wider geopolitical war.

Another example would be Switzerland.

Now they're not joining NATO, but they just took a vote. It was 14 to 11.

Stating that if a country had Swiss military gear and they wanted to export it to Ukraine, well that would be okay.

That wouldn't violate their, you know, famed neutrality. Switzerland, a country that is known for

...