wanted to do so because they feared the Russians might attempt to re-exert control over them through military means, right?

If I were them I would want some protection too!

And ask yourself this... why should NATO be so concerned about the risk of a hot war in Ukraine if the Russians aren't?

Should Ukraine and other countries be left to the mercies of Vladimir Putin becuase we are a afraid of a conflict he does not seem to be concerned about? Why isn't Putin concerned?

promises to Gorbachev and others that NATO forces would not project its forces in the countries immediately abutting Russia.

We sure as heck would not want missiles on our doorstep -- e.g., the Cuban Missile Crisis.

If we have enough armaments arrayed each other, the risk of kicking off a major conflict is very, very high. And it is certainly something that most Americans don't want -- right wing crazies and the media (which loves conflict) notwithstanding.

Also, we have spent quite enough money on the military-industrial complex and have too long believed that we have hammers and everything around us looks like a nail.

And there is no risk of conflict unless the Russians want to retake their former holdings. Why would there be? As I said, except for its nukes, Russia is not really relevant. They are second tier economic power at best.

This is all about Putin wanting to be a world player. The only way he can do that is pose a security threat.

NATO had very little interest in Russia in the late 90's and early 2K's. It wasn't until Putin began acting on his imperial ambitions that things even heated up again.

This is a bullshit narrative that serves the interests of the Putinistas.

"Jack Matlock, American ambassador to the Soviet Union during its final years, said that the West gave a "clear commitment" not to expand, and declassified documents indicate that Soviet negotiators were given the impression that NATO membership was off the table for countries such as Czechoslovakia, Hungary, or Poland.[53] Hans-Dietrich Genscher, the West German foreign minister at that time, said in a conversation with Eduard Shevardnadze that "[f]or us, however, one thing is certain: NATO will not expand to the east."[53] In 1996, Gorbachev wrote in his Memoirs, that "during the negotiations on the unification of Germany they gave assurances that NATO would not extend its zone of operation to the east,"[54] and repeated this view in an interview in 2008."

This view is clearly believed by many people, and yet we hear not a whisper of it in the press as we increase the chances of marching towards conflict with Russia.

The media will sell more space with conflict, military industrial companies will be able to justify more sales of war materiel.

This is an important issue that we should be aware of, even though Putin is a horrible, horrible person.

It is not NATO threatening to invade Russian client states. It was Russia supporting separatists in South Ossetia. It was Russia that invaded and seized Crimea. And it is Russia in the Donbass. Frankly, if the former Soviet states now in NATO weren't in NATO, they might be in a similar situation.

Do not be naive. Putin is not afraid that NATO will invade Russia. He's pissed that NATO stands between him and restoring the boundaries of the Soviet empire under his kleptocratic rule.

And this kind of stuff is exactly why Putin is glad to pay Hartmann a paycheck.

"diverging views on whether negotiators gave commitments regarding further NATO expansion east..." does not validate a premise as an absolute, nor is it supporting any direct evidence.

Keep digging... there's a jar of pennies buried down there somewhere!

just wrong?

"Jack Matlock, American ambassador to the Soviet Union during its final years, said that the West gave a "clear commitment" not to expand, and declassified documents indicate that Soviet negotiators were given the impression that NATO membership was off the table for countries such as Czechoslovakia, Hungary, or Poland.[53] Hans-Dietrich Genscher, the West German foreign minister at that time, said in a conversation with Eduard Shevardnadze that "[f]or us, however, one thing is certain: NATO will not expand to the east."[53]" (this is from the WIKI article on NATO.)

Further, the US has made use time and time again of "creative ambiguity" -- e.g., April Glassby's not warning Saddam Hussein before he invaded Kuwait (and of course the dog and pony show after that by Bush the elder to give us false reasons for Gulf War.

Important to remember the lies of the US Government. The following is a part of the WIKI hisotry of "Gulf War):

"Although there were human rights abuses committed in Kuwait by the invading Iraqi military, the alleged incidents which received most publicity in the US were inventions of the public relations firm hired by the government of Kuwait to influence US opinion in favor of military intervention. Shortly after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, the organization Citizens for a Free Kuwait was formed in the US. It hired the public relations firm Hill & Knowlton for about $11 million, paid by Kuwait's government.[98]

"Among many other means of influencing US opinion, such as distributing books on Iraqi atrocities to US soldiers deployed in the region, "Free Kuwait" T-shirts and speakers to college campuses, and dozens of video news releases to television stations, the firm arranged for an appearance before a group of members of the US Congress in which a woman identifying herself as a nurse working in the Kuwait City hospital described Iraqi soldiers pulling babies out of incubators and letting them die on the floor.[99]

"The story was an influence in tipping both the public and Congress towards a war with Iraq: six Congressmen said the testimony was enough for them to support military action against Iraq and seven Senators referenced the testimony in debate. The Senate supported the military actions in a 52–47 vote. However, a year after the war, this allegation was revealed to be a fabrication. The woman who had testified was found to be a member of Kuwait's Royal Family, in fact the daughter of Kuwait's ambassador to the US.[99] She hadn't lived in Kuwait during the Iraqi invasion.

"The details of the Hill & Knowlton public relations campaign, including the incubator testimony, were published in John R. MacArthur's Second Front: Censorship and Propaganda in the Gulf War (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1992), and came to wide public attention when an Op-ed by MacArthur was published in The New York Times. This prompted a reexamination by Amnesty International, which had originally promoted an account alleging even greater numbers of babies torn from incubators than the original fake testimony. After finding no evidence to support it, the organization issued a retraction. President Bush then repeated the incubator allegations on television."

Putin worries about that day and night!

The topic of “NATO expansion” was not discussed at all, and it wasn’t brought up in those years. I say this with full responsibility. Not a singe Eastern European country raised the issue, not even after the Warsaw Pact ceased to exist in 1991. Western leaders didn’t bring it up, either.

"In 1996, Gorbachev wrote in his Memoirs, that "during the negotiations on the unification of Germany they gave assurances that NATO would not extend its zone of operation to the east,"[54] and repeated this view in an interview in 2008.[55] "

I am interested in real facts.

And also am very interested in the facts that Thom Hartmann brings to the table.

Had you read the interview, Gorbachev admits that although guarantees were made to prevent NATO from placing weapons systems in Eastern Europe,but that no discussions whatsoever were made concerning NATO expansion. New memberships could be made.

Gorbachev and other non-Russian leaders agreed with the view that NATO expansion was going to be denied.

Once again, whether this answers totally the issue of the formal agreements on NATO expansion against Russia, this is an important issue that I have not seen any politician or media person bring up before. t

Tom Hartmann brought it up and it is very worthy of discussion.

It is not a source, it is crowd-sourced. Basically, it's "us."

The quote from Gorbachev (with the 54 footnote) is something I'd like to read in fuller context, but a more complete quote didn't come up in a quick google search.

A primary source will always be superior to Wikipedia.

A primary source is raw data, and must be the cornerstone of any analysis. In this case, the primary source is the leader who took part in the negotiations in question. Surely, anything Gorbachev, or an primary source, says must be questioned and analyzed, but in this case, the source himself is admitting to something that damages the side he is trying to defend. It is perhaps the most candid testimony.

OTOH, Wikipedia is written and rewritten by people who are not only not primary sources, they may have no professional or academic training. Entries can be altered by anyone--Americans, Russians, me, perhaps you--to suit their interests. Any topic that is at all controversial on Wikepedia must be automatically treated as suspect.

Expansion of NATO eastward was one aspect of this. So was the implementation of "shock therapy" economic reforms promoted by Western experts that ruined Russia and helped to usher in the era of the oligarchs. Russians suffered grievously under Yeltsin in the 1990s due to the poor implementation of privatization policies.

Here is one study on the negative impact of shock therapy on working-age male mortality in Russia: http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpub/article/PIIS2468-26671730072-5/fulltext

Russians are also paranoid about Western invasion due to a history of being invaded by Western powers. The Teutonic Knights, Poland, Sweden, Napoleonic France and Imperial and Nazi Germany all invaded Russia/the USSR. Russians have long memories and don't forget these attacks.

That doesn't mean that Putin is a swell guy or that we should allow the Russians to interfere with our elections or try to break up NATO but I do think it is important to understand why the Russians think and behave like they do.

Poland, Eastern Europe, Crimea (before 1918), the "Stans," Siberia, Tuva,etc.