so why cant they US give them a guarantee thats its not aimed at them? thats the only thing Russia is throwing a fit at...not for the sake of it
A few things come to mind having watched the video. One of the first, and this ties directly into how/why the US/NATO might not give a guarantee that the missile shield is not 'aimed' at Russia strategic missile forces, is the mention that negotiations about such an agreement or guarantee is underway. This makes me wonder just what exactly it is that Russia wants as part of that 'agreement'?
Last I had checked, Russia had somewhere upwards of ~1,000 warheads available, thought IIRC there was the possibility of a reduction down to 'only' 650 warheads.
If the European missile 'shield' is anything like the ABM system the US has in Hawaii and Alaska (total of 18-24 interceptors) then the system in Europe would have a comparable number of interceptors, and most likely fire 2-3 interceptors at each inbound warhead. That translates into being able to intercept somewhere between 6-12 inbound warheads. Unless there was some serious breakdown within Russia, I do not see how Russia would take an ICBM warshot with only a dozen warheads. Especially when some of the ICBM's can carry that many warheads aboard.
One of the other potential reasons why there might be issues with getting an agreement is that Russia apparently does not want the European missile shield to have sufficient range to intercept BM's outside of the country's airspace, i.e. does not want an interceptor launched in Poland to have range to hit a BM while it is within Russian airspace. This IMO is unworkable since one would want to intercept a known hostile BM warhead as soon as it is identified, that way if an intercept missile, there is time to try again. Otherwise one is forced to wait until there is only time for maybe one intercept attempt prior to warhead detonation.
As for why Poland would be a missile shield site... Russia has pressured a number of other, ex-WarPac nations to not be a part of the European missile shield. IIRC the Czech Republic was one country where the US/NATO wanted to locate the interceptors, being further south. After pressure from Russia though, the Czech Republic refused to host the missile shield. Other countries which could be potential sites for either the radars or the interceptors are Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia, Hungary, Croatia, Greece and Turkey.
Of these, I would immediately reject both Greece and Turkey from the list. Turkey I would reject both from being too close to the potential launch, as well as being too unstable (politically/socially and tectonically). Greece I also reject, in this case being too far to the south and west, away from the likely ballistic arcs of missiles being fired from Iran at Central and Western Europe, as well as being too (tectonically) unstable.
Bulgaria and Romania might be too close to the launch, or they might be in an ideal location. IMO though there are potential issues of domestic stability which could make a NATO deployment problematic. Similar issues are present with Croatia. That really only leave Hungary and Slovakia, and I would not be surprised if there had been negotiations which fell apart there as well.
-Cheers