Is Russia actually holding out a hand, what would that mean?

Having watched the news as everybody does, and having formed opinions, as everybody does it seems to me a logical question.

Given Russia's obvious willingness to get involved on the world stage I have to ask, what are the motives, right?

Let us look at the motives then.

Some people suggest that Russia's only motive in Syria is because of a possible oil pipeline and the necessary ingress into the Mediterranean.

Other people suggest that Russia wants to expand and retake its old territories.

Still others are saying that Russia is sending an internal message regarding Russian and Islamic extremism.

There are many thoughts on the matter.

Personally, I think that Russia, after a long period of ostracism, is basically saying to the international community, "Here I am".

Now my question is this, if this is the case, is that a bad thing?

There are no links in this OP. Nothing to influence your opinions, this is simply a question to the intelligent people who populate this website.

Does Russia have an agenda other than that which they state? Is that agenda a negative one? Should we be more open in our minds to the idea of Russia as another brother, or should we just regard anything Russian as bad?

The floor is open to you all. Any and all opinions are welcome.

Much respect to you all.

Yes I feel like they are

and in that hand is a ring with a needle on it laced with cyanide........

Putin is KGB, and will always be KGB

a reply to: Jonjonj

So far, I would agree. Putin can be quite the nice guy.




I too think this is Russia's defining moment in the spotlight. Now is where it can show the world it can be a force for good and not the old Soviet style bad guy.

a reply to: Jonjonj

I feel that Russia is bringing balance to the world. America can no longer do as it pleases. I think this is a good thing.

Off course, Russia is serving its own interests in the first place, but I think the world is better of when there is no longer one superpower controlling things.

Wether this really turns out to be a good thing depends more on how the West is going to handle this new situation, than on Russia's actions, imo.

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

I understand that opinion, but I have to ask, what is so bad about the KGB?

Was not the KGB simply the Russian equivalent of the CIA?

a reply to: Jonjonj

According to some Russian anti Putin analysts Putin's recent Syria steps motivated by

1. Distract population from falling economy
2. Exchange Syrian card for Novorossiya ( to have some diplomatic overt or covert agreement with US)
3. In the best scenario to hold something similar to Yalta 1945

a reply to: markosity1973

I agree completely with you. Nothing else to say really as I believe we need all nations to unite, not fight.

a reply to: RogueWave

When Putin made the statement that looking at Russia as a country, they truly did not need to expand, I kind of believed him because it is true, as it is of the USA. They really have all they need to progress as a country.

a reply to: kitzik

He's in Syria to protect his base at latakia. That much is true.

But it took him 4 years to get involved in the Syrian civil war, so I don't see any covert agendas myself.

a reply to: kitzik

Could you expand on the Yalta agreement? I would and I am sure most would be interested in that idea.

a reply to: markosity1973

Not exactly. Russia prevented US "closed sky" from the beginning of the conflict.

originally posted by: Jonjonj
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

I understand that opinion, but I have to ask, what is so bad about the KGB?

Was not the KGB simply the Russian equivalent of the CIA?

Yeah except the fact that he likes to kill or jail any opposition to him, that includes killing his own people and massacring the muslim population in Crimea

The guy does nothing w out some sort of other outcome in mind, which in itself isnt a bad thing......

The problem with him still being KGB is he still has no problem putting a hit on someone who doesnt agree with him

a reply to: kitzik

You surely mean from Russia's involvement in the campaign. At least its declared involvement.

a reply to: Jonjonj

This is not my idea. Yalta generally meaning Yalta conference between Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin near the end of ww2.

The author of this idea is Russian politologist S. Belkovsky. I don't know if he is suggesting the conference of winners over Islamo-nazism or in a less defined meaning.

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

As far as I understand the KGB does not even exist anymore. In military matters it is called the GRU.

The question is though, is Russian involvement in world affairs a bad thing?

a reply to: kitzik

I was curious as you used the Yalta agreement as some sort of way for Russia to ...what?

a reply to: Jonjonj

agreement between winning allies over the spheres of influence in the world

Well, personally I don't think that this is what will happen. This time neither Obama no British PM want to play ww2
Also there is a huge problem with Israel/Palestine and there are just too much conflicting interests to bring alliance between Russia, USA and Britain like the previous time.


The said politologist also doesn't believe in this outcome, this is just how he is "reading Putin"

a reply to: Jonjonj

Russia has every right to defend its allies or interests in the region as any other country or nation.
What is bad is that even in 2015 after many bloody wars, the world leaders seem to be unable to work together, to solve problems in a diplomatic way.
Hence because of their strive for power and dominance many more will die in a meaningless wars.

a reply to: kitzik

You see this is why I asked the question. It may seem to many people that Russia is just flexing its muscles, but I do not see it that way.

I rather see it as Russia saying look, we are here, we can help, we are not idiots and we are relevant.

a reply to: earthling42

I believe that Russia is saying it is time to work together, I really do.

They can not simply say "we will be your bitch".

It is a question of pride, they have to show their relevance.

And they are doing so I believe.