• Yes

  • No, only America is allowed to help its allies in the Middle East

69% 18 votes
31% 8 votes
  • Sure, Russia played a dominant role in recent victories. They killed something around 500 terrorists in a couple of days and Syria's army could take back a wide area entering 70 Km in ISIS and other terrorist groups territory. USA is in Syria to help some special rebels and at the same time to weaken ISIS. USA is NOT there to help Syrian people! The goal is to slay Assad no more no less.

  • But...them being there makes me nervous as to intentions with all the rude gesturing going in world politics and the US stance in the area. When will the sparks fly is the real question.

  • Somebody needs to stop ISIS and Obama sure hasn't been successful at it.

  • Rossiya str0nk

  • It all depends on which side you’re standing on. The US and EU states it wants to oust President Bashar al-Assad due to its secular Alawite sharia minority rule and his crimes against non-Alawites living in the country. Assard's treatment of these groups created a civil war. To compound the situation, ISIS is using the civil conflict as a stepping stone for its own agenda. Russia has about $20 billion dollars in financial interests in Syria. Russian Corporations are involved in oil/gas, irrigation projects, nuclear power plant building and supplying parts for oil production to name a few. They also have a naval facility in Tartus. Putin is protecting his bottom line by keeping al-Assad in power. He risks losing his business and strategic military interests with a regime change. The US and Europe on the flip side might have a lot to gain with a regime change with the end game of moving Syria into the World Bank fold; one of the last countries who do not belong. Global corporate and big financial interests lay at its seat. The only thing that has kept the US from a full affront is the distaste of the US public for yet another war. For now, Putin is using ISIS to his advantage to fight the anti-Assard forces for him. Until ISIS moves toward the capital he has no need to put them out of business,

  • I think its necessary to Have Russia intervene because crippling ISIS will become easier. Right now the Russians are being more effective against ISIS than the United States and have done more in 4 weeks than Obama has done in the past year

  • Can't believe all the people in the left column that think Russia is there to fight ISIS. The vast majority of Russian military targets are Syrian rebels, not ISIS. Russia is killing Syrians who are legitimately rebelling against the oppression of the Assad regime.

  • Like every other foreign nation getting involved in the conflict, Russia is trying to further their own interests in the region. To date, no one is fighting for the Syrian people.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
DJGorman says2015-10-14T04:30:17.9067998Z
I don't support Russia or the United States in Syria. I think that Russia has a stronger legal footing to be there, but their goals are totally self-serving. Pres. Obama has no legal standing to support Syrian rebels under American law or international law. His failed intervention only serves to destabilize the region further and make Syria and probably Iraq vulnerable to long-term Russian hegemony.
Denslat says2015-10-14T11:28:51.2227726Z
Why is this post so extremely one sided?
GreatPatrioticWar says2015-10-15T16:35:35.7620456Z
12 to 8. I don't think that's extremely one sided.
stargate says2015-10-16T18:10:32.1505276Z
I do not trust them.

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.