Your question is so... uhm... inscrutable, that I just can't find a proper answer...
Maybe, you'd care to share some details?
UPD
Ok, so...
don't you think it's sorely illogical that you synonymize "offensive" and "communist"? You're a polarized victim of brainwashing media. Political/economic system can NOT be offensive. People can regardless of what political, religious or national label they put on themselves.
Russia is not offensive, She is in fact defensive. And I'm telling you this as a Kievaness, whose Motherland is occupied by zio-fascist psychopaths financed by the U.S. govt. 2 decades ago some of them were brainwashed into thinking that we are not Russia, and now they ruin everything our own ancestors built for the sake of their alien masters.
Certain individuals from the EU, Israel govts and most from the U.S. govt act aggressive; right now they pursue a genocidal policy in former Ukraine, and you're accusing Russia of being "offensive"? Come here and try to survive in these colonial conditions and I'll see how non-offensive they would seem to you.
one of the point is:
many Russian citizens are ready to throw away their economic futures for a group rag tag insurgents ( in eastern Ukraine) just like Soviets used to be.
http://blog.transnational.org/2014/11/tff-pressinfo-288-why-russia-is-growing-tough-?-berlin-wall-down-25-years-1/ "President Vladimir Putin is often painted as an ogre in the world’s media. The seemingly eternal president of Russia has an iron grip on his nation and a foreign policy to match. Yet a large majority of Russians give him their support.
Is it his early economic success? Or is it because of a new stability? Or the nation’s growing self-respect after the ignominious years that followed the demise of the Soviet Union? Or is it a sense of besieged defensiveness because of the advantage the West undoubtedly took of Russia after that demise.
The answer is a bit of all these.
Few in the outside world seem to talk much about what happened after President Boris Yeltsin pushed aside Mikhail Gorbachev, the last president of the Soviet Union. Few recall the political and economic upheavals of that time and why the stability of Putin’s governance is welcomed by people at large. Perhaps it is because this was a quarter of a century ago and people now ruling the West, and the journalists who report on them, were only teenagers or in their twenties at the time – and suffer from that common Western political disease of lack of perspective and little knowledge of history.
..................
Nevertheless, after the vicissitudes of the Gorbachev and Yeltsin years, on the main issues that preoccupy most people, Putin seems to be a steady leader who gets on top of problems. State controlled TV stations (as in France) help ensure popular support.
For now Putin’s support has put down deep roots. The West must understand why. It is far more than the popular take over of Crimea or the meddling in Ukraine.
If only the West had given Gorbachev and Yeltsin a sound economic hand all this turbulent history might never have happened.
Now Russia, not just Putin, is in a very assertive mood."
Did Russia go to US' backyard? Incite "democracy" by ploughing $5 billion? All the countries US has "liberated" just how many of them are a thriving success? Back to the middle east, for the umpteenth time, under some pretext or another. Repeat the actions, hoping for a different outcome, like sitting for an exam after having shunned the subject like a leper, and being surprised at being graded "Failed".
China has offered Russia support. Russia has signed business deals with BRICs.
Power is shifting from the west!
Russia wants to run its own country. It is not Russia' job to kowtow to the financially inept western US empire. US already done the "my way or the highway"! An abject failure where US went "native". Nothing, no action, was out of bounds! Nothing to be proud of. No accountability. The law of the jungle, under the veneer of exceptionalism. A hollow, meaningless boast.
US under Reagan promised NATO would NOT expand! US welched! The purpose of NATO? ZERO! So obviously to keep NATO going the way of the dodo extinct, it needlessly expanded.Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iran, wherever NATO "has taken part" the country is question has zero security for civilians, and no prospects!
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article39133.htm "Cold War "could not have ended peacefully without Shevardnadze." But he and others are silent on the quid pro quo. The quid was Moscow's agreement to swallow the bitter pill of a reunited Germany in NATO; the quo was a U.S. promise not to "leapfrog" NATO over Germany farther East. Washington welched on the deal.
It began to unravel in October 1996 during the last weeks of President Bill Clinton's campaign for re-election. Mr. Clinton bragged that he would welcome Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic into NATO, explaining, "America truly is the world's indispensable nation" (and, sotto voce, can do what it wants).
Those three countries joined NATO in 1999, and by April 2009, nine more became members, bringing the post-Cold War additions to 12 — equal to the number of the original 12 NATO states. The additional nine included the former Baltic Republics that had been part of the USSR, but not Ukraine. NATO intentions, however, were made clear at its summit in Bucharest in April 2008, which formally declared, "Georgia and Ukraine will be in NATO."
Even hawkish former American national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski now concedes, "It is reasonable for Russia to feel uncomfortable about the prospect" of Ukraine in NATO. And that is the nub of today's crisis there — not the "chauvinistic fanaticism" Mr. Brzezinski attributes to Russian President Vladimir Putin.
The foundering of the unique opportunity in 1990 to create a lasting peace in what President George H. W. Bush called a "Europe whole and free" was a tragedy. The expansion of NATO to the east — especially the decision to bring in Georgia and Ukraine — led, among other things, to Georgian-Russian hostilities in August 2008 and now to the current violence in Ukraine.
The fact that the Shevardnadze-Baker agreement was not recorded in an official document has helped revisionists to create alternative history, but there is compelling evidence testifying to Washington's reneging on key oral commitments to Moscow."
Because US wants "regime change" in Russia! It wants another yes, yes! Man! Just like the spineless EU, who instead of servicing the needs of their own voters is too busy doing US dictates!
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/12/npr-propagandizes-putin-regime-change-russia.html
Really?
US is the one in desperate need of "war" as if their wars since 2003 had yielded anything other then failure!
Did Russia encircle US?
1962 USSR based misilles 40 miles of US, and US threw a hissy fit, and nearly ended the world! Alright for the oldies, they could probably do being relieved of their tenure on earth, if they chop their nose too spite their face! Their loss. Too bad!
But US has learnt zit, from that experience. The more one delves into real news the less of an shining example US appears!
Instead of concentrating on mending the crapped out economy US busy proliferating weapons of destruction as if their was a dire shortage of the useless (millions down the drain, unless used!) EU arming to the teeth with pointless upgrades, whilst inflicting austerity! No auserity for the "rulers" or their freebe vertical gravy train! The western model of capitalism is broke, because its crony capitalism that's being practiced.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/12/26/the-top-10-books-on-corporate-crime-in-2014/
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/12/26/the-empire-is-crumbling-that-is-why-it-needs-war/
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article40564.htm "December 26, 2014 Hungary has decided to align itself with Russia against the United States.
The Western Alliance is starting to fray, over the insistence by Barack Obama and the U.S. Congress to go to war against Russia."
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article40560.htm "Since the anti-war protests on Vietnam, the U.S. government has made “perception management” of the American people a high priority, feeding them a steady diet of propaganda about foreign crises, even getting “peace groups” to buy into “pro-democracy” wars"
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/12/yanukovych-proposes-solution-ukraines-civil-war-fits-obamas-plan.htmlhtml
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2014/12/26/amid-heightened-tensions-west-russia-declares-nato-top-military-threat
US taxpayers will be picking up again, the bill!
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/?s=derivatives
