On August 31, 2013, US president Barack Obama announced that he intended to launch a military attack on Syria in response to a chemical weapons attack in that country that the US blamed on the Syrian government. Obama assured the US public that this would be a limited action solely intended to punish the Assad government for using chemical weapons; the goal of US military action would not be to overthrow the Assad government, nor to change the balance of forces in Syria's sectarian civil war. According to a UN finding, it was the rebels and NOT Assad who used chemical weapons. Now if the ONLY reason for military intervention proved to be FALSE, what other reason is there to oust Assad? Indeed, tensions were building between Russia, the U.S. and the European Union amid concerns that the European gas market would be held hostage to Russian gas giant Gazprom. The proposed Iran-Iraq-Syria gas pipeline would be essential to diversifying Europe’s energy supplies away from Russia. Turkey is Gazprom’s second-largest customer. The entire Turkish energy security structure relies on gas from Russia and Iran. Plus, Turkey was harboring Ottoman-like ambitions of becoming a strategic crossroads for the export of Russian, Caspian-Central Asian, Iraqi and Iranian oil and even gas to Europe, assesses journalist Pepe Escobar writing for Al Jazeera. “Assad refused to sign a proposed agreement with Qatar and Turkey that would run a pipeline from the latter’s North field, contiguous with Iran’s South Pars field, through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and on to Turkey, with a view to supply European markets – albeit crucially bypassing Russia. Assad’s rationale was ‘to protect the interests of [his] Russian ally, which is Europe’s top supplier of natural gas.’” Knowing Syria was a critical piece in its energy strategy, Turkey attempted to persuade Syrian President Bashar Assad to reform this Iranian pipeline and to work with the proposed Qatar-Turkey pipeline, which would ultimately satisfy Turkey and the Gulf Arab nations’ quest for dominance over gas supplies, who are the United State’s allies. But after Assad refused Turkey’s proposal, Turkey and its allies became the major architects of Syria’s “civil war.” Much of the strategy currently at play was described back in a 2008 U.S. Army-funded RAND report, “Unfolding the Future of the Long War”: “The geographic area of proven oil reserves coincides with the power base of much of the Salafi-jihadist network. This creates a linkage between oil supplies and the long war that is not easily broken or simply characterized. … For the foreseeable future, world oil production growth and total output will be dominated by Persian Gulf resources. … The region will therefore remain a strategic priority, and this priority will interact strongly with that of prosecuting the long war.” In this context, the report identifies the divide and conquer strategy while exploiting the Sunni-Shiite divide to protect Gulf oil and gas supplies while maintaining a Gulf Arab state dominance over oil markets. “Divide and Rule focuses on exploiting fault lines between the various Salafi-jihadist groups to turn them against each other and dissipate their energy on internal conflicts. This strategy relies heavily on covert action, information operations (IO), unconventional warfare, and support to indigenous security forces. … the United States and its local allies could use the nationalist jihadists to launch proxy IO campaigns to discredit the transnational jihadists in the eyes of the local populace. … U.S. leaders could also choose to capitalize on the ‘Sustained Shia-Sunni Conflict’ trajectory by taking the side of the conservative Sunni regimes against Shiite empowerment movements in the Muslim world…. possibly supporting authoritative Sunni governments against a continuingly hostile Iran.” http://www.mintpressnews.com/migrant-crisis-syria-war-fueled-by-competing-gas-pipelines/209294/ No need for a pipeline? Some people are beyond clueless.
Its compilation of truths to form a single point. Something is currently brewing in Iraq. Whether this point is truth or not, only time will tell.
Qatar needs a gas pipeline thru Syria, not Saudi Arabia.. The Saudis had TAPLINE thru Syria to Sidon for over 20 years, but the pipeline was sabotaged so often after 1967 that they finally closed it. The plan to destabilize Syria originally came from Bibi Netanyahu in 1996. Then Bush called them the Axis of Evil in 2002 about the same time the Israelis bombed a Palestinian refugee camp out side of Damascus. Syria is impoverished and suffered 4-5 years of severe drought before Syrian troops started killing protestors.. Some troops refused to kill other Syrians and they were executed which then cause massive defections in the Syrian army.
That's like a treasure box only opened at the right time. That time would be when reserves in middle east are running low. The amount of influence and political gain this would bring at that right time would be stupendous. But with LENR, this is all irrelavent
That cool to know. But it still doesn't change the fact that part of the need to establish the pipeline is to diversify the supply cumming into Europe to weaken Russian hold. Nor does it change US plans to politically destabilize the region before the Arab spring. Or how the people who fought against Assad were mostly foreign mercenaries and extremists. They were so extreme that they used chemical weapons. And then Obama was quick to blame Assad as an excuse to bomb Syria and let the opposition take over. Who is the opposition exactly? So should Assad relinquish his seat of power to the foreign led opposition? This is all pretty common sense. America wants to oust Assad because he is in the way. this ties in to Assads statement today
Something is always brewing in the Middle East. Too many of the 'truths' are simply not true...for example, There is no vast Saudi force on the border.
And when the jihadists began entering Syria, and the defectors realized they were deceived by foreign entities, they all rejoined the Syrian army.
After reading these last few posts I get the feeling that Assad has no chance of retaining his country intact... no matter what he decides to do, either abdicate or keep fighting to the last drop of blood. It's six one way and half a dozen the other - Syria is doomed. UNLESS... Russia manages to stay and keep the wolves at bay, meaning: get the USA to change its mind and let go. THAT would require higher intervention, a civil war in the States, an atom bomb on the Pentagon or an uprising of the EU against its boss. That will with 99.99% likelihood never happen. Syria, like Libya, will sink into a rudderless chaos for the vultures to take their choice picks. Russia? All that has to happen is Putin gets assassinated. Khodorkovsky and Mossad could accomplish that. I would rather see that to happen than an all out nuclear war.
This might drag Iran into a war with Saudi Arabia, but that's okay we're not known as the Empire of Chaos for nothing. Maybe Washington fears a Chinese takeover. The oil wells as far as I know are leased by them...which means China is very dependent on Iraq's oil.
Why, Lavrov and Putin has stated and as recently as yesterday that when it comes to Assad. They stand with the Syrian people deciding for themselves. That Assad has the Right to run for re-election.
WOULD that make any difference to the US plans? So far the USA's track record of getting what it wants is pretty high. The forces against Assad are ruthless and washed with all waters! Look, another 18 killed near hospitals in Homs. The violence is all around in almost every country in the vicinity. Someone with lots of money is paying all these hooligans. Someone has an interest of destroying Syria.
I did notice that the Saud, Qatar, the MB, the Sunni, were throwing some money around and since the beginning protests against Assad. Haven't heard much about it being stopped.
Washington is lucky that Vladimir Putin is president, because if he wasn't we might have been in a nuclear war. Washington has done everything imaginable so it can impose its own 'skewed' standards on the world, with total indifference towards human lives and human rights...especially in the lands the 'untermenchen's live in such as the ME and Africa. Every moral offense is used to impose those standards and to keep their control over the world, even to the extent of supporting megalomaniac leaders such as Erdogan or terrorist groups such as ISIS. Washington with its arrogance believes themselves to be the chosen ones, much in the same vein as Adolph Hitler and Vladimir Lenin, so they know what's best for the world. What matter a few million lives here an there to achieve that end. Russia's Defense chief said they were under the impression there were 30,000 ISIS fighters in Syria. It was also the amount mentioned by the CIA, so they miscalculated and thought the war would be over in 3 or 4 months. This is what they were prepared for. Now it turns out it's more like 60,000. Assad though feels it is more like 120,000... and they are winning. Even though Russia has destroyed 8,000 targets, 70% of Syria's territory is now under ISIS control. I guess we can say thanks to those who support them. The hypocrisy is amazing. While Russia was put under sanctions because the people of Crimea didn't want to be under the American imposed Nazi junta , countries like Turkey, Ukraine, Israel and thirty seven others can support terrorists without being sanctioned...even though it's against international law. Jazz, are these the kind of people you want to control the world? This is a war of civilizations, and thank God for Vladimir Putin and the Russian people. When he said he hopes he does not have to use nukes in Syria, he meant it. Vladimir Putin does not speak idly, there is no way he will allow Washington to give ISIS their 'Sunnistan' in Syria under a megalomaniac Erdogan...or extremists governments such as KSA and Qatar. This would have been like handing Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union all of Europe in the last century.
It is a pitty really, as what we need is a nuclear war, to get rid of a few billion people from the Planet. I wonder if they could invent an H-bomb that could kill just socialists? Now that would be a good invention!
everyone is a socialist. To give all control to the people will be retarded. You would have a mob rule
It a quick resources in their mind. "That can't possibly be true" and then after that brief thought, they close their mid off to the truth. They just pass it on as lies and propaganda. Or its taking the "we are exemptional" rhetoric from Obama to heart. If you think that you are better than everyone else, of course you will push other people down to stay on top. And while those that would have cared closed their minds off to the truth, the ones who could justify it, just don't care. It's the same reason why Americans didn't care what was happening to the Indians and to the slaves. Everyone knew what was going on one way or another. Whether they chose to ignore it out of disbelief or justification is another matter. One side simply couldn't believe it while the other side didn't care because they could justify it. The people in the middle were far too few to make a difference. No we are waiting for a "turnaround " even though it may never happen. I'm glad to see that nothing has changed.
No, they haven\t stopped. The Saudis are buddies of USA, and USA wants Assad gone. The only worthwhile true friend Syria has right now is Russia. Putin is sticking his neck out and gives those characters heck: The Saudis and Putin are not on the same side. Back in October the Saudis blasted Russia, saying a war against ISIS was "dangerous". They were right, Russia lost one passenger plane and one bomber jet. And still he keeps fighting for his friend Assad.
While i have my fingers crossed that Russia will prove to be a true friend, and that it will stay the course and stick to the principles that it has announced and agreed with Iran, the only reason president Assad is still in power in Syria is because of Iran, not Russia. Back in the 2012 period, when the US had managed to get pretty much everyone on board the "Assad must go" bandwagon, and had even coerced Russia and China enough that they were reduced to mere feeble veto and opposition to what merely amounted as the rough edges of the plot they were hatching against Assad in various international fora, it was Iran that stood up and helped Assad organize a resistance that kept him in power when the west was saying Assad's fall was inevitable and only a matter of months, if not days! The fact of the matter is that without Iran, Assad's fate would have been the same as many other erstwhile Russian allies, including Qaddafi or that butcher Saddam. On the other hand, the same plot as against Assad was hatched against Hezbollah and its position in Lebanon. There was even a war launched by the Israelis against Hezbollah in 2006 and after that several other attempts (including UN resolutions which the Russians regrettably went along with) that were aimed at weakening the group. None of those plans worked with Iran standing firmly by its ally. Conversely, we have seen regimes that were regarded as Russia's best friends easily removed from power with the Russians standing feebly and idly without being able to do much about it at all! http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-williams2/iran-calls-the-shots-in-s_b_8763248.html Iran Calls the Shots in Syria Because It Cares More P.S. I don't want to understate the importance of Russia's assistance after it joined the fighting the past few months. The Russian bombing campaign, beyond the damage it helped inflict on the terrorists, also changed much of the geopolitical dynamics and gave a hint of the possibility of a promising alliance between Russia and Iran/Syria/Iraq and Hezbollah. The problem is not clear how steadfast and reliable the Russians will prove to be at the end? Putin's visit to Tehran and what was said by the Russians in its immediate aftermath helped allay some concerns that had emerged because of some inconsistent comments and actions by the Russians, but those kind of inconsistent actions and comments are again being seen and heard. Syria is either going to remain as part of the axis of resistance, or else all the money, all the blood, all the heartache has all been in vain. Who cares if Assad is left in place over Syria's ruins for a couple of more years during a transition period, if he is ultimately reduced to being something quite different to what he stood for in the past?
