The potential pipeline partially explains Russian support for Assad. If the pipeline was there Qatar would be able to undercut Russia in providing gas supplies to Europe, hence Assad’s refusal to allow the pipeline and Russia’s consequent support.I found this interesting from Wikipedia (you can read about it elsewhere).
The Qatar-Turkey pipeline was a proposal to build a natural gas pipeline from the Iranian–Qatari South Pars/North Dome Gas-Condensate field towards Turkey, where it could connect with the Nabucco pipeline to supply European customers as well as Turkey. One route to Turkey was via Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Syria,[1][2] and another was through Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq.[3][4] Syria's rationale for rejecting the Qatar proposal was said to be "to protect the interests of [its] Russian ally, which is Europe's top supplier of natural gas."[1]
In 2012 an analyst cited by Ansa Mediterraneansuggested that Qatar's involvement in the Syrian Civil War was based in part on its desire to build a pipeline to Turkey through Syria:
- "The discovery in 2009 of a new gas field near Israel, Lebanon, Cyprus, and Syria opened new possibilities to bypass the Saudi Barrier and to secure a new source of income.Pipelines are in place already in Turkey to receive the gas. Only Al-Assad is in the way. Qatar along with the Turks would like to remove Al-Assad and install the Syrian chapter of the Muslim Brotherhood. It is the best organized political movement in the chaotic society and can block Saudi Arabia's efforts to install a more fanatical Wahhabi based regime. Once the Brotherhood is in power, the Emir's broad connections with Brotherhood groups throughout the region should make it easy for him to find a friendly ear and an open hand in Damascus." [5]
Our diplomacy with the middle east is usually on the instruction of our American, Israeli or Saudi friends and it goes a bit like 'give us what we want or we will sanction you then attack you'.Diplomacy is the art and practice of conducting negotiations between representatives of states. It usually refers to international diplomacy, the conduct of international relations through the intercession of professional diplomats with regard to a full range of topical issues. International treaties are usually negotiated by diplomats prior to endorsement by national politicians. David Stevenson reports that by 1900 the term "diplomats" also covered diplomatic services, consular services and foreign ministry officials.
So is this conflict anything to do with outsiders wanting to build a pipeline through Syria or not?The potential pipeline partially explains Russian support for Assad. If the pipeline was there Qatar would be able to undercut Russia in providing gas supplies to Europe, hence Assad’s refusal to allow the pipeline and Russia’s consequent support.
By the way, now you’ve opened this can of worms again, Ricster will be along to prattle on about Genie Energy, its role in the war and its connections to Murdoch, the Rothschilds and Israel, most of which is conspiracy bollocks.
The potential pipeline explains why certain countries have chosen to support particular sides in the conflict and it’s probable that the war would have finished years ago if all outsiders left the Syrians to get on with killing each other by themselves until they’d had enough. As to the start of it, who knows?So is this conflict anything to do with outsiders wanting to build a pipeline through Syria or not?
I may be looking at this whole thing too simplistically but my understanding is that Syria has allied itself with Russia and the two countries offer each other benefits. If another country or collection of countries want to do something that doesn’t offer any advantage to Syria or Russia, why would they roll over? Would we if we were in the same situation?The potential pipeline explains why certain countries have chosen to support particular sides in the conflict and it’s probable that the war would have finished years ago if all outsiders left the Syrians to get on with killing each other by themselves until they’d had enough. As to the start of it, who knows?
My personal opinion was that it was a popular uprising along the lines of the other Arab spring uprisings, however Russia and Iran stepped in to protect their own interests which prompted other players such as Saudi and Qatar to start supporting some rebel groups to see if they could leverage any benefits such as the pipeline.
The Assad regime has certainly aligned itself to Russia for one main reason - to stay in power. From a Russian point of view, having a puppet government in place (which is what Assad’s is) guarantees continuation of their airbase at Latakia and their port at Tartus. It also guarantees that their gas interests are protected as discussed earlier. For these reasons they would never allow a popular uprising to succeed irrespective of what the majority of the population actually wants.I may be looking at this whole thing too simplistically but my understanding is that Syria has allied itself with Russia and the two countries offer each other benefits. If another country or collection of countries want to do something that doesn’t offer any advantage to Syria or Russia, why would they roll over? Would we if we were in the same situation?
That doesn’t make any sense.I found this interesting from Wikipedia (you can read about it elsewhere).
The Qatar-Turkey pipeline was a proposal to build a natural gas pipeline from the Iranian–Qatari South Pars/North Dome Gas-Condensate field towards Turkey, where it could connect with the Nabucco pipeline to supply European customers as well as Turkey. One route to Turkey was via Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Syria,[1][2] and another was through Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq.[3][4] Syria's rationale for rejecting the Qatar proposal was said to be "to protect the interests of [its] Russian ally, which is Europe's top supplier of natural gas."[1]
In 2012 an analyst cited by Ansa Mediterraneansuggested that Qatar's involvement in the Syrian Civil War was based in part on its desire to build a pipeline to Turkey through Syria:
- "The discovery in 2009 of a new gas field near Israel, Lebanon, Cyprus, and Syria opened new possibilities to bypass the Saudi Barrier and to secure a new source of income.Pipelines are in place already in Turkey to receive the gas. Only Al-Assad is in the way. Qatar along with the Turks would like to remove Al-Assad and install the Syrian chapter of the Muslim Brotherhood. It is the best organized political movement in the chaotic society and can block Saudi Arabia's efforts to install a more fanatical Wahhabi based regime. Once the Brotherhood is in power, the Emir's broad connections with Brotherhood groups throughout the region should make it easy for him to find a friendly ear and an open hand in Damascus." [5]
Yes well ricster was convinced that Saudi Arabia, with the blessing of the US, was going to overthrow the Qatari Emir and bomb the shit out it a la Yemen as well.By the way, now you’ve opened this can of worms again, Ricster will be along to prattle on about Genie Energy, its role in the war and its connections to Murdoch, the Rothschilds and Israel, most of which is conspiracy bollocks.
Ah so you’re forgetting him sending in tanks to put down peaceful protests during the Arab Spring and thus lighting the tinder box for their civil war?all he had to do was agree to do as instructed by the west which he refused.
For this refusal he has been castigated by the west and our biased media have been happy to oblige in his demonisation just as they did with Saddam Hussein and look what a mess Iraq is today.
You’re conflating “Syria” and “Assad” as if it means the same thing.I may be looking at this whole thing too simplistically but my understanding is that Syria has allied itself with Russia and the two countries offer each other benefits. If another country or collection of countries want to do something that doesn’t offer any advantage to Syria or Russia, why would they roll over? Would we if we were in the same situation?
Yes well ricster was convinced that Saudi Arabia, with the blessing of the US, was going to overthrow the Qatari Emir and bomb the shit out it a la Yemen as well.
What's the salary like? I'll do it for 500k a year.So, for those who firmly believe that Assad is responsible for the chemical attacks, what do you think or want the end game to be?
Don’t just glibly say “I just want him to stop gassing his own people”. Do you want him out and if so,to be replaced with who?
Doubt it. Not while there’s 10,000 US troops at their airbase at Doha. That’s unless the Americans were in on it.There was some truth to this. I know somebody well placed in Saudi Arabia that told me there were initial preparations underway within the RSAF. I think those plans were thwarted when Turkey refused to withdraw its forces from Qatar (and actually deployed more forces).
Doubt it. Not while there’s 10,000 US troops at their airbase at Doha. That’s unless the Americans were in on it.
Well I don’t know the figures percentage wise for how many Syrians support Assad. Nor do I for any middle eastern country. Or how many Russians truly support Putin.You’re conflating “Syria” and “Assad” as if it means the same thing.
So it's not about an alleged chemical attack and us stepping in on grounds of human rights?The potential pipeline explains why certain countries have chosen to support particular sides in the conflict and it’s probable that the war would have finished years ago if all outsiders left the Syrians to get on with killing each other by themselves until they’d had enough. As to the start of it, who knows?
My personal opinion was that it was a popular uprising along the lines of the other Arab spring uprisings, however Russia and Iran stepped in to protect their own interests which prompted other players such as Saudi and Qatar to start supporting some rebel groups to see if they could leverage any benefits such as the pipeline.
The 10,000 United States troops and their airbase also helped along with Rex Tillerson slapping Prince Cuntflap back into place.I think those plans were thwarted when Turkey refused to withdraw its forces from Qatar (and actually deployed more forces).