Syrian Civil War Developments

[Versus]

Cheeto Benito appears to be backtracking:

Never said when an attack on Syria would take place.
Could be very soon or not so soon at all!
In any event, the United States, under my Administration, has done a great job of ridding the region of ISIS.
Where is our “Thank you America?”

Narcissistic sociopath is bad combination.

At least he spelling "ridding" correctly.

Like,share,subscribe :)))))

[Versus]

There is an interview on the web, regarding 2018 and the energy crisis and in that interview it is said that 2018 is the point of no return for diversification of Eu supplies. I am trying desperately to find that interview but so far no luck. It was on youtube.

[Ironduke]

There is an interview on the web, regarding 2018 and the energy crisis and in that interview it is said that 2018 is the point of no return for diversification of Eu supplies. I am trying desperately to find that interview but so far no luck. It was on youtube.

People say a lot of things. Even brilliant people who are experts in their fields can turn out to be completely wrong. People have a tendency to look for patterns, and assume that the future will follow current trend lines.

[snapper]

There is an interview on the web, regarding 2018 and the energy crisis and in that interview it is said that 2018 is the point of no return for diversification of Eu supplies. I am trying desperately to find that interview but so far no luck. It was on youtube.

Alot of Gazprom's European contracts are up for renewal next year.

[Versus]

Well, that figures it. The LNG and CNG bonanza was just a clamp until TAP becomes operational, that is why US is rushing us to recognize Kosovo and it explains current events regarding Syria.

[Double Edge]

People say a lot of things. Even brilliant people who are experts in their fields can turn out to be completely wrong. People have a tendency to look for patterns, and assume that the future will follow current trend lines.

Some people just can't let go of the 'for the oil' pretext for every war...

tried to dig into this pipeline and competing whatnot a while back here and nothing conclusive came out of it

[Ironduke]

Some people just can't let go of the 'for the oil' pretext for every war...

tried to dig into this pipeline and competing whatnot a while back here and nothing conclusive came out of it

[RambleMode]
[CaptainObviousMode]

The problem is that virtually all people, everywhere in the world, fallaciously try to conclude that there's just one reason for their actions, the actions of other persons, and so on.

There is never just one reason for an action, whether by an individual or a group of persons. Cognitive dissonance, deniability, avoidance of feelings of guilt, etc. are among the primary reasons why most people fallaciously settle on that one single reason.

If you're dealing with an action of an individual, there might be ten, fifteen, or twenty reasons for an action. Some reasons are consistent, some are complementary, others are contradictory. You get a group of people together behind an action, the number of reasons multiply exponentially.

I'm absolutely sure that George W. Bush had nothing but the best of intentions in invading Iraq. I take him at his word, and that he's being 100% honest when he says why he did it. He literally thought Al-Qaeda was there, Husseinite Iraq was an imminent threat, and he also thought that God came to him in a dream, and he had a vision of a free Iraq with liberty and justice for all.

No joke, I'm not being sarcastic at all.

You throw in guys like Cheney, Wolfowitz, Perle, they all have their own angles. You got the oil guy, you got the neo-conservative/neo-liberal Wilsonians who want to re-make the world in America's image.

Best just not to think about all the angles and contradictions, you'd be literally trying to think through with thousands of them. Just deal with the consequences in the best way possible.

But that being said, the "this happened/I did this for this one single reason" is the biggest fallacy one can commit. If it matters, or it interests you, think it through. If it doesn't affect you, it's none of your business, or it's not your job, it doesn't even matter. Just go to work, put food in the cupboard, and pay your rent.

[/RambleMode]
[/CaptainObviousMode]

[Double Edge]

Best just not to think about all the angles and contradictions, you'd be literally trying to think through with thousands of them. Just deal with the consequences in the best way possible.

No can do. It's what we do in this place : D

Not thousands, just a handful of important ones that get that all important vote to prosecute a war. To get buy in from allies etc

Hard job figuring them out. Answers come later or rather stronger reasons.

btw , Here is where i attempt to engage with people about this alternative routes but it doesn't get very far

think there was another place but can't remember where

[Ironduke]

Of course it's what we do here. :-)

I'm more or less referring to regular type people, who just want to keep their head down, live the best they can, keep a roof over their head, keep their wife happy, and keep their children fed, whether it's the rickshaw driver in Bengaluru, the sarariman in Nippon, the Irish-American construction worker building a Manhattan skyscraper in the US, or the DJ at the Berlin discotheque mixing music and dropping the bass.

[Double Edge]

I'm absolutely sure that George W. Bush had nothing but the best of intentions in invading Iraq. I take him at his word, and that he's being 100% honest when he says why he did it. He literally thought Al-Qaeda was there, Husseinite Iraq was an imminent threat, and he also thought that God came to him in a dream and he had a vision of a free Iraq with liberty and justice for all.

No joke, I'm not being sarcastic at all.

I look at Iraq as two phases.

Not much disagreement about the invasion. Forget what the opposition thinks, they lost the vote.

However lots of disagreement about the occupation and this includes those that were for the invasion

Mistake the media makes is commingling both of those phases. Cannot go on about occupation and then question the invasion.

This is the dominant narrative we hear isn't it, the opposition asking was it worth it bla bla.

I'm more or less referring to regular type people, who just want to keep their head down, live the best they can, keep a roof over their head, keep their wife happy, and keep their children fed, whether it's the rickshaw driver in Bengaluru, the sarariman in Nippon, the Irish-American construction worker building a Manhattan skyscraper in the US, or the DJ at the Berlin discotheque mixing music and dropping the bass.

it's funny but ALL of those people have an opinion about Iraq or any war, just isn't articulated very well

Can't have a conversation unless we have a few peer reviewed reasons as to why it started in the first place.

[Ironduke]

The past is prologue. The result of the Iraq War was that we got an Iranian puppet state and ISIS. The question is, how do we deal with these consequences? The ISIS problem is mostly solved, at least on the ground in Syria/Iraq.

Iran has been the main geopolitical beneficiary of these last 15 years developments, but if we try to take their winnings away, we may get another vacuum and a big serving of some more ISIS plopped onto our plate. Catch-22, rock and a hard place, etc. We have a choice between two poisons, but we need to find out if there's an anti-dote for these poisons, a cure for the disease, or if the poison can be rendered harmless and made fit to drink.

I'm, of course, writing from my own individual perspective, which is obviously colored by an American/Western background.

[Double Edge]

The past is prologue. The result of the Iraq War was that we got an Iranian puppet state and ISIS. The question is, how do we deal with these consequences? The ISIS problem is mostly solved, at least on the ground in Syria/Iraq.

Iran has been the main geopolitical beneficiary of these last 15 years developments, but if we try to take their winnings away, we may get another vacuum and a big serving of some more ISIS plopped onto our plate. Catch-22, rock and a hard place, etc. We have a choice between two poisons, but we need to find out if there's an anti-dote for these poisons, a cure for the disease, or if the poison can be rendered harmless and made fit to drink.

I'm, of course, writing from my own individual perspective, which is obviously colored by an American/Western background.

I agree with what you've said. The Iranians want a ratification of the present status quo whereas the Saudis and Israelis would seek to challenge it.

Everybody else is a bystander. Why should the US or Russia or anyone else care about the status quo as it holds right now. ISIS is finished ie from a holds and governs physical territory pov

If the Israelis find a way to crimp weapons to Hezbollah that's them happy. Maybe with Russian help.

Which leaves only the Saudis. And what can they really do anyway

[Versus]

Some people just can't let go of the 'for the oil' pretext for every war...

tried to dig into this pipeline and competing whatnot a while back here and nothing conclusive came out of it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfVMPcepx3E

It always is...

[citanon]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfVMPcepx3E

It always is...

Actually these days and even back in gwii it's never really about oil for the US.

It's not that we aren't greedy. Our motivations are just different.

1: we are such a big and diversified economy that oil is not nearly as important to us as as it is to countries like Russia.

2: with the shale revolution we are now swimming in the stuff. Higher and lower oil prices benefit different sectors of our economy differently. There's no clear overall push for high or low.

3. Our policy makers do not directly profit from oil the same way the Russians and the Saudis do. There's less greed incentive there.

Now, we would like to crimp Russian exports, but that's more about constraining Russia and Iran than lining our own pockets.

[Versus]

Or you can say it in more "colorful" way. Its about curbing the Iran's tendency to spread its influence and get close to Israel, sort of forming Shia crescent over Sunni one. Than you have formerly rich oil countries whom are aware of their decline in production and desperately want to find new ways to maintain their revenues and capital. Than its about Kurdish desire to form a state. Than its about West and Russia and so on and so on. But the crocks of the issue is this.

Arab population has grown over its sustainable levels, thanks to the oil revenues. Now, those revenues are declining and unrest settles in, for a very simple reason and that reason is that, from a culture point of view, and this includes religious beliefs and convictions, Muslim see them selves as a "master race" that despises labor. Thus, almost 90% of population in those counters are on welfare doing nothing and we are talking generations living on subsidies. The net end result is that you have a massive population of, spoiled brats whom feel entitled to good life. Problem is, that they are willing to kill for it. Add to that low IQ and you have an ideal mixture for creating massive army that is willing and able to wreck havoc across globe. ISIS is not dead, it is very much alive and piloting where to reemerge next.