RSN April 14 Fundraising
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Gibson writes: "If the US were really concerned about spreading Democracy in the Middle East, we'd be helping the Occupy Gezi movement oust Turkish Prime Minister Ergodan and condemning his violent suppression of human rights, rather than assisting the Free Syrian Army."

Oil tanks near the Syria-Iraq border decorated with pictures of past and present Syrian leaders. (photo: Richard Messenger)
Oil tanks near the Syria-Iraq border decorated with pictures of past and present Syrian leaders. (photo: Richard Messenger)


The US Wants Syrian Oil, Not Democracy

By Carl Gibson, Reader Supported News

18 June 13

 

"... the Persian Gulf, the critical oil and natural gas-producing region that we fought so many wars to try and protect our economy from the adverse impact of losing that supply or having it available only at very high prices." -John Bolton, George W. Bush's ambassador to the United Nations

ll the hubbub over Syria is all about oil. And if you don't believe me, believe John Bolton.

When there's something being talked about in the news on a regular basis, and if one angle of the story is being consistently reported by various reputable news organizations, you can be sure there's something else to the story that isn't being told. Matt Taibbi called this "chumpbait" when referring to the media's unified dismissal concerning Bradley Manning's court-martial. The same applies to the latest corporate media stories speculating on US military involvement in Syria.

If the US were really concerned about spreading Democracy in the Middle East, we'd be helping the Occupy Gezi movement oust Turkish Prime Minister Ergodan and condemning his violent suppression of human rights, rather than assisting the Free Syrian Army. And the only reason the powers controlling the US would be interested in intervening in Turkey would be if Turkish protesters or government forces shut down the highly-productive Kirkuk-Ceyhan oil pipeline, which goes from Iraq through Southern Turkey.

All of the media has been atwitter about whether or not the US should get involved in the civil war unfolding in Syria by supporting anti-government forces. The atrocities recently committed by the Free Syrian Army are reminiscent of the kind committed against the Soviets in the 1980s by the Afghan mujahideen, whom we actively funded and supplied with arms. (Remember the movie Charlie Wilson's War?) It should be worth noting that the same mujahideen fighters we funded to fight our enemies for us in the 1980s became our enemies even before the 9/11 attacks.

In a roundabout way, the US media is making the argument that because the Assad regime is using chemical weapons on the Syrian people, the US military should intervene by arming and training the Free Syrian Army in the hopes of overthrowing President Assad. On the surface, most Americans would agree that Assad is a brutal dictator and should be removed from office. But if you asked most Americans whether or not the US military should intervene in Syria to make sure the profit margins of oil companies remain strong, it's likely most rational folks would say no. Digging just beneath the surface, it's easy to see that US interest in Syria isn't to provide Democracy to Syria, but to ensure the Kirkuk-Banias oil pipeline will be restored to profitable status. Even President Obama's press secretary said that foreign policy isn't driven by what the people want, but by what is best for "American interests."

The Kirkuk-Banias pipeline runs from Kirkuk in Northern Iraq, to the Syrian town of Banias, on the Mediterranean Sea between Turkey and Lebanon. Ever since US forces inadvertently destroyed it in 2003, most of the pipeline has been shut down. While there have been plans in the works to make the Iraqi portion of the pipeline functional again, those plans have yet to come to fruition. And Syria has at least 2.5 billion barrels of oil in its fields, making it the next largest Middle Eastern oil producer after Iraq. After ten unproductive years, the oil companies dependent on the Kirkuk-Banias pipeline's output are eager to get the pipeline operational again. The tension over the Syrian oil situation is certainly being felt by wealthy investors in the markets, who are thus dictating US foreign policy.

It's easy to see why the oil-dominated US government wants to be involved in Syria's outcome. The Free Syrian Army has since taken control of oil fields near Deir Ezzor, and Kurdish groups have taken control of other oil fields in the Rumeilan region. Many of the numerous atrocities that Assad's government committed against unarmed women and children were in Homs, which is near one of the country's only two oil refineries. Israel, the US's only ally in the Middle East, is illegally occupying the Golan Heights on the Syrian border and extracting their resources. The US wants to get involved in Syria to monopolize its oil assets, while simultaneously beating our competition – Iran, Russia and China – in the race for Syrian black gold.

Big oil's ideal outcome would be for US troops to back the FSA's overthrow of the Assad regime, meaning that sharing in Syrian oil profits would be part of the quid-pro-quo the US demands in exchange for helping the Syrian rebels win. It would be very similar to when the US, under Teddy Roosevelt, backed Panama's fight for independence in exchange for US ownership of the Panama Canal. But even after numerous interventions, including the kidnapping of Panama's head of state, the Torrijos-Carter accords gave control of the Panama Canal back to Panama in 1999. The imperialistic approach to Panama turned out to be more costly than it would have been if we had just left Panama alone in the first place.

George Santayana said that those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. If we don't learn from our past mistakes, like basing foreign policy goals on greed-inspired imperialism, Syria will blow up in our faces.



Carl Gibson, 26, is co-founder of US Uncut, a nationwide creative direct-action movement that mobilized tens of thousands of activists against corporate tax avoidance and budget cuts in the months leading up to the Occupy Wall Street movement. Carl and other US Uncut activists are featured in the documentary "We're Not Broke," which premiered at the 2012 Sundance Film Festival. He currently lives in Madison, Wisconsin. You can contact him at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , and follow him on twitter at @uncutCG.

Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.

 

Comments   

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
+23 # MainStreetMentor 2013-06-18 06:59
While I agree that Syrian unrest requires diplomatic addressing, President Obama needs to address too many other issues within our own borders before extending funding to the Syrians. Issues such as: domestic spying; the investigation and subsequent prosecution of Wall Street criminals; the XL pipeline; Monsanto’s ownership of our legislature; prosecution of sexual misconduct within our military; poverty; inequality in gender related pay scales; the repeal of the Patriot Act … all these things, and more, need addressing here, now, before foreign countries should be considered as financial aid recipients. We are the nation in dire need of aid …!
 
 
+4 # tigerlille 2013-06-21 00:02
Wasn't the whole point of the article that the purpose of involvement is not to aid Syria, but to secure big oil company holdings?
 
 
-14 # angry 2013-06-18 07:05
Yea, oil is important and getting it before Iran does is critical. Too bad. Maybe now's the time for a one-world government, though a "clean democracy" would be key. Not our present political payola.
 
 
+16 # noitall 2013-06-18 08:56
Quoting angry:
Yea, oil is important and getting it before Iran does is critical. Too bad. Maybe now's the time for a one-world government, though a "clean democracy" would be key. Not our present political payola.

Another shallow thinker drank the KoolAid!
 
 
+2 # RLF 2013-06-20 02:03
You call that Multinational Corporatocracy or plain ole tyranny!
 
 
+18 # Guy 2013-06-18 07:14
But it is no walk in the park to re-establish the flow of oil for big oil.
This is not Iraq nor Libya .And the American establishment knows this all too well.They have Iran and Russia to deal with this time.
And the chess game goes on with NO ONE wanting to explode the Middle East into WW3.Hopefully sanity will prevail.
Instead of being the instigator,the US could team up with Russia and establish peace in Syria.I really think that everyone would be a winner.Even big oil.
If only it could be that easy.
 
 
+6 # Eldon J. Bloedorn 2013-06-20 08:26
Not that I thought former president Ford was all that brilliant. but he did make a very intelligent comment that stuck with me: 'All wars are fought over natural resources."
 
 
+19 # MidwestTom 2013-06-18 07:16
I am not sure where the author gets the 2.5 billion barrel number for oil reserves. Other articles I have read in industry publications put the recoverable reserves at less than 1.0 billion barrels. The Sunni Saudis are the reason we are there. The majority of the Syrian population support Assad; literally all of the western educated people in Syria support Assad, the Rebels are the fundamentalist Muslims who only study the Koran. When we overthrew Kadafi in Libya the people hated him, not the case in Syria. The Israelis hate the Persians who dominate Syria, another possible cause why we are there.

About four weeks ago it was reported that we had 200 troops in Jordan training the rebels. Last night is was reported that we have "thousands" of troops in Jordan. I wonder who gets the Peace prize for this war.
 
 
+7 # Activista 2013-06-18 10:54
we overthrew Kadafi in Libya the people hated him ..
people hated him - NOT Tripoli - there were MANY pro Qaddafi demonstrations - but we armed the other tribe in Benghazi - and they killed US ambassador that armed them .. militias (anti-American) rule Libya - and it is getting worse
 
 
+1 # Patrice Ayme 2013-06-18 11:54
France did it, not "we".
 
 
+3 # Activista 2013-06-18 21:42
NATO did it - USA dominates NATO ..
 
 
+3 # karenvista 2013-06-21 18:19
Quoting Activista:
we overthrew Kadafi in Libya the people hated him ..
people hated him - NOT Tripoli - there were MANY pro Qaddafi demonstrations - but we armed the other tribe in Benghazi - and they killed US ambassador that armed them .. militias (anti-American) rule Libya - and it is getting worse



You still haven't read the Oct. 10, 2012 article where the CIA admitted that Bengazi was a CIA operation? The story goes that CIA was collecting some of the masses of weapons we had shipped there and which were contributing to mass murders among racial groups and tribes. They were collecting them and sending them to Syria where we were outfitting the next war.

On the news tonight Rachel Maddow was shocked to hear that we had been training the al Qaeda associates (Free Syrian Army/al Nusra Front) in the use of heavy weaponry and anti aircraft missles. We shipped those there from Libya, the famous MANPADS that we said we were so worried about.

Well I'm not shocked. News has been dribbling about all our involvement since last year. Just keep your ear to the ground.

Now we say that Assad has used chemical weapons so we're going to become even more involved. If there is any chemically contaminated evidence there is no chain of custody for it. It has been provided to us by the rebels. It would be in their best interest to try to prove that so they will get additional assistance from us.

NO CHAIN OF CUSTODY-NO PROOF!
 
 
+2 # Malcolm 2013-06-18 13:30
. "The Israelis hate the Persians who dominate Syria, another possible cause why we are there"

PERSIANS??
 
 
0 # karenvista 2013-06-21 18:21
Quoting Malcolm:
. "The Israelis hate the Persians who dominate Syria, another possible cause why we are there"

PERSIANS??


Iranians are Persians and Syria and Russia are their allies.

We have allies too but apparently other countries are not supposed to have allies.
 
 
0 # Billy Bob 2013-09-14 08:09
"Persian" is an ethnic, cultural, and linguistic term. It's not an insult like you imply.

Culturally, Iranians are Persians. Iraqis are Arabs.

Do you know anybody from the Middle-East? If you did, this would have come up in conversation. It's no different than saying "Hispanic", or "gentile", or Indo-European, etc.
 
 
+10 # Johnny 2013-06-18 15:38
The Zionist owned media said the people hated Kadafi. You have to be sick in the head to think the Libyan people prefer the "democracy" that NATO brought them to the prosperity they enjoyed under Kadafi.
 
 
+2 # Even 2013-06-19 02:01
A bit of an over exageration. "The people hated him." Some of the people hated, and some of that was due to tribal differences, but with the highest standard of living in the Arab world and a better distribution of wealth than most of the area, lots of libyans did not hate him. Anyway the US was not involved in that débacle because they wanted to protect libyan human rights.
 
 
0 # curmudgeon 2013-06-18 07:43
Carl and others....

Devi's advocate...I have just finished talking with Turkish friends who have given the other side of so-called protest.

They do not claim to know themselves..

1. Apparently the large (Turkish equivalent of 1%) has been funding protests - they have suffered loss of income during AKP at the gain for workers.
2. CNN in Turkey on Sunday started showing pictures of AKP rally and claimed it was a massive turnout of protesters against the government...
3. Much news feeds are actually based outside of Turkey - Bulgaria. Activities are being coordinated and were BEFORE the initial Gezi Park protest was held.
4. ...

I am not sure myself but maybe more reseach could be done in light of this lack of clarity
 
 
+1 # karenvista 2013-06-21 18:24
And I get photos and emails saying the exact opposite. I guess what we hear depends on who our friends are.
 
 
+30 # reiverpacific 2013-06-18 07:51
Ahhhh, John "Belligerent" Bolton! Now there's a name that should live in infamy if you are a medievalist and blinkered nationalist whom only a blundering ignoramus like Dimwits would appoint ambassador to the UN, which he so long stridently opposed and railed against.
As for the US posing as wanting a Democracy in Syria, why would they want something for a distant country that they don't have at home?
 
 
+4 # Malcolm 2013-06-18 13:31
Rat on!
 
 
+18 # grouchy 2013-06-18 07:53
Us doing dirty deeds in order to get more oil? I've never heard of such a plot! That would mean we would have to go overseas and muck around in the politics and military and economics of other countries which would be totally evil and selfish! That would also be totally stupid. We would never do such things. :-)
 
 
+22 # David Starr 2013-06-18 08:01
Quoting John Bolton: "...we fought so many wars to try and protect our economy from the adverse impact of losing that supply or having it available only at very high prices."

I realize Bolton is out of his mind (what a
"checkered" performance as U.S ambassador to the UN), and so I must reply to this quote:

Bolton is implying that the U.S. has the "right" to make war on other countries to steal their oil. He expresses the imperial mindset within the U.S. pysche that's been self-evident since the time of the U.S. founders.

It's been clear that Bolton and others within the Bush Jr. regime didn't have much concern about U.S. "commoners" as gas prices soared under that administration.

But, being connected to big oil, I'm sure the Bushites made a killing, in more ways than one. Bolton no doubt was rough and ready to back the profiteering.

What did U.S. citizens get, generally? Further struggling with trying making ends meet. Then, there was the emerging of a $10 trillion dollar debt. Greed by mismanagement.

So, now , U.S. imperial elites are using the same script as with Iraq. How can some U.S. citizens not see the obvious: the attempt to provoke another imperial war, with oil being the major objective? Where's the freedom and democracy these citizens embrace?

A gross contradiction.
 
 
+11 # Malcolm 2013-06-18 13:37
[quote name="How can some U.S. citizens not see the obvious: the attempt to provoke another imperial war, with oil being the major objective? Where's the freedom and democracy these citizens embrace?

A gross contradiction.


I suspect-and have no data to back it up-that there's a plethora of Americans willing to look the other way, as long as their insane spendthrifty lifestyles are unaffected.
 
 
+4 # fliteshare 2013-06-18 18:34
Quit listening to their words and start looking at their deeds.

Understand that Capitalism requires scarcity to function. And the most effective way to create scarcity is: Start a war (or two).

Imagine how much richer the already rich will become when the oil price goes to $200.00 per barrel (or even more). The only thing required is a little war in and around the oil producing countries so "the markets" can panic as to drive up the price.
 
 
+15 # Buddha 2013-06-18 08:08
I'm shocked, shocked I say, that our foreign policy is being dictated by our insatiable demand for Oil.
 
 
-14 # mignatoff 2013-06-18 08:09
I don't agree. I think the only reason we are arming the rebels is the large Russian presence. Otherwise Syria does not matter to the U.S.

Mitchell E. Ignatoff, Esq.
 
 
+9 # Johnny 2013-06-18 15:43
The only reason the US pays any attention to Syria is that destroying Syria is a stepping stone on the way to destroying Iran, the only obstacle to total control by Israel and the only obstacle to the total extermination of the native population of Palestine.
 
 
+1 # Harold R. Mencher 2013-06-18 21:44
Quoting mignatoff:
I don't agree. I think the only reason we are arming the rebels is the large Russian presence. Otherwise Syria does not matter to the U.S.

Mitchell E. Ignatoff, Esq.


If Putin and the Russians continue to act as they have towards the United States threats against Syria, like wimps and wussies, and if they do nothing to stop or block the United States from illegally establishing and enforcing a no-fly zone over Syrian airspace, then Syria will eventually fall under the control of the United States in the same way that Iraq and Afghanistan have, by the United States successfully replacing Bashar Assad with another puppet leader similar to Karzai and Maliki to run Syria but answer only to the demands of the United States.
 
 
+2 # karenvista 2013-06-21 18:47
Harold R. Mencher- Russia is sending warships with Marines. Maybe they'll actually do something to push us back or at least slow us down.

It would be terrible if the fictional (inevitable) nuclear war where Iran attacks Israel morphs into a real nuclear war between the U.S. and Russia because the neo-cons are still having us fight Israel's wars.

I know oil is involved but PNAC had Syria on its list of countries we should take down right after Iraq & Libya, then on to Lebanon and Iran.

They proposed the same wars in the document "A Clean Break" that they presented to Netanyahu before Clinton turned them down and Bush, who surrounded himself with them, took them up on it. By then it was entitled "Rebuilding America's Defenses" and called for "a new Pearl Harbor." which they provided.
 
 
0 # RLF 2013-06-20 02:11
Still living in the cold war? Think that one ended already.
 
 
+17 # jwb110 2013-06-18 08:12
Oil is the ultimate chemical weapon.
 
 
+2 # kalpal 2013-06-18 08:41
Syria's oil production is minimal and nobody expects Syrian oil to ever be controlled by the USA, other than conspiracy theorists and ignorant fools.
 
 
+3 # RMDC 2013-06-19 02:54
That's right. The US does not want the oil. It wants control of the nation. This is about pure imperialism. The independence of any nation (i.e., Cuba, Iran, N. Korea, Venezuela, and so on) is what the US hates and will spend all of its wealth to destroy. The great principle of the Englightenment about the inalienable right of self-determinat ion on both a personal and national level is what the fascists and reactionaries in the US hate the most. That is what they are at war against.

Remember Bush's 2004 National Security Document -- "free market capitalism" is the only sustainable political-econo mic system on earth. Of course his crony capitalism control all the markets, so it is not really "free."
 
 
+9 # rockieball 2013-06-18 08:41
So whats new here? Remember the original code for invading Iraq was O-I-L, Operation Iraq Liberation. Yet what the press and our politicians do not mention is that the biggest importation of oil to the USA comes not from the Middle East, but from Canada.
 
 
+3 # Harold R. Mencher 2013-06-18 09:00
Whether the U.S. succeeds or not in doing to Syria what we did to Iraq (and what we continue to do to Iraq as a consequence of our illegal war) & Afghanistan, by destroying the country & getting rid of a leader we don't like because he will not bow to us or do our bidding, will depend totally on what Russia does. China appears to be staying out of the fracas, at least publicly.

Based on the wimpish & (so far) unbelievably weak behavior of Russia's response to U.S. aggressive advances towards Syria up till now, I'd say that Bashar Assad & Syria are in deep deep trouble.

There is only one thing that Russia can do to stop the U.S. in its tracks from any further advances towards taking over control of Syria, and that would be to draw a immovable hard line in the sand & demand & warn the U.S. to stay out of the internal affairs of an ally of Russia, that Russia will directly intercede with troops & weapons if the U.S. makes any attempt to attack Syria and/or to establish any no-fly zone, limited or otherwise, over the country, and Russia must convince the U.S. that they are in no way bluffing.

If the shoe were on the other foot as happened during the Cuban/Missile crisis, the U.S. would be giving Russia that very same warning. In the case of the Cuban/Missile crisis, the consequences would've been an all-out nuclear war that would've destroyed all life on this planet, and that in fact almost happened, literally a button-push away by a Russian submarine captain.
 
 
+9 # Activista 2013-06-18 11:06
Syria war is Israel (US is a pawn) proxy war on Iran... oil is NOT a reason .. more like cover up ..
"US Senate voted unanimously in favor of a Lindsey Graham resolution, S.Res.65, which "trongly support(s) the full implementation of United States and international sanctions on Iran .."
...his resolution contains among the clearest legislative language to date promising that should Israel decide to attack Iran, the US would back Israel militarily. It is breathtakingly foolhardy for the US Senate to give such carte blanche permission to any foreign country to attack another nation as it sees fit with the promise of the backing of the United States military. The move will likely embolden Israel to continue recent escalation of military action in the region and will likely propel Israel .."
www.economicpolicyjournal.com/
 
 
+9 # Quickmatch 2013-06-18 11:37
Ever since RSN has begun publishing satire it’s become difficult for me to determine which posts I should take seriously. For example, in this one Carl Gibson writes “And Syria has at least 2.5 billion barrels of oil in its fields, making it the next largest Middle Eastern oil producer after Iraq.” Seriously, the same website he quotes lists Oman with 5.5 billion barrels. Saudi Arabia is listed with 262 billion, followed by Kuwait at 104 and UAE at 97 billion. That’s the Arabian Peninsula. Iraq is credited with 195 and Iran with 137 billion. Taken together Syria has about 0.3% of the petroleum reserves of that area of the world. Syria is 43rd in global daily production, accounting for less than 0.5% of world production. Granted, the price of oil is set at the margin, but Syria seems hardly even a marginal player. But, assuming the presence or absence of Syrian oil on the global market could sway prices, the profit for oil producers would hinge much less on obtaining a share in Syria’s tiny output and much more on sharing the profit windfall that Syria’s absence from the market would cause in higher market prices for everyone else’s oil in the global market. Gibson also writes “Sharing in Syrian oil profits would be part of the quid-pro-quo the US demands in exchange for helping the Syrian rebels win.” Seems I remember that the Bush Administration said the cost of the Iraq war was to be covered by selling Iraqi oil. How is that working out?
 
 
+6 # placid 2013-06-18 13:06
wrong about Syrian oil. they are number 15 in list of ME countries.. after Yemen. Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait are first four. check your facts.
 
 
+2 # Malcolm 2013-06-18 14:01
Quoting placid:
wrong about Syrian oil. they are number 15 in list of ME countries.. after Yemen. Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait are first four. check your facts.


There are many different ways of comparing different countries' oil holdings, reserves, and production.

One thing that's pretty damn clear is that Gibson's claim about Syria being next largest oil producer in the middle east after Iraq is WAY off base!

Or does he have an unusual definition of "Middle East"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_production
 
 
+1 # Johnny 2013-06-18 15:46
Carl Gibson has been making Zionist propaganda for years. It is no surprise he is trying to divert out attention from the real reason the U.S. is making war against Syria.
 
 
+4 # RnR 2013-06-18 18:09
Anyone notice that the #2 CIA guy resigned the day before O announced sending the Syrian rebels arms?
 
 
+1 # Activista 2013-06-18 21:53
the same security advisor ... Rice took over pro Israel hawks now rule Obamam ..
 
 
+1 # Activista 2013-06-21 17:51
"Obama’s National Security advisers (John Kerry, Susan Rice, John Brennan, Samantha Power, and others) are all pro-Israel radical Zionists and more hawkish than Barack Obama."
 
 
+3 # ladymidath 2013-06-18 18:41
The situation in Syria is bad but US intervention will make it a hundred times worse. All you have to do is see what's happened to Iraq. That war was nver to free the people from Saddam Hussein, it was to free the people from their oil. The same will happen in Syria if this government intervenes. They do not care about the plight of the people, only the oil. I do hope that the Syrians do overthrow this regime, but without the might of the US. I do not want to see the Syrians end up like the Iraqis with their country destroyed and half the population dead or imprisoned.
 
 
+4 # RMDC 2013-06-19 02:40
The best thing for Syrians is to keep Assad in power. Elections are rigged in every country. An election would put a US puppet in power, since an election would be framed in terms of "vote for Assad and the war continues." "Vote for the opposition candidate and the war stops." People will vote to stop the war, at any risk. Who would not vote that way. This is the US plan. It can control Syria by military defeat or by electoral defeat. It does not care which.

The goal is the "new middle east" as conceptualized by the neo-cons and Israelis in the 1990s. Condolezza Rice said of the horrible violence and killings in Iraq that it was only "the birth pains of a new middle east." That is what Syria is going through. For me, I see it as the rape of Syria by the US/Israel working through their proxies in Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Lebanon, France, and UK.
 
 
+2 # Activista 2013-06-18 21:46
Secretary of State John Kerry "vociferously" pushed for air strikes on Syrian airfields at a White House meeting last Wednesday, reports Jeffrey Goldberg of Bloomberg ....
Kerry was shot down by Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey, who said the Pentagon would not back a plan...
How dare (Dempsey) - Kerry takes orders directly from Tel Aviv ...
 
 
+1 # Activista 2013-06-18 21:50
Sick EU .. Syria's Opposition Hopes to Win the War by Selling Oil | TIME.com
world.time.com/2013/05/.../can-syrias-rebellion-win-the-war-by-selling-...‎
May 1, 2013 – Before the war, Syria earned about $3.6 billion a year exporting oil and ... as well as the existing export terminals on the Mediterranean, rebel ...
EU lifts sanctions on Syria oil exports from rebel-held areas | World ...
www.worldtribune.com/.../eu-lifts-sanctions-on-syria-oil-exports-from-re...‎
Apr 24, 2013 – Officials said the EU move was meant to relay aid to Sunni rebels who have been fighting the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad.... like in Libya ...
 
 
+2 # shraeve 2013-06-18 23:15
Are we sure that chemical weapons were used, and if so, are we sure that it was the Syrian government that used them? This sounds suspiciously like another weapons-of-mass -destruction story - a lie invented so the USA has a pretext to intervene.

Talk about intervening in order to control Syria's oil? What about the NATO war on Libya? That was obviously done in order to get Western hands on Libya's oil.
 
 
+1 # Activista 2013-06-19 07:48
It is 99.9% certainty a lie - to get air strikes on Syria going - help "rebels" which are loosing (see Kerry push for strikes).
 
 
+3 # wmarcelle@earthlink.net 2013-06-19 10:59
So now it's the OIL in SYRIA. Each time I see LOCUSTS I am reminded of what our species really is ... we are highly evolved PARASITES with brains so advanced that we are able to very effectively rationalize our need to DOMINATE and DEVOUR each other and everything else around us. And thus we have built a world based on illusion and self-deception. Only a highly-evolved PARASITE would design a CORPORATION or CAPITALISM. And only a highly evolved PARASITE which is irrational and self-deluded in the extreme would wage war against its fellow inhabitants in order to obtain ultimate power through the burning of a fossil fuel which will destroy our entire existence as we know it. All the voices above remind me that we are a species on a very fast-track toward self-annihilati on.
 
 
+2 # Activista 2013-06-19 14:55
We are at the brink of self-destructio n (to maximize the profit of few parasites..)
And humans are not a happy species - under lot of stress, constant fear, pathetic specie ...
 
 
-2 # BKnowswhitt 2013-06-19 18:18
U.S. and Western interests have no chance with the old regime. That guy was a bad dictator. So now we watch the 'civil' war. You can bet the CIA played a role. However. If one side will win it is in our best interest to be something better. One thing we all miss is this: The policies of those people are draconian. Could this come back to be backing another bad regime? Maybe maybe not. But regardless of what you or I think this is going to happen ... We'll see about the outcome ...
 
 
-2 # BKnowswhitt 2013-06-19 19:10
What gets lost in this is this: We do and have historically backed human rights. O.k. bush lied to invade Iraq we all know that now. But dont' lose site on what's going on in the Middle East. The ARab spring etc. Let's say this was Iraq and that they were instead fighting Hussein. Certainly most americans would applaud that. But because Bush/Cheney et al lied and put our troops and dollars on the ground it taints it all. Obama inherited this mess. However the oppression of dictators in the region is real. The rise of Islamic Extremists who's methods are to kill are real. Russia is a bit player subordinate to China economically and have footholds in the old regime. It is time for a change. Violence begets violence ..
 
 
+1 # Activista 2013-06-19 20:03
Russia is a bit player subordinate to China economically?
Russia has solid infrastructure and resources ... China has crap dumping to USA consumer society ... kind of speculative
 
 
-1 # BKnowswhitt 2013-06-19 20:17
In all due respect to your view. Mine is that China is the Big Dog and Russia a bit player to their elevated economic status .. they are the current day Russia ... Putin is 'grabbing for straws' on the old commie dictator style of regimes ... Putin was KGB and very corrupt fellow .......
 
 
0 # Activista 2013-06-20 11:06
China Re USA maybe ... China holds most of the US debt - China, top foreign owner of U.S. Treasury debt, increased its holdings 0.7% to $1.22 trillion ....
In the long run I would bet on Russia ..
Russia is steeply ramping up oil deliveries to China, with Asia now importing almost a fifth of oil exports from the world's largest crude producer ... and Russia has still free (good technical - engineers) educational system
 
 
+1 # BKnowswhitt 2013-06-20 09:10
Today's version of 'Make Love Not War' is Consumer Capitalism. China is smart enough to recognize it. Why? 'Cause that's where the money is ' .. Old models are dead. Long as things are produced people can progress and buy things produced .. the shrinking world market place can get along .. though China is that old dictatorship model ...
 
 
+4 # fredboy 2013-06-20 14:10
Still amazed we're not going into Mexico. The people there are being savaged, the cartels are making billions preying on the US, and it's all happening right along our border. But alas, no oil, and too many US fat cats are profiting from it all.
 
 
+3 # karenvista 2013-06-21 19:00
Quoting fredboy:
Still amazed we're not going into Mexico. The people there are being savaged, the cartels are making billions preying on the US, and it's all happening right along our border. But alas, no oil, and too many US fat cats are profiting from it all.


Mexico has oil but it's not in Israel's neighborhood and they don't see it as a threat.
 
 
0 # Curbrunner 2013-08-30 14:27
Syria's oil production itself is negligible to the global market. Even before the crisis that now engulfs the country, Syria exported barely 150,000 barrels a day to foreign buyers - mainly the European Union. That compares with 10 million barrels a day exported by Saudi Arabia, for example, and a global oil consumption rate of 92 million barrels a day. When sanctions were imposed on the regime of President Bashar al-Assad in late 2011, the exports stopped, and Syria is now estimated to produce just 50,000 barrels per day, and all of it refined domestically.
 
 
0 # atlasexploration 2014-01-06 11:48
I have worked in the oil and gas business for over 30 years. Most of this time I have worked in Africa and the Middle East. I have published papers on the oil and gas potential of Syria. I would like to state that the oil and gas resources of Syria are insignificant compared to those of Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia. The oil and gas production in Syria is declining and there are few prospects of increasing the future reserves. Syria will soon be an oil importer if not already due to the existing fields coming under the control or destruction by Syrian rebels. I feel sorry for my friends in Syria as their world has been torn apart. If there was significant reserves in Syria such as in Iraq, then the US and other countries would be involved as they were/are in Iraq. There is a lot more oil in North Dakota in the Bakken Formation than in Syria and there is not an ongoing war. Where would you invest Syria or North Dakota?

http://www.ogj.com/articles/2013/04/bakken--three-forks-resources-rise-two-fold-in-new-usgs-estimate.html
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN