Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The strategic goal is to encircle Iran, and it's pretty much complete. Syria is one of the final steps, as was discussed by General Clark years ago in the lead up to the invasion of Iraq ... all of the subsequent targets had already been decided on back then ... Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, Syria, to go along with already established military bases in Saudi Arabia, Turkey, UA, etc.
But, maybe it's just a coincidence?
Eh, I dunno. I think you're overestimating the role and goal of those US outposts, especially as it concerns Syria. Long before Syria or Libya came into view, the US had all the access to Iran it could possibly need. I believe Iran is a focal point, but we're far past the point of needing to interfere with more countries in order to secure a positive outcome in Iran. If anything, Syria is icing on the cake.
I guess it depends on the individual landowners' version of what is "rich?" Either he/she can sleep well at night knowing that he/she is sitting on an untapped natural resource, or he/she can sleep well at night knowing that he/she is receiving a royalty check for allowing it to be tapped. I'm quite positive that the individual landowner's in question weighed the cost/benefit of mineral rights and each of them signed (or didn't sign) based on what they felt was right and just.
Why should we care what others have signed off on concerning their own property and whether it was right or wrong? If they didn't like the figures presented to them, then they shouldn't have signed on the dotted line.
I guess you read the link the same way landowners read the contracts.
I guess you are all for landowners getting screwed and companies making profit if it means the US can cut it's dependency on other countries. Way to go Chuckles.
I guess you read the link the same way landowners read the contracts.
I guess you are all for landowners getting screwed and companies making profit if it means the US can cut it's dependency on other countries. Way to go Chuckles.
Again, why should anyone care that landowner's failed to do their due diligence when deciding whether to grant access to minerals? If the landowner's didn't read the fine print, whose fault is that??
Well I don't buy a lot of this but the key is the saudis say they will allow Russian to keep their base in syria which is what the ruskies want. Assad is about to get a nightstick up the butt like momar.
"The talks appear to offer an alliance between the OPEC cartel and Russia, which together produce over 40m barrels a day of oil, 45pc of global output. Such a move would alter the strategic landscape.
The details of the talks were first leaked to the Russian press. A more detailed version has since appeared in the Lebanese newspaper As-Safir, which has Hezbollah links and is hostile to the Saudis. As-Safir said Prince Bandar pledged to safeguard Russia’s naval base in Syria if the Assad regime is toppled, but he also hinted at Chechen terrorist attacks on Russia’s Winter Olympics in Sochi if there is no accord. “I can give you a guarantee to protect the Winter Olympics next year. The Chechen groups that threaten the security of the games are controlled by us,” he allegedly said.
Prince Bandar went on to say that Chechens operating in Syria were a pressure tool that could be switched on an off. “These groups do not scare us. We use them in the face of the Syrian regime but they will have no role in Syria’s political future.”
President Putin has long been pushing for a global gas cartel, issuing the `Moscow Declaration’ last to month “defend suppliers and resist unfair pressure”. This would entail beefing up the Gas Exporting Countries Forum (GECF), a talking shop.
Mr Skrebowski said it is unclear what the Saudis can really offer the Russians on gas, beyond using leverage over Qatar and others to cut output of liquefied natural gas (LGN). “The Qataris are not going to obey Saudi orders,” he said.
Saudi Arabia could help boost oil prices by restricting its own supply. This would be a shot in the arm for Russia, which is near recession and relies on an oil price near $100 to fund the budget.
But it would be a dangerous strategy for the Saudis if it pushed prices to levels that endangered the world’s fragile economic recovery. Crude oil stocks in the US have already fallen sharply this year. Goldman Sachs said the “surplus cushion” in global stocks built up since 2008 has been completely eliminated"
Of course the Saudi's hint at terrorist organizations they don't know about or have any control over. What a joke. Deal is pretty much done it appears. Fly the bombers, liberals will cheer at what a great leader Obama is and oil is doing just fine traded in dollars..............for now. Till Iran comes into the front page news yet again and the nukes and "centrifuges" etc are babbled about lol.
Interesting article - this meeting took place in late July - it's not unusual for these meetings with Russians. They all go to Russia on a regular basis for "discussions". The file photo that accompanies the article is from 2007. Netanyahu (Israel) has made several recent trips. Al-Safir is pro Hezbollah (thanks for pointing that out), but it is also primarily pro-Syria and al-Assad. So what is the point of the article?
Oil agreements and pushy-shovey on oil prices is normal - Russia (and Iran) do need oil to remain at about $100 a barrel for their economy. Russia sells a lot of natural gas to Europe, he doesn't want any competition on that. Russia is looking for investment in their energy sector and the Saudis can offer that. I don't buy the Chechen terrorist stuff at all ... true or not, the House of Saud would not be threatening the Russians with terror attacks at a meeting to try and convince Putin to withdraw his VETO at the UN on Syria ..... which is exactly what the meeting was about.
So ..... why has Russia moved the base? Putin is trying to take some heat off him by moving - he will go back to Tartus when it suits him. He is probably also concerned about Hezbollah flooding into Syria to fight for Assad and a danger to the many Russians in Syria (now being evacuated). It could also be that Putin wants to get his people out of Syria with these escalating Chemical attacks. As far as the Oil & Gas deal - who knows? I do know that Cyprus & Israel have signed a deal to develop Gas fields that they have laid claim to in the Mediterranean and they will be laying a pipeline. This would be of concern to Russia. Putin is very aware that things are getting a lot worse in Syria and made his move in June.
At this point ..... none of this matters. Russia has already stated that they will VETO any US and/or European action against al-Assad in Syria at the UN. China is likely to agree, but may have some qualms about supporting Assad in view of the Chemical attack.
I post it because it's what I've been saying the entire time. Russia only cares about their naval base on the med. The question you should ask is why does the Us care about Syria so much. Only one reason I can think of............Iran.
Two..getting Syria back on the USD for trading oil.
It looks a lot better to the watchful eyes of the world if you can bribe Russia into goving UN Securoty Council approval for a military strike.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.