interpret this doublespeak please

[theDoctorisIn]

What do you think it's "about", then?

The OP and others on the partisan right are attempting to contrive Syria as ‘Obama’s Iraq.’

It’s not, of course.

But that won’t stop conservatives from promulgating that lie.

Regardless of the extent of the action in Syria, it reveals the anti-war left to be hypocrites. You don't see them rioting in the streets do you?

How can an undefined group of people be "hypocrites"?

 

[dilloduck]

As has been pointed out in countless other threads, the consensus of the international community (and the majority of Americans as well), is to leave it alone.

Well since that ain't happening how are they going to receive some one saying---"Assad has suddenly changed his mind and is going to be nice." Do you think that will be an acceptable result ?

What do you mean "acceptable result"?

Do I think it's a major public image thing to overcome? Not really, since Obama isn't running for re-election anyway. Do I think that the "international community" will care? Doubtful - particularly European countries who've just got a new source for gas.

Leaving Assad in power after all this demonization and financial investment is unthinkable. How could they possibly let this man stay in power ? He's our entire casus belli.

 

[Trajan]

If he builds the pipelines they want? Sure.

who is they and what pipelines ( to be built) are you referring to?

Sorry, posts always get lost if they're the last on a page:

are you referring to oil pipelines?

Yes. (Actually, gas pipelines)

Russia and China want Assad to ok building a pipeline to Iran.

France, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar want Assad to ok building a pipeline to Saudi Arabia - and they want our help.

sorry Doc, thx for reposting.


Look I am not sure how that makes sense, Russian ( gazprom) has huge LNG reserves and exploration extent...why would they want to help another country add to the global pool?

and, as I said, so do we. we have 16 permits pending to build export terminals.....I am sorry, I don't see it. China?but to load for china, LNG ships, qatar and SA have plenty of coastline to do it and its closer to china than the Mediterranean.....

Russia? No, it doesn't make sense.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Well since that ain't happening how are they going to receive some one saying---"Assad has suddenly changed his mind and is going to be nice." Do you think that will be an acceptable result ?

What do you mean "acceptable result"?

Do I think it's a major public image thing to overcome? Not really, since Obama isn't running for re-election anyway. Do I think that the "international community" will care? Doubtful - particularly European countries who've just got a new source for gas.

Leaving Assad in power after all this demonization and financial investment is unthinkable. How could they possibly let this man stay in power ? He's our entire casus belli.

As you pointed out in this thread's OP, even Obama isn't calling for Assad to be removed from power.

 

[dilloduck]

What do you mean "acceptable result"?

Do I think it's a major public image thing to overcome? Not really, since Obama isn't running for re-election anyway. Do I think that the "international community" will care? Doubtful - particularly European countries who've just got a new source for gas.

Leaving Assad in power after all this demonization and financial investment is unthinkable. How could they possibly let this man stay in power ? He's our entire casus belli.

As you pointed out in this thread's OP, even Obama isn't calling for Assad to be removed from power.

Which is the HUGE LIE. We are already supporting the "rebels" and their mercenaries who intend to do just that.----------They want to slowly tear him to pieces.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Upgrading the opposition... which is Al Qaeda, so Obama is upgrading Al Qaeda

fanfuckingtastic!

Obama must have killed bin laden in an effort to take control of AQ

I don't know how else to interpret Obama ME strategy

Destabilize Egypt... check

Destabilize Libya...check

Abandon Iraq....check

 

[theDoctorisIn]

who is they and what pipelines ( to be built) are you referring to?

Sorry, posts always get lost if they're the last on a page:

Yes. (Actually, gas pipelines)

Russia and China want Assad to ok building a pipeline to Iran.

France, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar want Assad to ok building a pipeline to Saudi Arabia - and they want our help.

sorry Doc, thx for reposting.


Look I am not sure how that makes sense, Russian ( gazprom) has huge LNG reserves and exploration extent...why would they want to help another country add to the global pool?

and, as I said, so do we. we have 16 permits pending to build export terminals.....I am sorry, I don't see it. China?but to load for china, LNG ships, qatar and SA have plenty of coastline to do it and its closer to china than the Mediterranean.....

Russia? No, it doesn't make sense.

The issue here is Europe's fear of gazprom controlling the entire continent's supply of LNG.

A pipeline will be built through Syria - there's no question of that. The gazprom monopoly is too much of an issue. Russia and China want it going to Iran - their ally - rather than Qatar.

At least that's what I'm getting out of the situation.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Leaving Assad in power after all this demonization and financial investment is unthinkable. How could they possibly let this man stay in power ? He's our entire casus belli.

As you pointed out in this thread's OP, even Obama isn't calling for Assad to be removed from power.

Which is the HUGE LIE. We are already supporting the "rebels" and their mercenaries who intend to do just that.----------They want to slowly tear him to pieces.

If we really wanted Assad out, he'd be out already. His government ministries would be smoking holes in the ground.

Lobbing a few cruise missiles (that we helpfully inform Assad about ahead of time) isn't "regime change", it's doing the absolute minimum amount of actual damage to Assad.

 

[dilloduck]

Pipelines are preferred over shipping.

 

[dilloduck]

As you pointed out in this thread's OP, even Obama isn't calling for Assad to be removed from power.

Which is the HUGE LIE. We are already supporting the "rebels" and their mercenaries who intend to do just that.----------They want to slowly tear him to pieces.

If we really wanted Assad out, he'd be out already.

We don't want to appear to be the ones who did it.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Pipelines are preferred over shipping.

Yeah, they're a lot cheaper.

 

[dilloduck]

As you pointed out in this thread's OP, even Obama isn't calling for Assad to be removed from power.

Which is the HUGE LIE. We are already supporting the "rebels" and their mercenaries who intend to do just that.----------They want to slowly tear him to pieces.

If we really wanted Assad out, he'd be out already. His government ministries would be smoking holes in the ground.

Lobbing a few cruise missiles (that we helpfully inform Assad about ahead of time) isn't "regime change", it's doing the absolute minimum amount of actual damage to Assad.

we going to tip the scales of the ground war in favor of the rebels.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Which is the HUGE LIE. We are already supporting the "rebels" and their mercenaries who intend to do just that.----------They want to slowly tear him to pieces.

If we really wanted Assad out, he'd be out already.

We don't want to appear to be the ones who did it.

If Assad were to be removed from power, there's no way it wouldn't "appear" that we did it.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Which is the HUGE LIE. We are already supporting the "rebels" and their mercenaries who intend to do just that.----------They want to slowly tear him to pieces.

If we really wanted Assad out, he'd be out already. His government ministries would be smoking holes in the ground.

Lobbing a few cruise missiles (that we helpfully inform Assad about ahead of time) isn't "regime change", it's doing the absolute minimum amount of actual damage to Assad.

we going to tip the scales of the ground war in favor of the rebels.

I very much doubt that.

But you could be right.

 

[Trajan]

from the east to the west----LNG lines---providing Europe with energy so they aren't dependent on Russia.

forget my last post I missed this.....

uhm hello, WE want to sell LNG, why would we make it easier for 'them'?

where would these 'pipelines' originate and end, exactly?

Europe isn't buying gas from us now, they're buying it from Russia.

Saudi Arabia and Qatar (and France) want a pipeline through Syria between Qatar and Saudi Arabia, in order to sell gas to Europe.

Russia (and China) want a pipeline through Syria and Iraq to Iran.

see my above.

and, please look at a map, it still doesn't make sense. Russia shares a large contiguous border with rep.'s that border iran. if russia wants to gain control of the nat. gas find off of Syria coast, so? where would the pipeline go? from syria thru turkey? why wouldn't Russia want to sell their own? and they would only get a cut of the Syrian gas, when they have theirs.

The sauds have already said no to qatar running a pipeline thru Saudis territory, becasue, they want to sell THEIR nat. gas...

 

[Katzndogz]

As you pointed out in this thread's OP, even Obama isn't calling for Assad to be removed from power.

Which is the HUGE LIE. We are already supporting the "rebels" and their mercenaries who intend to do just that.----------They want to slowly tear him to pieces.

If we really wanted Assad out, he'd be out already. His government ministries would be smoking holes in the ground.

Lobbing a few cruise missiles (that we helpfully inform Assad about ahead of time) isn't "regime change", it's doing the absolute minimum amount of actual damage to Assad.

The only reason for this little futile exercise is for obama's vanity. He's been mocked. Now he will have a tantrum.

 

[Trajan]

If we really wanted Assad out, he'd be out already. His government ministries would be smoking holes in the ground.

Lobbing a few cruise missiles (that we helpfully inform Assad about ahead of time) isn't "regime change", it's doing the absolute minimum amount of actual damage to Assad.

we going to tip the scales of the ground war in favor of the rebels.

I very much doubt that.

But you could be right.

and thats why I went form a yes, to, a no. this has 'pharmaceutical factory' written all over it.....

 

[dilloduck]

If we really wanted Assad out, he'd be out already. His government ministries would be smoking holes in the ground.

Lobbing a few cruise missiles (that we helpfully inform Assad about ahead of time) isn't "regime change", it's doing the absolute minimum amount of actual damage to Assad.

we going to tip the scales of the ground war in favor of the rebels.

I very much doubt that.

But you could be right.

we aren't arming the rebels and lobbing in cruise missiles because of any gas attack.

 

[Trajan]

Pipelines are preferred over shipping.

Yeah, they're a lot cheaper.

yes thats true, BUT, you always have to account for what countries the pipelines thru and, its not like anyone else ( but the sauds) there is very stable...... and the geography and economics still doesn't work....

 

[theDoctorisIn]

forget my last post I missed this.....

uhm hello, WE want to sell LNG, why would we make it easier for 'them'?

where would these 'pipelines' originate and end, exactly?

Europe isn't buying gas from us now, they're buying it from Russia.

Saudi Arabia and Qatar (and France) want a pipeline through Syria between Qatar and Saudi Arabia, in order to sell gas to Europe.

Russia (and China) want a pipeline through Syria and Iraq to Iran.

see my above.

and, please look at a map, it still doesn't make sense. Russia shares a large contiguous border with rep.'s that border iran. if russia wants to gain control of the nat. gas find off of Syria coast, so? where would the pipeline go? from syria thru turkey? why wouldn't Russia want to sell their own? and they would only get a cut of the Syrian gas, when they have theirs.

The sauds have already said no to qatar running a pipeline thru Saudis territory, becasue, they want to sell THEIR nat. gas...

See MY above, as well.

The proposed Qatar-Saudi-Syria-Turkey pipeline (which Saudi Arabia has not actually approved or rejected) would benefit Saudi Arabia a whole lot more than an Iran-Iraq-Syria pipeline would.