International Syria Discussions, v2: Turkey and Syria Trade Deadly Strikes, As Russia Watches Uneasily.

C'mon Murica, you're not even trying to hide blatant resource grab anymore.


https://www.newsweek.com/exclusive-...rawal-1467350?amp=1&__twitter_impression=true

Securing resources has kinda been the name of the game since time began. Unfortunately if we dont secure them our enemies ( russia china) do. It would be an awesome world if it ran on rainbows and sunshine but instead it runs on minerals and fossil fuels. Our society would really have to take a long look in the mirror and make some really hard choices to get off this train and thats the ugly truth of it. Everything you own and every modern convenience you enjoy is due to this machine ... but like end the wars man bring our troops home :) and you dont have to be an american for this to be true either. The whole western world functions on this rule its just that america does the dirty work so everyone else pats themselves on the back and thinks they are better. Your car your iphone and all your toys say otherwise
 
Tax payer funded military protecting private company interest is corporate socialism. Difference is it costs us American lives in addition to tax dollars and we the public see zero benefit

Where my right wingers at
I'm no neoconservative, so I think cars like this as reprehensible. We don't need unending wars for no clear reasons.
 
This still isn’t about the oil. We could give a fuck less. It’s more about making sure Syrians don’t get their oil revenue back. And mist importantly, we are still watching the Iraq/Syrian birder for isreal.

we are in Syria upon isreali demand, and we have too many John Bolton’s in the deep state that are isreali firsters.

Yeah, like the commander in chief.

Or are we pretending he isnt actually in charge
 
This will be the test for trump.

We are either in or out.

Nah. Just blame deep state and the media if he doesnt. Standard playbook. Someone in here already did
 
Securing resources has kinda been the name of the game since time began. Unfortunately if we dont secure them our enemies ( russia china) do. It would be an awesome world if it ran on rainbows and sunshine but instead it runs on minerals and fossil fuels. Our society would really have to take a long look in the mirror and make some really hard choices to get off this train and thats the ugly truth of it. Everything you own and every modern convenience you enjoy is due to this machine ... but like end the wars man bring our troops home :) and you dont have to be an american for this to be true either. The whole western world functions on this rule its just that america does the dirty work so everyone else pats themselves on the back and thinks they are better. Your car your iphone and all your toys say otherwise

but then we couldn’t sherdog :(
 
Securing resources has kinda been the name of the game since time began. Unfortunately if we dont secure them our enemies ( russia china) do. It would be an awesome world if it ran on rainbows and sunshine but instead it runs on minerals and fossil fuels. Our society would really have to take a long look in the mirror and make some really hard choices to get off this train and thats the ugly truth of it. Everything you own and every modern convenience you enjoy is due to this machine ... but like end the wars man bring our troops home :) and you dont have to be an american for this to be true either. The whole western world functions on this rule its just that america does the dirty work so everyone else pats themselves on the back and thinks they are better. Your car your iphone and all your toys say otherwise
Oil (and natural gas) isn't a US national security issue anymore. Current fracking and already discovered but unused fracking fields covers it. We're energy independent for the next 100 years. Longterm, America's going to be pulling out of the ME for that reason. Unless one of the democrats wins the election bans fracking like some of the leading candidates have promised, then we're back to 2003 and peak oil all over again.

Oil (and natural gas) is still a national security issue for Europe but that isn't really our problem. That's Europe's problem and it thus requires European solutions. I'm actually very curious to see how Europe crafts their militaries, especially in regards to funding and force projection, and foreign policy going forward as its foreign interests decouple from America's in the post-Soviet and post-peak-oil (for America) era.
 
Last edited:
Securing resources has kinda been the name of the game since time began. Unfortunately if we dont secure them our enemies ( russia china) do. It would be an awesome world if it ran on rainbows and sunshine but instead it runs on minerals and fossil fuels. Our society would really have to take a long look in the mirror and make some really hard choices to get off this train and thats the ugly truth of it. Everything you own and every modern convenience you enjoy is due to this machine ... but like end the wars man bring our troops home :) and you dont have to be an american for this to be true either. The whole western world functions on this rule its just that america does the dirty work so everyone else pats themselves on the back and thinks they are better. Your car your iphone and all your toys say otherwise

We in the US, actually don't. 300 million people in one of the most resource rich areas spanning the length of a continent.

The growth model needs global markets, but the American people don't.

It maybe beneficial to grow the pie(atleast for some), but it isn't needed.
 
U.S. send troops to northeastern Syria to protect oil fields from ISIS, Pentagon says
OCTOBER 24, 2019

syria-oil-fields-isis.png

A look at where U.S. military assets would be deployed to assist troops protecting oil fields from being recaptured by ISIS.

A Pentagon official said Thursday that the U.S. is planning to send additional troops into northeastern Syria to protect oil fields from ISIS. The announcement comes as Russia, which has gained new power in the region, ordered all U.S. troops out of the country and called the remaining American troops an "occupying force."

While most U.S. troops are withdrawing from Syria, the Pentagon is planning a major increase in firepower to protect the ones left behind. If approved, a combat unit armed with tanks would be sent into an area along the Euphrates River to reinforce about 200 lightly armed troops who are staying in Syria to protect the oil fields.

"One of the most significant gains by the U.S. and our partners in the fight against ISIS was gaining control of oil fields in Eastern Syria — a crucial source of revenue for ISIS," a defense official said.

Senator Lindsey Graham said he was briefed on the situation Thursday by Joint Chiefs Chairman General Mark Milley.

"There's a plan coming together from the Joint Chiefs, that I think may work, that may give us what we need to prevent ISIS from coming back around," he said.

www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/turkey-syria-news-us-plans-to-send-additional-troops-to-syria-to-protect-oil-fields-from-isis-pentagon-says/
 
So do we accept this was never about 'leaving' or getting the troops home or the Kurd/Turkey border area dispute and was really about the US allowing Turkey to basically dislodge the Kurds so the US could then say 'Kurds move to where the Oil Fields are and we will establish security for you'.

The US did not want to continue leaving troops to protect Kurds on worthless 'sand' but is happy to increase troop amounts and use the Kurds as an excuse (we are protecting them) if they gain control of the oil.



McGurk right that Trump has sent 14,000 troops to Middle East since May

President Donald Trump has insisted that his decision to withdraw U.S. troops from the Syrian border with Turkey is a step toward getting the United States out of "endless" wars. ...

"That is one reason we're seeing so much increased tension in the region and that President Trump has sent 14,000 American troops to the region since May,"... "So he can't tell his political rallies that he's getting troops out of endless wars when he's sending 14 times the amount back into the region."

We wanted to check if McGurk, who also served under Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama, was right that Trump has shipped 14,000 troops to the Middle East since May.

Spoiler: McGurk’s claim is spot-on.
 
This part from the quote above made me laugh

"So he can't tell his political rallies that he's getting troops out of endless wars when he's sending 14 times the amount back into the region."


Of course he fuckin can.

When it comes to the cry that 'Trump is bringing home troops... who does not want to end, endless wars... blah, blah, blah,?' it is once again Trump counting on useful idiots to parrot what he says while ignoring what he is actually doing.

(just as he does with the deficit and draining the swamp and other).
 
Trump may not care about the people and having troops in the region for that reason but he is unabashed about ceasing oil.





and a WSJ interview (which I don't think we can embed??) saying the same... LINK



Shocking - It's almost like Trump has no comprehension of what the reason was that Osama and Al Qaeda used to foment rage in their attacks against America. Like he is completely ignorant of the history and somehow thinks the best way to keep America safe and not a target is to take all the oil.
<TheWire1>


Does America really need all that foreign oil? If I am not mistaken USA is now the largest oil producer .

I get that by seizing foreign oil production the US can control the market at their will but is it really worth all that trouble?

This is not rhetorical question I am legit curious.
 
Does America really need all that foreign oil? If I am not mistaken USA is now the largest oil producer .

I get that by seizing foreign oil production the US can control the market at their will but is it really worth all that trouble?

This is not rhetorical question I am legit curious.
It’s horse shit. People assume we’re still in Afghanistan to steal resources when there’s hardly any US companies in there meanwhile China has trillions in deals in Afghanistan.

We went to steal Iraqi oil but the majority of companies invested in Iraq are not US companies.

My guess is to keep it as a bargaining chip for Syrian Kurds or to keep it out of the hands of Turkey or Assad
 
It’s horse shit. People assume we’re still in Afghanistan to steal resources when there’s hardly any US companies in there meanwhile China has trillions in deals in Afghanistan.

We went to steal Iraqi oil but the majority of companies invested in Iraq are not US companies.

My guess is to keep it as a bargaining chip for Syrian Kurds or to keep it out of the hands of Turkey or Assad
Also Syria has little oil in the big picture. Yet you do not want these oilfields on ISIS hands. ISIS made millions off these fields(they sold it for cheap in the black market) and used that to support their war and the YPG will certainly profit enough to sustain their 60 thousand troops, composed mostly of light infantry making $100 a month, but it's peanuts for a big country and a modern military.

The petroleum industry in Syria forms a major part of the economy of Syria. According to the International Monetary Fund, before the Syrian Civil War, oil sales for 2010 were projected to generate $3.2 billion for the Syrian government and accounted for 25.1% of the state's revenue.[1]
See, 3.2 billion for ALL the fields, that's is nothing. It was about 0.5% of the world oil production before the war.
 
Also Syria has little oil in the big picture. Yet you do not want these oilfields on ISIS hands. ISIS made millions off these fields(they sold it for cheap in the black market) and used that to support their war and the YPG will certainly profit enough to sustain their 60 thousand troops, composed mostly of light infantry making $100 a month, but it's peanuts for a big country and a modern military.


See, 3.2 billion for ALL the fields, that's is nothing. It was about 0.5% of the world oil production before the war.
Since ISIS was defeated as a conventional army, I didn’t even consider them but you’re right and that is probably the most likely reason.

US foreign policy is bad enough, we don’t need to lie to criticize it. But this is the internet age, facts don’t matter, headlines and 15 second sound bites are what matter.
 
U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper says U.S. will leave forces in Syria to defend oil fields from Islamic State



BRUSSELS — Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper said Friday that the United States would leave forces in Syria to protect oil fields and keep them from falling into the hands of the Islamic State.

The move came a day after Trump said the United States would prevent the Islamic State from regaining control of oil fields in eastern Syria and signaled an increasing U.S. focus on Syrian energy assets.

“We are also considering how we might reposition forces in the area in order to make sure that we secure the oil fields,” Esper said. “We are now taking some actions. I’m not going to get into the details.”

He said the U.S. deployment “would include some mechanized forces,” but he declined to comment on reports that the Pentagon’s plans include the possibility of tanks or other armored vehicles and support personnel. The purpose of the troop repositioning is to “ensure that we can deny ISIS access to the oil fields,” he said, using an acronym for the Islamic State.

Esper said the overall U.S. withdrawal from Syria would continue.

The troops would remain in the eastern Syrian province of Deir al-Zour, where the United States has maintained a base, Esper said. He said the U.S. military remains in close contact with the Syrian Kurdish forces that it has long assisted.

Esper’s announcement came a day after Trump said on Twitter that “we will NEVER let a reconstituted ISIS have those fields!”

“Perhaps it is time for the Kurds to start heading to the Oil Region!” he added.

Pentagon officials have expressed concern that the unstable situation in Syria could allow the Islamic State to regain strength. Administration leaders have been discussing options, including tanks and associated U.S. troops, to protect oil fields that are currently under SDF control.

The shift to protecting oil fields also could raise issues in Congress.

The Pentagon is operating in Syria under the long-standing Authorization for Use of Military Force passed by lawmakers in the wake of terrorist attacks in September 2001 to target “nations, organizations, or persons” who were involved and to prevent “future acts of international terrorism.”

While the Obama and Trump administrations have argued that allows action against the Islamic State, there are concerns that the Syrian regime or forces aligned with it also could want the oil fields.

One U.S. official, speaking before Esper’s announcement, said an operation to secure oil fields would probably require about a company of U.S. troops at the outset, including a couple hundred service members, several tanks and supporting equipment.

The details would be decided based on what equipment is already in the theater, said the official, who spoke on the condition on anonymity because of the sensitivity of the situation.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...131f1a-f723-11e9-829d-87b12c2f85dd_story.html
 
Back
Top