This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
ISIS Breaches US Military Advisers' Iraqi Base
Just as we warned hours ago, it appears the capture of a nearby town was not the endgame and, as The Wall Street Journal reports, A group of Islamic State militants penetrated an Iraqi air base where U.S. military advisers are training Iraqi forces, the first time attackers have gotten beyond the outer perimeter of an Iraqi base being used by American trainers.
As The Wall Street Journal reports,
U.S. officials said eight Islamic State militants struck a small building at the edge of the huge al-Asad Air Base before being repelled by Iraqi forces. All eight were killed.
Military officials said American and other coalition trainers were “several kilometers” away from the attack and under no direct threat. There are 400 U.S. Marines and other service members at the base.
An Iraqi security-force official said that at the time of the attack, Islamic State militants also were firing rockets and mortars at the base.
The attacks on the base came after Islamic State fighters moved against the nearby Iraqi town of al-Baghdadi earlier on Thursday. The militants, according to an Iraqi official, took control of a number of government buildings after the local police fled following a pair of suicide bombings. It isn’t clear how much of the town the militants control.
...
Friday’s assault was the first in which Islamic State forces sent an armed team to attack the base. U.S. military officials said Iraqi forces repelled the attack, which occurred at 7:20 a.m. Iraqi time on Friday, killing all eight attackers. The U.S. provided overhead surveillance for the Iraqi force.
“Eight guys going after al-Asad—that is a suicide mission. They have no chance,” said a U.S. defense official. “But they have an interest in al-Asad and I would venture to say they will have an interest anywhere we have people.”
The defense official said Islamic State fighters have been targeting the base because of the propaganda value of the attacks. Even ineffective attacks in the vicinity of the base have generated widespread newspaper and television headlines.
* * *
We leave it to Ron Paul to conlude on where this goes next...
Declaring war against ISIS is like declaring war against communism or fascism. The enemy cannot be identified or limited. Both are ideological and armies are incapable of stopping an idea, good or bad, that the people do not resist or that they support. Besides, the strength of ISIS has been enhanced by our efforts.
Our involvement in the Middle East is being used as a very successful recruitment tool to expand the number of radical jihadists willing to fight and die for what they believe in. And sadly our efforts have further backfired with the weapons that we send ending up in the hands of our enemies and used against our allies and Americans caught in the crossfire.
Good intentions are not enough. Wise policies and common sense would go a long way toward working for peace and prosperity instead of escalating violence and motivating the enemy.
»
- 37047 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
This will only end with us spending lots of Draghi/Yellen bucks bombing moar brown people.
What happens when they run outta brown ppl?
The timing could not be better.
Next news update: "ISIS soldiers capture and torture slow motion bald eagle."
Albeit hating violence and war, beings places we gots no business, kill all them crazy ass ISIS fuckers and let God sort 'em out.
I mean, mights well, this seems to be what everybody wants, no?
Even better, a chance for another Peacezza Prize Choomie!
FALSE FLAG TO GET THE US TO INVADE SYRIA!!!!
A people so gullable and ignorant as we Americans have become can not endure.
God I want to go back to sleep.
The Institute for the Study of War has amazing real time data on ISIS. Funny how its run by a Kagan...
@SMG - no, pretending to burn the Jordanian pilot was a flase flag to get JORDAN to aust Assad for us, but you were close. Now of course we will provide the bombs, contractors and training for Jordan to do this. This particular wrinkle is to get the sheeple to support the US support of Jordan doing the proxy work.
Trouble in Iraq? Why do I immediately ask myself what Israel is planning to bomb in Lebanon or Syria?
I must be reading too much ZH!
Trouble in iraq means ... we need to bomb NK, right?
John Kerry's tongue is flicking like a buzzsaw
Do they have to put peanut butter in his mouth to get him to talk too?
pods
Man, our base is belong to ISIS? How is it the Global Hyperpower can't do a job that PA deer hunters easily could? Oh, well, AMURIKA is nummer one!
Kerry and peanut butter. That's almost as disturbing as the fellow's comment about McCain's power dildo....
Kerry and peanut butter is still far better thought than Ms. Yellen on a lonely Friday night with only her raspy tongued cat and a jar of peanut butter.
For those who are visual people, I apologize.
pods
"" U.S. officials said eight Islamic State militants struck a small building at the edge of the huge al-Asad Air Base before being repelled by Iraqi forces. All eight were killed.""
ANOTHER 8 X 72 Virgins Required...
They just gotta' be running outta' bad guys, oops sorry...
virgins...
I always wonder what female suicide bombers expect to get out of their actions. 47 virgin boys, around age 16 or younger?
And then the religious contend us humanists and secularists are "perverted" in our views on human sexuality.
Cmon isis, blow up that dam already.
it was a tough battle against over whelming odds, but finally the ameicans had victory, and destroyed all 8 of them.
I think her cat deserves an apology. Hairballs anyone?
uh...., will those be served with tea?
yum!
Mc Cain and Kerry just parachuted in with an elite force to provide fire support
I heard Brian Williams was first out the plane door
8 people against that base is a test of the bases security and forces. More will come if its not complete bull shit.
Lets just hope they follow SOP and blow the weapons if they bail out and can't carry them...something they oddly enough failed to do at...well, anyways, blow them this time even if not ordered.
you gotta walk `em to ..... shadows, draw him in the shallow water, gonna draw him in and drown him
Perhaps the 'twitch' is too tight.
Come to think about it,Kerry looks just like the gelding I had to 'oil' the other day,
after it broke open the grain bin.Exact same look after a double dose of tranquilizer.
Congress has not approved Barry's request so he told ISIS to attack.
Did you vote for this traitor?
At least your gelding had value to be tranked and oiled. Kerry is worthy only for the knacker to be rendered.
Miffed;-)
Made me spit my coffee....
You might owe me an Ipad
I think you guys are just a little too hard on Mr. Ed
Too bad the US doesn't have any air power. Otherwise we could help these poor souls out before the 300 (that number) gets whiped out, so we don't have to go in and level another desert with our air power. Am I getting this right? Can I get a gig at the Ministry of Truth now?
USSA needs President Alfred Obamba E. Neuman to lead the charge vs ISIS.
Hope he brings his golf clubs with him, he can hit fairway shots using isis soldier's heads.
When Obama comes in it will be muz on muz
Found this at : http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/2015/02/nuke-used-ukraine-confirmed-26...
(strange document what do you people think of this?)
Further – A Nuclear Safety Conference is set for 17 through 18 March in Dc corresponds well with the Nuke set to go off in DC on 17 February. While all the World Leaders are their to discuss Nuclear Safety they will all be turned into ashes blowing in the wind. I wish I was kidding. When President Obama leaves the conference – get out, run like the wind. His handlers are aware of this potential Nuclear Detonation all too well.
I knew about the incoming Nuke long before I learned about the conference.
Yulia Tomashenko – leader of the ” All Ukrainian Party of the Fatherland” started by Hitler got her wish today. Russian citizens who are part of the Ukraine go nuked. She was told about this by the US Ambassador to the Ukraine but refused to participate in this Nuclear Murder of her fellow citizens but also refused to try and stop it.
Dr William B. Mount
Spelling Errors brought to you by US Army Cyber Command
11th Annual Nuclear Energy Conference | Home
The ISIS linked Twitter accounts are tweeting about the developments.
Iraqi officials say they have lost contact with the base.
ISIS is openly mocking Obama.
You do know that "Before It's News" allows any old nut job to post whatever story they imagined while tripping on acid, right?
Seriously? Hmmmm.
Seriouly good acid.
Like "seeing the pilot look at you while the plane was landing as you lay on the end of the runway" good acid?
I've heard of that.
pods
Actually, that sounds like too much Wild Turkey. Don't ask me how I know this.
“Eight guys going after al-Asad—that is a suicide mission. They have no chance,” said a U.S. defense official. “
Wow.. what an insightful comment by Defense.. real out of the box thinking. They must all be geniuses.
I knew guys who did that -- with B52s. I could be pretty wild when I was young but ran into people that made me feel sane.
hey Brian Williams just got an interim gig at Before It's News...
give the man a break...
Those tweets are from mid-day yesterday. You are way, way behind the curve. For an update about the attack on Al-Baghdadi and Ain Al-Assad airbase (which is about the size of Boulder, Colorado), go check out CNN's website. (Seriously.) @ml8_ml8
"There are 400 U.S. Marines and other service members at the base. "
I thought that the last article said that there were 300 'trainers' at the base NOW the number is 400 marines and other service personnel, this would imply many more soldiers are there then have previously been accounted for.
WHY is this base not fortified with heavy artillery, helicopter gunships, drones, fighter cover, etc.??
How many fucking TRILLIONS have been spent and you tell us that our troops are being surrounded in the sand ala Benghazi AGAIN??
Are we to believe that Al-CIA-duh/ISIS stole every weapon the US brought to Iraq from undefended bases and that there are absolutely no support/defence resources available anywhere within range with all of the US military bases spread across the ME?
WTF? Fly some jets outta Saudi or Kuwait or wherever, napalm those fuckers where they stand, drop in the choppers and heavy artillary and manpower and chase the fuckers down and incinerate the lot -or better: just pack your shit, bring everyone and everything home and shut the fuck up about Iraq and the ME once and for all you assholes!
Maybe the 100 extra are pretend so the government can say 100 were killed and we need to "do something now".
Let's parachute those tuff guys McCain and Inhofe in and let them take care of business with their bare hands!
Ok, ok: Inhofe can have a knife...
I smell unripe fertilizer from a male bovine.
pods
Now the people will want ISIS blood
ISIS, being the cowards that they are, will run and hide right under Bashar Al Assad before it is over. And the mighty and righteous USA will even go so far as to remove Assad if that means finally winning the war on ISIS/ISIL/IS.
pods
They read you into the script?
Coward liver eating sand monkeys. We have a duty to the free world to show the evil doers that we cannot allow this to stand. We are the last bastion orf liberty.
(NSA has me on double secret probation, so shhhh)
pods
Once we clear out all those ISIS maniacs, the middle east will be peaceful and democratic for the rest of time.
Fucking Saddam woulda taken care of this shit.
He'd have played William Tell with them one at a time with a gold plated machine gun between trays of h'orderves and shots of Patron.
Why'd Bush get rid of him, again? Told off his daddy or sumpin'?
Perhaps they got rid of Saddam so that ISIS could run wild in Iraq.
But I thought there was air strikes in Iraq? Surely they could have just ordered some strikes and taken them out?
I'm confused at how their playing this.
THIS JUST IN FROM THE CP!
"It's probably not a good idea to allow oneself to get captured by the ISIS."
No, it's all a false flag. There is no ISIS, was no Iraqi war, and no nation of Iraq. It's all being staged from studios in Area 51, so that the population never discovers the REAL TRUTH: the subterranean Lizard People are stealing our precious bodily fluids!
Say no to fluoridation!
but extra msg please...
I wish Obama's presidency tyranny was a false flag
re; eagle
B. Franklin was right, the turkey instead of the eagle should have been our official symbol
Reserve currency makes a country do crazy things, like situate camps and bases in everyone else's kitchen.
ENOUGH ALREADY.
In the kitchen OR right next to the poppy fields...
turf battle.
well they already ran out of red so my guess back to high yellar
They go to the next closest color...
If nature has taught us nothing else, it's that this particular supply is limitless.
Bingo
Nice work Bill
YES "HE" IS!
Langley born and raised!!!
I'm going out on a limb to say this encounter will not end well for ISIS.
Everybody (us included) should remember that it's not wise to poke a bear in the eye with a sharp stick. Ya' gets mauled.
Shades of the Arclight runs
Hopefully we can locate some C130's to clean up the mess.
Bottom line , if you a trainer there , save the last bullet for yourself.
Who is ISIS ?
Apparently they are either a wildlife conservation group, or a microfinance/creditcard app for your cell phone.
And there's somethingorother in Asia Minor. Funny how these Arabic Muslims always give themselves a name in English using the Latin alphabet. ... and then go by an acronym.
You're welcome in advance.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Awg99tk6vys&list=PLGc9zOUDuXbPcvvhgCp50Z...
ISIS isn't the long term problem, Saudi Arabia is http://bit.ly/1KTEZ0s
Nothing to worry about as long as the brown Commander In Chief is busy playing the fidd - er, taking selfies at the White House. Everything's under control!
What a clusterfuck.
I'm embarrased...again. Bengazi-2?
CIA should of defunded them months ago to avoid this
As if the CIA is wholly dependent upon the allowance from the Congress Critters...
The first step to reigining in the CIA and DoD is getting control of their finances, unfortunately those responsible for doing so can't even figure out the correct balance to the nearest couple trillion, and then conveniently lost ALL the relevant documentation on 9/11/01, and promptly gave up trying. (or so they say)
"As if the CIA is wholly dependent upon the allowance from the Congress Critters...
The first step to reigining in the CIA and DoD is getting control of their finances, unfortunately those responsible for doing so can't even figure out the correct balance to the nearest couple trillion, and then conveniently lost ALL the relevant documentation on 9/11/01, and promptly gave up trying. (or so they say) "
Yep. Sad but true.
The warpig cocksuckers would nuke NYC -and Boston for good measure- in a heartbeat before they give up their unlimited checking account at The FED and have to do something other than strategize how to institgate chaos so that their various overt and covert defence contractor buddies can get rich and their various overt and covert corporate/private/religious mercenary contractors and militia goons get their rocks off shooting at each other and raping women and children in the distant affliction zones they create..
Don’t worry... once the movie comes out and you hear the soundtrack, you be singing patriotic songs again in your stars and stripes boxer shorts...
hahah!
"Oh Lord, spare us. Sit down."-Berkeley Breathed
The NSA has to know my underwear size yet can't tell if a coordinated attacking force is 2 miles away?
This is a full-spectrum fuckup. Que the beheading of the trainers followed by declaration of war. The US has GOT to get a war started ASAP!
Design by FUBAR.
It's too stupid to believe. World super-power has once again abandoned it's 'best and brightest' to savages in the wilderness?
Not for lack of funding.
Someone has absolutely no fucking brains or has a very ugly agenda that requires martyrs be served in furtherance thereof.
No generals in the compound? Inhofe and McCain and Kerry-Kohn and Nuland are ALL safe at home tonight in their cozy McMansions?
Obama still in his office screwing around with his selfie stick to amuse the besotted ghetto louts?
"Someone has absolutely no fucking brains or has a very ugly agenda that requires martyrs be served in furtherance thereof."
Remember who the President is, and who the Secretary of State is - John Heinz Kerry. And who the Secretary of State was - Hillary Clinton. And who is the Sec State spokesperson - Jen Psaki. Overeducated incompetent buffoons, all of them. It's not hard to imagine they have absolutely no clue what the hell they're doing other than having James Taylor play his guitar or starting a hashtag response to mass kidnapping/murder.
so what size is your underwear?
too small for Yellen
Broken Arrow
" U.S. officials said eight Islamic State militants struck a small building"
EIGHT?
INVASION!!!!!!
ATE
A bit of military history is in order here. During the battle for Khe Sanh in 1968, general Giap ANV threw away about 100 men in a nighttime raid on two outposts. They were shot to pieces, mostly on the perimeter. Meanwhile, in the valley between the two camps he quietly manuvered a 6 inch rocket into position, aimed at the main base ammo dump and blew it the hell up. The U.S. Marines were temporarily dangerously low on ammo and had Giap made a frontal assult while the weather was too poor to rearm the camp - he may just have overrun the base ala Dien bien Phu.
I would expect more probing before the assault, but rest assured, the propaganda value is huge and they will do their damnedest to capture some American servicemen for video execution. Count on it.
Maybe some video water-boarding?
" U.S. officials said eight Islamic State militants struck a small building"
EIGHT?
Dude, they had, like scimtars or samauri swords. They looked really sharp.
They wore masks and spoke with british accents.
Where are the evacuation choppers!?
This is the setup, the impending massacre, that will justify wider involvement, and "boots-on-the-ground." Same tactic used in Lebanon...
There will be no massacre. Not saying this won't lead to boots on the ground and a wider US participation. Any massacre, though, would include OZero's presidency, so ain't gonna happen.
Own the air....? We're not there yet
any shot i can hop on musk's next test-flight to outter fuggin space ... doesn't seem like there's much war being conducted on saturn
Just take the HyperMusk to Istanbul, then transfer to a local.
Fuck small businesses. The military and Navy are where the jobs are.
Ignoring that we helped train, and certainly indirectly and probably directly armed ISIS, it should be pointed out that an area where a group like ISIS can take root has some very serious problems, and even if we went in and "corrected" our mistake, somebody else would rise up in the power vacuum created.
US=Hoover Vacuum nahh US=Anarchy yehh
American Hypocrisy –
What to do NOW about religious extremists that want to kill You/US!
NOT WORTH ONE AMERICAN SOLDIER’S LIFE OR INJURY!
Finish Off ISIS in One Month versus Several Years
I. USA Method – “Civilized” – Always a Loser Strategy
Drones, endless bombing, train locals to fight back; goes on for years; costs billions;
= Thousands of Local Civilian Casualties.
II. Cleansing the Pugnacious – Guaranteed to Work; Secondary Benefit
Give widespread notice, No Exceptions - for every ISIL combatant found alive or dead, no prisoners, and will track down wherever they live your family and promptly kill your mother, father, sisters, brothers, aunts, uncles, and cousins, and your pets; and we will track down and kill the “religious fanatic teacher who you followed and do the same to him and his family. And we will put these “ugly” proceedings on live television and the internet for all of your whack-job cohorts to see.
= few local civilian casualties because “WAR” is over before it really gets going.
Or do you think having them cluster in the Levant makes it easier to eliminate them? If so, you go get them. And spare our faithful soldiers the risk of injury and death to deal with an overpopulation, fanatical religious, massive poverty, corrupt government problem that reoccurs on a regular basis throughout history.
Many countries have been trying that unsuccessfully for years. The usual application of that in the US is more often a bluff to a non-POW, POW, but then the Droner-in-Chief does his thing, and instead of one dead jihadi with a dead family, there is a handful new jihadi recruits at least one of whom has a alrady-dead family.
Counter insurgency can be difficult, but doing counter-productive shit and ignoring what actually works is what got us where we are.
It's a fine line UR. Remember the late 1970s crime and murder rate in NY, and the vigilanism it resulted in? Then the 3-strikes and you're out policy, that successfully and drastically collapsed those crime and murder rates? The liberal fringe had claimed it would never work and would make things much worse. It didn't, just the reverse occurred. Sometimes carrot 'n stick with punative blunt tools works fairly well when something effective absolutely has to be done.
Sometimes.
Reichsführer Bill Bratton would love that intelligent people can equate law enforcement tactics with military tactics.
To crush an insurgency you need to cut off its base of support, either by killing it or buying it off.
If the MIC actually wanted to crush ISIS, it's not that difficult- start grabbing their external financiers (in KSA and Qatar, and for double plus spook points- torture their financial assets out of them, before liquidating both) and then go after ISIS's internal finance infrastructure (shut off the oil flow and trade that facilitates waging war and placating the plebes).
Killing civilians just enrages the masses, even when one can correctly identify targets, which the USSA has demonstrated it is incapable of.
Interesting. There's little that can not be done, if you're willing to accept irreversible outcomes not being what you'd ideally wanted.
I suspect that's why 'safer' piecemeal methods that have those blow-backs are still the preferred approach.
--
I went over that document about the South Pars field you've posted several times. I made notes, you may be interested. See notes in [bold face]:
Is Qatar plundering Iran's share in the South Pars joint gas field?
By Bahman Aghai Diba, PhD international law of the Sea
06/19/2014
The South Pars gas field, which is the largest single gas field in the world, is a joint gas field in the Persian Gulf in the borders of Iran and Qatar. While Qatar has succeeded to use these resources in the line of achieving the highest per capita income in the world, Iran had hardly been able to do anything other than supplying gas to its own domestic consumers in subsidized prices. The main obstacle for Iran in developing these resources is the sanctions imposed by the UN, US and EU on Iran, especially on the oil and gas sector. Iran is in serious need of technology and investment [not necessarily true] to reach its set goals in exploitation of these resources. However, at the moment, some persons in and out of Iran are warning that [um, assertion! ... unreferenced too] Qatar may be using the joint resources in a way that Iran’s share is depleted. Also, there is an important point here: is Qatar under any obligation to cooperate with Iran for using this common deposit?
According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), the South Pars (Qatar calls its part the Northern Dom) field holds an estimated 1,800 trillion cubic feet (51 trillion cubic meters) of natural gas and some 50 billion barrels (7.9 billion cubic meters) of natural gas condensates. This gas field covers an area of 9,700 square kilometers (3,700 sq. mi), of which 3,700 square kilometers (1,400 sq. mi) (South Pars) is in Iranian territorial waters and 6,000 square kilometers (2,300 sq. mi) (North Dome) is in Qatari territorial waters. The Iranian section also holds 18 billion barrels (2.9 billion cubic meters) of condensate in place of which some 9 billion barrels (1.4 billion cubic meters) are believed to be recoverable, while Qatari section believed to contain some 30 billion barrels of condensate in place and at least some 10 billion barrels (1.6 billion cubic meters) of recoverable condensate.(1)
Iran remains insignificant as a natural gas exporter. There are several key reasons for its poor export records. International sanctions present one of the major obstacles, seriously crippling the entire Iranian economy including its gas industry, which is approaching collapse. Until 2010 their effect on the Iranian energy sector was rather modest, but new sanctions which directly targeted the Iranian energy sector have significantly impacted the development of the natural gas industry, with all Western companies leaving the Iranian market. European Union sanctions introduced in 2010 blocked Iran from receiving all technology used in exporting liquefied natural gas, including tankers for transport. As a result, all LNG projects in Iran stalled, as Russian and Chinese experts could not provide substitutes for Western technology so the country could only export by pipeline, which accounts for only a fraction of its natural gas sales. In comparison with Qatar which exports around 125 bcm of its natural gas, creating huge account surpluses, Iran uses almost all produced gas to satisfy the needs of its 77 million citizens. Natural gas was provided to Iranian people at highly subsidized prices, triggering overconsumption. (2) for now, absent tangible sanctions relief, officials developing South Pars must rely on domestic resources and Chinese firms. (3)
A great number of oil and gas resources, are in the maritime and land boundaries of two or more countries. This has led to development of an extensive amount of legal materials and rules that can be used for delimitation of shares or arrangement of joint efforts for exploration and exploitation of the resources. (4)
The entire seabed of the Persian Gulf is continental shelf and due to the rich resources, it has to be carefully delimited. Iran has concluded a delimitation agreement with Qatar in 1969 and the agreement concerning the boundary line dividing the continental shelf between Iran and Qatar, dated 20 September 1969, provides that: “If any single geological petroleum structure or petroleum field, or any single geological structure or field of any other mineral deposit, extends across the Boundary line set out in article one of this Agreement and the part of such structure or field which is situated on one side of that Boundary line could be exploited wholly or in part by directional drilling from the other side of the Boundary line, then: (a) No well shall be drilled on either side of the Boundary line as set out in article one so that any producing section thereof is less than 125 meters from the said Boundary line, except by mutual agreement between the two Governments, (b) Both Governments shall endeavor to reach agreement as to the manner in which the operations on both sides of the Boundary line could be coordinated or unitized.” (5)
As it is evident from the text of this agreement, the cooperation of two countries on the joint fields is referred to a separate agreement that the two sides will try to reach. Up to now, there have been some coordination efforts by the two sides, but no such agreement has been concluded. Therefore, at the moment, Iran and Qatar follow basically their own separate plans for exploiting the gas resources of this joint field.
Also, Article 142 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (1982 UNCLOS), provides that “Activities in the Area, with respect to resource deposits in the Area which lie across limits of national jurisdiction, shall be conducted with due regard to the rights and legitimate interests of any coastal State across whose jurisdiction such deposits lie.” This is calling for attention of countries to the interests of others during actions that are related to the seabed when the resources are across the limits of national jurisdiction lines, according to the related rules. In the South Pars also, an arrangement for joint work is the best way but it is blocked by the sanctions against Iran [It's not clear that is true, or relevant].
So the answer to the first question is yes. Although Qatari side of the joint deposit is already two times the Iranian part, it is a fact [no, a fact has not been established here, only stridently asserted, with zero evidence provided, so far ... and the agreement of 1969 says, "No well shall be drilled on either side of the Boundary line as set out in article one so that any producing section thereof is less than 125 meters from the said Boundary line.", so where is the evidence of Qatar doing this?] that development of resources in the Qatari part of the deposit pushes a part of Iran’s share to the other side. Now, it is time to review the second question: is Qatar under serious and legally binding obligations to cooperate with Iran in using this joint deposit and is Qatar in violation of international law using the Qatari side of this joint deposit without paying attention to what is happening in the Iranian side?
[That seems a rather nothing and nowhere question, for if Iran is not developing the field, then it is up to Iran to do things differently, not for Qatar to stop what it is doing on its side and in excess of 125m from the boundry. The 1969 agreement over border interaction and development seems to be particular only to the very narrow sub-125 meters area closest to the boundary. If Qatar is doing nothing within that boundary then it would not have to make any subsequent mutual agreement with Iran.]
The general principle of cooperation between states sharing natural resources is enshrined in some UNGA resolutions. On December 13, 1973, UNGA adopted Resolution 3129 on "co-operation in the field of the environment concerning natural resources shared by two or more States." [yes, but the shared zone of resource is only within the combined 250 m wide strip straddling the boundry itself it does not apply to the areas that are clearly within respective territories outside of that 125 m buffer zone. So it seems this whole assertion of culpability is drawing a long bow over not very much (if any) evidence.] It drew attention to the need to establish "adequate international standards for the conservation and harmonious exploitation of natural resources common to two or more States," with such cooperation being developed "on the basis of a system of information and prior consultation...." [This seems more relevant to areas like the South China Sea, where borders are not settled and rights to resources are not secured. I don't see how this necessarily applies to Qatar and Iran's mid-gulf mutually settled and agreed borders and resource boundaries and buffers.] This was supported by Article 3 of the 1974 Charter of Economic Rights and Duties of States, Resolution 3281, which provides that: "In the exploitation of natural resources shared by two or more countries, each State must co-operate on the basis of a system of information and prior consultations in order to achieve optimum use of such resources without causing damage to the legitimate interest of others." [It seems to me the 1969 agreement already did that, so why bring this up, sans any evidence of wrong-doing in the relevant 250 m border buffer zone? Looks to me like the writter is trying to make something out of nothing with these quotes, while providing no evidence of a problem, or of wrong-doing by Qatar, with respect to Iranian resources and economic interests being impinged, impaired, or degraded in some way.]
The general obligation to cooperate is stressed in the 1982 UNCLOS. In a reference to joint development within the continental shelf and EEZs, the Convention sets forth "the States concerned, in a spirit of understanding and co-operation shall make every effort to enter into provisional arrangements of a practical nature and, during this transitional period not to jeopardize or hamper the reaching of the final agreement. Such arrangements shall be without prejudice to the final delimitation." (6) [Well, the 'final delimitation' of sovereign claims occurred in 1969, so how are Iranian interests being 'prejudiced' against, subsequently?]
Article 123 of UNCLOS indicates: "States bordering an enclosed or semi-enclosed sea (the Persian Gulf is a clear case at hand) should co-operate with each other in the exercise of their rights and in the performance of their duties under this Convention." [And they have] In the conservation and management of marine natural resources, the principle of regional cooperation with respect to semi-enclosed seas can be regarded as a "progressive development towards fulfilling the general requirement to cooperate." (7) [Already did]
Qatar, using the exclusive technology of the LNG (liquefied natural gas), is a major exporter of the LNG. Iran, although it has the second biggest reserves of natural gas in the world, due to many problems (especially the need for investment, technology and at the same time the international sanctions due to the nuclear program of Iran) is not an exporting gas in a meaningful way at the moment. Participation of Iran in plans like Nabucco is largely dependent on the political issues, especially the fate of the Iran-US relations.
[But how is this Qatar's fault or responsibility if Iran got into hot water via its actions or policies with third-party states? What relevance does that have within existing functional and still functioning agreements? There is simply no evidence presented, nor any real argument with valid points being made by the author of this article. It seems to be suggestive innuendos at this point.]
Although Europe is hopeful to change its level of dependence on the Russians for energy, until such time that the problems of Iran with the West, especially the US, on the various issues (such as the nuclear case of Iran, the support of terrorism by Iran and the regional ambitions of Iran) are settled, there is no prospect for progress in this line. The obstacles for the support of Iran’s gas are hurting Iran and the West together. [Not really, the West for the most part has plenty of gas, and access to it. The price at which it can be delivered may be becoming a problem in recent months, for Eastern Europe though. But there's no lack of gas. More to the point, could Iranian gas be delivered to Europe cheaper? No. But it can go to India by pipeline, but Pakistan can not be trusted either. So it would have to go by ship. So Iran needs big partner(s) to develop the infrastructure for gas to liquids via ship, to markets like India. Pipelines remain a long shot, and very prone to geopolitical disruptions within intervening countries.] The future negotiations between Iran and the US should open a special account for the issues related to gas. [No, that's for a commercial arrangement between a supplier and a contracting buyer/market. It's not a relevant topic in talks on sanctionable matters, between Iran and the West.] As far as gas is concerned, Iran can benefit in a major way by solving its problems with the West. [It certainly can, but doing so does not mean a major customer and investor is going to step-up and sign supply contracts, and thus allow Iran to borrow the money on that contract, to build the infrastructure needed to deliver. The major deciding factor for the customer is Sovereign risk. Can the supplier actually reliably deliver, or will supply possibly be interrupted, suddenly?
THAT is where Iran is weakest and needs credibility and that will take time. Meanwhile, you can bet Nuttyahooie and his fellow travellers will be stirring the pot to try and wreck Iran's options in this area. Basically Iran needs China and India to put an end to that stirring because it's not clear Europe will actually tell Israel to get stuffed and grow-up, and learn to live with neighbours in the region that it inserted itself into. Basically the whole world has to tell the dicks in the Knesset to shut up and stop making trouble else diplomatic downgrades or sanctions against Israel. They should have been told this in about 1975.]
Conclusions:
1- Qatar owns the bigger part of the joint gas field of South Pars/Northern Dom
2- Delays and lower production in Iranian side due to sanctions is resulting in migration of gas to the Qatari part and a loss for Iran. [Like it or not this is irrelevant if the Qatari extraction is occurring outside of the the agreed 125 m border buffers]
3- There is no mechanism to stop exploitation of the Iranian side by Qatar.
[Yes there is. The 1969 agreement is one mechanism, plus Iran can change its state policies to resolve and remove their dilemmas. It's mere insinuation that Qatar is doing anything wrong, illegal, or improper.
But I would note that these sorts of boundary oil and gas reserve issues, were the very excuses Saddam used for invading Kuwait.
So Qatar had better make sure it isn't making a problem. It also remains unclear that the field is structurally cohesive, or traps continuous, they almost certainly aren't. Nor the same structural traps, but rather a series of isolated traps with no flow to others location viable, merely due to extraction operations elsewhere in that field. That is the wrong suggestion, it's a massive over-simplification of structural geology of the traps and it does not follow that such resource migration would occur.
Yes, there could be depletion, in border-straddling traps, and if Qatar is wise they'd pay agreed royalties to Iran if extracting resources in those areas. But given the vastness of the reserves of Qatar, and the lack of a need to develop it right up to the borders, it's far more likely Qatar is simply not extracting from the co-joined traps that may straddle the border areas, at all ... so far.]
4- Qatar has succeeded to get the US and South Korean technology for LNG and having this is very advantageous for it. Even the Russians do not have and are desperately in search of this technology. [I'm quite sure they can licence the technology and buy the equipment and ships here, if they so desire. They only have to pay a cut to get it.]
5 - There is no contractual obligation for cooperation of Qatar with Iran regarding exploitation of South Pars.
[And there's also no obvious need for one, and nothing really stopping Iran from developing the field. It just means Iran must have other countries see it as a trustable reliable timely supplier, that has low sovereign risk and they will get the markets and customers.]
6- There is a set of rules and motives that Qatar should help Iran in development of South Pars.
[I fail to see how that's true. Certainly the author did not argue a relevant case for that being so. Define 'help'. The author seems to be asking for Qatari investment money here but I don't see why Qatar is being singled-out. Iran is the one who has the responsibility to be an attractive investment, to a suitable investor(s).]
7- Both Qatar and Iran, being Islamic countries, should observe the general Islamic principle of “La-Zarar” (No Loss) and refrain from entering into activities that result in the loss to the other side.
[I don't think Islam comes into it - at all - nor needs to be invoked.
Do the UK and Norway have to invoke Christianity, to cooperate and 'win-win' in the North Sea? You just don't screw your neighbours nor anyone else if you want a happy region and stable economy. Why do these countries always feel an insecure need to drag religion into mutual cooperation?]
8- If Iran was a really powerful and influential country in the region, it would not be the case that Qatar uses the resources connected to the Iranian share and not care about what happens to the share of Iranians.
[This is a red herring. There's no evidence presented that Qatar is, or was, doing anything of the sort. The author seems to want to lead the reader to assume this assertion is true - sans evidence. It's a problem within this entire article.]
9- This is another example of losses inflicted upon the nation of Iran due to the policies of the Islamic regime in Iran that are not based on the national interests. Iran, under the sanctions from the international community due to an unnecessary nuclear program, is suffering major and long-term losses in the South Pars.
[This is nonsense. As far as I can tell (given the conspicuous omission of supporting evidence for the claims) from reading this, the whole problem is most likely manufactured, that there's no such thing occurring.
If it's not actually propaganda it does look and smell like it and the completely lack of evidence suggests it's some mischief, and probably irrelevant.
The last part of the paragraph seems designed to urge the Iranians to seek a resolution of sanctions, ASAP.
Who benefits from delivering that message to them?
Who is this author and why are they taking this particular angle, at the very end of the 'conclusions'?]
10 - Iranian politicians have claimed many times that Iran’s international isolation and the economic sanctions-including those imposed by the UN Security Council-have not hurt the country seriously, and they insist on continuing the nuclear program at all costs. In reality, however, Iran’s oil and gas industry (the country’s main source of income) have suffered and will suffer further. The projected construction of oil and gas pipelines over the next 25 to 50 years all bypass Iranian territory and Iran will lose the transit fees, jobs, investment and prestige that accompany such projects.
[Ah! ... and there it is! ...
The propaganda hook here is to induce Iran to resolve the issues that introduced the sanctions.
When you combine that with the strange low-bow argumentation and quotes, with a total lack of evidence supporting alledged Qatari surreptitious extraction of Iranian resources, the probable purpose and agenda of the article comes more clear.
It's most likely a US produced (probably Israeli-inspired) psy-op document. It was designed to pressure the Iranians with a dangled carrot of LNG rewards, they've just got to forego the nuclear energy and go for LNG developments instead, but with no guarantee of that happening, if they do.
The Iranians are not likely to be easily swayed by this rationale. As far as I can tell their leaders aren't dumb. They consistently make the strategic choice which best serves their more immediate national survival needs, and thus their ability to resist and respond to attack, or invasion.
I think it's safe to say the Iranian leadership will continue to act accordingly as long as the US is periodically bombing in the ME and keeps stationing a massive network of missile and air defences over the GCC, and approaches to Israel.
Gulf Cooperation Council and Ballistic Missile Defense - May 14, 2014
This link doc is ~6-months after the Saudis blew their gasket at Obama, over backing away from bombing Syria. It tells you they were all extremely worried about Iran lashing out at them, at that time.
Your Pars document is dated June 19th 2014, i.e. published just one month later.
So I think we must view the document within that GCC-Iran potential gulf missile confrontation context and fence-mending geopolitical subtext, of carrots and sticks.]
2-cents worth UR
That's worth a lot more than 2¢.
I'm willing to forgive the author for his some of his rhetorical compromises and political ambitions, specifically compromises due to publishing in a theocracy, and not wanting to embolden tHE local war mongers. As to the boundary line and the 125m zone, in the abstract- there are two facts that aren't in evidence that are critical to determining relevance, one- the geological data in three dimensions (surveys and seismic) and two- the well geometry, since 0° from vertical would be an assumption...
Speaking of assumptions, what goes from being an apparent fact or reasoned conclusion, to assumption (and the mother of all fuckups) if one changes the two instances of "dry" in the following post to "wet" - as the only evidence in the public domain is the unsworn assertion of ConocoPhillips?
http://www.theoildrum.com/story/2006/6/8/155013/7696
Questions About the World's Biggest Natural Gas Field
Posted by Dave Cohen on June 9, 2006 - 6:41pm
The Size and Role of North Field
Not only is North Field, which lies in Qatar and it's eastern extention, South Pars, which lies in Iran, the biggest natural gas field in the world, it also contains a lot of non-associated natural gas. From the EIA's excellent article Natural Gas Processing: The Crucial Link Between Natural Gas Production and Its Transportation to Market, we learn that
Natural gas processing begins at the wellhead. The composition of the raw natural gas extracted from producing wells depends on the type, depth, and location of the underground deposit and the geology of the area. Oil and natural gas are often found together in the same reservoir. The natural gas produced from oil wells is generally classified as “associated-dissolved,” meaning that the natural gas is associated with or dissolved in crude oil. Natural gas production absent any association with crude oil is classified as“non-associated.” In 2004, 75 percent of U.S. wellhead production of natural gas was non-associated.
Most natural gas production contains, to varying degrees, small (two to eight carbons) hydrocarbon molecules in addition to methane. Although they exist in a gaseous state at underground pressures, these molecules will become liquid (condense) at normal atmospheric pressure. Collectively, they are called condensates....
And as we learn from this IHS report Middle East Outlook by Stuart Lewis published on March 8th of 2006, that non-associated gas reserves are rare, at least in the Middle East.
You can easily discern that North Field outpaces all the other fields in the Middle East as regards to natural gas. Here's what the SCI Qatar report has to say about the size of the field.
The North field is currently assumed to contain approximately 900 tcf of recoverable natural gas reserves, accounting for 14% of the 6,337 tcf of worldwide natural gas reserves according to the BP statistical review of world energy. In addition, Iran’s South Pars field (a geological extension of Qatar’s North field) is estimated to contain 280 tcf of reserves. Taken together, the North field and South Pars are assumed to hold 1,180 tcf of reserves, or roughly 19% of the world total. The North Field covers an area of over 6,000 sq.km, almost half of the surface area of Qatar. Reservoir depth is up to 11,000 feet. Pressure is up to 5,200 psi (350 Barg). The field is a carbonate reservoir with approximate thickness of 1,500 feet (this varies considerably throughout the reservoir).
That's a lot of natural gas. Obviously, the importance of any gas field of this size can not be understated. To put this in perspective, Russia holds the largest percentage of proven gas reserves with 25% of the world's total. This single field alone accounts for 19% of global reserves. And what is to become of all this natural gas? Qatar is ramping up to become the largest LNG (liquified natural gas) exporter in the world. Much of this imported gas will be exported to the United States. At this time, Qatar's liquefaction capacity is 3.4/bcfd, 14% of the world's total. However, the current plan is to ramp this production up to 10.3/bcfd by 2011. Qatar's intention is to achieve 100 years of production. The SCI report states that "This would not seem to be much of a challenge on current reserve assumptions and production rates. However, the 320% increase in production capacity planned over the next five to six years will bring Qatar’s expected production to 25 bcfed [billion cubic feet equivalent per day] and the North field’s reserve life to 97 years (slightly below the minister's target of 100 years). This leaves little room for error if what is believed to be the world's largest gas field turns out to be anything under 900 tcf". This brings us to the moratorium.
So Why the Moratorium?
Citing the link at the top,
Qatar has put a moratorium on future projects utilizing natural gas from the massive North Field and the freeze is to apparently give Qatar Petroleum (QP) time to conduct field tests on the reserves.
"A decision had been taken sometime ago to freeze any further development in the North Field," Ali Al Hammadi, marketing manager of QP, told the 2nd Middle East liquefied natural gas (LNG) shipping conference here yesterday.
The re-evaluation of the fields should be completed in the 2007/2008 time frame. Another reason for the decision comes from Ahmed Al Klulaifi, the chief operating officer of QatarGas. He notes the fact that there is already a huge effort underway at Ras Laffen to build up Qatar's liquefaction and GTL (gas to liquids) capability. This massive effort leaves little in the way of spare resources and manpower for major operations in untouched parts of the fields. While this explanation seems quite reasonable on the face of it, it would appear that the re-evaluation of the fields is necessary because there are serious questions about the geology of the field and what precisely its proven reserves are. Here's a quote from an interview with Matt Simmons that succinctly summarizes the situation.
Well, in 2004, if the reports were correct—and I haven’t seen any denials—ExxonMobil booked 94% of its reported proven reserve additions as a result of contracts they signed in Qatar for gas from the North Field. Now, the North Field has basically two producing platforms, Alpha and Bravo. And, while ConocoPhillips last summer was drilling the wells for the Charlie platform, they hit dry holes. What’s more, the quality of the gas is already sufficiently different, between Alpha and Bravo, that it would appear that the geology of the whole North Field is compartmentalized. In any event, the sheer audacity of the idea that you could have only two producing platforms in such a huge area, and know enough to book 30 years of supply is breathtaking. And we are not talking about some tiny wildcatter here. We are talking about the largest, and theoretically the most conservative, of all the oil companies in the world.
This is in answer to a question about oil & natural gas field reserves accounting practices. Besides from the question of ExxonMobil's dubious bookkeeping, the pertinent information concerns the geology of North Field/South Pars. This brings us to the geology of the field.
The Geology of North Field/South Pars
Recall from Figure 1 that Simmons characterized the North Field/South Pars geology as complex, non-homogeneous and containing a lack of fault delineation. Before citing some specific details from the Simmons report, I had asked one of TOD's resident petroleum geologists, Jeffrey Brown, aka westexas who has also done some nice work over with Khebab over at Graphoilogy, to explain what these terms meant. Here was his response.
An ideal field would be one with a very high porosity and permeability reservoir with great continuity, i.e., a pay zone in a well on one side of the field looks like a pay zone in a well on the other side of the field, and there is one continuous, high porosity and high permeability reservoir. Our ideal field could be developed with a minimum number of wellbores, with low decline rates per well.
A less than ideal field would be a series of discrete reservoirs, with little or no continuity between the discrete reservoirs. To fully develop our less than ideal field would require far more wells than the ideal field. Also, given the limited volume in each reservoir, the decline rate per well would be fairly high.
In regard to fault delineation I assume that he means that there is no definite fault trap, but I am not sure.
In summary, I assume that he is saying that the play consists of a bunch of small ("small" in Middle Eastern terms) discrete reservoirs, but I am certainly no expert on Iran [or Qatar].
Apparently, as we see from Jeffrey's description and Simmons' brief remarks quoted above, North Field/South Pars does not seem to be an "ideal" natural gas field. We get more information from the SCI report but not all the details are known.
Regarding complexity and non-homogeneity (lack of uniformity in the producing underground formations), SCI's best source of information comes from talks with the IOC's (ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips) working in the area and some SPE papers.
For instance, the IOCs who have booked reserves for the North field don’t generally provide precise information on the reserves that have been recorded. This leaves our analysis heavily dependent on conversations with various IOC executives. Still, these conversations have been illuminating. For instance, we find no support for the myth that the North field is a single, large, homogenous structure. To the contrary, several industry representatives, including CEOs of two of the five largest IOCs in the world have represented that the field is complex and non-homogenous. Meanwhile, conversations with other industry representatives indicate that new assumptions have emerged about the North field structure over the past two to three years and that those assumptions imply a more complex reservoir than what was previously assumed to be the case. Non-uniformity applies to the different Khuff formations. It is generally assumed that developments to date have favored the highly productive and liquids-rich zone 4 from the Khuff formation. This leaves a higher degree of uncertainty with regard to production capabilities from the shallower three zones.
Regarding the "disappointing drilling results", the report confirms Simmons' remark saying "that ConocoPhillips drilled an unexpected dry hole in the North Field and that this event was at least a partial catalyst for a revamped perspective on the North field structure and potential [ie. the moratorium and re-evaluation]". This raises questions about the actual proven reserves.
Meanwhile, in 2005, COP [ConocoPhillips] recorded 1,212 bcf of natural gas reserves and 21 mmboe of NGLs in this business segment, noting that these additions were primarily attributable to Qatar. These amounts equate to 33% of COP’s 2005 organic reserve additions, without which COP would have reported a 67% RRR [Reserves Replacement Ratio] for 2005. A 93% expense rate on exploration costs incurred would imply that the company is basically taking it on faith that these reserves are proven. The obvious unknown offset is what well specific information the Qataris might have provided COP in order to book these reserves. Such information is required by the SEC in order to book reserves as proven. Meanwhile, other IOC operators in Qatar have referred to the North field as one of the least delineated natural gas fields in their portfolio of proven reserves.
[editor's note, by Dave] RRR Reserves change during the year, before the deduction of production, divided by production during the year. An annual RRR of 100% indicates full replacement of production by reserve additions for that year. Source.
In regards to the political motivations of the author in the piece I originally cited... I've been looking for something publicly written to explain one part of the geopolitical puzzle, and the pickins' are very slim. The article below is more blunt as to the naivety of Pepe Escobar's thesis, which the ZH echo chamber amplifies endlessly, but the article is even more political, directly war mongering, focuses on another part of the geopolitical puzzle, and lacks any sort of basis in law or the physical sciences - which is what leads to the social sciences (geopolitical) clusterfuck. So I ran with the first "acceptable" piece I came across - because I am sick of listening to the idiocrisy in the echo chamber, but I'm not of the mind to pull a disappearing act from ZH right now.
Is Greed the Cause of the Syrian Conflict – Gas Reservoirs?
There are great suspicions regarding the nature of the people behind the Syrian conflict, including the various so-called rebel leaders and generals. Clearly, these leaders and generals have their own agenda which has nothing to do with Islaam or Islaamic civilization.
Rather, their behavior indicates a kind of lust, that is the lust for power, rule, and material gain. These leaders and military figures (if they really are military figures; this, too, could readily be a hoax) are extremists in their causes to such a degree that they take a blind eye to the consequences of their acts, including the mass murder of innocents, including the ruthless slaughter of women, children, the elderly, the defenseless,and religious scholars.
What is the motivation for their bloodthirsty acts? Is it great power and material gain? It surely isn’t the service of God (i.e. Islaam). Their acts are the antithesis of this grand faith, so these murderous ones have demonstrated actions which have proven them to be a disservice to that almighty Being. This is by doing the untenable, which is to wildly and brutally take the lives which almighty God has deemed sacred.
What have these terrorists and their leaders been promised? A stake in the action after conquering Syria? This is surely the case. Why else would the terrorist leaders be working in such close collaboration with the Zionist entity, the Zionist-controlled UK government, and the Zionist-controlled Obama government?
Is this not, then, evidence that the Zionists themselves are the source of the greed, seeking absolute control over Syria, attempting to turn it into yet another one of its puppet states? Surely, the author is right that it can be no coincidence that the covert war against the Syrian nation was initiated just as the gas pipeline agreement between Iran and Syria went through.
Surely, the wretched, terminally greedy Zionists couldn’t stand the thought of that joint Syrian-Iranian collaboration, nor could their fellow mobsters in crime in the United States. Thus, they waged a war of conquest in order to deprive the Syrian people and rulership of their own natural gas reservoirs as well as their right to decide how such a resource is to be transported through their country. This explains the factional nature of the rebel entities. Make no mistake about it these are materialistic, not spiritual, warriors and they all want in on the action, which includes the confiscation and profiteering upon Syria’s natural resources.
Sep 14, 2013
The Great Gas Game over Syria
by Gulshan Dietl – IDSA
Even as much has been written about the regional and global actors pursuing their pitiless agendas in Syria, one sub-plot in the vicious drama has remained relatively unexplored. And that is the gas resource and its routes from production to the market.
The past five years have seen discoveries of immense energy reserves in the Eastern Mediterranean; both the Levant Basin located along the shores of Syria, Lebanon, Israel, Gaza and Cyprus and the Nile Basin north of Egypt. According to preliminary geological surveys, the Levant Basin contains 3.5 trillion cubic meters (tcm) of gas and 1.7 billion barrels (bb) of oil. The Nile Basin contains 6 tcm of gas and 1.8 bb of oil.
The energy bonanza has predictably led to competitive resource scramble and its transport to the favoured customers. After all, the control of and access to the natural resources have been fundamental drivers of much of geopolitics. The roads, railways, ports, as also the oil and gas pipelines are the coveted objects of the powerful. The oil and gas have a three-fold merit: as the commodity inside, as the containers of that commodity and as the carriers of that commodity.
Syria alone is estimated to have discovered proven gas reserves of 284 bcm, oil reserves of 2.5 bb and shale reserves of 50 billion tonnes with the possibility of more findings. The production levels are, however, drastically falling. The pre-uprising level of oil was 380,000 barrels a day (bd), which fell to just 20,000 bd, a decline of about 95%. According to some estimates, the natural gas output has halved at 15 million cubic meters (mcm). A lot of gas is used for reinjection into the oil fields to improve the oil recovery. The unrest has not only disrupted the production, but has resulted in the withdrawal of foreign producers and financiers.
Almost the entire Syrian oil was exported to the European Union (EU). The sales have come to a virtual standstill after the European Union (EU) put an embargo on the Syrian oil in December 2011. In fact, in April this year, the EU has permitted imports from the rebel-held areas so long as the deals are approved by the Syrian National Coalition.
Within the country, there has been no investment in the refineries, energy pipelines or other infrastructure. Additionally, there is a constant fear of sabotage by the rebels. Since the diesel in the country has been subsidized and priced lower than in the neighbourhood, there has always been a smuggling of the oil, the levels of which are rising alarmingly.
On June 25, 2011, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed in the Iranian port city of Bushehr to construct a gas pipeline from the Iranian gas field of Assaluyeh through Iraq and Syria. To be built at a cost of $10 billion, its projected capacity of 110 mcm per day was tentatively allocated among Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. It was proposed to extend it to Greece through a submarine line and from there on to the markets in Europe. Named the “Islamic Pipeline”, it was to be supplemented by the export of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) from the Syrian ports on the Mediterranean. Latakia and Tartous are two major Syrian ports (Note: Latakia was the site of one of the most horrific massacres by the greed-motivated FSA, with some 500 defenseless people slaughtered). Russia has leased Tartous and constructed a naval base there.
In more realistic terms, the project is still-born. Even though the Syrian route makes sense in normal situation, the political circumstances are totally unfavourable at present. Both Syria and Iran are under sanctions eliminating the possibility of external funding. The civil war in Syria rules out pipeline construction over a long stretch of area for many years.
Qatar has the third largest reserves of gas after Russia and Iran. Estimated at 25 tcm, most of its gas exports are in the form of LNG. The shale gas production in the US will impact the sale of Qatari LNG, therefore, Qatar seeks to secure long-term contracts via pipelines to the European countries. The EU has secured its energy imports till 2030, and is looking for secure infrastructural investments for the future thereafter. The Nabucco pipeline project from eastern Turkey to Austria is stalled due to insufficient gas available.
It is in this context that a new pipeline for Qatari gas has been proposed. In 2009, during the Qatari Emir Sheikh Hamad bin Thani’s visit to Turkey, it was agreed to build a pipeline and link it up with the Nabucco in Turkey. It is to originate in Qatar and move through Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Syria reaching Turkey. The European markets would share the resource with an insatiable Turkey.
Syria is a key link in both the rival pipeline projects; the one originating in Iran and the one originating in Qatar. Whether the Assad regime survives or a change of regime happens there would determine the global gas system in a large way. Qatar will not be the sole beneficiary of the pipeline. There are three distinct calculations besides carrying Qatari gas. It would pry Turkey loose from dependence on Iranian supplies, it would severely curtail the Russian near monopoly as the gas supplier to Europe and it would facilitate Israel’s gas export to Europe.
There are many interesting conspiracy theories making rounds around this pipeline. One sees a clear connection in the timing between the signing of the memorandum on the Iran-Iraq-Syria gas pipeline and the beginning of violent uprising in Syria. The other notes a coincidence between the fiercest fighting in places inside Syria and the proposed route of the Qatari pipeline through its territory. Yet another explains the Qatari support for the Muslim Brotherhood among the Syrian rebels and beyond in the region in this context. After all, Qatar has sunk three billion dollars in the Syrian civil war. A small sum in Qatar’s wealth, but big in comparison to the Western handouts to the rebels. An additional consideration could be that Qatar shares its gas field, which it calls the North Dome with Iran, which calls it South Pars. Together it is the largest gas field in the world. The disputes of the past may flare up in future over the borders and extraction rights in the gas field.
Russia has high stakes in the Syrian developments. Its presence on the Tartous port is one of the important ones. Its warning to the Western powers against any military intervention in Syria and the imminent arrival of the Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov in Tartous testifies to the Russian commitment to secure its present military presence there and future point of gas transit from there.
The West has high stakes too and not just to contain Russia. Europe has been struggling to break loose of the Russian near monopoly over its gas supplies. Azerbaijan has emerged as a partner of choice in an ambitious “southern energy corridor” which would transport ten billion cubic meters of gas from the newly developed Azeri gas fields to Europe via Turkey. The Azeri gas reserves are limited. The commercial viability of the corridor would depend on feeding additional gas into the supply chain. The Qatari gas is an indispensible component in the success of the venture – the gas that would traverse though Qatar-Saudi Arabia-Jordan-Syria and Turkey.
Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia was the country’s ambassador to the US from 1983 to 2005. Since July 2012, he has been the Director-General of the Saudi Intelligence Agency. On 31 July this year, Prince Bandar made a hurried visit to Kremlin. He is reported to have pleaded his case for regime change in Syria and offered some incentives to Putin by way of fifteen billion dollars worth of arms contracts, security against terror attacks from Saudi-funded Chechens during next year’s Winter Olympic Games to be played in Sochi and more. He is also believed to have offered an assurance that whatever regime came after Assad, the Saudis would not sign any contracts damaging Russian interests by allowing Gulf countries to transport their gas across Syria to Europe. Yet another conspiracy theory? Who knows.
by Gulshan Dietl
September 9, 2013
http://nodisinfo.com/greed-cause-syrian-conflict-gas-reservoirs/
I'll read all of what you've posted and get back to you some time along the way, it is interesting to me too. I'm glad you're sticking around, the echo-chamber is driving me nuts too. I do wonder what the hell Tyler thinks of it, and if he's OK with it. Bloody sad, but at least it's not a moderated forum. The best response is the make the posts worth reading if we're going to stick around. The zh rabble/rump can go to hell as far as I'm concerned.
Element Thanks. I always appreciate yr analyses.
;-)
Your II sounds sorta like the Israeli approach to the Palestinians they have displaced and dispossessed. So how is that working out for them, huh? You are sick, sir.
Come on, we all know that Obama isn't going to get his 51% of popular support unless we see a few Americans get burned alive. That's what they're there for. If anything, Bammy is just pissed that it's taking his employees so long to get it done.
The Tonkin 300? Or is it The Thermopylae 300? Oh the irony!
Watch your backs soldiers!
we hung some people out to dry
we hung some "folks" out to dry
fix it fer ya ;)
This situation has all of the classic signs of a setup to rile up the American people. There are probably dedicated spy satellites, not to mention drones, planes, and every other conceivable means of surveillance available to US forces for that particular area, but some ISIS guys snuck up on them? Come on. It's not believable. That isn't to say the sociopaths running things would not put the soldiers in harm's way. They clearly would. And I can almost guarantee that most members of the American public will suddenly think we need to go in with boots on the ground.
moar of the same fucking shit. lter-spot on...
Perhaps, but when you see it LIVE on FoxNews with a reporter on the scene you'll (we'll, I guess some of us will) know the fix is in.....
It's been going on for awhile. The media has ignored it. Here's a good article on the base from late December from a blogger.
http://libertyunyielding.com/2014/12/21/u-s-private-security-contractors...
"In sum, these developments indicate that U.S. personnel find themselves deployed, in significant numbers, to a base that’s right in the middle of a major ongoing fight for territory in Anbar. They’re not there with a mission to participate in the fighting. They can only defend themselves, “if required.” On two occasions now, they appear to have been involved in fighting to repel ISIS from positions several miles distant, which may or may not qualify as self-defense.
The stupidity of this situation can hardly be overstated. It’s bad enough for a big concentration of Americans to be present in Irbil, some 30-35 miles from the forward line of ISIS control near Mosul. It’s ridiculous to put 350 or more Americans at Al-Asad, in one of the Iraqi forces’ most exposed positions – in the middle of a swath of territory swarming with ISIS operatives – and authorize the Americans “only to defend themselves.”
Read more at http://libertyunyielding.com/2014/12/21/u-s-private-security-contractors...
No different than FDR keeping the Pacific Fleet in Pearl Harbor, "just in case."
So it's the CIAsis versus the pentagon.
Yup, what a shit show. Our tax dollarz at work.
Eye-cys is not after that oil or our noble soldiers there; they crave a taste of the New McDs Camel Burger at that American airbase.
"They're jealous of our camel burgers," is what one commander said.
Same as it ever was.
That's a bingo! Not surprised more people haven't picked up on that.
"So it's the CIAsis versus the pentagon."
My money is on the CIA.
Like the Army-Navy game, but with live ammo.
This is such depressing news and obviously an opening act to another operation iraqi (insert proper buzzword here). I was 19 when we first went into iraq...Which means that half my life we have been at war, one way or another, in this shithole country.
So the CIA and central bankers finally made their move.
Our efforts are like a coiled snake shooting itself in the foot: Impossibly stupid.
Proud as a peacock.
The Fed must be pleased. Did they get it on tape?
How else is Obama going to demoralize the US military, hand over weapons and intel to the enemy, and otherwise aid and abet a declared enemy of the United States?
Obama IS ISIS.
Obama=ISIS.
Will they be able to get someone out into the woods just past the dogleg on the approach to the green on the 13th hole in time to save these guys?
"The defense official said Islamic State fighters have been targeting the base because of the propaganda value of the attacks. Even ineffective attacks in the vicinity of the base have generated widespread newspaper and television headlines."
Seems like the propaganda potential is equally great here, especially invoking the '300'.
Just send in an A-10 and watch the ISIS fireworks show.
Stop making perfect sense!!!
Oh, wait... BHO sold those for scrap.
Nope, not all. Several National Guard units have them. I think still in limited use in Afghanistan. Damn good aircraft- could rival the B52 lifetime if it actually was loved by the brass. Foot soldiars love it. Brass, not so much. Not shiny.
Those Warthogs, maybe the last still in service, got redeployed to the Ukrainian front, for the fireworks show there. Along with, funnily enough, 300 servicemen...all part of the "USAFE" US Air Force in Europe plan
http://sputniknews.com/military/20150211/1018114630.html#ixzz3RWA4IlIc
I'd think they would be worried about them over there. If a little scrap iron gets sucked into one of those air intakes, and ... well there aren't many detail shops in Ukraine that can buff out the scratches.
All Obama had to do was stop arming, training and paying ISIS.
Have no fear, I heard Bernank is on the scene, crushing their skulls by dropping bombs of tightly-packed cash
Get Brian Williams in there stat! he knows all of Seal Team-6 ops/tacs/mets etc.
redemption Brian, ride that whorse