Quote Originally Posted by wm View Post
Syrian oil production for export is a pittance, and their primary customer outside the country is the EU. According to US EIA, China is a partner with India in a joint production venture that includes the Syrians (50% interest) and the Dutch via Shell Oil (32%). So the Chinese may get about 9% of the revenues from this venture if they have a 50-50 split with India in Himalaya Energy Syria. If China is backing Syria over oil, it is more likely doing so to appease Iran, which at about 1/12 (.4 of 4.8MM bbl/day) of China's total bbl/day imports is a distant third largest source for Chinese oil imports after Saudi Arabia and Angola at about 800K BBls each/day(again according to US EIA)

And what would the Chinese do with a bunch of modified old SCUDs and SS-21s? North Korea is much closer as a source for tactical SRBM/MRBM development if the Chinese needed or wanted an outside source.
Ok... so you obviously don't understand.

I suggest that you study how China approaches foreign relations and how and by what means it enters into and establishes relationships with countries. Also it would be valuable for you to come to understand that unlike with the US - who seek instant gratification - China is quite happy to plan over a 100 year time frame. Yes I appreciate that all this is beyond the understanding of the average western mind but I do suggest you give it a shot.


IMHO, a concern associated with regime change or anarchy in Syria that is bigger than US/Western oil imports would by Iran's loss of its primary staging base for its crusade against Israel. I submit that Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey would not be too greatly affected by further bloodshed or, as you described it, anarchy and total civil war in Syria, nor would the rest of the smaller Persian Gulf oil-producing states. But who knows what trouble the IRGC and its surrogates like Hezbollah might kick up across the region?
You are entitled to speculate as is anyone. Now why don't you attempt to put something down like I did in post #383? A little more than a single 'who knows'?

OK so you have stated that you disagree that there would be a knock on effect across the region should the Syrian state "collapse into anarchy and total civil war". We shall see.

BTW, Dayuhan's post hit while I was writing mine. We aren't in cahoots or channeling for each other as far as I know. What we seem to share from our locations that are almost half a world apart is a desire for facts and good arguments rather than bombastic rhetoric and eristic expositions.
Great!

Well then why not set the example by doing just that rather than sitting off to one side and sniping at other peoples comments?

Use my simple attempt as in post #383 as an example if you wish.

But really its not going to happen is it? Not your style or his. Both seem better suited resorting merely to criticism of others.

Hey, I may be wrong with you. Maybe you can guide me to a post of yours somewhere around here where you have actually gone out on a limb and expressed an opinion (as opposed to merely to comment on what others have said or a 'me too' response). Surprise me.