ayatoilet1

With france decomissioning almost half its nuclear plants (21 out of 56 plants) in the next 10 years, Europe will need a hell of a lot of natural gas to generate the power they need. All of that can come from the Middle East if these pipelines are built. See the picture and the layout of the two pipelines and the 3 new regions in the 'soft' partition of Syria. There will be a Norther Shiite/Alawite region, and western kurdistan ...along similar lines to what happened in Iraq. The good news is they will be very independent, and be able to ultimately guarantee safe transit for Israel's gas and Kurdish oil and gas directly to Europe via Turkey.  Iran (and Lebanon) will be next!!!

And, surprise, surprise U.S. comes to the Rescue (for Europe) with Secret Meetings behind Closed Doors at the US State Department. Check this out:

A top level US State Department meeting was held in May with members of the Syrian Kurdish opposition. In attendance were representatives of the Kurdish National Council (KNC),  Robert Stephen Ford, the outgoing US ambassador to Syria (who has played a key role in channelling support to the rebels) as well as Frederic C. Hof, a former business partner of Richard Armitage, who currently serves as the administration’s "special coordinator on Syria". (Ibid). The delegation also met with Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Jeffrey Feltman. 

Frederic C. Hof, Robert Stephen Ford and Jeffrey Feltman are the State Department's key Syria policy-makers, with close links to the Syrian Free Army (SFA) and the Syrian National Council (SNC).   

Clearly, the objective of the US sponsored armed insurgency is --with the help of Israel-- to "Break Syria into Pieces".

And now below text was taken from the Brookings Institution Recommendations for Iraq (and then just substitute Syria for Iraq in the text and you get the picture)

Each (region) would assume primary responsibility for its own security and governance, (similar to what) Iraqi Kurdistan already does. Creating such a structure could prove difficult and risky. However, when measured against the alternatives—continuing to police an ethno-sectarian war, or withdrawing and allowing the conflict to escalate— the risks of soft partition appear more acceptable. Indeed, soft partition in many ways simply responds to current realities on the ground. Soft partition may be the only means of avoiding an intensification of the civil war and growing threat of a regional conflagration. While most would regret the loss of a multi-ethnic, diverse Syria, the country has become so violent and so divided along ethno-sectarian lines that such a goal may no longer be achievable. 

It would require new negotiations, the formation of a revised legal framework for the country, the creation of new institutions at the regional level, and the organized but voluntary movement of populations.