Apocalyptic scenes of Damascus suburb obliterated by violent clashes (RT EXCLUSIVE DRONE FOOTAGE)

Russia Today ^ | December 23rd, 2015

[Mariner]

The Jobar neighborhood of Damascus is the epicenter of some of the fiercest fighting in Syria with Islamist rebels refusing to give up their only stronghold. Once densely populated, the area has now been completely obliterated, RT’s Murad Gadziev reports.

Most of the pre-conflict population has fled the rebel-held neighborhood of Jobar in the eastern suburb of Ghouta in Damascus, while fighting between the Syrian army and rebel groups has devastated the suburb over the past years.

Before the conflict in Syria erupted in 2011, the neighborhood was home to some 300,000 residents, most of whom were Sunni Muslims. The suburb contained a number of ancient landmarks, most notably the Green Synagogue, the oldest Jewish synagogue in the world. It also contained the Grand Jobar Mosque in addition to the tomb of the Prophet Elijah. Jobar also housed ancient baths that were built during Ottoman times.

Now totally destroyed, as can be seen in RT’s exclusive drone footage, Jobar is just one of the many testaments to the ongoing brutality and civilian suffering which has taken place during the Syrian war. The rebels who are holed up in Jobar and moving via underground tunnels don’t belong to any single group, the Syrian military told RT’s Murad Gadziev.

[familyop]

"ETL; All
Look you sick piece of sh*t,"

The commie/fascist anti-American posts and threads are much like the crypto-Nazi dope pusher and fighting dog (pit bull) threads--like watching a fight in a bad neighborhood from the comfort of one's home. Except that many of the bad neighborhoods are full of those suffering from "affluenza."

[familyop]

...government-funded “affluenza,” even (those fat, juicy incomes from all levels of government, including local.

[Paul R.]

Sorry for the slow reply. I have been (and am) VERY busy with family matters. Elderly parents...

Your definition of “a very long time” must be far different than mine. Normally, if I was thinking about “a very long time”, I’d be thinking in terms of millions of years. OTOH, if thinking about persevering under Obama, maybe I’d shorten that to 8 years...

In this context, let’s just say that the odds of an oil & gas glut, or, at least production matching consumption to the tune of oil at $50 max per barrel in 2016 dollars, in, oh, say, 20 years, are about 50/50. This assumes no major wars going on at the time.

As for the short term, production HAS to fall to better match consumption. The current production glut cannot be sustained. But, that said, the present dynamic, in which OPEC now has very serious non-OPEC competition, OPEC countries are at odds with each other (principally SA and Iran), and a great many petro producing countries with low production costs are utterly addicted to petro revenues, remains. This has already hurt the US petro industry, and will continue to. But, the reserves are still there, and competitive pressure will push the technology. Of course, the cycles in the petro business will continue, to some extent, likely exacerbated by the banksters, political unrest, wars, and so on, BUT, the basic equation of readily available* reserves and reasonable cost to extract (say, $70 per barrel of oil, in 2016 dollars, on average) is going to be with us a long time - which I would define as 50-100 years.

*What is a “readily available reserve”? I’d call it anything that can be tapped for production within 4 years with off the shelf technology, for under $100 / barrel (of oil) in 2016 dollars. I’m sure one of our petro industry experts can give a better “industry” definition, but that’s my “economic” definition.

My original reply was to the idea that the world is running out of fossil fuels, causing conflict. Yes, distribution problems and desire(s) for the easiest / cheapest supplies cause problems. (Libya and Syria are recent examples.) Consider: If SA and its friends could not produce so much petro so cheaply, the situation in Syria would likely be far different.

But is the world running out of fossil fuels, in the sense of my definition of readily available reserve? Nonsense.

We do agree on population and RT, though. :-)

[familyop]

"But is the world running out of fossil fuels, in the sense of my definition of readily available reserve? Nonsense."

We agree on that, too, and thanks for your comment. We'll see what will happen with consumption and costs of production vs. technological gains in the future. I'm sorry that the situation there is difficult and hope for better days soon for you and your family. Caring for and about one's parents is one of the most respectful and loving efforts that can be done.