So based on the best theories about the pipeline or pipelines, the Syrian civil war is happening because Bashar is protecting Russia's EU fuel supply franchise. While the none ISIS opposing forces are being manipulated by competitors who want to supply the EU out of the middle east. ISIS just happened to be in the right place at the right time in all of this.
Is anyone today that organized to pull off a manipulation of this magnitude? For it to really be a regime change to favor a deal like either one of the following, Bashar would have had to be deposed in under 6 months, a replacement with an ability to fight ISIS in place, or you would have exactly what is happening in Syria now. And if it's about Russia's pipeline to the EU, how do you get them to leave the country with so much at stake? And why wouldn't Hezbollah or Turkey or Iran or Saudi Arabia not see a vacuum to fill for their own purposes since Syria would be all clusterfloped up at that point. The UN\NATO steps in and appoints a protectorate until things are stabilized, Russia declares itself an interim protectorate until some future date to be determined.
What is so important about the location and geology of Syria? No real natural resources to fight a war over. One large very hot desert taking up about 1\2 of the land mass. It's between Europe, the Med, Turkey and the rest of the middle east. Natural location to mount an offensive against a tiny nuclear armed neighbor if you had an army and weapons systems in place. But, that wouldn't be as profitable as using Syria for what it was always used for. Part of a bridge from east to west like it has always been.
The idea of the pipelines sounds good with the EU and middle east winning economically, conspiracy, anyone's guess.
-------------------------------
The Iran-Iraq-Syria pipeline (called the Friendship Pipeline by the governments involved and the Islamic gas pipeline by some Western sources[2]) is a proposed natural gas pipeline running from the Iranian South Pars / North Dome Gas-Condensate field towards Europe via Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon to supply European customers as well as Iraq, Syria and Lebanon.[1] The pipeline was planned to be 5,600 km (3,500 mi) long and have a diameter of 142 cm (56 inches).[1] A previous proposal, known as the Persian Pipeline, had seen a route from Iran's South Pars to Europe via Turkey; it was apparently abandoned after the Swiss energy company Elektrizitätsgesellschaft Laufenburg halted its contract with Iran in October 2010 in the face of pressure over US sanctions against Iran.[3][4]
Iraq signed an agreement with Iran in June 2013 to receive natural gas to fuel Iraqi power plants in Baghdad and Diyala. The contract covers 1.4 Bcf/d over 10 years. Iran's plans to export 176 MMscf/d of gas to Iraq by 2015.[5]
In July 2011 Iran, Iraq and Syria said they planned to sign a contract potentially worth around $6bn to construct a pipeline running from South Pars towards Europe, via these countries and Lebanon and then under the Mediterranean to a European country, with a refinery and related infrastructure in Damascus.[1][6][7][8] In November 2012 the United States dismissed reports that construction had begun on the pipeline, saying that this had been claimed repeatedly and that "it never seems to materialize."[9] A framework agreement was to be signed in early 2013, with costs now estimated at $10bn;[10] construction plans were delayed by the Syrian civil war.[11] In December 2012 the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies said that the project "remains doubtful. It is not clear how such a project will be financed given that both Iran and Syria are subject to strict financial sanctions."[12] In July 2015, Iranian Gas Engineering and Development Company (IGEDC) and Pasargad Energy Development Company signed a BOT (build-operate-transfer) contract under which the project owner will provide 25% of finance and National Development Fund of Iran the rest for the construction of IGAT-6.[13]
The pipeline would be a competitor to the Nabucco pipeline from Azerbaijan to Europe.[1] It is also an alternative to the Qatar-Turkey pipeline which had been proposed by Qatar to run from Qatar to Europe via Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and Turkey.[14] Syria's rationale for rejecting the Qatar proposal was said to be "to protect the interests of [its] Russian ally, which is Europe's top supplier of natural gas."[14]
---------------------------
The Qatar-Turkey pipeline was a proposal to build a natural gas pipeline from the Iranian–Qatari South Pars / North Dome Gas-Condensate field towards Turkey, where it could connect with the Nabucco pipeline to supply European customers as well as Turkey. One route to Turkey was via Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Syria,[1][2] and another was through Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq.[3][4] Syria's rationale for rejecting the Qatar proposal was said to be "to protect the interests of [its] Russian ally, which is Europe's top supplier of natural gas."[1]
Theory relating to Syrian conflict
In 2012 an analyst cited by Ansa Mediterranean suggested that Qatar's involvement in the Syrian civil war was based in part on its desire to build a pipeline to Turkey through Syria:
"The discovery in 2009 of a new gas field near Israel, Lebanon, Cyprus, and Syria opened new possibilities to bypass the Saudi Barrier and to secure a new source of income. Pipelines are in place already in Turkey to receive the gas. Only Al-Assad is in the way. Qatar along with the Turks would like to remove Al-Assad and install the Syrian chapter of the Muslim Brotherhood. It is the best organized political movement in the chaotic society and can block Saudi Arabia's efforts to install a more fanatical Wahhabi based regime. Once the Brotherhood is in power, the Emir's broad connections with Brotherhood groups throughout the region should make it easy for him to find a friendly ear and an open hand in Damascus." [5]
