Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Katelew who wrote (25468)	4/16/2002 8:48:33 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Respond to of 281500

Your first source supports my position. Only if you fail to look at the maps Katelew. lib.utexas.edu Pay SPECIAL attention to the area just north of the Sea, called the DMZ and Gadot. It's the only area that Syria controlled where the Jordan river passed into their territory. But they wanted to divert it all for themselves. I didn't say that I agreed with the source's interpretations, but only with the general history... Again, the issue was whether Israel's building of an irrigation canal to the Negev fed by the Sea of Gallilee equates to Syria attempting to divert the actual Jordan river which feeds the Sea itself. Having grown up out west where irrigation is the lifeblood of agriculture, I can understand the difference between people all drawing out of the same water resevoir (some more than others), and when someone diverts the rivers and creeks that fill that resevoir. The Syrians could have drawn water from their side of the Sea and the Israelis would have been hard put to complain. But shutting off the very source of water that fills the Sea, is going WAY TOO FAR, and amounts to an act of war. Are you less confused now?.. :0) Hawk