Posted on 07/23/2011 2:07:08 PM PDT by Eleutheria5
Egypt and Saudi Arabia want to construct a giant bridge to accommodate road and rail traffic across the Gulf of Aqaba, Der Spiegel reports.
Egyptian officials say the project, under discussion since 1988, has been approved.
Egypt's interim Prime Minister Essam Sharaf of the ruling junta has reportedly put General Abdul Aziz, chairman of the Arab Road Association, in charge of overseeing the project.
The Gulf of Aqaba runs along the eastern edge of the Sinai Peninsula. Plans call for the 32-kilometer (20-mile) bridge to cross the narrow Strait of Tiran from Ras Nasrani, near the Egyptian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh, to Ras Hamid in northwestern Saudi Arabia. Parts of the bridge would be suspended.
For the Arabs, the massive construction project would be a triumph linking the middle east to north africa for the first time since Israel's founding in 1948. The absence of such a route, Israel says, is a void of the Arab's own making rooted in their refusal to normalize relations with the Jewish state.
Officials believe that tolls paid by millions of Muslim pilgrims on their way to holy sites in Saudi Arabia could make up for the roughly $5 billion the bridge is expected to cost. They also believe the bridge will significantly increase the number of pilgrims.
But Israel and Jordan are concerned the project is a bridge too far. Both nations have vital and prosperous sea ports, Eilat and Aqaba, in the northern reaches of the Gulf of Aqaba whose profitability is threatened. Also, the area of the Red Sea where planners intend to construct the bridge is highly important to Israel and Jordan as it provides them with access to the Indian Ocean.
(Excerpt) Read more at israelnationalnews.com ...
... after this bridge is built, they’ll want one over the Gulf of Suez - these people will never be happy!
$5 billion for a bridge for what? Commerce? Products produced by these islamic countries the world is clamoring for?
No, so more pilgrims can ride in air conditioned comfort to throw stones at the devil and wander around in a circle around a black rock.
I know this region quite well, and I can’t for the life of me figure where the 32 kilometer figure comes from. A major bridge to either Tiran or Sanafir Island and thence to the Saudi coast should not take 20 miles. Like all such things, there is a rake-off to be considered. In the end, the cost will be paid for by Saudi Arabia if they find it in their interest.
I know this region quite well, and I can’t for the life of me figure where the 32 kilometer figure comes from. A major bridge to either Tiran or Sanafir Island and thence to the Saudi coast should not take 20 miles. Like all such things, there is a rake-off to be considered. In the end, the cost will be paid for by Saudi Arabia if they find it in their interest.
Then one from Morocco to Granada, so the invasion of Spain can continue apace.
How does the bridge put the two port cities at risk? Will it choke shipping by being built incorrectly? Can it be collapsed in a terrorist act, thus blocking the ports?
Am I to understand they intend to recoup the costs on the backs of millions of poor Muslims trying to get to Mecca, as their religion demands?
not “Building Bridges”, but “Building Bridgheads..”
I’ve been through the straits and up the gulf to Aquba. Beautiful passage. They must be counting the approaches that would have to built into that 20 mile figure.
Am I to understand they intend to recoup the costs on the backs of millions of poor Muslims trying to get to Mecca, as their religion demands?
Their religion demands that they make millions of poor Muslims pay for everything? What a sucky religion.
Yeah. I should have put "religion" in quote marks. This "religion" demands that interest cannot be charged on loans because it exploits the poor. I s*** you not.
Don’t charge them interest. Just strap a bomb to them and promise eternal playboy party.
Make it a tunnel; then it won’t interfere with shipping or the landscape.
“Make it a tunnel; then it won’t interfere with shipping or the landscape.”
But what would be the fun of that? To whom would they be sticking it if they did that?
A tunnel would not have the visual importance of a tunnel. The monied Arabs seem to have a bit of an edifice complex judging from some development I’ve seen. Also think of the importance of The Brooklyn Bridge and The Golden Gate bridges in their day. It would probably cost more to build providing the ground was even suitable. The pilgrims would still have to pay to use it. Do you care if Muslims have to pay to go to Mecca? If Saudi’s sponsor another 9/11 here, they would need to worry about the vulnerability of either a bridge or a tunnel.
Egypt and Saudi Arabia want to construct a giant bridge to accommodate road and rail traffic across the Gulf of Aqaba... under discussion since 1988... Plans call for the 32-kilometer (20-mile) bridge to cross the narrow Strait of Tiran from Ras Nasrani, near the Egyptian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh, to Ras Hamid in northwestern Saudi Arabia. Parts of the bridge would be suspended... Officials believe that tolls paid by millions of Muslim pilgrims... They also believe the bridge will significantly increase the number of pilgrims... Israel and Jordan... have vital and prosperous sea ports, Eilat and Aqaba, in the northern reaches of the Gulf of Aqaba.. it provides them with access to the Indian Ocean.A train tunnel (like The Chunnel) makes much more sense, imho.
>>> A train tunnel (like The Chunnel) makes much more sense, imho.
Consider the interaction of the African, Arabian and Eurasian plates on a big tunnel. This area had a 7.3 quake just a decade ago.
Well, that was careless. I meant to say visual importance of a bridge.
If you’d like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
..................
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.