Before it begins I think we can rule out China as one of the unnamed investors. They would want to preserve the Panamanian monopoly.
1 posted on
10/01/2006 3:28:30 AM PDT by
tlb
To: tlb
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAH
THose poor pathetic fools!!!! Kar Rove as I type is creating a northwest passage with his global warming devices.
BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
2 posted on
10/01/2006 3:31:29 AM PDT by
Tribune7
To: tlb
Well.. China's probably hoping that Jimmah Carter will help them get this one as well.
To: tlb
So are they going to go under or over the mountains? Even at the southern end there are mountains. Can't imagine removing that much dirt for 50 plus miles of mounts.
5 posted on
10/01/2006 3:48:21 AM PDT by
KillTime
(Democracies that can't distinguish between good and evil or deny any difference shall surely perish.)
To: tlb
You know, instead of a wall, maybe we should be thinking of a 700 mile canal instead?
To: tlb
The environmental impact statement is gonna be a bitch...
7 posted on
10/01/2006 3:53:44 AM PDT by
Jim Noble
(Who you gonna call?)
To: tlb; All
11 posted on
10/01/2006 4:30:28 AM PDT by
backhoe
To: tlb
"Path Between the Seas" is an excellent read and "must read" research for anyone who wants to seriously discuss these issues. I read it while stationed in Panama, OIC Ft Clayton Health Clinic 1990-1993.
The Nicaraugua route is one of 5 considered by Congress initially. Panama won because of earthquakes and volcanos that threatened all other routes. This remains the same today.
That said, Nicaraugua has the advantage of being a potentially sea level route which is an assest that the Panama Canal does not have and hence is not rain water dependent. Over the decades deforestation of Panama has caused an ever decreasing rainfall which is one factor that makes the Panama Canal an ultimate loser in any case.
Panama was able for a time to overcome the lack of freshwater by storing some in a higher reservoir, I can't remember the name of the lake, but this was a band-aid that allowed them to limp along for a few decades.
A sea level canal would quickly make Panama a second rate passage and it would probably quickly fall into disrepair. (See Panama Railroad...)
14 posted on
10/01/2006 4:43:37 AM PDT by
wastoute
To: tlb
I think we should build it. We could dig out the Rio Grande.
Fence? We don't need no Steenking fence.
25 posted on
10/01/2006 5:23:52 AM PDT by
Shooter 2.5
(Vote a Straight Republican Ballot. Rid the country of dems. NRA)
To: tlb
I thought we were wainting on global warming to open the NW Passage?
To: tlb
Finally Jimmy Carter's folly will be reversed.
To: tlb
The Chinese probably would invest. The,, they'll go for the port management contract just like Panama.
It is the operational side that would concern me. Logistics, safety, training and procedures are well established in Panama. I should think that many of the post-Panamax ships will wait to see how well any new waterway will handle the ships.
32 posted on
10/01/2006 5:55:57 AM PDT by
allen08gop
("Woman is the most powerful magnet in the universe... and all men are cheap metal!")
To: tlb
Sorry Nicaragua, but I hear this stamp was pretty convincing.
33 posted on
10/01/2006 5:57:03 AM PDT by
VanDeKoik
(Fitzmas Has Been Canceled.)
To: tlb
What's up with all of that think China is the be-all and end-all when it comes to investment? Why would China invest in this project over, say, JPMorgan Chase?
34 posted on
10/01/2006 6:01:13 AM PDT by
1rudeboy
To: tlb
the project would be a joint public-private venture financed by unnamed investors
Cintra?
35 posted on
10/01/2006 6:02:58 AM PDT by
TXnMA
("Allah": Satan's current alias...)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson