From: Ad 

George Sherwood wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 13:53:22 -0400, Rich Gauszka wrote:
>
>> As in waterway disputes around the world it depends
>>
>> http://www.sundayherald.com/news/heraldnews/display.var.1284398.0.0.php
>> IN COMMON with most disputed waterways which provide a border between
>> two countries - in this case Iraq and Iran - the Shatt al-Arab (or Arab
>> River) is a difficult place to demarcate. As a result, it has been the
>> scene of countless disputes in which shots have been fired or people
>> have been arrested. The 120-mile stretch of water, formed by the
>> confluence of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, is a vital channel for
>> Iraq as it provides its only access to the Persian Gulf. The river also
>> supplies fresh water to southern Iraq and Kuwait, but its main
>> importance is the channel it provides for ships to travel as far as
>> Basra, Iraq's principal port.
>
> No doubt about it.  They is why you don't go seizing people and holding
> them hostage in an area like this unless you are trying to make a point
> or want to use them for some reason.  If they push this too in my opinion
> they will find they overplayed their hand.
>

"seizing people and holding them hostage" ?

George george george. Umm Arrested & held by legally mandated forces.
The US does not want to get into a legally held vs kidnapped debate (both
wrt Iraq & wrt Guantanamo).

It has always been a fun area wrt demarkation. e.g. what was the time &
thus state of the tide? I say that as it's a river delta emptying into a
shallow sea & the islands are radically larger at low water vs high
water & thus the border changes.

& then you have the whole Saddam & the Shah middle of the river deal &
whether the fact that Saddam broke it so as to try & conquer
"Arabistan" means the agreement is void.


Adam

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5