land in the West Bank and Gaza isn't for the land; it's for the water. Israel needs water for residents and for business very badly and the only way is to take land and remove Palestinians.

a much cheaper and more efficient way of getting fresh water for sure

about that and I want to say there was water under land the Palestinians were on. If I feel better later I will see if I can find it. It was long ago.

That's part of it. I personally think Israel just wants to remove the Palestinians completely, but if they can get their resources in the mean time, well. There were articles and photos some years ago about Palestinian towns being restricted to water use 2-3 days a week, while Israeli settlements nearby had swimming pools.

At the same time, B'Tselem I think it was, crunched numbers and found that with the taxes and fees on Palestinians vs. the cost of occupation, Israel was actually making a profit in the Occupation.

that the River Jordan drains into the Dead Sea.

At The Dead Sea, Getting That Sinking Feeling.

There's an old joke about an Israeli boy who, after hearing his friends boast about their dads' feats and exploits, declares "You know the Dead Sea? Well, my father killed it."

In reality, the Dead Sea is being killed, slowly, by people, and it's no joke. One of the natural wonders of the world, this 41 mile-long body in Israel's Jordan Rift Valley is known for its high salinity and extremely dense water. But now, it seems to be quickly drying up, year by year, because of a one-two punch from nature and man.

>

But geologist Eli Raz, a resident of Kibbutz Ein Gedi who has devoted decades to studying the Dead Sea, says the clock is ticking. The water level is dropping by as much as two billion gallons a year, and the shoreline is receding by nearly four feet a year, he says.

>

Raz, of Ben-Gurion University's Dead Sea and Arava Science Center, warns that it isn't just the sea water that's disappearing. The groundwater in the surrounding dry beds is drying up as well, and that's causing sinkholes to form all around the periphery.

http://www.sci-tech-today.com/story.xhtml?story_id=030001OKJKEC

improve the technology and the entire world will benefit.

Even the salt and other minerals extracted could be used. The salt for building material? They for sure should not let the brine run back into the seas or on the lands.

Water from the Red Sea would increase the level of the Dead Sea and reverse its decline in size. A side affect would be more water sipping into the surrounding ground water, after water goes through about 100 feet of earth, it tends to be drinkable and usable for agriculture. The problem is the amount of fresh water produced this was is limited (and some of the nearer wells to the Dead Sea may become to salty for use by Humans, Animals or plants). You should also see an increase level of rain do to increase loss of water into the air, but given that this is close to the Tropic of Cancer, in much of the year it would stay local, falling back into the Dead Sea.

Tropic of Cancer:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropic_of_Cancer

Around the Coast, Orographic rainfall can be quite heavy, but the Dead Sea is to far from the Mediterranean Sea for this to have much effect on it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precipitation_types#Orographic

In the temperated climates, we have "Weather Fronts" that move air and thus any water in the air West to East. This is quite limited as you near the tropics. Technically the Dead Sea is NORTH of the Tropic of Cancer, but not by much and thus most water falls into the area between the Mediterranean Sea and the Galilee Sea, Jordan River, Dead Sea line.

A great idea of to connect the dead sea to the red sea. That is something that could be done today. Great waterway for shipping and transportation.

Love to see them connect the Gulf of Mexico and the NW passage. Reverse the mississippi. A water transportation super highway.

Many years ago, as a Christmas Present, I received a book written by two retired Israeli Generals, called "Battles of the Bible". It was an interesting read, they analysis the battles in the bible with a military eye (for example, the taking of Jericho, marching around the city for seven days at first put the defenders on edge, but as this march continued day after day the defenders then started to accept it as a nothing, thus slowing their response, thus on the seventh day when the Israelis instead of returning to camp stormed the walls, the Defenders were unprepared and thus the walls "came tumbling down" for their failed to stop the onslaught).

Anyway, one of the recurring themes in the book was that the base for the power of Ancient Israel was the West Bank, it provided a Strategic fall back position that the Ancient Israeli could fall back on if necessary.

On the other hand the Coastal areas, where most of present Israel is located, was along the main road between Iraq and Egypt. They mention when Napoleon had taken Egypt and was marching his army north through modern day Israel, one of his Generals mention Jerusalem. Napoleon said NO, it was to much of a risk given its location among the Judean Hills AND away from the main road along the Coast AND it was NOT needed if the Army was just passing through Palestine.

The Concept that Israel needed to West Bank as a Strategic fall back position, kept coming back in that book. They mention the Crusaders and that they success in HOLDING Palestine for as long as they did was due to the fact they took and held Jerusalem and thus any attack on the Crusader kingdom had to come from Syria or Egypt (and march the distance between those areas and Palestine, a march of many days that had to occur along the only highway, thus easy to stop). On the other hand, if someone else holds Jerusalem and the West Bank, it is less then a days march to anywhere on the Coastal Highway. Napoleon had paid off the Arabs holding Jerusalem when he was in Palestine, thus NOT a concern for him, but it was a concern for the British during WWII (for the Turks held Jerusalem).

Once you understand what makes Jerusalem AND the West bank so important from a MILITARY point of view (as to holding modern Israel as opposed to just marching through it), then why the Israelis were willing to give up on Gaza, while still building settlements in the West Banks is clear, the Israeli high command sees the West Bank as a Strategic position that they want to be Jewish. For the rest of Israel is less then a days march from the West Bank. At the same time The West bank being in the Judean Hills, a Strategic fall back position many enemies would prefer to avoid, as did Napoleon.

Now before you mention that Jordan is the other side of the Jordan River, I like to point out that what is today is Jordan is more desert then farm-able acreage. It is beyond the reach of rain generated from the Mediterranean sea and thus has always had a much lower population then areas closer to the sea, with those areas increase rainfall. On the other hand the West Bank is within the area where rains fall often enough to permit farming, and thus you have a way to feed and thus support a larger population. Thus who holds Jordan is unimportant, it is to dry to support any sizable rural population. On the other hand the West Bank can and does support a sizable rural population, a population Israel wants to be Jewish.

to keep the oil flowing?

That's my guess, at least partially.

And most of it is "recovered" as the oil is pumped out. Excessive water mixed with oil is a sign of an aging well, adding water to a well pushes the oil to the top of the oil formation (oil floats on top of water) and is the main secondary recovery method for oil.

A second problem with your response is the main oil fields are on the other side of the Arabia Peninsula, along the Persian Gulf not the Red Sea, thus using water to go into the oil wells would have little affect on water levels in Israel or Jordan and to a lesser degree Syria.

Side note: Syria has part of the Western oil Fields of Iraq. The Iraqi oil fields in Western Iraq are controlled by the Kurds, while smaller then the oil fields to the South East along the Kuwaiti Border, still quite large extending into Eastern Syria. NASA is showing this area part of the loss of Water and in these areas local fresh water is used in secondary oil recovery, but it is also the hills where the Euphrates and Tigris Rivers flow out of, so they have more water to spare then further south.

When the oil is gone and the water is gone we will get our money back by selling these despots water. How does $200 a barrel sound?

when their $$$$$$$$$$$$$ will be all spent

then their sandboxes (for electronic gizmoz)

then what?

Surely the case in our west.

Country to run out of water.

in the form a qat, a narcotic plant commonly chewed by many Yemenis.

Off hunger...

for it being such a desolate dump LOL...


You would think the "holy" land would be a lush paradise right?


Something like Victoria Waterfalls in Southern Africa maybe...

There are millions living a poverty city life on a very small land mass. Once they get the technology down right to remove the salt from the sea, there should be enough water for everyone.

Still won't solve the problem of the pals, millions crammed on such a small land mass with no education,no land to farm and no technology of their own to de-salt sea water or use hydroponics vertical farming to grow their own food.

Welcome to the 21st century, and the beginnings of the Resource Wars that have long been predicted.

I'd recommend anyone interested in problems like this read "Peak Everything": http://www.amazon.com/Peak-Everything-Waking-Century-Declines/dp/0865716455