Subject: Re: IQSYTR
Date: Feb 23, 2005 @ 22:43
Author: aletheiak ("aletheiak" <aletheiak@...>)
Prev    Post in Topic    Next [All Posts]
Prev    Post in Time    Next


thats an interesting point
whether one agrees with it or not

& it might also be fun to look for iqsytr classmates
in similarly integral tricountry areas around the world

like say afirpk
baluchistan perhaps
etc

sort of like azcanv in the usa really being just
mohave stan

or manyvt really being just
williams college stan

or algatn really being just
tva stan

etc if any

for it is easy to overreach in the excitement for less & less
authenticity of stanhood
like say by assigning ilinmi & ilmiwi to
lake michigan stan
which i think would overdilute your basic nicety too much

for it seems any list of truly integral triareas like iqsytr
on any given level
must be rather short & sweet at best
& probably always subject to some degree of arbitrariness
but perhaps still worth a look & a try


--- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "sdrawkcabdom"
<sdrawkcab8@h...> wrote:
>
> This tripoint is not as 'important' in my view - it's Kurdistan
> rather than three different countries.
>
>
> --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "aletheiak"
<aletheiak@y...>
> wrote:
> >
> > this was a couple of years ago
> >
> > --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "acroorca2002"
> > <orc@o...> wrote:
> > > --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Jesper Nielsen"
> > <jesniel@i...>
> > > wrote:
> > > > Possible tripoint island at IQSYTR:
> > > >
> > > > http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/EART/iraq/200k/J38_25.jpg
> > >
> > > bravo
> > > it looks plausible from here
> > > & could be unique in the world
> >
> > but on second thought
> > since all 3 of the pertinent ibs numbers for iqsytr
> > namely 27 & 100 & 163
> > place the boundaries on the thalwegs here
> > without qualification or exception
> > it would not appear so plausible after all
> >
> > & in any case
> > not nearly so plausible as a bggrtr tripoint on kavak island
now
> > appears
> > which really stands to be unique in the world to the best of
our
> > knowledge
> > despite being contradicted also by all 3 of the pertinent ibs
> > numbers
> > namely 41 & 49 & 56