Subject: Re: Topomap iljosy<br/>
Date: Jan 14, 2003 @ 18:34<br/>
Author: acroorca2002 &lt;orc@orcoast.com&gt; (&quot;acroorca2002 &lt;orc@...&gt;&quot; &lt;orc@...&gt;)<br/>
<a href="8643.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Topic&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="8645.htm">Next</a>&emsp;[<a href="topic8546.htm">All</a> Posts]<br/>
<a href="8643.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Time&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="8645.htm">Next</a><br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-1240255193">--- In <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="mailto:BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com">BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com</a>, &quot;Jan S. Krogh&quot; <br/>
&lt;jan.krogh@t...&gt; wrote:<br/>
<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; Sorry, no, I meant to say that the tp seems to be a confluence <br/>
 </span></blockquote>between the<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; Yarmuk River and the unknown river the thalweg making the <br/>
 </span></blockquote>JOSY boundary<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; probably is hiding, not shown on the photo. <br/>
<br/>
 </span></blockquote>jan there may or may not be a stream confluence there<br/>
i dont know what you saw<br/>
but the tripoint is not defined by a confluence<br/>
<br/>
it is defined by where the old josy railroad crosses the yarmuk<br/>
<br/>
i agree most probably at the thalweg tho that isnt in the treaty<br/>
<br/>
& it is also monumented <br/>
per international boundary study number 94<br/>
presumably on the banks <br/>
just below & just clear of the railroad bridge<br/>
no part of which presumably could be in israel<br/>
<br/>
whether there was any trace remaining of this railroad in your pic<br/>
in what is now israeli occupied golan heights <br/>
i rather doubt <br/>
but it should be kept in mind as a possibly huge clue<br/>
<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; (I also presume that this still<br/>
&gt; only is a de facto tp as Hamat Gader is located on Israeli <br/>
 </span></blockquote>occupied Golan<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; heights, according to UN belonging to Syria.)<br/>
<br/>
 </span></blockquote>yes but it isnt de facto <br/>
it is the de jure iljosy <br/>
the one described in the treaties<br/>
& it is indeed just at the israeli side of the golan heights<br/>
<br/>
but in fact there really is no de facto iljosy <br/>
since the united nations intervenes <br/>
between the syrian & israeli front lines<br/>
which are at the other side of the golan heights<br/>
<br/>
so there there are only the iljoun & josyun de facto tripoints<br/>
<br/>
but these are many miles off frame to the right anyway<br/>
& neednt confuse us</div>