Jump to content

Talk:Bridge of the Horns

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

June 2008

[edit]

Do we need the notation of being a relative of Osama? Tons and tons of decent people are. Lots42 (talk) 20:17, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, we don't. Removed. ~~ N (t/c) 20:27, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is the same bridge as Djibouti-Yemen bridge.12.217.72.240 (talk) 02:48, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Railways?

[edit]

Is the bridge (with its new name) still meant to carry railway lines? Tabletop (talk) 05:57, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here is their promotional page. It's mentioned there. --Voidvector (talk) 07:26, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Mentions railway

huh?

[edit]

Ok, I understand that this comment has no place in the article itself, but does this bridge not seem like a really strange idea to anyone else? I mean if you are going to spend $200 billion, why not get something more useful? 65.167.146.130 (talk) 16:42, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's private money. They can do whatever they want with it. --Voidvector (talk) 21:31, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I personally think this would be a major development for trade, toursim, life in general both for Arabia and the Horn of Africa. One glitch, I have a letter from a correspondent in Jeddah University who asked directly to Tarek Bin Laden what was of the project, as my collaborators at the Ministry of Culture and Tourism in Ethiopia, as me, were obviously interested. The sad answer was his government was against, objecting pressure on the fragile Arab ecosystems from a possible.. influx of African migrants. In easy terms, it will never go ahead. Not due to ecological or money consideration, in any case the funds had to be risen, but out of the diffused fear we call Xenofobia. Yet a bridge of that sort is so easy to monitor fully. Anyone there ready to relaunch the idea? marcoetio Marcoetio (talk) 13:55, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If the Bridge were just a regional affair involving only the Horn and the Gulf countries, then it would certainly go through. The two regions have been trading and interacting for centuries, so it's nothing new. This project, however, would connect the Arabian peninsula to a lot more than just the Horn and its people, as the project is intended as a continental "gateway" of sorts into Asia. That's where the fear of "African migrants" presumably comes from (the unknown Other). Incidentally, Djibouti also planned on constructing a cross-continental highway system from the Horn to West Africa. But that too has met local resistance for similar xenophobic reasons. 174.94.122.43 (talk) 04:31, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dead and buried

[edit]

It's May 2014 and nothing has been heard about this project since it was officially "delayed" in June 2010. No earthmoving equipment in sight. Shouldn't it be mentioned somewhere that, 6 years after the official announcement, the whole thing is obviously dead and buried?--Lubiesque (talk) 11:48, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's a common problem with huge infrastructure projects; the ones least likely to succeed are the ones which get most media coverage around the world, and they get articles on en.wiki which are carefully tended by fans of megaprojects. Unfortunately, when a huge project isn't going ahead, that doesn't attract the same media attention; so how are we supposed to have realistic coverage when the sources are so skewed? bobrayner (talk) 12:53, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yawn...This is July 2015 and since 2010 total silence about this $20 billion "mega project" that, if half-serious, should make the headlines of all the major newspapers of the world.--Lubiesque (talk) 12:42, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Political issues

[edit]

First of all the current insurgency in Yemen makes it unlikely that the Yemeni side will be able to do much on the project. Secondly, as this will in essence bridge the Red Sea, there is potential for Israel to be very unpleased with this, as their access to the red sea and from there the open Indian Ocean was cited as a casus belli at least once before. Should any of this be mentioned in the article to show the reader how likely this is to happen in the real world (hint: the Hyperloop has a marginally better chance of becoming reality) 2A02:810A:8200:20B0:1D9B:1C20:922F:1963 (talk) 19:51, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bridge of the Horns. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:07, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Bridge of the Horns. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:51, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Bridge of the Horns. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:52, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dead and burried

[edit]

Not a single shovelful of earth has ever been moved. After a news blackout of nearly 10 years, that stillborn project can be classified as dead and buried (pun intended).--Lubiesque (talk) 00:59, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously, someone doesn't like any mention in this article that this project --the most expensive megaproject ever -- has not been heard of since it was suspended in 2010, even before Phase I started. That someone has been deleting any mention regarding the total radio silence on this megaproject which was supposed to be inaugurated in 2020, including in engineering and other magazines listing current megaprojects, on the pretext that lack of news for the last 9 years on a 200-billion megaproject is not notable and that "an independent reliable secondary source mentioning such lack of news" is necessary".
With such as silly argument, if someone were to mention in 2050 that nothing has been heard of this megaproject since 2010, this could be immediately deleted due to the fact that an absence of news for 40 years in not notable, and that no independent serious source has mentioned such lack of news. For good reason since that stillborn project had been dead and buried since at least 2010, and that no serious source is going to bother mentioning it.--Lubiesque (talk) 14:45, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bridge_of_the_Horns&oldid=1230095944"