|
Hate to interrupt a good laugh with technicalities, but Russia does not want to and would not ever actually annex Poland, they just want to turn it into a puppet state  The Baltics, Belarus and Ukraine, though...
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 23:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 22:52 |
|
|
Okay who put Zhirinovsky in charge?
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 23:48
|
|
|
Lord Hydronium posted:Wouldn't be the first time in history that the North Sea was dry land. Nermal posted:The Baltic is ripe for one of those "dam & pump a trillion litres of water out" projects IMO. No faultlines, only a tiny 3 stretches of water to dam between Denmark & Sweden. What could go wrong?  Unfortunately, this is like 25,000 of years in the future. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 23:52
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:Quicker and dirtier. You didn't even give them Finland? 2/10.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 00:09
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
PittTheElder posted:You didn't even give them Finland? 2/10. There isn't even Finland on that map.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 00:15
|
|
|
Hey at least I didn't forget Poland.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 00:17
|
|
|
No Alaska, Manchuria, Turkey, or Hokkaido 3/10
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 00:18
|
|
|
Nermal posted:The Baltic is ripe for one of those "dam & pump a trillion litres of water out" projects IMO. No faultlines, only a tiny 3 stretches of water to dam between Denmark & Sweden. What could go wrong? With all of these megaprojects wouldn't the reclaimed land basically be barren wasteland not suitable for anything? I'm no expert in geology, but I doubt that the former seafloor would support any kind of terrestrial plant life.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 00:19
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:You didn't even give them Finland? 2/10. There are still Finns in Finland, of course the Russians can't have it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 00:25
|
|
|
 http://russiancouncil.ru/en/inner/?id_4=1903 quote:We are pleased to announce today the formation of a new High Level Leadership Task Force on European-Russian Relations: A Cooperative Greater Europe by 2030. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 00:32
|
|
|
Konstantin posted:With all of these megaprojects wouldn't the reclaimed land basically be barren wasteland not suitable for anything? I'm no expert in geology, but I doubt that the former seafloor would support any kind of terrestrial plant life. Anyway, the fact that Baltic water comes from precipitation basically means you would have to build a dam right across the rivers leading into it, as well as across the Danish straits. Hell, if you just built one across the Danish straits, the sea level would rise until it found another path, probably through the Kiel Canal area. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tb-gI_pFog0
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 00:32
|
|
|
Konstantin posted:With all of these megaprojects wouldn't the reclaimed land basically be barren wasteland not suitable for anything? I'm no expert in geology, but I doubt that the former seafloor would support any kind of terrestrial plant life.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 00:33
|
|
|
Ofaloaf posted:It's got to be cluttered with organic cruft like poo and dead fish, surely. That might make a decent component of fertile soil, right? I don't know how to make soil Volcanic ash makes nice soil if you're willing to wait a few centuries.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 00:37
|
|
|
Konstantin posted:With all of these megaprojects wouldn't the reclaimed land basically be barren wasteland not suitable for anything? I'm no expert in geology, but I doubt that the former seafloor would support any kind of terrestrial plant life. Former seafloor is great for farming since it's been collecting/forming ultra compost from everything in the water decomposing on top of it. e: the most famous example of this is the black belt in the southern US. Maps of former cotton production, old plantations and today the distribution of blacks will spike along what was an old sea bed that is now a couple of hundreds of miles inland that was excellent for growing cotton on. Raskolnikov38 fucked around with this message at 00:54 on Mar 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 00:42
|
|
|
Speaking as a citizen of the mighty EU, that is not a bad idea in and of itself. It's probably only  and that particular project will probably be quite Russo-centric but there has to be some sort of improved level of co-operation between Europe and Russia in the coming decades. Worsening relations will lead to a very bad place.Well, you know what, forget about it. I had a look around the site and there's a headline article talking about the evil fascist coup in Kiev. Neeeext. Fabulous Knight fucked around with this message at 00:56 on Mar 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 00:53
|
|
|
Yeah that is basically Russia's proposal to replace the EU with a similar organization run by Russia.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 01:03
|
|
|
I like that Turkey's good enough for consideration in the EU, but not for Russia.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 01:10
|
|
|
BBJoey posted:I like that Turkey's good enough for consideration in the EU, but not for Russia. Huh, I guess the dream of Tsargrad did die.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 01:54
|
|
|
russia-nameplate-flips-to-soviet-union.gif
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 02:03
|
|
|
Soviet Union? Please, that is obviously the People's Republic of Eurasia.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 02:08
|
|
|
Capital is Moscow of course.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 02:09
|
|
|
made of bees posted:Soviet Union? Please, that is obviously the People's Republic of Eurasia. It's not Eurasia because the UK is in it. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 02:17
|
|
|
The least plausible thing about that map is that Kazakhstan has somehow been excluded.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 02:19
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:You didn't even give them Finland? 2/10. Don't be ridiculous, the Finns will be returned to their ancient homeland siberia after Russia moves to protect its civilians
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 03:04
|
|
|
I think back in the nineties quite a few starry-eyed pro-European idealists were dreaming of Russia eventually joining the EU. Obviously, it's out of the question now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 03:21
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Salinity in the Baltic is only a fourth of what it is in the North Sea around the Danish islands, and it drops to less than a tenth in the furthest reaches, due to a high level of precipitation vs. narrow and extremely shallow straits. Conversely, the Mediterranean is very saline, especially in the east, since it has a high level of evaporation and a constant inflow from the Atlantic. Huh, neat. I wonder if there is a map of this? fake edit: yup 
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 03:22
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:No Alaska, Manchuria, Turkey, or Hokkaido 3/10 
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 04:08
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 04:11
|
|
|
^^^ the Hwanbba will never not be hilarious.Lord Hydronium posted:Even Russia must bow before the might of Greater Turkiye. I understand everything but the southeast asian islands, as they're areas that have been ruled by people who originate from the eurasian steppe (who I assume in this lunatics mind are all turkish) within the past millenium. Except for the southern areas of africa maybe? But it doesn't include China at all even though it was ruled by multiple empires originating in the steppe. ...Ok I understand nothing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 04:35
|
|
|
Probably something to do with those parts of Southeast Asia being Muslim, I'm guessing?
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 04:41
|
|
|
Sorry these are so small! I got them from here.   
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 04:42
|
|
|
Lord Hydronium posted:Even Russia must bow before the might of Greater Turkiye.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 04:47
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:I think back in the nineties quite a few starry-eyed pro-European idealists were dreaming of Russia eventually joining the EU. Obviously, it's out of the question now. The 90s? My Russian language teachers in St Petersburg in 2012 swore that Russia was going to join the EU soon. Whaaaaaaaaaa?
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 04:55
|
|
|
Lycus posted:What's with all the exclaves? Most of the European exclaves are immigrant Turkish and Tatar populations. I assume the Asian/African exclaves are similar immigrant communities. Here's a more accurate (German) map of Turkic peoples.  I'm surprised there's such a big presence in the Arctic.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 05:03
|
|
|
Lord Hydronium posted:Even Russia must bow before the might of Greater Turkiye. What the gently caress is this. So basically every city in Eurasia part of the "Turkish World?"
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 05:07
|
|
|
I love how the ancient Glorious Korean Worldspanning Empire conveniently vanishes just before writing was invented. "Welp, sorry they all gave up and went home 5 minutes before anyone thought to write poo poo down, but the only proof you need is the obvious superiority of the Korean race anyway." 
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 05:13
|
|
|
SUPERFINE CONCUBINE posted:The 90s? My Russian language teachers in St Petersburg in 2012 swore that Russia was going to join the EU soon. And you thought OUR creationist fuckwits were a bunch of racist shitheels with an inferiority complex did ya? Ours are practically the height of historical orthodoxy compared to many other cultures wingnuts. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Hwandan_Gogi
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 05:46
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:I love how the ancient Glorious Korean Worldspanning Empire conveniently vanishes just before writing was invented. I'm surprised they didn't add Australia and parts of the Americas as well because why the gently caress not. They already added frigging England (conveniently ending at present-day borders with Scotland too!)
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 06:14
|
|
|
AreWeDrunkYet posted:I see, my mistake was comparing Shanghai - Los Angeles by land and sea instead of Rotterdam - Los Angeles. On the other hand, unless transhipment in China is required, wouldn't that just be shipped across the Atlantic and through the Panama Canal? Is it still faster to go overland in the opposite direction? Yes, considerably. Shanghai > Rotterdam takes approx 20 days, whilst Maersk "guarantee" their ships will do the same route in 34 days (and their compensation offering for late delivery is so small that isn't much more than a PR stunt). An advantage trains have over ships is that they travel overland - many of the factories and mines in China are far from the sea, so picking up products and transporting them to Shanghai will take at least another 3-4 days before they even get on the ship. Then of course you've got customs which can take 2-4 days at Shanghai (it being a massive container port) but should be a lot quicker if you do it at a quiet railway station within China itself. So yeh, you're looking at at least 40 days for sea transport and 20 for rail. AreWeDrunkYet posted:Also, I may be doing the math wrong here, but CSX claims it can move a ton of freight ~450 miles on a gallon of fuel. A large container ship (plucking the Emma Maersk since information is plentiful) burns 1,660 gallons of fuel per hour at 12 knots (13.8 mph) to move 157,000 tons of cargo, or over 1,300 miles per ton on a gallon of fuel. Am I comparing apples to oranges somewhere? I think I've given the impression that rail transport is "better" than sea which isn't exactly the case. For China > Europe the main transport options are air, sea or rail; which option is best depends on the product, the profit margin and how quickly it needs to reach its market. Generally speaking if you want something moved quickly you send it by air, if you want it moved cheaply you send it by sea and if you need a middle ground you send it by rail. The majority of goods being sent by rail are heavy, expensive mid and high-end goods: cars, vehicles, heavy machinery, some manufactured goods. The majority of goods being sent by air are light, expensive high-end goods: computers, peripherals etc. The goods sent by sea are heavy low and mid-end goods: clothes, furniture, raw materials. So you're sort of comparing apples and oranges but there are so many factors to consider it's hard not to. If I needed to move my product from China to Europe and knew I could make 30% profit if it was there in 20 days but only 5% profit if it was there in 40 days then rail freight is obviously my best option. The point is that rail freight isn't "better" but that opening the Bering Straits to rail traffic would open markets which can be accessed more cheaply than by air and more quickly than by ship.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 08:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 22:52 |
|
|
Korea is larger than Great Britain, look at all the improbable poo poo people from that island controlled and do control. I'm not saying they are right, I'm saying the world that actually was was that insane.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 09:38
|
|
