Is there any point in keeping NATO around?

[Flying Pig]

China already has quite a lot of that within its own borders, though. If you look at a population map of China, the east coast is extremely densely populated, but the rest is quite empty.

EDIT: Not quite as I thought (though note the logarithmic scale) - the logical point of expansion in some directions will go into Mongolia relatively soon before it goes into western China - but then we might also compare the US, which had a similar map in the early-mid 19th century and (as far as I know) never showed any interest in annexing Nova Scotia.

 

[Tahuti]

Wouldn't China be somewhat interested if Russia decided to pay Ukraine level attention to Mongolia? I've been wondering what the population pressures on the east are going to be when the PRC's economy actually slows down. Big expanses of lightly-populated land is kinda the historical go-to for densely industrialized economies that want to grow.

Well, that's why Russia doesn't do it. They don't want to be on the bad side of China, until they have no reason for quarrel with the West at least.

If the West decides at one point that Russia could have Ukraine and Belarus, well, then it would be possible Russia turns its attention to China. Alternatively, Russia feels threatened by China and gives in to Western demands, or tries to play out the West and China.

 

[REDY]

China already has quite a lot of that within its own borders, though. If you look at a population map of China, the east coast is extremely densely populated, but the rest is quite empty.

The rest are deserts and mountains.

 

[Flying Pig]

That's a perfect argument as to why most of the US (California and Utah spring to mind immediately) should be empty, isn't it?

 

[Yeekim]

Well, Utah is pretty much empty, isn't it?

As for CA, isn't it major hub of farming and agriculture?

 

[Tahuti]

Well, Utah is pretty much empty, isn't it?

Mormons aren't exactly in short supply there.

 

[red_elk]

I don't want to derail the thread with an n-th debate on language, so I'll just say that Russian has constitutionally protected status in Ukraine, as well as official regional language in half the country.

Not sure what you mean by constitutionally protected status, but it has now indeed regional status there. In the regions where substantial minority of Russians live.
This is what was achieved after more than 20 years long debates and fighting, and only after relatively pro-Russian government of Yanukovich came to power.
And this applies to Ukraine only, Baltic states don't have even that.

We tried the whole neutrality thing last time around, didn't work out too well.

Yes, like 75 years ago.
By the way, we were attacked by Germany at that time and lost about 27 mln people or so.
I mean, your experience of WW2 period is not necessary relevant now, don't you think?

Wouldn't China be somewhat interested if Russia decided to pay Ukraine level attention to Mongolia? I've been wondering what the population pressures on the east are going to be when the PRC's economy actually slows down. Big expanses of lightly-populated land is kinda the historical go-to for densely industrialized economies that want to grow.

About population in China, it seems nobody wants to live in Northern provinces there, much less move to Russia:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/markado...siberia-is-a-myth/?ss=international-investing

As for attention to Mongolia, if Russia wanted to annex it, it had more than 100 years to do that when China wasn't interested.

Well, that's why Russia doesn't do it. They don't want to be on the bad side of China, until they have no reason for quarrel with the West at least.

Or alternatively, the idea about Russia being aggressive monster wanting to annex everything what's nearby, may be not quite corresponding to reality.

 

[Tahuti]

Or alternatively, the idea about Russia being aggressive monster wanting to annex everything around, may be not quite corresponding to reality.

Here is a dirty secret from the Netherlands: The Dutch public television channel cut around several minutes of footage from an interview with Putin, making him appear more aggressive than he actually is as shown in the footage.

 

[Yeekim]

Yes, like 75 years ago.

This (minus 15 years) would be what I would've replied in 2000 or so.

Unfortunately, the more time passes, the more idolized that period seems to become in Russia and the faster the rate new monuments are erected to Stalin...

When will Dzerzhinski be returned to Lubyanka, what do you think?

 

[red_elk]

This (minus 15 years) would be what I would've replied in 2000 or so. Unfortunately, the more time passes, the more idolized that period seems to become in Russia

Not too much has changed since 2000 in that regard. Stalin is very controversial figure, many people praise him, many hate, some repeat myths about his bright leadership in WW2, some repeat Solzhenitsyn myths about 60 mln. killed and half the country imprisoned. But all this is history, his crimes and achievements are already sorted out.

If you wonder whether official position has changed since then, listen to this. It was said just a few months ago.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8rvaD7fRGWU

and the faster the rate new monuments are erected to Stalin...

The rate? I heard about maybe two or three monuments/busts in the last 20 years. Installed somewhere at regional CPRF committees. The authorities position is the same as it was in USSR time - in 1950-s they removed everything Stalin-related from public places and don't comment people's initiatives about that anymore.

As for Dzerzhinsky, well, the monument will be restored when and if people come to decision about it. Communists collect signatures for restoring, liberals protest against it - isn't it how the proper discussion in democratic society suppose to be?

 

[Phrossack]

Neither Russia nor China wants Mongolia. It's sparsely populated because very little of it is arable. Most of the country is mountainous, desert, or steppe suitable only for nomads.

 

[Aleksey_aka_al]

Baltic states are some archaic nonviable entities. While every other tribe this way or another came to a united entity, to a federation, those three somehow devolved to an outdated useless form. And the most loud representatives of theirs claim they had never evolved to something better, bigger than that. They once were an equal part of the nation which brought the first human to space, but they rewrote their history to solidify their image as helpless Micronesia-like nations occupied by a superior neighbouring entity. They de-industrialized themselves. Fighting for their identity with words, they erase it with their policies. They gave up all the achievements of the past or the future, except those directed against their neighbour. Because they had nothing left, they became addicted to Russophobia, it is the only way to keep some significance and justify the three sorry excuses of a state to make map-makers spend extra paint and time to draw their microscopic borders on an atlas. The only two things which sustain these "nations" is the nationalism imported by the Germans in the XX century to counter the Soviets and the desire of the U.S. military to have the best ETA to Moscow possible. Be proud, Estonia! You are still capable enough to cause a tiny pain in the arse of the 140-million neigbouring state, being so small you hardly would fill one division of its capital (especially, considering the emigration to EU, when the off-springs of engineers become servants in a better country westward, which is called freedom). Be proud!

 

[Tahuti]

Baltic states are some archaic nonviable entities.

Their membership of NATO and EU can be seen as a form of life-support.

 

[Verbose]

That kind of attitude kind of sums up why the Baltics might feel a need to have guns at hand when Russians are in the vicinity...

 

[REDY]

These archaic non-viable entities sometimes surpass other nations in modern governing, for example e-government in Estonia.

 

[Kyriakos]

These archaic non-viable entities sometimes surpass other nations in modern governing, for example e-government in Estonia.

Thing is, though, that Estonia and Latvia have the populations of a smallish city in any other euro country, and their economies are by all means client-economies of Germany (i would mention Finland too for Estonia, but Finland is mostly a client state of Germany as well, so ).

They aren't viable when bordering some entity which doesn't have a mandate to extend life-support. Unlike with even smaller states between France and Germany, despite them being more artificial to begin with (Luxemburg, various principalities, and -due to other reasons- Belgium).

 

[Tahuti]

These archaic non-viable entities sometimes surpass other nations in modern governing, for example e-government in Estonia.

What about a Hong Kong like arrangement with Russia?

Unlike with even smaller states between France and Germany, despite them being more artificial to begin with (Luxemburg, various principalities, and -due to other reasons- Belgium).

The question remains, should Belgium be annexed by Germany, France or the Netherlands?

 

[Kyriakos]

Doesn't it usually get a theoretical partition between France and Netherlands?

Although Brussels will be a difficult area to go to either side...

 

[red_elk]

What about a Hong Kong like arrangement with Russia?

No, Putin will send all Estonians to Siberia. Have a pity.

 

[Yeekim]

Baltic states are some archaic nonviable entities. While every other tribe this way or another came to a united entity, to a federation, those three somehow devolved to an outdated useless form. And the most loud representatives of theirs claim they had never evolved to something better, bigger than that. They once were an equal part of the nation which brought the first human to space, but they rewrote their history to solidify their image as helpless Micronesia-like nations occupied by a superior neighbouring entity. They de-industrialized themselves. Fighting for their identity with words, they erase it with their policies. They gave up all the achievements of the past or the future, except those directed against their neighbour. Because they had nothing left, they became addicted to Russophobia, it is the only way to keep some significance and justify the three sorry excuses of a state to make map-makers spend extra paint and time to draw their microscopic borders on an atlas. The only two things which sustain these "nations" is the nationalism imported by the Germans in the XX century to counter the Soviets and the desire of the U.S. military to have the best ETA to Moscow possible. Be proud, Estonia! You are still capable enough to cause a tiny pain in the arse of the 140-million neigbouring state, being so small you hardly would fill one division of its capital (especially, considering the emigration to EU, when the off-springs of engineers become servants in a better country westward, which is called freedom). Be proud!

Thank you for ever so eloquently reinforcing my point.

See, red_elk - we are ingrates who have "rewritten our history to solidify our image as nations occupied by neighboring entity".

You can't both say "nah, not relevant, happened 75 years ago, we're not like that any more" and "nah, never really happened - and you should grateful anyway!".
Or, well, you can, but I hope you see how that doesn't instill much confidence. Maybe when we "stay neutral, soften our rhetoric, be nice to Russian-speakers" some overly kind and helpful ruler of yours will try to make us equal part of your great nation again? Just because he might take pity of us sorry excuses of a state - and of map makers who now need to spend extra paint and time to draw our microscopic borders.

They aren't viable when bordering some entity which doesn't have a mandate to extend life-support.

Says Greek. Delicious irony.