The Altera Centauri collection has been brought up to date by Darsnan. It comprises every decent scenario he's been able to find anywhere on the web, going back over 20 years.
25 themes/skins/styles are now available to members. Check the select drop-down at the bottom-left of each page.
Call To Power 2 Cradle 3+ mod in progress: https://apolyton.net/forum/other-games/call-to-power-2/ctp2-creation/9437883-making-cradle-3-fully-compatible-with-the-apolyton-edition
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
United States of Europe vs. Stalinland: Ukraine, pt. II
Very interesting point of view. I even have my spirits up a little bit.
Summary in English? Please?
Why can't you be a non-conformist just like everybody else?
It's no good (from an evolutionary point of view) to have the physique of Tarzan if you have the sex drive of a philosopher. -- Michael Ruse
The Nedaverse I can accept, but not the Berzaverse. There can only be so many alternate realities. -- Elok
It was a problem but the average Soviet nuclear ballistic sub was noiser, had fewer war heads, most had to surface before firing until the 70's, and NATO had the ability to track them while the Soviets had huge difficulties doing the same to western ships. That NATO hydrophoned the who Greenland-Iceland-UK Gap as well as most of the Artic Sea, Barents Sea (at least from Norway to Svalbard) to Greenland, and nearly all of the mid atlantic ridge.
That meant it was much, much harder to get Soviet subs in place where as NATO made a policy of conducting missile drills in even the most sensitive of Soviet seas like the White sea, off Murmansk, in the Sea of Okhotsk, and throught the Artic. NATO made it very clear that it could get all of it's subs very close to the USSR before the Soviets could figure it out while the Soviets really couldn't do the same in the numbers needed.
Thus the Soviets decided to concentrate on land based nuclear missiles. Their theory was they'd just build so many and scatter them over such a wide area that hopefully some would survive even in the event of an enemy first strike.
Colon and I have a running discussion about Russia's prospects. The discussion began about 3 years ago, when I said that the price of oil would increase inevitably and this would give a respite to Russia so that it could reform itself into a powerful country again. Colon said I was daydreaming.
I couldn't have been more correct about the price of oil, and Russia is transforming its external finances. But Putin is regressing on the important items for Russia's long-term strength. Rather than a top-to-bottom recapitalization of the government's instruments of power, he's screwing around with the centralization of power and creating a Putin dynasty. He's preoccupied with preserving the Russian sphere of influence. What a fvcking waste of time. This crap doesn't strengthen Russia in the long term one iota.
I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891
Putin's attacks upon private companies which challenge his power will severly ****** Russia's future development. Just as Putin's playing with the legal and political systems to keep both him and his cronies in control will harm Russia's long term stability and development.
I think many Americans and Euros were inclined to give Russia the benefit of the doubt in its political journeys. However, Russia's political proclivities are reinforcing Western prejudices.
And vice versa. Reinforced Western prejudices reinforce Russia's political proclivities.
Russia's recent political atmosphere feels decidely totalitarian.
Partly, this is an inevitable side effect of overcoming the anarchy and disarray of Yeltsin years. Partly, this is an impression blown out of proportions by western media.
In fact, what Putin is desperately trying to do is to create such a system of political parties and civic organizations that would make political pluralism work for the benefit of Russia, and not for its destruction as often happened in the past.
Under such an atmosphere, the West starts grasping to keep as many countries free as we can and to turn as many countries to freedom while there is still time.
You know, the West started this long before Russia's recent political changes. So what you say here is not very just.
On the contrary, the West's long-standing insatiable thirst for grasping as many countries as possible has not been helping Russia's democracy. Not at all.
I wouldn't be surprised at all to see NATO attempt to extend its hand toward Ukraine in the next couple of years.
I would be surprised if it didn't happen. But please don't pretend that this is a result of Russia's recent behavior. It is a masterplan worked out loooong time ago. What happens now is just a convenient pretext for a decisive move.
Originally posted by DanS
Colon and I have a running discussion about Russia's prospects. The discussion began about 3 years ago, when I said that the price of oil would increase inevitably and this would give a respite to Russia so that it could reform itself into a powerful country again. Colon said I was daydreaming.
I couldn't have been more correct about the price of oil, and Russia is transforming its external finances. But Putin is regressing on the important items for Russia's long-term strength. Rather than a top-to-bottom recapitalization of the government's instruments of power, he's screwing around with the centralization of power and creating a Putin dynasty. He's preoccupied with preserving the Russian sphere of influence. What a fvcking waste of time. This crap doesn't strengthen Russia in the long term one iota.
I'm gloomy. Colon is proving me wrong.
No no no, I do not remember that day-dreaming-oil-crashing bit. I do remember being sanguine about Russia's structural reforms, and I was considering the start of Russia's economic upturn back then as partly a result of a structural change, which would survive a drop of the oil prices. IIRC you were rather sceptical about such an ability of Russia's economy.
Since the oil prices haven't really crashed since then, neither of us have been proven wrong. (even though I no longer believe Russia's economy to be structurally better off than in the past)
DISCLAIMER: the author of the above written texts does not warrant or assume any legal liability or responsibility for any offence and insult; disrespect, arrogance and related forms of demeaning behaviour; discrimination based on race, gender, age, income class, body mass, living area, political voting-record, football fan-ship and musical preference; insensitivity towards material, emotional or spiritual distress; and attempted emotional or financial black-mailing, skirt-chasing or death-threats perceived by the reader of the said written texts.
Just out of curiosity, how much of the Russian Federation's import/export is from/to Ukraine?
The most recent information I have is for the second quater of 2004:
The share of the countries of united economic space (Ukraine, Kazkhstan and Byelorussia) in Russian export was 15,4%.
The share of the countries of united economic space (Ukraine, Kazkhstan and Byelorussia) in Russian import was 22.8%.
Ukraine contributes to 39.3% and 39.4% of this share, accordingly. So Ukranian share in Russian export/import was 6.05% and 8.98% accordingly. Compare this with Russian share in Ukranian export/import aprox. 18.5% and 37% and take into account that 65% of Ukranian import from Russia it's oil and gas. These resources are crucial for Ukranian economy, (esp. considering they are "buying" them for our internal prices that are several times lower than European prices), on the other hand Russia can sell them anywhere else/can afford to do not sell them at all, since export to Ukraine doesn't make any profit anyway, becasue prices are too low and they do not pay even those prices, only make their debt to Russia bigger.
Do you get the picture now?
Originally posted by Heresson
No wonder they want to set free, then
You want them free? FINE GODDAMNIT! TAKE THEM! All you have to do is to give them millions, millions, millions and millions of bucks every month absolutely for free (with no chance to ever return them, I'm not talking about debt here, I'm talking about donatations), to supply them with oil and gas, to open your market for their goods (which mean that hundreds of thousands of your workers will lose their jobs and you'll have to pay their unemployment reliefs). That's all. Take them for all I care.
The most recent information I have is for the second quater of 2004:
The share of the countries of united economic space (Ukraine, Kazkhstan and Byelorussia) in Russian export was 15,4%.
The share of the countries of united economic space (Ukraine, Kazkhstan and Byelorussia) in Russian import was 22.8%.
Ukraine contributes to 39.3% and 39.4% of this share, accordingly. So Ukranian share in Russian export/import was 6.05% and 8.98% accordingly. Compare this with Russian share in Ukranian export/import aprox. 18.5% and 37% and take into account that 65% of Ukranian import from Russia it's oil and gas. These resources are crucial for Ukranian economy, (esp. considering they are "buying" them for our internal prices that are several times lower than European prices), on the other hand Russia can sell them anywhere else/can afford to do not sell them at all, since export to Ukraine doesn't make any profit anyway, becasue prices are too low and they do not pay even those prices, only make their debt to Russia bigger.
Do you get the picture now?
We clearly and absolutely HAVE them.
Certainly, i get the picture, and if i was an Ukranian i would run like hell to get free of such terms.
Btw, why should Ukraine be more woulnerable than any other country ? Other colonies have done fine since the fall of the soviet empire - it may hurt for a short while, but later it only gets better.
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Tweet
Comment