Very well said. You explained exactly what Russia does.
Thought Experiment: Sustainable Russian Military
- Thread starter Jon K
- Start date
I would also remind you all that in the past, Eastern Slavs and later Russians were invaded &/or raided many times, from East, West, and South (by the Crimean Tatars)- no wonder they are very suspicious of BMD & NATO expansion, given their wealth in natural resources & declining population!
BTW, I forgot to unclude Belarus data:
Population: 9,724,723; growth rate: -0.41% ; ethnic Russian only 11.4%, or about 1,108,618. Addind that to 12,456,454 (Ukraine's & Kazakstan's Russians) we get 13,565,072. A drop in the bucket as far as long-term military conscription and/or enlistment material are concerned!
Update:
Last edited:
What our analysts think of this one?-
http://mdb.cast.ru/mdb/2-2007/item1/item2/?form=print
http://mdb.cast.ru/mdb/2-2007/item1/item2/?form=print
I just read some part of the TIME magazine interview where they honoured Putin as the Man of 2007.
In the Interview he said that Russia has no intention of becoming a Superpower nor will Russia annex Ukraine. He said Integrating Ukraine will mean more economical problems for Russia n Russia doesnt want that.
Looks like that is the end of idea of ukraine joining Russia?
In the Interview he said that Russia has no intention of becoming a Superpower nor will Russia annex Ukraine. He said Integrating Ukraine will mean more economical problems for Russia n Russia doesnt want that.
Looks like that is the end of idea of ukraine joining Russia?
Ukraine may just break apart some day, with Russian-speaking part joining Russia, and Ukrainian-speaking maybe joining Poland. I don't expect them to survive for too long as they are now. Russia will probably try to pull some strings, but I doubt that there will be large-scale war to retake it. The Russified part is the most developed and strategicaly placed- Eastern Ukraine and along the Black Sea coast. The Crimea (the historic home of the Russian Black Sea Fleet) was given to them in 1954 to commemorate the 300 year of unity with Russia. Odessa was founded in 1794 and was a duty-free port
Last edited:
It has begun
Vladimir Putin could become a leader of a united Russia - Belarus state. This development may result from talks that begin on Thursday in Belarus.
Putin has unexpectedly revived efforts to create a single state from the two former Soviet republics - a merger that would expand his options for exercising power after he steps down from the Russian presidency next year, the AP reports.
Putin heads to the Belarusian capital, Minsk, on Thursday for discussions of a framework for the long-debated union, fleshing out an existing agreement that has meant little in practice.
A merger of Russia and Belarus could allow Putin to leave the Russian presidency as promised in May yet still remain a chief of state.
"I wouldn't be surprised if Putin tries to speed up a union with Belarus ... to become the president of the unified state," said Gennady Zyuganov, Russia's Communist Party chief.
Putin, who has indicated he will seek to retain significant influence after term limits force him from the Kremlin, does have at least one other option.
On Monday, he said he supported his protege, first deputy prime minister Dmitry Medvedev, to become Russia's next president. Medvedev instantly became the overwhelming favorite in the March 2 vote and he, in turn, asked Putin on Tuesday to be his prime minister, though Putin has not yet accepted.
The creation of a single state could give Putin an alternative to the Russian prime minister's post.
If the two countries can agree, it would mark the first merger of a former Soviet state with Russia since the Soviet Union split apart in 1991 - a step that would make many Russians proud.
But the move could damage Russia's relations with the West, especially if Moscow is seen as using pipelines that supply Belarus with natural gas to force the smaller country into an agreement.
Ahead of Putin's visit, Belarus' beleaguered Western-oriented political opposition was already fighting the idea of a merger. Police on Wednesday forced some 200 protesters from a Minsk square where they waved flags and chanted "No union with imperial Russia !"
One of the leaders of the opposition Young Front was knocked off his feet and stomped on by riot police. He was bundled into an ambulance, unconscious.
Some analysts doubt a deal can be reached, because Belarus President Alexander Lukashenko - a Soviet-style leader dubbed Europe 's last dictator by the West - is unlikely to cede power.
Lukashenko's office said last week the talks between Putin, Lukashenko and other ranking officials would focus on a draft constitution of a union.
Russia's Ekho Moskvy radio quoted unidentified members of the Lukashenko administration as saying Moscow and Minsk had struck a deal: Putin, the sources said, would become president of a Russia-Belarus union while Lukashenko would become the speaker of its parliament.
Officials in Moscow and Minsk have denied the report, but politicians and commentators in both countries agree that Putin's trip signals a renewed interest in the merger.
When Medvedev proposed that Putin become prime minister, many analysts saw it as the Kremlin's preferred plan to maintain his influence. But some said Putin would never accept what would amount to a demotion.
Pavel Borodin, secretary of the existing Russian-Belarusian executive body, said Wednesday that drafts of the constitution being considered would give the president of a new unified country the power to rule over the current national governments.
He said the new constitution would be subject to approval by each nation's parliament and would be put to voters in national referendums.
Putin could find it difficult to persuade the Belarusian leader to relinquish his country's independence. And Lukashenko seems to lack the leverage needed to win an agreement that favors Belarus, which has a population of just 9.7 million compared with Russia's 141.4 million.
"Putin and Lukashenko have sought to outmaneuver and cheat one another over the past few years," said Fyodor Lukyanov, the editor of Russia in Global Affairs magazine.
Russia and Belarus signed a union agreement in 1996 that envisaged close political, economic and military ties, but efforts to achieve a full merger have foundered.
In the 1990s, Lukashenko pushed for the creation of a single state, apparently hoping to take the reins from Russia's ailing President Boris Yeltsin. Putin's election in 2000 demolished Lukashenko's hopes to rule both countries.
Two years later the Belarusian leader angrily rejected a Kremlin proposal for incorporating his nation into the Russian Federation - leaving him without a job.
Bilateral relations soured. Lukashenko described Russia as a "huge monster," saying Moscow's actions were worse than those of Nazi Germany, which reduced much of Soviet Belarus to ruins in World War II.
If Lukashenko refuses to cede control, the Kremlin could try to force his hand by using its most powerful weapon: energy.
At the year's start, Russia more than doubled the price of natural gas and imposed a customs duty making oil more expensive. To pay its bills, Belarus was forced to sell half of its national gas pipeline company to Gazprom, Russia's state gas monopoly.
In August, Gazprom threatened to halt future natural gas shipments if Belarus failed to pay what it already owed.
The two sides negotiated a settlement, but the threat of a further increase in energy prices still looms over Belarus ' heavily subsidized, Soviet-style economy.
It looks like before Putin exits office, we will see something happen. With Nato ever increasing its borders n military around Russia, the Union of former Soviet states will become high on Russia's agenda before it loses more ground.
Vladimir Putin could become a leader of a united Russia - Belarus state. This development may result from talks that begin on Thursday in Belarus.
Putin has unexpectedly revived efforts to create a single state from the two former Soviet republics - a merger that would expand his options for exercising power after he steps down from the Russian presidency next year, the AP reports.
Putin heads to the Belarusian capital, Minsk, on Thursday for discussions of a framework for the long-debated union, fleshing out an existing agreement that has meant little in practice.
A merger of Russia and Belarus could allow Putin to leave the Russian presidency as promised in May yet still remain a chief of state.
"I wouldn't be surprised if Putin tries to speed up a union with Belarus ... to become the president of the unified state," said Gennady Zyuganov, Russia's Communist Party chief.
Putin, who has indicated he will seek to retain significant influence after term limits force him from the Kremlin, does have at least one other option.
On Monday, he said he supported his protege, first deputy prime minister Dmitry Medvedev, to become Russia's next president. Medvedev instantly became the overwhelming favorite in the March 2 vote and he, in turn, asked Putin on Tuesday to be his prime minister, though Putin has not yet accepted.
The creation of a single state could give Putin an alternative to the Russian prime minister's post.
If the two countries can agree, it would mark the first merger of a former Soviet state with Russia since the Soviet Union split apart in 1991 - a step that would make many Russians proud.
But the move could damage Russia's relations with the West, especially if Moscow is seen as using pipelines that supply Belarus with natural gas to force the smaller country into an agreement.
Ahead of Putin's visit, Belarus' beleaguered Western-oriented political opposition was already fighting the idea of a merger. Police on Wednesday forced some 200 protesters from a Minsk square where they waved flags and chanted "No union with imperial Russia !"
One of the leaders of the opposition Young Front was knocked off his feet and stomped on by riot police. He was bundled into an ambulance, unconscious.
Some analysts doubt a deal can be reached, because Belarus President Alexander Lukashenko - a Soviet-style leader dubbed Europe 's last dictator by the West - is unlikely to cede power.
Lukashenko's office said last week the talks between Putin, Lukashenko and other ranking officials would focus on a draft constitution of a union.
Russia's Ekho Moskvy radio quoted unidentified members of the Lukashenko administration as saying Moscow and Minsk had struck a deal: Putin, the sources said, would become president of a Russia-Belarus union while Lukashenko would become the speaker of its parliament.
Officials in Moscow and Minsk have denied the report, but politicians and commentators in both countries agree that Putin's trip signals a renewed interest in the merger.
When Medvedev proposed that Putin become prime minister, many analysts saw it as the Kremlin's preferred plan to maintain his influence. But some said Putin would never accept what would amount to a demotion.
Pavel Borodin, secretary of the existing Russian-Belarusian executive body, said Wednesday that drafts of the constitution being considered would give the president of a new unified country the power to rule over the current national governments.
He said the new constitution would be subject to approval by each nation's parliament and would be put to voters in national referendums.
Putin could find it difficult to persuade the Belarusian leader to relinquish his country's independence. And Lukashenko seems to lack the leverage needed to win an agreement that favors Belarus, which has a population of just 9.7 million compared with Russia's 141.4 million.
"Putin and Lukashenko have sought to outmaneuver and cheat one another over the past few years," said Fyodor Lukyanov, the editor of Russia in Global Affairs magazine.
Russia and Belarus signed a union agreement in 1996 that envisaged close political, economic and military ties, but efforts to achieve a full merger have foundered.
In the 1990s, Lukashenko pushed for the creation of a single state, apparently hoping to take the reins from Russia's ailing President Boris Yeltsin. Putin's election in 2000 demolished Lukashenko's hopes to rule both countries.
Two years later the Belarusian leader angrily rejected a Kremlin proposal for incorporating his nation into the Russian Federation - leaving him without a job.
Bilateral relations soured. Lukashenko described Russia as a "huge monster," saying Moscow's actions were worse than those of Nazi Germany, which reduced much of Soviet Belarus to ruins in World War II.
If Lukashenko refuses to cede control, the Kremlin could try to force his hand by using its most powerful weapon: energy.
At the year's start, Russia more than doubled the price of natural gas and imposed a customs duty making oil more expensive. To pay its bills, Belarus was forced to sell half of its national gas pipeline company to Gazprom, Russia's state gas monopoly.
In August, Gazprom threatened to halt future natural gas shipments if Belarus failed to pay what it already owed.
The two sides negotiated a settlement, but the threat of a further increase in energy prices still looms over Belarus ' heavily subsidized, Soviet-style economy.
It looks like before Putin exits office, we will see something happen. With Nato ever increasing its borders n military around Russia, the Union of former Soviet states will become high on Russia's agenda before it loses more ground.
Grand Danois
Entertainer
Except that this was later officially vehemently denied by the Kremlin.
Something you left out.
It's an old story btw - which would be obvious if you had included the source.
Something you left out.
It's an old story btw - which would be obvious if you had included the source.
I dont think its old news. Its from Pravda.ru, dated 13th december 2007, which makes it fairly new.
http://english.pravda.ru/news/russia/13-12-2007/102782-putin_belarus-0
The kremlin is probably in denial to reduce the attention to this development by the world. Obviously the west is not in favour of any union of the former states, so they'd probably be giving out mixed signals, so as to put off the unwanted attention until the deal can be sealed.
http://english.pravda.ru/news/russia/13-12-2007/102782-putin_belarus-0
The kremlin is probably in denial to reduce the attention to this development by the world. Obviously the west is not in favour of any union of the former states, so they'd probably be giving out mixed signals, so as to put off the unwanted attention until the deal can be sealed.
Grand Danois
Entertainer
Old enough - you presented it as a current development. It has been commented upon in broader media; responses and later developments concluded the duck of a story.
Ya, unfounded rumors about such "development" are floating for 2-3 years already. Simply put - nonsence.
At the year's start, Russia more than doubled the price of natural gas and imposed a customs duty making oil more expensive. To pay its bills, Belarus was forced to sell half of its national gas pipeline company to Gazprom, Russia's state gas monopoly.
In August, Gazprom threatened to halt future natural gas shipments if Belarus failed to pay what it already owed.
Blackmail from Putin... another surprise!:grab
Maybe that was why Ukraine was siphoning off gas from th pipeline to Western Europe, eh?
You can only push the little guys so far before they get together and push back.
So, okay, Belarussia couldn't make it on it's own, so they ran home to Momma. I think Romania ought to try to get Moldavia on thier side before Putin gets to them, too.
In August, Gazprom threatened to halt future natural gas shipments if Belarus failed to pay what it already owed.
Blackmail from Putin... another surprise!:grab
Maybe that was why Ukraine was siphoning off gas from th pipeline to Western Europe, eh?
You can only push the little guys so far before they get together and push back.
So, okay, Belarussia couldn't make it on it's own, so they ran home to Momma. I think Romania ought to try to get Moldavia on thier side before Putin gets to them, too.
Putin can rise gas prices for Ukraine and Belarus only so far... i mean, up to average world level at most. Either way, it is much more effective from economical and propaganda POV to just give these billions $$ directly to Ukraine and Belarus than indirectly throught low oil prices.
Incognito129
Banned Member
Dont under estimate the profit margin of oil.
???? What you mean here?
Well you talk about russia has a powerful weapon when it comes to gas, and in other topics i read about russia backing iran 100% etc. But the truth is that Russia has great competition when it comes to Iran and especially China.
The Russian domestic market uses approxently 550 billions cubic meters (bcm) That is gas that Gazprom produces it self. They also have exports for approx. 80 bmc, mainly to Europe. But this gas is imported from Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan. But since the Russian state owns all gas pipelines from this countires they get the gas for only $65 / 1000 cubic meters (cm), when they sell it to Europe they do it for the market price that is around $250 / 1000 cm. A recently signed contract with Turkmenistan inusres Russia with 50 bcm until 2009. But China is growing and have now also signed a contract with Turmenistan to import 30 bmc, this contract is valid for more then a decade if i remember correctly. The gas pipe line will be paid by China. Iran has also signed a treaty for 14 bcm with Turkmenistan, according to a US diplomat in the area there is no way that Turkmanistan can ddeliver all there agreements. How will Turkmenistan chose, and what will the oothers say? With more gas pipe lines that aint owned by Russia will increase the price, to the right one, this means that the Gazprom will lose alot and will proberly be forced to rise the heavily reduced price on gas. Will this lead to a Russian energy crise where customers wont afford the world market price on gas. Will Russia ensure deliveries to Europe or will it priority closer markets, and the domestic market? While China expanding, the USA also contributes to try to rip apart the Russian monopoly on gas.
But looking at world priced on gas vs. oil. Oil costs about 6 times more then gas, which proberly will lead to increased Gas prices within a year or two.
About the military thing, cant really add anything, dont know much about the Russian military, but they should invest in good looking fighters and and tanks, even if they do there job.
The Russian domestic market uses approxently 550 billions cubic meters (bcm) That is gas that Gazprom produces it self. They also have exports for approx. 80 bmc, mainly to Europe. But this gas is imported from Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan. But since the Russian state owns all gas pipelines from this countires they get the gas for only $65 / 1000 cubic meters (cm), when they sell it to Europe they do it for the market price that is around $250 / 1000 cm. A recently signed contract with Turkmenistan inusres Russia with 50 bcm until 2009. But China is growing and have now also signed a contract with Turmenistan to import 30 bmc, this contract is valid for more then a decade if i remember correctly. The gas pipe line will be paid by China. Iran has also signed a treaty for 14 bcm with Turkmenistan, according to a US diplomat in the area there is no way that Turkmanistan can ddeliver all there agreements. How will Turkmenistan chose, and what will the oothers say? With more gas pipe lines that aint owned by Russia will increase the price, to the right one, this means that the Gazprom will lose alot and will proberly be forced to rise the heavily reduced price on gas. Will this lead to a Russian energy crise where customers wont afford the world market price on gas. Will Russia ensure deliveries to Europe or will it priority closer markets, and the domestic market? While China expanding, the USA also contributes to try to rip apart the Russian monopoly on gas.
But looking at world priced on gas vs. oil. Oil costs about 6 times more then gas, which proberly will lead to increased Gas prices within a year or two.
About the military thing, cant really add anything, dont know much about the Russian military, but they should invest in good looking fighters and and tanks, even if they do there job.
He predicted two World Wars, their start and end dates, the economic crisis in 1929 and the following economic growth in 1933. He also foretold the defeat of Germans at the Kursk Bulge, the fall of fascism and the victory of the USSR in the Great Patriotic War. They called him the sleeping prophet, as he made his predictions while asleep. He would close his eyes, fall asleep and begin to prophesy. When awake, the prophet would remember nothing of what he had spoken about at night.
This article is about one of the most famous predictors in the history of mankind – Edgar Cayce (March 18, 1877 – January 3, 1945). In the west he is no less famous than Vanga in Eastern Europe. Having no medical education, Cayce could successfully diagnose and cure people. Last year saw 130 years since Cayce’s birthday.
A month before his death, when the Red Army victoriously walked through Europe, the prophet predicted the fall of communism and the collapse of the Soviet Union. He also said that Russia would successfully meet the after-communism crisis “by friendship with the nation which trusts in God even on its banknotes. "Through Russia, comes the hope of the world. Not in respect to what is sometimes termed Communism or Bolshevism -- no! But freedom -- freedom! That each man will live for his fellow man. The principle has been born there. It will take years for it to be crystallized; yet out of Russia comes again the hope of the world," he said.
He also believed that those nations who would be in good relations with Russia, would live better, gradually changing the whole world for the better. Thus, Cayce’s visions came true. The USA and the U.S. dollar in particular really left a mark on the post-perestroika Russian history; and those countries that maintain friendly relations with Russia live perfectly well thanks to Russian oil and gas. But what would happen next?
Not so long ago many experts said that Cayce’s forecast about the revival of the Soviet Union in 2010 was absurd. However, this prophesy is gradually becoming true. Belarus is known to be the first candidate for the alliance. Then, as modern political scientists think, it could be followed by Kyrgyzstan, Eastern Ukraine, Armenia and Kazakhstan. Even freedom-loving Georgia will possibly take a step towards friendship with Russia. It is worthy of note that legendary prophetess Vanga also said that Russia would be a great empire again.
But other Cayce’s predictions are not so optimistic. He predicted the growth of political power in China. He envisioned the future where China would be “the cradle of Christianity as applied in the lives of men”. No Third World War is to take place according to his forecasts. Something more awful is in store –natural cataclysms. In 1930 Cayce prophesied the global warming, although nobody thought about climate changes at that time. “Where there has been a frigid or semi-tropical climate, there will be more tropical weather, and moss and fern will grow,” he indicated, “New York, Connecticut and many territories of the East Coast will be seriously disturbed, along with many territories of the West Coast and the central part of the United States. Los Angeles and San Francisco will be among those that will be destroyed. The waters of the Great Lakes will flow into the Gulf of Mexico.”
Climatic and seismic cataclysms are to shake the whole planet and, consequently, change it greatly, Cayce predicted. But Russia will suffer least of all. It will lead the reviving civilization with the centre in Western Siberia. But the time when all the above-said events should happen is already wrong: Cayce assigned the end of the 20th century for all these catastrophes. But it is still possible that he defined the tendency itself quite right. Scientists say that in about ten years the glacier melting in Greenland and Antarctica can provoke violent tectonic activities such as volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, tsunamis and floods. Cayce’s predictions remind those of Vanga’s at this point. In 1979 she prophesied that everything would thaw like ice and only Russia would be left untouched.
source: Pravda.ru
This article i from Jan 2008. I know its prophecy, but its interesting nonetheless.
This article is about one of the most famous predictors in the history of mankind – Edgar Cayce (March 18, 1877 – January 3, 1945). In the west he is no less famous than Vanga in Eastern Europe. Having no medical education, Cayce could successfully diagnose and cure people. Last year saw 130 years since Cayce’s birthday.
A month before his death, when the Red Army victoriously walked through Europe, the prophet predicted the fall of communism and the collapse of the Soviet Union. He also said that Russia would successfully meet the after-communism crisis “by friendship with the nation which trusts in God even on its banknotes. "Through Russia, comes the hope of the world. Not in respect to what is sometimes termed Communism or Bolshevism -- no! But freedom -- freedom! That each man will live for his fellow man. The principle has been born there. It will take years for it to be crystallized; yet out of Russia comes again the hope of the world," he said.
He also believed that those nations who would be in good relations with Russia, would live better, gradually changing the whole world for the better. Thus, Cayce’s visions came true. The USA and the U.S. dollar in particular really left a mark on the post-perestroika Russian history; and those countries that maintain friendly relations with Russia live perfectly well thanks to Russian oil and gas. But what would happen next?
Not so long ago many experts said that Cayce’s forecast about the revival of the Soviet Union in 2010 was absurd. However, this prophesy is gradually becoming true. Belarus is known to be the first candidate for the alliance. Then, as modern political scientists think, it could be followed by Kyrgyzstan, Eastern Ukraine, Armenia and Kazakhstan. Even freedom-loving Georgia will possibly take a step towards friendship with Russia. It is worthy of note that legendary prophetess Vanga also said that Russia would be a great empire again.
But other Cayce’s predictions are not so optimistic. He predicted the growth of political power in China. He envisioned the future where China would be “the cradle of Christianity as applied in the lives of men”. No Third World War is to take place according to his forecasts. Something more awful is in store –natural cataclysms. In 1930 Cayce prophesied the global warming, although nobody thought about climate changes at that time. “Where there has been a frigid or semi-tropical climate, there will be more tropical weather, and moss and fern will grow,” he indicated, “New York, Connecticut and many territories of the East Coast will be seriously disturbed, along with many territories of the West Coast and the central part of the United States. Los Angeles and San Francisco will be among those that will be destroyed. The waters of the Great Lakes will flow into the Gulf of Mexico.”
Climatic and seismic cataclysms are to shake the whole planet and, consequently, change it greatly, Cayce predicted. But Russia will suffer least of all. It will lead the reviving civilization with the centre in Western Siberia. But the time when all the above-said events should happen is already wrong: Cayce assigned the end of the 20th century for all these catastrophes. But it is still possible that he defined the tendency itself quite right. Scientists say that in about ten years the glacier melting in Greenland and Antarctica can provoke violent tectonic activities such as volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, tsunamis and floods. Cayce’s predictions remind those of Vanga’s at this point. In 1979 she prophesied that everything would thaw like ice and only Russia would be left untouched.
source: Pravda.ru
This article i from Jan 2008. I know its prophecy, but its interesting nonetheless.
Yes, pretty much nonsense. Btw, everyone talks how "overpopulated" China is - but the simply fact here is what Europa, comparable, much more overpopulated than China. And still EU can probably double its population without real problems with space...If its true, its a hell of a witch
I believe in global warming etc, but to tell the truth, i think this is a story to increase the nationalism in Russia. Why would't China be left after the floods? Its also pretty big, and Africa and the US?
Global warming surery will be mostly advantageous for Russia (also for many nordic states - Finland, Scandinavian, etc) - but while most other countries will suffer - it will be far from total catastrophe.
That's nonsense. China has a slightly higher (about 25%) population density than the EU, and a far higher proportion of low-grade land. Take out the sandy desert, bare rock, permanent snow, & dry pasture where sustainable stocking density is counted in tens of hectares per animal rather than animals per hectare & other useless & nearly useless (in terms of supporting people) land & China is much more densely populated than the EU. Arable land per head in the EU is twice as much as in China - about 0.23 hectares compared to 0.11 ha. The EU has an even better ratio of forest land to population: about 0.29 ha, vs 0.11 (again) ha.
As if EU have it better... Take for example Germany, France, Belgium...
Germany: Area - 357,021 SQ KM , Population - 85 mil (4120 SQ KM per million)
China : Area - 9,596,960 SQ KM, Populaton - 1.3 bil - (7300 SQ KM per million).
And there are also quite large areas in Germany with "low grade land" - mountains, hills, etc...