I am German as well and, in fact, managed to visit Koenigsberg in 1987 (don't ask how). It never was nice to vist in first place and visiting any city in Russia before Putin's rise to power (that is before 2000) would be insane.
They are both pretty equally fascist, especially after the Maidan revolution. The only difference is which aspects of fascism are more prominent. If we go by the classic 14 defining characteristics, then in Russia emphasis would be on
- Supremacy of the Military - Religion and Government are Intertwined
and in the Ukraine on
- Powerful and Continuing Nationalism - Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause
the rest is basically the same between the two countries.
Ukraine has enough neo-nazis of their own. And before some arsehole tries to dismiss it as Russian propaganda, I've been in the Ukraine and I've personally seen them. Scared the shit out of me. There were more of them than at the yearly neo-nazi demonstration in Dortmund and they were armed by the Ukrainian government.
They should be. Soyuz-U launchers used to be absolutely reliable, with 30 years of flawless flights before the 2010s. Apparently the new generation of Russian aerospace workers are monkeys, there is no other explanation for the failures.
What I meant is that there is plenty of old coal power plants in the gigawatt range that probably will be decommissioned soon. Even Germany has built a couple of new coal power plants as the replacement of some old ones.
Besides, economics sometimes dictate things that run contrary to the common sense - for example the Irsching power plant in Bavaria was shut down earlier this year even though its units 4 and 5 are only 6 years old and are among the most efficient fossil fuel power stations in the world.
Well, maybe because your country was founded by lawbreakers, traitors, and, by modern definition, terrorists? But you have changed the language and call them "founding fathers".
Apparently expats from European Zimbabwe are too dense to realise that attacks on border guards have nothing to do with hate and are simply self defense incidents of smugglers.
I also don't get the logic of a bloody immigrant hollering against other immigrants. I mean, it is like rock stars speaking against drugs or murderers picketing abortion clinics - complete bollocks.
Nothing dubious about it, actual socialist countries considered basic education being the most important thing they can and must provide. That was the way in the USSR, in GDR, in Cuba, in Yugoslavia and so on. GDR schools were quite a bit better than they are in any German state nowadays, I can tell you that from personal experience.
Chobham is just a marketing name for a certain composite armour, nothing more. A lot of countries use composite armour nowadays, even India and China, it is really nothing special anymore. Nobody has used rolled homogeneous armour for "fucking years, absolutely years".
KE penetrators don't bounce as such, they either shatter or go in. The only reason for them to bounce would be hitting in a very unlucky angle, which is quite unlikely. Very old KE penetrators that were very short and made of steel might bounce, but long rod penetrators made of tungsteen or depleted uranium were introduced 50 years ago and these, like I said, don't bounce.
And no, M1 is not a very good tank. It still can be disabled with a machine gun because its turret is so heavy it needs its own engine which can be easily disabled. The whole tank is way overweight and emits so much heat it probably can be detected from low earth orbit. Its combat record only says that it was always used against a vastly inferior enemy without an air force, without modern tanks and without modern shells. A couple of RPG hits can kill an M1 just as well as any other tank. The whole M1 concept was basically a heavy tank destroyer, which is certainly not what a main battle tank should be. It took years to upgrade the tank to some capabilities beyond destroying tanks, all of these upgrades (like anti-infantry shells or reactive armour) came with the experience of how much the tank sucked in the Iraq war for every task that didn't involve destruction of enemy tanks but it is still akin to polishing a turd - doable, but pointless.
A main battle tank is supposed to be capable of all tasks armoured troops are supposed to execute, not just taking out tanks. This is why all other modern tanks are better than M1.
There was no need to steal anything. Matter of fact, composite armour was introduced with the T-64. It was actually the first tank to have that, along with quite a lot of other firsts that make the tank quite problematic. Bouncing shots is something that can happen with a HE-FRAG shell, but that is something that stopped with WW2. Modern shots are either APFSDS (the new shells for the 125mm gun introduced in the 1990ies would probably be able to penetrate the M1A2 frontal hull at ranges lower than 2 km), HEAT (that one probably won't, even the modern triple charge ones), or ATGM (something of a Russian specialty and could go either way).
And M1 is not that good anyway - it can be disabled with a machine gun, as Saddam's army found out.
T-62 is perfectly capable of firing (and hitting) on the move. This isn't a WW2 design, even its predesessors have received two plane stabilisation in the fifties. T-62 is just very old and very, very light compared to the M1. Two thirds of the M1 weight tops. Funny fact - T-62 was considered overweight at its introduction, hence its successor - T-64, a much better machine in every way - weighted a couple of tons fewer.
You see, we can continue walking on that thread of logic and say that if you aren't comfortable with people that aren't comfortable in their bodies, then the problem is in your own head and you need to take responsibility for it, not make everyone around you treat you like a special snowflake. And this can go on and on and on to reductio ad absurdum, which, contrary to what people thing, is a very useful tool - if an idea, reduced to the absurd, still makes sense, it is probably an excellent idea, but I digress. Anyway, do yourself a favour and truly stop caring instead of merely saying that you don't.
Except when it doesn't. The terms for getting a credit from the IMF were (among other) that the Ukrainan government basically stops the natural gas and electrical power subsidies. When people have to pay two thirds of their monthly income for power and heating, they tend to lower their consumption. I have just checked out of curiosity, in Kiev the price per kWh is 1.29 hryvnas, that is about 5 eurocents, which is about half of the price in Bulgaria (let's take two more or less comparably piss poor countries for this). The average annual net household income in Bulgaria is EUR 4596. The annual average net household income in Ukraine is EUR 1884. In Germany, the average power price is abot 29 eurocents per kWh (and yes, that does hurt a bit) but the average net household income is over EUR 27180, so 3100 kWh per year is only EUR 900 - just over 3% of the income. Same 3100 kWh per year would be more like 8% of the Ukrainian income, so it would be the same as me paying not, say, EUR 900 per year (I actually pay about EUR 700, got a better than average tariff), but EUR 2400 - a whole month of net income. Ouch. Feel free to calculate how much you'd have to pay if electicity would cost 8% of your yearly income.
Slashdot Mirror
East then, West now.
I am German as well and, in fact, managed to visit Koenigsberg in 1987 (don't ask how). It never was nice to vist in first place and visiting any city in Russia before Putin's rise to power (that is before 2000) would be insane.
They are both pretty equally fascist, especially after the Maidan revolution. The only difference is which aspects of fascism are more prominent. If we go by the classic 14 defining characteristics, then in Russia emphasis would be on
- Supremacy of the Military
- Religion and Government are Intertwined
and in the Ukraine on
- Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
- Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause
the rest is basically the same between the two countries.
Ukraine has enough neo-nazis of their own. And before some arsehole tries to dismiss it as Russian propaganda, I've been in the Ukraine and I've personally seen them. Scared the shit out of me. There were more of them than at the yearly neo-nazi demonstration in Dortmund and they were armed by the Ukrainian government.
They should be. Soyuz-U launchers used to be absolutely reliable, with 30 years of flawless flights before the 2010s. Apparently the new generation of Russian aerospace workers are monkeys, there is no other explanation for the failures.
That is funny. A dumbass Ukrainian immigrant tells a German what to do. Sorry, no. And stop protecting your homoerotic fantasies onto me.
What I meant is that there is plenty of old coal power plants in the gigawatt range that probably will be decommissioned soon.
Even Germany has built a couple of new coal power plants as the replacement of some old ones.
Besides, economics sometimes dictate things that run contrary to the common sense - for example the Irsching power plant in Bavaria was shut down earlier this year even though its units 4 and 5 are only 6 years old and are among the most efficient fossil fuel power stations in the world.
I am German, dumbass.
Well, maybe because your country was founded by lawbreakers, traitors, and, by modern definition, terrorists? But you have changed the language and call them "founding fathers".
Apparently expats from European Zimbabwe are too dense to realise that attacks on border guards have nothing to do with hate and are simply self defense incidents of smugglers.
I also don't get the logic of a bloody immigrant hollering against other immigrants. I mean, it is like rock stars speaking against drugs or murderers picketing abortion clinics - complete bollocks.
Phones are not imaging devices and their cameras suck donkey balls.
Who says they will stop at small old powerplants?
The article about hype driven programming fits very well here.
Nothing dubious about it, actual socialist countries considered basic education being the most important thing they can and must provide. That was the way in the USSR, in GDR, in Cuba, in Yugoslavia and so on. GDR schools were quite a bit better than they are in any German state nowadays, I can tell you that from personal experience.
Since when replacing dirty and inefficient powerplants with more efficient ones with far better scrubbing wouldn't help?
Not if the construction tools are built on the moon or an asteroid.
Have you ever considered that China actually might build new coal power plants to shut down old and less efficient ones?
Chobham is just a marketing name for a certain composite armour, nothing more. A lot of countries use composite armour nowadays, even India and China, it is really nothing special anymore. Nobody has used rolled homogeneous armour for "fucking years, absolutely years".
KE penetrators don't bounce as such, they either shatter or go in. The only reason for them to bounce would be hitting in a very unlucky angle, which is quite unlikely. Very old KE penetrators that were very short and made of steel might bounce, but long rod penetrators made of tungsteen or depleted uranium were introduced 50 years ago and these, like I said, don't bounce.
And no, M1 is not a very good tank. It still can be disabled with a machine gun because its turret is so heavy it needs its own engine which can be easily disabled. The whole tank is way overweight and emits so much heat it probably can be detected from low earth orbit. Its combat record only says that it was always used against a vastly inferior enemy without an air force, without modern tanks and without modern shells. A couple of RPG hits can kill an M1 just as well as any other tank. The whole M1 concept was basically a heavy tank destroyer, which is certainly not what a main battle tank should be. It took years to upgrade the tank to some capabilities beyond destroying tanks, all of these upgrades (like anti-infantry shells or reactive armour) came with the experience of how much the tank sucked in the Iraq war for every task that didn't involve destruction of enemy tanks but it is still akin to polishing a turd - doable, but pointless.
A main battle tank is supposed to be capable of all tasks armoured troops are supposed to execute, not just taking out tanks. This is why all other modern tanks are better than M1.
Not really. If the spaceship is built in the orbit, it will never see the atmosphere.
Build a spaceship on the moon or in the orbit.
There was no need to steal anything. Matter of fact, composite armour was introduced with the T-64. It was actually the first tank to have that, along with quite a lot of other firsts that make the tank quite problematic. Bouncing shots is something that can happen with a HE-FRAG shell, but that is something that stopped with WW2. Modern shots are either APFSDS (the new shells for the 125mm gun introduced in the 1990ies would probably be able to penetrate the M1A2 frontal hull at ranges lower than 2 km), HEAT (that one probably won't, even the modern triple charge ones), or ATGM (something of a Russian specialty and could go either way).
And M1 is not that good anyway - it can be disabled with a machine gun, as Saddam's army found out.
T-62 is perfectly capable of firing (and hitting) on the move. This isn't a WW2 design, even its predesessors have received two plane stabilisation in the fifties.
T-62 is just very old and very, very light compared to the M1. Two thirds of the M1 weight tops. Funny fact - T-62 was considered overweight at its introduction, hence its successor - T-64, a much better machine in every way - weighted a couple of tons fewer.
You see, we can continue walking on that thread of logic and say that if you aren't comfortable with people that aren't comfortable in their bodies, then the problem is in your own head and you need to take responsibility for it, not make everyone around you treat you like a special snowflake. And this can go on and on and on to reductio ad absurdum, which, contrary to what people thing, is a very useful tool - if an idea, reduced to the absurd, still makes sense, it is probably an excellent idea, but I digress.
Anyway, do yourself a favour and truly stop caring instead of merely saying that you don't.
That's what "insightful" was supposed to be.
Except when it doesn't. The terms for getting a credit from the IMF were (among other) that the Ukrainan government basically stops the natural gas and electrical power subsidies. When people have to pay two thirds of their monthly income for power and heating, they tend to lower their consumption. I have just checked out of curiosity, in Kiev the price per kWh is 1.29 hryvnas, that is about 5 eurocents, which is about half of the price in Bulgaria (let's take two more or less comparably piss poor countries for this). The average annual net household income in Bulgaria is EUR 4596. The annual average net household income in Ukraine is EUR 1884. In Germany, the average power price is abot 29 eurocents per kWh (and yes, that does hurt a bit) but the average net household income is over EUR 27180, so 3100 kWh per year is only EUR 900 - just over 3% of the income. Same 3100 kWh per year would be more like 8% of the Ukrainian income, so it would be the same as me paying not, say, EUR 900 per year (I actually pay about EUR 700, got a better than average tariff), but EUR 2400 - a whole month of net income. Ouch. Feel free to calculate how much you'd have to pay if electicity would cost 8% of your yearly income.