> Pop GDP ActMen MilBud
Pop GDP NAC 685.6 5,848.1 ESU 2,183.5 1,853.7 FSE 189.4 1,320.5 NSL 123.1
1,139.0 IF 422.9 546.4 PAU 469.2 241.1 IC 527.2 235.0 Japan 124 2400 OU 23.7
219.4 FCT 40.0 212.4 Israel 4.4 27
Revisions: Ireland and Greece to FSE, S Korea to ESU, Turkey to IF, Japan
separated from NAC plus a couple other minor adjestments. The main nation not
included is Taiwan, at 20 pop and 95 GDP. Of course, all this doesn't mean
anything concrete for 2 centuries later, but it might be a helpful guide to
proportions. For example, when I design the IF fleet list (after hiring a
consultant from the ScanFed), I'll give them about half the points of the NSL
FTFB fleet (and fudge a bit since the FB doesn't have all active ships).
It also gives a clue as to the most likely arena for political action in 2183:
ESU attempts to woo Japan away from NAC. Meanwhile ESU citizens put triple the
tax rate into the defense budget that the NAC
does (which is historically the case--Russia was at 17% when the US
was about 6%, IIRC, during the height of the Cold War).
G'day,
> These are the >> 1988 << figures for the areas which will later become
Ahh its suddenly a lot clearer thanks;)
> Pop GDP
Given what these are I guess there as good a start as any (if you're going to
start anywhere it may as well be there, any reason you didn't use the CIA
worldbook though, its a bit more current?). However as you point out its only
a rough guide for 2 centuries into the future, so I think we'd all
do well to be careful about proportionality statements - I think you'd
find
off world colonisation benefiting NAC/FSE etc disproportionally more
than the ESU for instance.
I was about to say "have fun populating", but after my last effort I think you
guys have the wrong impression of me already;)
Thus I'll stick with the much more lady-like "Have fun".
Beth
> Given what these are I guess there as good a start as any (if you're
a) 200 years from now, who cares? b) the Dunnigan book has it all in one place
> However as you point out
Or the right impression....
From: Laserlight
> Japan 124 2400
I'm not sure if this can apply to any other FT powers, but there is virtually
no connect between the 1988 population or GDP for Israel and the FT nation of
New Israel. Old Israel is destroyed utterly in 2027, and New Israel is built
almost entirely from the diasporic remnants of the people (which numbers a few
times the indigenous population of Israel today).
> The main nation not included is Taiwan, at 20 pop and 95 GDP. Of
IMO, If Tawan isn't part of ESU, IC, or OU, it's probably either
aradioactive/chemical wasteland as a result of war or one of the
stronger minor powers.
> It also gives a clue as to the most likely arena for political action
Mayhap. But if Japan keeps it tech edge, it won't be listening to too much
wooing from any major power. It'll be able to stand on its own and forge
alliances on its terms.
Noam said
> IMO, If Tawan isn't part of ESU, IC, or OU, it's probably either
Same trio I came up with for Taiwan to be annexed by, but which one?
> It also gives a clue as to the most likely arena for political
True--but the ESU would be happy just to get Japan _away_ from NAC.
On Tue, 14 Dec 1999 21:43:38 -0500, "Laserlight"
<laserlight@quixnet.net> wrote:
> Noam said
Personally, I think none of the above...
> It also gives a clue as to the most likely arena for political
Japan is unlikely to be wooed into joining the ESU. Too many problems
historically. Okay, this IS the far future, and we know how alliances change
(Britain once owned chunks of France, then fought against France, then became
an ally; in this century alone Britain was best friends with Japan, then
fought a war against Japan, and is now cordial with Japan).
Assuming that things aren't patched up (50 years later, China is still
rightfully bitter at Japan), both Russia and China have historically been at
odds with Japan. So has Korea. There's a LOT of anti-Japanese sentiment
in the ESU to be overcome. Especially since a Japan in the ESU would tend to
rise to a position of dominance.
Going by Jon's naming of the figures in Stargrunt, he seems to suggest that
the Japanese forces are mercenary forces. This suggests Japan has formed a
somewhat belligerent neutrality, a nation housing off shore dataforts and
renting soldiers to the highest bidder. The Japanese don't appear to be part
of the ESU, or any other, structure.
> Same trio I came up with for Taiwan to be annexed by, but which one?
Okay, why not?
> It also gives a clue as to the most likely arena for political
(snip)
> True--but the ESU would be happy just to get Japan _away_ from NAC.
This doesn't seem to have much bearing on the GZGverse. ESU already has China,
India and Russia in one organization. I can imagine their "political
infighting" emphasizes the "fighting" more than the "political".
> Going by Jon's naming of the figures in Stargrunt, he seems to
Canon says NAC considers Japan to be under its protection. Maybe the ESU's
efforts have been at least partially successful, to separate the two?
On Wed, 15 Dec 1999 19:12:20 -0500, "Laserlight"
<laserlight@quixnet.net> wrote:
> Same trio I came up with for Taiwan to be annexed by, but which one?
My mistake... I read Taiwan and thought Japan. Actually, I could see the ESU
annexing Taiwan...
> This doesn't seem to have much bearing on the GZGverse. ESU already
Historically China and Russia didn't get along all that well, so you do have a
point. But it's hard to see China, Russia, and Japan all in one group. It just
seems to grate... I wonder if Japan is still as xenophobic/xenophilic in
the Tuffleyverse as it is today...
> Canon says NAC considers Japan to be under its protection. Maybe the
Or, take it the other way. The ESU's attempts to annex Japan force an
independent Japan to seek help... or the NAC offers the help, knowing Japan
can't refuse.