RE: Questions regarding NAC ground units, was SG IF morale

Actually, I meant (and badly phrased) that when the ESU leave Earth at a
time when the Chinese element is ascendant, then why did they suddenly
revert to Russian names, make the capital a Russian planet etc. That was
the
bit I could not understand.

I hadn't thought about the non-nuclear takeover, but if we extrapolate
that
the USA keeps paying the ex-USSR to dismantle its nuclear warheads,
combined
with  the recent talks on reducing the US and USSR stockpile, then maybe
there really are too few nukes to defend when the Chinese expand into
the
Asian republics.

Just an idea of the top of my head.... ;-)

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[mailto:owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU]On Behalf Of Laserlight
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 12:28 AM
To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: Questions regarding NAC ground units, was SG IF morale

> Brian (and others),  I cannot agree with this as the Universe really
feels
> like it is written from a Western perspective. It doesn't really
cater for
> the potential super-powers of the future such as India,

a notable lack, someone really out to do a planet Kshatriya.

> and I wouldn't be in
> the least surprised if the Islamic World became THE dominant force
on Earth,
> purely down to numbers if nothing else.

IMHO, the cohesiveness isn't there.

> Since China takes over the ex-USSR to a large extent, why on earth
would it
> revert to Nova Moskya when they move to space. Now that really
doesn't make
> sense to me....

I believe it's mentioned in Canon, essentially the Russians wrested
control away.

I grant you that China taking over Russia (without nukes flying) is
extremely implausible--much more so than the NAC.