Discussion:
meta: countries in the sea of time
(too old to reply)
Dan Goodman
2013-04-13 23:56:50 UTC
Permalink
A country is sent back several thousand years into the past. (Occupying
the same area.) Which countries might do well, and which wouldn't?

I suspect Nazi Germany would manage to get itself defeated in war.

From our time into the past? Don't know.

From several thousand years in the future into our time?
--
Dan Goodman
Phil McGregor
2013-04-14 00:18:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dan Goodman
A country is sent back several thousand years into the past. (Occupying
the same area.) Which countries might do well, and which wouldn't?
I suspect Nazi Germany would manage to get itself defeated in war.
By *whom*, exactly?

"Several thousand years" (say 3000+) "occupying the same area" ... in
1000 BC the people(s) surrounding 1933-39 Germany are so deficient in
both techology *and* population that it would, literally, be a
walk-over.

The would be no contest whatsoever. The C20th Germans would win hands
down.

The onlyy thing(s) preventing them from doing *anyything* they damn
well please would be the less obvious economic consequences of the
shift ...

* Starvation. Germany was barely self-sifficient in food and planned
to starve the Poles in 1939+ and the Russians in 1941+ by stealing
*their* food for Germany, and starve them in *massive* numbers (IIRC
at least a third of the Poles and 2/3rds of the Russians) in order to
feed themselves and their army, and to make the needed "lebensraum"
for the good Aryans.

In 1000 BC there simply aren't enough surrounding peoples, and their
methods of agriculture are so pathetically unproductive (about 1:1.5 -
barely enough to have seed crop for the next harvest and still have
"enough" to eat themselves (if hunger 8+ years of 10, of which 2+ are
typically famine, and large scale starvation or starvation related
deaths *anyway* are *your* idea of "enough") that the Germans aren't
gonna get enough food from them even if they take it *all* ... and
that assumes they'd be able to transport it all back home on the
nonexistent railroads, roads or through nonexistent ports ...

Sure, they can introduce better farming practices, better (and new)
crops, and better agricultural machinery ... but that will all take
time. Time I am not sure they'd have.

In short, the first year(s) would make "turnip winter" look like a
plethora ...

* Disruption of resource supplies. Germany went to war because, apart
from food (see above) she had to import all sorts of vital industrial
supplies ... and, suddenly, they're all gone. Oil and Iron Ore being
the two most obvious (sure, they're still "there" ... but completely
undeveloped ... and developing t6he Mines/Wells and transport
infrastructure will be a nontrivial task).

There's lots more, but you get the idea, I hope.

Still, I suspect the German state would survive and prosper ... and
that that wouldn't be good for the rest of Europe, circa 1000 BC. The
1000 Year Reich would have a decent chance of surviving that long
simply because there is no competition (though not necessarily a 1000
year NAZI Reich).

YMMV
SolomonW
2013-04-14 08:09:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Phil McGregor
* Starvation. Germany was barely self-sifficient in food and planned
to starve the Poles in 1939+ and the Russians in 1941+ by stealing
*their* food for Germany, and starve them in *massive* numbers (IIRC
at least a third of the Poles and 2/3rds of the Russians) in order to
feed themselves and their army, and to make the needed "lebensraum"
for the good Aryans.
In 1000 BC there simply aren't enough surrounding peoples, and their
methods of agriculture are so pathetically unproductive (about 1:1.5 -
barely enough to have seed crop for the next harvest and still have
"enough" to eat themselves (if hunger 8+ years of 10, of which 2+ are
typically famine, and large scale starvation or starvation related
deaths *anyway* are *your* idea of "enough") that the Germans aren't
gonna get enough food from them even if they take it *all* ... and
that assumes they'd be able to transport it all back home on the
nonexistent railroads, roads or through nonexistent ports ...
Fishing would be logical. The German ports are in the right position
already and the fishing areas such as Iceland and Russia then would be full
of fish. Since its going by sea transport, much of the problem of lack of
railways and roads are solved.
Phil McGregor
2013-04-14 08:32:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by SolomonW
Post by Phil McGregor
* Starvation. Germany was barely self-sifficient in food and planned
to starve the Poles in 1939+ and the Russians in 1941+ by stealing
*their* food for Germany, and starve them in *massive* numbers (IIRC
at least a third of the Poles and 2/3rds of the Russians) in order to
feed themselves and their army, and to make the needed "lebensraum"
for the good Aryans.
In 1000 BC there simply aren't enough surrounding peoples, and their
methods of agriculture are so pathetically unproductive (about 1:1.5 -
barely enough to have seed crop for the next harvest and still have
"enough" to eat themselves (if hunger 8+ years of 10, of which 2+ are
typically famine, and large scale starvation or starvation related
deaths *anyway* are *your* idea of "enough") that the Germans aren't
gonna get enough food from them even if they take it *all* ... and
that assumes they'd be able to transport it all back home on the
nonexistent railroads, roads or through nonexistent ports ...
Fishing would be logical. The German ports are in the right position
already and the fishing areas such as Iceland and Russia then would be full
of fish. Since its going by sea transport, much of the problem of lack of
railways and roads are solved.
And that would *ameliorate* the problem, but not change the facts of
another turnip winter.

The cost would be high, relatively speaking, as you'd need to use
diesel powered fishing boats and that presupposes the availability of
diesel fuel ... with the obvious problem(s).

Those being that the Synthetic Oil plants didn't produce diesel,
afaiui and, even if they did, they didn't produce enough of any fuel
to replace the major shipments coming from Ploesti (and the USSR) ...
and, as I noted, though the Germans know where this fuel came from,
they'd have to produce all the drilling rigs, move them over
nonexistent roads or rail lines, or through nonexistent ports, to the
virgin wilderness, then drill the wells ... then ship the oil back to
the refineries in Germany over the self-same nonexistent transport
infrastructure.

Like I said, turnip winter ... which is *not*, you might note, the
same as "mass starvation and cannibalism" ... hard times, for years,
perhaps decades, but slowly improving.

And not good for the locals, crazy racial policies notwithstanding.

(In fact, come to think of it, the Nazis might decide to send an
Expeditionary Force to Israel and wipe out the Jews root and branch!
Or not.)

Phil
SolomonW
2013-04-15 08:50:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Phil McGregor
Post by SolomonW
Post by Phil McGregor
* Starvation. Germany was barely self-sifficient in food and planned
to starve the Poles in 1939+ and the Russians in 1941+ by stealing
*their* food for Germany, and starve them in *massive* numbers (IIRC
at least a third of the Poles and 2/3rds of the Russians) in order to
feed themselves and their army, and to make the needed "lebensraum"
for the good Aryans.
In 1000 BC there simply aren't enough surrounding peoples, and their
methods of agriculture are so pathetically unproductive (about 1:1.5 -
barely enough to have seed crop for the next harvest and still have
"enough" to eat themselves (if hunger 8+ years of 10, of which 2+ are
typically famine, and large scale starvation or starvation related
deaths *anyway* are *your* idea of "enough") that the Germans aren't
gonna get enough food from them even if they take it *all* ... and
that assumes they'd be able to transport it all back home on the
nonexistent railroads, roads or through nonexistent ports ...
Fishing would be logical. The German ports are in the right position
already and the fishing areas such as Iceland and Russia then would be full
of fish. Since its going by sea transport, much of the problem of lack of
railways and roads are solved.
And that would *ameliorate* the problem, but not change the facts of
another turnip winter.
Initially, as most of the German fishing fleet would be at sea, so I
suppose much of this is lost in this POD immediately.
Post by Phil McGregor
The cost would be high, relatively speaking, as you'd need to use
diesel powered fishing boats and that presupposes the availability of
diesel fuel ... with the obvious problem(s).
I am not so sure much of the German fishing fleet used coal until the early
1950s.
Post by Phil McGregor
Those being that the Synthetic Oil plants didn't produce diesel,
afaiui and, even if they did, they didn't produce enough of any fuel
to replace the major shipments coming from Ploesti (and the USSR) ...
and, as I noted, though the Germans know where this fuel came from,
they'd have to produce all the drilling rigs, move them over
nonexistent roads or rail lines, or through nonexistent ports, to the
virgin wilderness, then drill the wells ... then ship the oil back to
the refineries in Germany over the self-same nonexistent transport
infrastructure.
Like I said, turnip winter ... which is *not*, you might note, the
same as "mass starvation and cannibalism" ... hard times, for years,
perhaps decades, but slowly improving.
Much of the problem in WW1 with the turnip winter was a premature frost
that destroyed much of potato harvest; Germany may not suffer this in this
POD.

The lack of agricultural workers as much of Germany's population then had a
strong rural root plus no enemies so the army is free to be used in
agriculture so this should not be a problem.

Germany has been cut off from fertilizers and this would be a major
problem, but some of this would be alleviated due to a reduction in
munition requirements.

However, tractors, willing hands and slaves much could be done in a few
years.

Germany has in this POD has her Lebensraum at almost no cost.
Post by Phil McGregor
And not good for the locals, crazy racial policies notwithstanding.
(In fact, come to think of it, the Nazis might decide to send an
Expeditionary Force to Israel and wipe out the Jews root and branch!
Or not.)
Phil
Phil McGregor
2013-04-15 09:53:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by SolomonW
Post by Phil McGregor
Like I said, turnip winter ... which is *not*, you might note, the
same as "mass starvation and cannibalism" ... hard times, for years,
perhaps decades, but slowly improving.
Much of the problem in WW1 with the turnip winter was a premature frost
that destroyed much of potato harvest; Germany may not suffer this in this
POD.
The lack of agricultural workers as much of Germany's population then had a
strong rural root plus no enemies so the army is free to be used in
agriculture so this should not be a problem.
THAT was the reason they had to starve the Poles in 1939+ ... to
mobilise the army for the attack meant pulling workers off the farms
...

So the peacetime component off the Army was separate ... and not
needed.
Post by SolomonW
Germany has been cut off from fertilizers and this would be a major
problem, but some of this would be alleviated due to a reduction in
munition requirements.
As I recall they didn't need to import Fertilisers - the Fischer-Topf
(??) process gave them plenty ... the problem in 1917-18 was that
there was plenty for *either* Fertiliser production *or* explosives
... they chose the latter, another reason for the "turnip winter"
being so bad.

In this instance, they don't need to produce the huge amounts of
smallarms ammo and artillery shells that they needed in 1917-18, so it
shouldn't be a problem
Post by SolomonW
However, tractors, willing hands and slaves much could be done in a few
years.
As long as they don't mobilise the *whole* army, and keep to peacetime
only staffing levels, they won't have a problem. And the 36 (?) or so
pre-mobilisation Divisions would be more than enough to conquer
anything they damn well pleased!

Tractors would, of course, release more men for other things ... but
wouldn't have been *necessary* ... and they could produce a hell of a
lot of them if they're not having to produce Total War quantities of
U-Boats, Tanks and Combat Aircraft!

Phil
Dan Goodman
2013-04-14 20:02:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Phil McGregor
Post by Dan Goodman
A country is sent back several thousand years into the past. (Occupying
the same area.) Which countries might do well, and which wouldn't?
I suspect Nazi Germany would manage to get itself defeated in war.
By *whom*, exactly?
"Several thousand years" (say 3000+) "occupying the same area" ... in
1000 BC the people(s) surrounding 1933-39 Germany are so deficient in
both techology *and* population that it would, literally, be a
walk-over.
The would be no contest whatsoever. The C20th Germans would win hands
down.
My take: The Germans would try to conquer the world, and spread their
resources too thin.
Post by Phil McGregor
The onlyy thing(s) preventing them from doing *anyything* they damn well
please would be the less obvious economic consequences of the shift ...
* Starvation. Germany was barely self-sifficient in food and planned to
starve the Poles in 1939+ and the Russians in 1941+ by stealing *their*
food for Germany, and starve them in *massive* numbers (IIRC at least a
third of the Poles and 2/3rds of the Russians) in order to feed
themselves and their army, and to make the needed "lebensraum" for the
good Aryans.
In 1000 BC there simply aren't enough surrounding peoples, and their
methods of agriculture are so pathetically unproductive (about 1:1.5 -
barely enough to have seed crop for the next harvest and still have
"enough" to eat themselves (if hunger 8+ years of 10, of which 2+ are
typically famine, and large scale starvation or starvation related
deaths *anyway* are *your* idea of "enough") that the Germans aren't
gonna get enough food from them even if they take it *all* ... and that
assumes they'd be able to transport it all back home on the nonexistent
railroads, roads or through nonexistent ports ...
Sure, they can introduce better farming practices, better (and new)
crops, and better agricultural machinery ... but that will all take
time. Time I am not sure they'd have.
In short, the first year(s) would make "turnip winter" look like a
plethora ...
* Disruption of resource supplies. Germany went to war because, apart
from food (see above) she had to import all sorts of vital industrial
supplies ... and, suddenly, they're all gone. Oil and Iron Ore being the
two most obvious (sure, they're still "there" ... but completely
undeveloped ... and developing t6he Mines/Wells and transport
infrastructure will be a nontrivial task).
There's lots more, but you get the idea, I hope.
Still, I suspect the German state would survive and prosper ... and that
that wouldn't be good for the rest of Europe, circa 1000 BC. The 1000
Year Reich would have a decent chance of surviving that long simply
because there is no competition (though not necessarily a 1000 year NAZI
Reich).
YMMV
--
Dan Goodman
SolomonW
2013-04-15 08:43:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dan Goodman
Post by Phil McGregor
Post by Dan Goodman
A country is sent back several thousand years into the past. (Occupying
the same area.) Which countries might do well, and which wouldn't?
I suspect Nazi Germany would manage to get itself defeated in war.
By *whom*, exactly?
"Several thousand years" (say 3000+) "occupying the same area" ... in
1000 BC the people(s) surrounding 1933-39 Germany are so deficient in
both techology *and* population that it would, literally, be a
walk-over.
The would be no contest whatsoever. The C20th Germans would win hands
down.
My take: The Germans would try to conquer the world, and spread their
resources too thin.
Spanish conquistadors had almost no resources.
Post by Dan Goodman
Post by Phil McGregor
The onlyy thing(s) preventing them from doing *anyything* they damn well
please would be the less obvious economic consequences of the shift ...
* Starvation. Germany was barely self-sifficient in food and planned to
starve the Poles in 1939+ and the Russians in 1941+ by stealing *their*
food for Germany, and starve them in *massive* numbers (IIRC at least a
third of the Poles and 2/3rds of the Russians) in order to feed
themselves and their army, and to make the needed "lebensraum" for the
good Aryans.
In 1000 BC there simply aren't enough surrounding peoples, and their
methods of agriculture are so pathetically unproductive (about 1:1.5 -
barely enough to have seed crop for the next harvest and still have
"enough" to eat themselves (if hunger 8+ years of 10, of which 2+ are
typically famine, and large scale starvation or starvation related
deaths *anyway* are *your* idea of "enough") that the Germans aren't
gonna get enough food from them even if they take it *all* ... and that
assumes they'd be able to transport it all back home on the nonexistent
railroads, roads or through nonexistent ports ...
Sure, they can introduce better farming practices, better (and new)
crops, and better agricultural machinery ... but that will all take
time. Time I am not sure they'd have.
In short, the first year(s) would make "turnip winter" look like a
plethora ...
* Disruption of resource supplies. Germany went to war because, apart
from food (see above) she had to import all sorts of vital industrial
supplies ... and, suddenly, they're all gone. Oil and Iron Ore being the
two most obvious (sure, they're still "there" ... but completely
undeveloped ... and developing t6he Mines/Wells and transport
infrastructure will be a nontrivial task).
There's lots more, but you get the idea, I hope.
Still, I suspect the German state would survive and prosper ... and that
that wouldn't be good for the rest of Europe, circa 1000 BC. The 1000
Year Reich would have a decent chance of surviving that long simply
because there is no competition (though not necessarily a 1000 year NAZI
Reich).
YMMV
Paul F Austin
2013-04-15 14:21:13 UTC
Permalink
...
Post by SolomonW
Post by Dan Goodman
Post by Phil McGregor
"Several thousand years" (say 3000+) "occupying the same area" ... in
1000 BC the people(s) surrounding 1933-39 Germany are so deficient in
both techology *and* population that it would, literally, be a
walk-over.
The would be no contest whatsoever. The C20th Germans would win hands
down.
My take: The Germans would try to conquer the world, and spread their
resources too thin.
Spanish conquistadors had almost no resources.
Numbers count. NAZI Germany would add roughly 60M people to "Europe"
whose population in 1000BC was under a million. The case of 16th Century
Spain is apropos. Spain conquered Mexico and Peru and imported a vast
stream of silver that paid the rest of Europe to produce for Spain as it
converted to an engine for war. The agricultural base of 16th Century
Europe could at least marginally support Europe plus Spain.

In a 10th Century BC Europe, neither valuata nor duress could force
European "native" agriculture to feed 60M new mouths. The only avenue
for German survival would be a rapid breaking of new land to "modern"
20th Century agricultural methods. 20th Century agricultural
productivity, given the land, machinery and agri-chemical inputs could
feed Germany. 10th Century BC agricultural methods could not.

So, to survive, Germany would need to organize for clearance of
sufficient new land to feed its 60M, build the communications network
(river ports and roads to get harvest to Germany), produce the
machinery, fuels and fertilizers and store and transport the resulting
harvests. The machinery could be largely horse-drawn (gang plows and
harvesters) but that means the national horse herd would need to grow.
Fertilizers could be produced using coal-powered Haber-Bosch process
production.

Paul
Rich Rostrom
2013-04-15 17:57:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul F Austin
harvesters) but that means the national horse herd would need to grow.
The problem with that is that it is impossible to
produce a new draft horse in less than several years.

Furthermore,it is impossible to produce additional
brood mares with which to produce additional draft
horses in less than several years.

And an ISOT country doesn't have those years.
Cast-iron steam tractors, crude but functional,
running on coal, would be much faster to get up.

(Even if Germany had _no_ domestic iron ore supplies,
there's enough scrap iron or scrappable iron to make
the tractors.)

One might gain a short boost by converting beef and
dairy cattle to draft oxen. I don't know if that's
even possible.
--
The real Velvet Revolution - and the would-be hijacker.

http://originalvelvetrevolution.com
Paul F Austin
2013-04-15 23:41:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rich Rostrom
Post by Paul F Austin
harvesters) but that means the national horse herd would need to grow.
The problem with that is that it is impossible to
produce a new draft horse in less than several years.
Furthermore,it is impossible to produce additional
brood mares with which to produce additional draft
horses in less than several years.
And an ISOT country doesn't have those years.
Cast-iron steam tractors, crude but functional,
running on coal, would be much faster to get up.
The Hitlerian horse herd was quite large. The German Heers was largely
horse-drawn. According to Richard Overy in _Why the Allies Won_, the
German army employed 700,000 horses in support of Barbarossa. During
1942, another 400,000 horses were mobilized from Germany and the German
occupied countries. Overy didn't break out German vs e.g., French horses.

Steam-powered tillage doesn't even require tractors. The river valley in
the north of France that are tilled by cable-pulled plows. The cables
stretch across from one side of the river valley to the other in a
continuous loop. Steam winches pull the cable and plows and harrows back
and forth by attaching to the cables.

Paul
Phil McGregor
2013-04-16 01:02:18 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 10:21:13 -0400, Paul F Austin
Post by Paul F Austin
In a 10th Century BC Europe, neither valuata nor duress could force
European "native" agriculture to feed 60M new mouths. The only avenue
for German survival would be a rapid breaking of new land to "modern"
20th Century agricultural methods. 20th Century agricultural
productivity, given the land, machinery and agri-chemical inputs could
feed Germany. 10th Century BC agricultural methods could not.
Thning is, pre-war Germany was more or less self suffficient in food.
The reason they planned to starve the Poles after conquest was because
they had to call up the army to conquer them, and, since Germany still
had a manpower heavy rather than machine heavy agricultural sector,
this meant the 1939 harvest would be dramatically down on what was
needed to feed the nation ... not, as I understand it, to the point of
famine, but to the point where the Nazis preferred not to face the
likely political consequences.

If the Poles starved, no-one (immediately) cared.

So, with no need to mobilise beyond the peacetime 36 divisions, the
"1939" growing season is not disrupted, and the above (and below) can
be done all in good time.
Post by Paul F Austin
So, to survive, Germany would need to organize for clearance of
sufficient new land to feed its 60M, build the communications network
(river ports and roads to get harvest to Germany), produce the
machinery, fuels and fertilizers and store and transport the resulting
harvests. The machinery could be largely horse-drawn (gang plows and
harvesters) but that means the national horse herd would need to grow.
Fertilizers could be produced using coal-powered Haber-Bosch process
production.
I dunno, would 600,000 horses be enough?

That's how many the Wehrmacht had in the East at the beginning of
Barbarossa!

And, of course, the Germans are not mobilising 350 mostly Infantry
divisions who had mostly horse drawn transport, they can easily
conquer the world with their "peacetime" 36 divisions.

So, would the balance of around 290 Divisions worth of horses be
enough?

Phil

Bradipus
2013-04-15 19:37:49 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 18:56:50 -0500, Dan Goodman
Post by Dan Goodman
A country is sent back several thousand years into the past.
(Occupying
the same area.) Which countries might do well, and which
wouldn't?
I suspect Nazi Germany would manage to get itself defeated in
war.
By *whom*, exactly?
"Several thousand years" (say 3000+) "occupying the same area"
... in 1000 BC the people(s) surrounding 1933-39 Germany are
so deficient in both techology *and* population that it would,
literally, be a walk-over.
The would be no contest whatsoever. The C20th Germans would
win hands down.
The onlyy thing(s) preventing them from doing *anyything* they
damn well please would be the less obvious economic
consequences of the shift ...
* Starvation. Germany was barely self-sifficient in food and
planned
to starve the Poles in 1939+ and the Russians in 1941+ by
stealing *their* food for Germany, and starve them in
*massive* numbers (IIRC at least a third of the Poles and
2/3rds of the Russians) in order to feed themselves and their
army, and to make the needed "lebensraum" for the good Aryans.
In 1000 BC there simply aren't enough surrounding peoples, and
their methods of agriculture are so pathetically unproductive
(about 1:1.5 - barely enough to have seed crop for the next
harvest and still have "enough" to eat themselves (if hunger
8+ years of 10, of which 2+ are typically famine, and large
scale starvation or starvation related deaths *anyway* are
*your* idea of "enough") that the Germans aren't gonna get
enough food from them even if they take it *all* ... and that
assumes they'd be able to transport it all back home on the
nonexistent railroads, roads or through nonexistent ports ...
Sure, they can introduce better farming practices, better (and
new) crops, and better agricultural machinery ... but that
will all take time. Time I am not sure they'd have.
In short, the first year(s) would make "turnip winter" look
like a plethora ...
* Disruption of resource supplies. Germany went to war
because, apart from food (see above) she had to import all
sorts of vital industrial supplies ... and, suddenly, they're
all gone. Oil and Iron Ore being the two most obvious (sure,
they're still "there" ... but completely undeveloped ... and
developing t6he Mines/Wells and transport infrastructure will
be a nontrivial task).
There's lots more, but you get the idea, I hope.
Still, I suspect the German state would survive and prosper
... and that that wouldn't be good for the rest of Europe,
circa 1000 BC. The 1000 Year Reich would have a decent chance
of surviving that long simply because there is no competition
(though not necessarily a 1000 year NAZI Reich).
YMMV
I think that in year 1000 BC European plains were covered by a
dense forest with a few burned clearings, and swamps.

To plow that land one has to cut down all those trees and dig
canals to drain water.

I suppose the first year half of population dies.
--
o o
SolomonW
2013-04-14 08:19:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dan Goodman
A country is sent back several thousand years into the past. (Occupying
the same area.) Which countries might do well, and which wouldn't?
Very few countries would do well initially as they would be cut off the
world market and almost everyone imports something.

Some, however, like Qatar would have a real problems as they have no
customers for their product, and their economy is really pathetic.
Phil McGregor
2013-04-14 08:36:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by SolomonW
Post by Dan Goodman
A country is sent back several thousand years into the past. (Occupying
the same area.) Which countries might do well, and which wouldn't?
Very few countries would do well initially as they would be cut off the
world market and almost everyone imports something.
Some, however, like Qatar would have a real problems as they have no
customers for their product, and their economy is really pathetic.
And, generally speaking, you can't eat crude oil ... so *they* would
be *far* worse off than the Nazis ... though, possibly, the climate in
the region is somewhat better then than it is now ... even so, same
problem as the Germans, net importer (net *massive* importer) of food
faces situation where the local population is far too small and their
methods of agriculture not the best for producing enough for the
Qataris to even steal.

Of course, the Tigris-Euphrates cities would be good targets ... and
*may* be enough, *if* the Qataris have enough brains to not slaughter
the goose in the first raids ;-(

Phil
Dan Goodman
2013-04-14 20:08:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by SolomonW
Post by Dan Goodman
A country is sent back several thousand years into the past.
(Occupying the same area.) Which countries might do well, and which
wouldn't?
Very few countries would do well initially as they would be cut off the
world market and almost everyone imports something.
Which countries NEED to import? I think all three North American
countries could survive on their own resources.
Post by SolomonW
Some, however, like Qatar would have a real problems as they have no
customers for their product, and their economy is really pathetic.
--
Dan Goodman
Derek Lyons
2013-04-15 05:21:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dan Goodman
Post by SolomonW
Post by Dan Goodman
A country is sent back several thousand years into the past.
(Occupying the same area.) Which countries might do well, and which
wouldn't?
Very few countries would do well initially as they would be cut off the
world market and almost everyone imports something.
Which countries NEED to import? I think all three North American
countries could survive on their own resources.
The problem isn't that they don't need to import - the problem is that
they *do* import. And once they've travelled through time, those
imports cease and must be replaced. For some countries this might end
up being nothing but a minor bobble, for others disastrous or nearly
so.

Or, to put it another way, countries adrift suffer the same problems
as anything else adrift - massive short term resource and allocation
problems, resulting in a race against time with one foot in a bucket
of cement to adress them.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL
Rich Rostrom
2013-04-15 17:40:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dan Goodman
Post by SolomonW
Very few countries would do well initially as they would be cut off the
world market and almost everyone imports something.
Which countries NEED to import? I think all three North American
countries could survive on their own resources.
In the long term.

In the short term, all three countries import a great
variety of manufactured goods, including essential
components of critical technologies.

(This is true of almost _any_ nation today.)

The immediate total cutoff of these supplies would
be a disruptive shock.
--
The real Velvet Revolution - and the would-be hijacker.

http://originalvelvetrevolution.com
Rich Rostrom
2013-04-14 22:30:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dan Goodman
A country is sent back several thousand years into the past. (Occupying
the same area.) Which countries might do well, and which wouldn't?
Would do well: Countries which could feed themselves,
have strong civil orders, are technologically
capable, and large enough to have a sufficiently broad
technical capacities to rebuild what they don't have.

Wouldn't: anybody else.

This is complicated by the extreme interdependence
of world industry. It seems as though everyone
imports at least some vital and irreplaceable goods
from somebody else.

For a country even to survive as an organized entity,
it may have to have very strong food availability and
civil order (as well as the tech base).
--
The real Velvet Revolution - and the would-be hijacker.

http://originalvelvetrevolution.com
The Horny Goat
2013-04-14 22:47:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dan Goodman
A country is sent back several thousand years into the past. (Occupying
the same area.) Which countries might do well, and which wouldn't?
I suspect Nazi Germany would manage to get itself defeated in war.
From our time into the past? Don't know.
From several thousand years in the future into our time?
I dunno - Nazi Germany in 12000 would have occupied England .... of
course Britannia (English/Scotland/Wales) wasn't an island at that
time so no talk of Sealion...
Loading...