鐵幕正在歐洲卷土重來，盡管東側的地區(qū)變得更少（完）
[OC]The Iron Curtain is returning in Europe,altough fewer regions are now on its Eastern side
譯文簡介
這些地圖也總是夸大了實際的影響。
俄羅斯幅員遼闊，但俄羅斯在其他領域并不大。
正文翻譯
鐵幕正在歐洲卷土重來，盡管東側的地區(qū)變得更少（完）
評論翻譯
很贊 ( 0 )
收藏
These maps always overplay the actual impact too.
Russia is big in land. Russia is not big in anything else.
France and Germany alone have +6 million more people than Russia does, and their economy is about 4x that.
Russia is essentially a small nation next to a superstate (EU).
這些地圖也總是夸大了實際的影響。
俄羅斯幅員遼闊，但俄羅斯在其他領域并不大。
法國和德國加一起人口就比俄羅斯多600萬，他們的經濟是俄羅斯的4倍。
俄羅斯本質上是一個小國，緊挨著一個超級大國(歐盟)。
Russia is big in land, resources and nuclear weapons.
俄羅斯領土遼闊，資源豐富，核武器也很多。
Russia is big in land, resources
But not economy or people
and nuclear weapons.
That don't work
The amount of land you have is irrelevant. Australia is huge but is not a great power. UK is tiny but is a top world power.
What matters most is people. Everything else is secondary.
但經濟很小，人口不多。
核武器不起作用。
你擁有的土地數量無關緊要。澳大利亞幅員遼闊，但不是一個大國。英國雖小，但卻是世界頭號強國。
最重要的是人，其他一切都是次要的。
redditor moment, their nukes do work stop spreading misinformation
Reddit時刻，他們的核武器確實有用，停止傳播錯誤信息。
For real. If even a quarter of their weapons work, that's still more than a thousand nukes
說真的，即使他們武器只有四分之一有效，那仍然是超過1000枚核武器。
exactly, What's more annoying is the random premonition of declaring this, like what evidence do they have to make this asinine claim. Yeah the Russian military kinda sucks but I wouldn't go around saying their nukes don't work.
確實，更讓人惱火的是他們憑感覺在那里胡說八道，比如他們有什么證據來做出這個愚蠢的聲明。
是的，俄羅斯軍隊有點糟糕，但我不會到處說他們的核武器沒用。
Even 1% of Russia’s nukes would probably be enough to kill all of Europe. Russia’s nuclear programme is almost certainly capable to a certain extent, Putin basically needs it as his insurance policy.
即使俄羅斯只擁有1%的核武器，也可能足以殺死整個歐洲。
俄羅斯的核計劃在某種程度上幾乎可以肯定是有能力的，普京基本上需要它作為他的保險政策。
1% of their arsenal would not be able to “kill” Europe, though it could damage us severely by hitting just a few big cities.
Modern nukes are very destructive, but they’re not that destructive. Europe may be a small continent, but there’s still a lot of land to cover and it would take a hell of a lot of their 1.6megatonners to kill even just the cities, never mind the towns and the countryside.
It might be a slightly pedantic point as even just one nuclear bomb hitting e.g. the centre of London would still be an almost unthinkably awful situation, but be careful not to ascribe magic to nuclear weapons.
They’re still bound by the laws of physics, and they do not generate infinitely big explosions.
他們1%的軍火庫不足以“殺死”歐洲，盡管僅靠襲擊幾個大城市就能對我們造成嚴重傷害。
現(xiàn)代核武器的破壞力非常大，但也沒大到那種程度。歐洲可能是一座很小的大陸，但仍有很多的土地需要覆蓋，即使只是摧毀城市，也需要大量的160萬噸TNT當量，這還不算城鎮(zhèn)和鄉(xiāng)村。
這可能是一個有點賣弄學問的觀點，因為即使只是一顆核彈擊中倫敦中心，仍然是一個幾乎無法想象的可怕的情況，但小心不要把魔力歸咎于核武器。它們仍然受到物理定律的約束，它們也不會產生無限大的爆炸。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網 http://www.top-shui.cn 轉載請注明出處
Finally, a grounded comment…..
People speak of nuclear war as if it’s certain. Putin loves his lavish lifestyle and will not be starting a nuclear Armageddon anytime soon.
終于有一個接地氣的評論了.....
人們說起核戰(zhàn)爭，就好像它是必然的。普京喜歡他奢華的生活方式，不會很快開始一場核末日的。
America, along with NATO, and her allies could reduce Russia to ashes without firing a single nuke. Many of our weapons are so technologically advanced that they’re damn near impossible to defeat. Russia can’t even invade Ukraine without massive losses. Russia is no match for the west.
美國和北約及其盟友可以不發(fā)射一枚核彈就將俄羅斯夷為灰燼。我們的許多武器在技術上是如此先進，幾乎不可能被擊敗。
俄羅斯甚至無法在不遭受巨大損失的情況下入侵烏克蘭。俄羅斯不是西方的對手。
You wouldn't know it considering horrible blunders in Iraq and some horrible presidents, but when the cause is in line and the players are willing, it's a different story. People forget
考慮到在伊拉克犯下的可怕的錯誤和一些可怕的總統(tǒng)，你不會知道這一點。但當目標一致，這些國家也愿意，那就是一個不同的故事了。
Exactly. North Korea, a poor country with little access to trade with other countries, managed to make nukes. Russia is definitely more powerful that North Korea.
完全正確。朝鮮，一個幾乎無法與其他國家進行貿易的貧窮國家，成功地制造了核武器。俄羅斯肯定比朝鮮更強大。
If what matters most was people india would be a superpower right now and about the nukes
Wanna find out by betting the lives of billions?
如果最重要的是人，印度現(xiàn)在就是一個超級大國。
想用十數億人的生命來打賭嗎?
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網 http://www.top-shui.cn 轉載請注明出處
India is almost a superpower tho. Lol.
China and India are poised to become World Superpowers.
然而印度勉強也算個超級大國，哈哈哈哈
中國和印度準備成為世界超級大國。
INDIA SUPERPOWRR SAAAR MODI SULTAN 2023
印度超級大國！莫迪蘇丹王！2023！
Haha, nice one. China already is a superpower, India is in line behind Japan, Germany France and the UK. It'll be many decades if at all.
哈哈哈，說得好。
中國已經是超級大國，印度還落后于日本、德國、法國和英國。就算成了超級大國也是數十年后的事兒了。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網 http://www.top-shui.cn 轉載請注明出處
First of all China isn't a Superpower according to the strict definition of a [Super power] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superpower). It is the second most powerful after the USA, no debate there. Secondly India is already way ahead of France and the UK in most power metrics (military, manpower, GDP (3rd in the world after USA/China in PPP terms 5th in Nominal terms) and is one of four [Potential Superpowers] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potential_superpower) along with the EU (as a bloc), Russia and China. The more you know....
首先，根據嚴格的超級大國定義，中國不是超級大國。中國是僅次于美國的第二大強國，這毫無疑問。
其次，印度在大多數實力指標上已經遙遙領先法國和英國（軍力、人力資源、平價購買力GDP已經位居世界第三，名義GDP位居世界第五），是世界四個最有潛力成為超級大國的國家之一，其他還有歐盟集團、俄羅斯和中國。
China is a power. A superpower? Not really? At this point they cant really project hard power much beyond their borders (nukes aside).
India is barely a regional power despite its population.
中國是一個大國。
一個超級大國?真的嗎?在這一點上，他們無法真正將硬實力投射到境外(核武器除外)。
盡管人口眾多，印度勉強算個地區(qū)強國。
Yes because China's economy is large enough and integrated with the global economy enough that they can influence the global economy by doing things like putting in new tariffs or intentionally duing their own currency.
是的，（中國是超級大國，）因為中國經濟足夠大，與全球經濟整合得足夠好，他們可以通過提高關稅或故意讓自己的貨幣貶值來影響全球經濟。
But the classic definition of superpower is being able to project force (and by force we’re talking military power) anywhere in the world on relatively short notice. China does not have that capability. If you want to classify China as a superpower based on economic influence then you kind of need to create another separate category for the US because there is still a massive gulf between China’s ability to project hard or soft power and what the US can do.
但超級大國的經典定義是能夠在相對短的時間內在世界任何地方投射力量(我們指的是軍事力量)。中國沒有這種能力。
如果你想根據經濟影響力將中國歸類為超級大國，那么你需要為美國創(chuàng)建另一個單獨的類別，因為中國投射硬實力或軟實力的能力與美國的能力之間仍有巨大的鴻溝。
Is there a universally accepted classic definition? Force projection is one aspect of global influence but it's not the only one.
有沒有一個被普遍接受的經典定義?軍力投射是全球影響力的一個方面，但不是唯一的一個方面。
Maybe not universal, but I like Wikipedia’s definition:
A superpower is a state with a dominant position characterized by its extensive ability to exert influence or project power on a global scale. This is done through the combined means of economic, military, technological, political and cultural strength as well as diplomatic and soft power influence.
I would say that using this definition China is not yet a superpower, and is certainly not yet a peer to the US in that sense.
也許沒有被普遍接受的定義。但我喜歡維基上的定義：
超級大國是指擁有主導地位的國家，其特征是在全球范圍內施加影響或投射力量的廣泛能力。綜合運用經濟、軍事、技術、政治、文化，以及外交和軟實力等多種手段。
我想說，按照這個定義，中國還不是一個超級大國，在這個意義上，中國肯定還不是美國的對手。
You've got to be able to apply power, both hard and soft, to other countries to be even a regional power. You need to be able to apply power to countries around the world to be a world superpower. India barely influences their own neighbors beyond Bollywood; they're too wrapped up in their own significant internal issues and border disputes with Pakistan and China, and the Hindu nationalism means nobody from outside India is clamoring to move there for a better life. I like India and want India to flourish, but right now it's very self-focused. China's working harder at the international-power front, but most of the countries they have good relations with don't have much influence on the world stage (and in many cases, sadly, are going to get poorer and less habitable as global warming continues).
你必須能夠將實力，包括硬實力和軟實力，運用到其他國家，甚至成為一個地區(qū)強國。你需要能夠將力量應用到世界各國，成為一個世界超級大國。除了寶萊塢，印度幾乎不會影響自己的鄰居；他們太專注于自己的重大內部問題，以及與巴基斯坦和中國的邊界爭端，印度教民族主義意味著印度以外沒有人會為了更好的生活而吵著搬到那里去。
我喜歡印度，希望印度繁榮發(fā)展，但現(xiàn)在印度太以自我為中心。中國在國際力量戰(zhàn)線上更加努力，但大多數與中國有良好關系的國家在世界舞臺上沒有多大影響力（可悲的是，隨著全球變暖的持續(xù)，在許多情況下，它們將變得越來越窮，越來越不適合居住)。
If what matters most was people india would be a superpower right now and about the nukes
Wanna find out by betting the lives of billions?
No, because I didn't say all that matters is people. I just said everything else is secondary.
Here, I'll try to explain;
Do all countries with a lot of people have superpower status? No.
Do all countries with a lot of land have superpower status? No.
Do all superpowers have a lot of people? Yes.
Do all superpowers have a lot of land? Also yes.
A great example of this, is the US and Russia. Even if Russia had the same GDP per capita as the US (which is very high - 67,000) its economy would still be 9.7 trillion - about 40% of the US economy. Would it be a superpower then? No.
“如果最重要的是人，印度現(xiàn)在將是一個超級大國。想用數十億人的生命來打賭嗎? “
印度不是超級大國，因為我也沒有說人是唯一重要的因素。我是說其余的都是其次。
在這里，我會試著解釋;
所有人口眾多的國家都有超級大國的地位嗎?不。
所有擁有大量土地的國家都是超級大國嗎?不。
所有超級大國都有很多人嗎?是的。
所有的超級大國都有很多土地嗎?也是的。
一個很好的例子就是美國和俄羅斯。即使俄羅斯的人均GDP與美國相同(非常高，為6.7萬)，其經濟仍將是9.7萬億美元，約占美國經濟的40%。那么它會成為一個超級大國嗎?不。
Just so you know,even during the cold war the ussr was a poor shithole and its gdp per capita Was smaller than mosy westwen countries,it didnt stop it from being a superpower
And you seem to jot differentiate between world/great powers and superpowers
正如你所知，即使在冷戰(zhàn)期間，蘇聯(lián)也是一個貧窮的糞坑，它的人均gdp比大多數西方國家都小，但這并沒有阻止它成為一個超級大國。
你似乎很難區(qū)分世界大國和超級大國。
I mean, its not a small population.
Its not that big though. The US has 330 million. Brazil 215 million. EU 450 million. China, India 1.3 billion.
Its big enough to be a great power, but too small to be the superpower it wants to be.
我的意思是，它（俄羅斯）的人口并不小少
不過也沒那么大，美國有3.3億，巴西2.15億，歐盟4.5億。中國，印度13億。
它足夠大，可以成為一個大國，但又太小，不能成為它想成為的超級大國。
It's the biggest population in Europe by far.
它是歐洲人口最多的國家。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網 http://www.top-shui.cn 轉載請注明出處
Russia is not big in anything else.
France and Germany alone have +6 million more people than Russia does
You mean, the two largest countries in EU put together have slightly more people than Russia alone. I mean, I'm from a country of about 5 million, Russia's 140 million makes it a fucking huge country to me.
Russia is essentially a small nation next to a superstate (Europe).
Europe is not a state, let alone a superstate.
“俄羅斯在別的方面都不大。法國和德國加一起人口比俄羅斯多600萬人?！?br /> 你的意思是，歐盟兩個最大的國家加起來的人口比俄羅斯一個國家的人口還要多。但我的意思是，我來自一個有500萬人口的國家，俄羅斯的1.4億人口讓它對我來說絕對是個巨大的國家。
“俄羅斯本質上是一個小國，緊挨著一個超級大國(歐洲)?！?br /> 歐洲連國家都不是，更別說一個超級國家。
A lot of territory honestly can be a bit detrimental to a nation somethmes, be it because of political divisions or infrastructure. If handled correctly is a blessing of course (more space, more resources) but you know
老實說，很多領土有時會對一個國家造成一點損害，因為政治分歧或基礎設施。
如果處理得當當然是一件好事(更多的空間，更多的資源)，但是你知道的。
Resources...you can have economy like EU or Japan that are a juggernauts,but flacid without recources, which are provided by Russia or Australia,so its very co-dependent system. Russia just sold bunch of gas to EU countries,via Ukraine...so,its not black/white kind of deal.
資源……你可以有像歐盟或日本這樣的經濟體，它們是強大的，但沒有資源就會疲軟，而這些資源是由俄羅斯或澳大利亞提供的，所以這是一個非常相互依賴的體系。俄羅斯剛剛通過烏克蘭向歐盟國家出售了大量天然氣……所以，這不是一種黑白分明的交易。
When you check the real size of Russia off of the mercator projection, it's not even that big. Still the biggest country in the world sure, but you could almost fit it on the Sahara desert + the Arabian peninsula.
當你拋開墨卡托投影，查看俄羅斯的實際面積時，它其實沒有那么大。
盡管仍然是世界上最大的國家，但你幾乎可以把它放在撒哈拉沙漠和阿拉伯半島上。
I mean.. Russia is huge, its about the size of the US + Canada combined..
我的意思是，俄羅斯很大，相當于美國加加拿大的總和。
Not denying that, just saying that when looking at the map of the world, it looks unbelievabely huge, yet it's not as big as it seems.
That comment sounds kinda sus without the context.
我不否認這一點，我只是想說，當我們看世界地圖的時候，它看起來大得令人難以置信，但它并沒有看起來那么大。
這句話聽起來有點怪異。
Russia is about 10% smaller than the US and Canada combined. Still huge though.
俄羅斯比美國和加拿大加起來要小10%，不過仍然幅員遼闊。
Didn't some US leader call Russia "a gas station with nuclear weapons"?
不是有美國領導人說俄羅斯是“擁有核武器的加油站”嘛?
Turkey isn’t Europe but Cyprus is?
土耳其不算歐洲，但塞浦路斯算？
Yes.
是的。
Nope. This map shows the geographical borders of Europe and Cyprus is geographically 100% in Asia.
不。這張地圖顯示的歐洲的地理邊界。而塞浦路斯的地理邊界在地理上100%位于亞洲。
It isn’t geographical but rather cultural. If you look at the map you can clearly see the nations who come from Greko/Roman or Judeo/Christian culture. Since Turks are muslim, they are not European that is why they don’t include them.
這不是地理上的，而是文化上的。如果你看一下地圖，你可以清楚地看到來自希臘文化/羅馬文化或猶太文化/基督教文化的國家。因為土耳其人是穆斯林，他們不是歐洲人，這就是為什么這張圖沒有包括他們。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網 http://www.top-shui.cn 轉載請注明出處
Excuse me? This map is NOT cultural since it doesn’t show the rest of the parts of Russia. Also America, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia have European culture as well
but as you can see, this map only shows the geographical borders of Europe where it ends in Ural and Caucasus mountains. Also Turkey is partially included in this pic (Istanbul and Eastern Thrace), I don’t understand why you’re saying Turkey is not included. Again, Cyprus is NOT geographically in Europe. PERIOD.
抱歉?這張地圖不是文化地圖，因為它沒有顯示俄羅斯的其他部分。美國、加拿大、新西蘭和澳大利亞也有歐洲文化。
但正如你所看到的，這張地圖只顯示了歐洲的地理邊界，它的終點是烏拉爾山脈和高加索山脈。土耳其也在這張圖片里(伊斯坦布爾和東色雷斯)，我不明白你為什么說土耳其不包括在內。
同樣，塞浦路斯在地理上并不在歐洲。
Cyprus is not in the Asia they are in the European unx, which makes them European not eastern. However, we Turks are middle easterners therefore it is normal for them not to include Turkey.
塞浦路斯不是亞洲國家，而是歐盟國家，這使他們成為歐洲國家，而不是東方國家。然而，我們土耳其人是中東人，因此他們不包括土耳其是正常的。
Omg aren’t you able to read properly? Dude, again, Cyprus is 100.00% in Asia, it’s a fact, you can’t change it.
As you can see, Cyprus is in Asia. Yes, they are in the EU ,which is kinda ridiculous, but it doesn’t mean that their country is located in Europe. Turkey, however, has lands both in Europe and Asia. That’s a fact, get over it. Geez
我的天啊，你看不懂嗎?伙計，再說一次，塞浦路斯百分百是亞洲國家，這是事實，你不能改變它。
如你所見，塞浦路斯在亞洲。是的，他們在歐盟，這有點可笑，但這并不意味著他們的國家位于歐洲。然而，土耳其在歐洲和亞洲都有土地。這是事實，直面它吧，天啊。
I think firstly you should learn what European means because you clearly don’t understand the term of it. Being European doesn’t come from your geography but it comes from your culture. Non-Turkish people living in the Cybrus can be European but Turks can not. Even though Turkey has lands in the European continent, Turkey itself has never been an European because of their different cultural backgrounds. Like I said before Turks are not European and they have NEVER been.
我認為首先你應該了解歐洲的意思，因為你顯然不理解它的術語。歐洲人不是來自于你的地理位置，而是來自于你的文化。
居住在塞浦路斯的非土耳其人可以是歐洲人，但土耳其人不能。盡管土耳其在歐洲大陸上有土地，但由于文化背景的不同，土耳其本身從來就不是歐洲人。就像我之前說的，土耳其人不是歐洲人，他們從來都不是。
Russia is slowly disconecting itself from Europe in all possible ways
most immigrants come now from Central Asia,as Ukraine,Moldovan and Georgian immigration has declined
trade relations with Europe are steadily declining,while those with China increasing or maintained
western brands are leaving the country,and China will soon be (if already is not) the largest foreign investor)
problem is that this is extremely inefficient:
80%of the population is on the European side of Russia
the two largest cities,Moscow and Sainkt Petersburg,were 2-3 hours away from major European cities,and it was easy for Western companies to collaborate and establish subsidiaries in Russia
language and cultural difference:far more Russians know to use the Latin alphabet and speak English language,than the ones who know Chinese alphabet and Chinese language
trade with Europe is easier than trade with China,due to already existing infrastructure,and also due to longer logistic networks needed to transport goods from China(ships need to pass through the Arctic Ocean or through the Transsiberian railways,which will cost loads of money to maintain
things like natural gas and oil will need new gigantic infrastructure networks to be sent to China or India(thousands of kilometers in length)
俄羅斯正以各種可能的方式慢慢脫離歐洲：
隨著烏克蘭、摩爾多瓦和格魯吉亞的移民數量下降，現(xiàn)在大多數移民來自中亞。
與歐洲的貿易關系正在穩(wěn)步下降，而與中國的貿易關系卻在增加或維持。
西方品牌正在離開俄羅斯，中國將很快成為(如果現(xiàn)在還不是的話)最大的外國投資者。
問題是這是非常低效的:
80%的人口在俄羅斯的歐洲一側。
俄羅斯最大的兩座城市，莫斯科和圣彼得堡，距離歐洲主要城市只有2-3小時的車程，西方公司很容易在俄羅斯合作并建立子公司。
語言和文化差異:知道使用拉丁字母和說英語的俄羅斯人要比知道中文單詞和漢語的俄羅斯人多得多。
與歐洲的貿易比與中國的貿易更容易，因為現(xiàn)有的基礎設施，也因為從中國運輸貨物需要更長的物流網絡，船只需要穿過北冰洋或穿越西伯利亞鐵路，這將花費大量的資金來維護。
像天然氣和石油這樣的東西需要新的巨大的基礎設施網絡輸送到中國或印度(數千公里長)。
Baltics about to cut off russia even more. no transit to Russia or from thru there. only by sea or that narrow air corridor.
波羅的海國家將進一步切斷與俄羅斯的關系。沒有過境俄羅斯，只通過海路或狹窄的空中走廊。
Latvia singed a contract to buy Russian gas in Roubles already.
拉脫維亞已經簽署了以盧布購買俄羅斯天然氣的合同。
No they did not sign a contract to pay in rubles. A Latvian gas company announced that they might be able to pay in rubles, they are analyzing the contract to see if it's possible and if it violates sanctions. They announced that they can probably do it.
Latvian company Latvijas Gāze is considering the possibility of paying for Russian gas in rubles.
"At first glance, the settlement procedure in Russian rubles does not officially violate the sanctions regime, and it is possible," the company said
不，他們沒有簽署以盧布支付的合同。一家拉脫維亞天然氣公司宣布他們可以用盧布支付，他們正在分析這份合同，看它是否可行，是否違反了制裁。他們宣布他們可能能做到。
拉脫維亞公司Latvijas Gāze正在考慮用盧布購買俄羅斯天然氣的可能性。
“乍一看，以俄羅斯盧布結算的程序并沒有正式違反制裁制度，這是可能的，”該公司表示
Almost as if Russia should be two countries.
搞得好像俄羅斯是兩個國家一樣。
? Why?
為什么這么說？
No. Even deep into Siberia, Russia is more connected to Europe than to Asia.
The only place that could be another country would be the Northern Caucasus, which is ethnically distinct, being majority-Muslim, closer to Turkey and Azerbaijan than to Moscow. But it is also entirely in Europe, so probably not what you meant.
不。即使在西伯利亞深處，俄羅斯與歐洲的聯(lián)系也比與亞洲的聯(lián)系更緊密。
唯一可能成為另一個國家的地方是北高加索地區(qū)，這個地區(qū)在民族上是獨特的，主要是穆斯林，它更靠近土耳其和阿塞拜疆，而不是莫斯科。
但它也完全在歐洲，所以可能不是你想表達的意思。