User, come help me, I have trouble understanding. I've been thinking about this for a long time and yet no answer

user, come help me, I have trouble understanding. I've been thinking about this for a long time and yet no answer.
So, riddle me this: how am I supposed to take countries like Finland, Denmark, Slovakia seriously when their population is smaller than just 1 our city? Or maybe Bogota, Colombian city? Or Tehran, Iran? I am not bullying, just geniunely questioning.
Or maybe any of these cities: m.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=cities with population more than 7000000 ?
Imagine this: a whole nation, spanning a region on the world map, its people, flag, the history, vs. just one city.
It feels just like when smallest dogs bark the loudest.

Attached: genuine interest.jpg (550x488, 102K)

They are more city state than country

Quintessential Russian: bigger=better post

Because if you go there, that little country is the ultimate authority in its patch of land and can (theoretically) do whatever the fuck it wants under the threat of force. While your city is subject to a superior authority. So essentially it doesn't matter if you take Slovakia seriously, because if you go to Slovakia and don't follow Slovak law they will use force to stop you, and they are only accountable to themselves.

That's literally all a state is. The monopoly on violence in a certain area. Some areas and historical circumstances lend themselves to the formation of large empires like Russia or the US, others favour many small, fragmented states like Switzerland. One is not neccessarily superior to the other, since the only condition of a state's success is survival.

Shit the fuck up. Everybody knows this but what USSRanon was suggesting is might = right. And by god most of you are pissants compared to us. Reality is unbiased.

>might = right
that is literally what I just said you tremendous mongrel brainlet

Attached: 1512323435891.jpg (3504x2337, 855K)

Thanks for your thoughts, although I never mentioned these countries being better, especially since Russia can easily lose on some comparison points of interest. It's just.. they are so small population-wise

They could be just one guy innawoods with a rifle, all that matters is that they're the final authority in their neck of the woods. The relative comparisons don't mean shit so long as the big guy is not directly challenging the little guy's authority.

What's wrong with it? Most of small countries are not just small in population, but also has a small area. Nevermind that being small in population and area doesn't make them small in terms of production, culture or technology.

>how am I supposed to take countries like Finland, Denmark, Slovakia seriously
you're not, except if you want to visit, as latvia was saying.

Riddre me this, westeln pigdog... How am I supposed to take a country rike Russia, which has less population than a single province in my country seriously?

Attached: 430b2314-6617-11e7-8c84-2c9d21aee0d8_image_hires_170936[1].jpg (980x551, 188K)

how are you supposed to take russia seriously when the economy is smaller than italys economy, which has less than 1/2 its population

Attached: hmm.jpg (514x544, 23K)

It's economy is smaller than Tokyo as a city
They seriously need to make this better

>They seriously need to make this better
Nobody cares here about it, everyone is worried about how strong our army is and whether the whole world is afraid of us.

>le bigger is le better meme

this, little countries with no real power would do well to keep their mouths shut while the big boys talk, don't overestimate yourself, learn your place, and don't ever act you're on our level.

t. new zealand 2.0

t. new zealand beta version

t. zealand 0.9

based

I already forgot wolframalpha existed

And that's basically where it gets extremely confusing
I don't think those carriers and planes come free, and having strong economy is one of the most important thing for keeping a strong army
Can average Russians actually feel like they need to make their life better instead of caring about shit that would possibly not change anything of their life?

>we have 100 million "people" who eat grass to stay alive and they cant even read but we are more relevant than first world countries

The worst part is that these irrelevant micronations are usually the most arrogant ones

I've told to my great grandmother yesterday, she's alive now thanks god, she is 94 now, btw. She is a hard worker of the rear in ww2, but now receives an undeservedly little pension, which you can only pay bills and buy yourself something to eat. And do you know what she said to me? Let Putin reign, thanks to him every country are afraid of us, we will kill the damned America, we will defend Syria. And about total corruption, she says - Putin was stolen already, probably no more stealing. You know, it hurts to see how she slowly dies in this post of Soviet shit, she's a good and kind person.

Attached: rage.png (633x758, 16K)

How's the coast line working out for ya?
Your "big" country is on roids, all mass no use

>and having strong economy is one of the most important thing for keeping a strong army
USSR proved your wrong, they just happen to have a lot of cannon fodder which also works.

Attached: 2f7[2].jpg (601x508, 28K)

inb4 merely pretending

>how am I supposed to take countries like Finland, Denmark, Slovakia seriously when their population is smaller than just 1 our city?
You arent