3 ms·
Well yes, but China claims that their development of the islands makes them sufficiently substantial. They've built airports, military bases, ports and entire d
by arcticbull 4y ago
Well yes, but China claims that their development of the islands makes them sufficiently substantial. They've built airports, military bases, ports and entire developments. Check out the 'before and after' photos. [1]
Frankly, I think their claim may just get upheld in due course. To be clear I think it's shameful and an environmental catastrophe, but I've no doubt they will invest as much time and effort as deemed necessary to make these substantial islands.
[1] https://www.marketwatch.com/story/chinas-artificial-islands-in-before-and-after-photos-2015-10-27 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/chinas-artificial-islands-...
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- post-it 4y ago> The reef itself was only 7.2 square kilometers; it has been expanded to add another 100,000 square meters. This sounds as though the author doesn't know that 100,000 square metres = 0.1 square kilometres.
- arcticbull 4y agoAgreed, as peer pointed out that's bad journalism. It's also old (a 2016 write-up). I imagine it's evolved a lot since.
- renewiltord 4y agoHaha, journalists are really something else > The reef itself was only 7.2 square kilometers; it has been expanded to add another 100,000 square meters. So they took a 7.2 km^2 thing and made it 7.3 km^2? Cool photos by the way. Thank you for sharing link.