Warsaw is the natural capital of Europe, not Brussels

Warsaw - natural capital of Europe

i hope that most of people of this forum feel this way. Europe would be better place with Warsaw as capital of this continent, for many reasons...

Warsaw is one giant ugly concrete village. While in Warsaw I heard some old lady saying that all mannerly dwellers had been killed by Germans or Soviets. It makes sense.

For which reason? Care to give an example? Banja Luka?
Maybe Srebrenica would be a good choice?

Balkan corner alert by the way.

What does that scuptural looking building to the left of center in the OP photo house? It looks like the prow of giant ocean liner or a work by Constantin Brancusi.

not worse then Brussels, i can tell you that one. In any case, after decent investments and support by entire continent /what one natural capital of Europe deserve/ it would be much better.


take for example geographical location of Warsaw in comparison to Brussels. Brussels represent exclusively western part of Europe while is position of Warsaw more balanced. Warsaw is natural center

Berlin would probably be the best capital, considering it is in the best European nation (Deutschland) and is probably the most developed and sophisticated.

Maybe people living outside of Poland don't want to invest money in Warsaw

It isn't build yet.

is it a "phantom" or will it be built in the future

it's slowly raising.

Its currently under construction: skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=257171&page=32

Give a t least one. lol

That's an inspired design. Does it have a name?

Złota 44 - which is the street adress as far as I know.
Among other things its going to contain 251 apartments.

I wish here in Frankfurt they would take some inspiration from that, all our skyscrapers are exclusivly office building with no flats :-/

BTW. am I the only one who thinks that the fact that Crow picked a render CGI instead of a real photograph to present Wasaw, probably without even realizing it, incredibly ironic and fitting?

Shows just perfectly how much he really knows what he's talking about ;)

Warsaw is the natural capital of Europe, not Brussel
I thought it should be Budapest.

I agree. The Ister is very much Europe's central river and since the Magyars are neither Slavs nor Latins, nor Gemanics their capital would be a good neutral choice too. Another good choice would be Crete because that is the first place in Europe that its Phoenician namesake was taken to.

Honestly, when our company needed to gather our clients from all over East Europe, we were always choosing Budapest. Great hotel base, equal driving distance and what can I say? Budapest is far nicer than Warsaw. Serbs need no visa to Budapest, something for Crow ;-)

Budapest bikers, April 2nd, 2011.

Making businessmen more comfortable is a banal reason to choose Budapest for a European Capital

It is the East Europe Capital already ;-)

Poles are Slavs and Catholic, right.

Now, for western Europeans fact that Poles are Catholics should be enough of a reason to be satisfy with Warsaw. On the other side, Slavs would be satisfy that one major Slavic country represent center of Europe and giving capital to the continent.

See? You can`t say same for the Brussels. Its fact that Slavs don`t feel Brussels as center that could care of their interests, too.


Budapest?

you won`t love idea when you learn that creation of Budapest (Buda was merged with Pesta) was inspired and financed by Serbians. It was back in time when Serbs learned Hungarians to ride horses properly (in the same time Serbs formed first winged cavalry in Poland) to be able to resist to Turks. Actually, Serbs were Hungarian first and last line against Turks. Then, in reward to Serbians, Hungarians committed massive genocide on them. From the Budapest to the Seged and Srbobran (Sentomas), Serbians were slaughtered and scattered.


above comment goes for you, too

Warsaw actually sounds like a lethal fighting weapon whereas Brussels is the name of a pate (pasztet).

On a more serious note, Warsaw could lay some claim based on fighting for Europe in the past. Poland was a pioneer of democracy, albeit short lived back in the day.

Short lived?

It means not for a long time, David ;)

Ever since the 16'th century Poland has been a pioneer for democracy.

But i guess your ignorant ass don't care.

You mean at the break of centuries 19th/20th c. when both cities were merged and indeed developed? At the time Budapest was the second capital city of the Austro-Hungarian monarchy? I will read with interest about Serbian participation in the construction of the St. Stephen's Cathedral and of the Parliament. I also wonder if I'm wrong thinking Vojvodina used to be a Hungarian province for a long time?

David, I meant their earliest efforts were foiled by the Soviets. There was a Constitution but it was dismantled as the Soviets disliked what it represented. That's what I meant.

Seanus you must mean the Imperial Russians not the Soviets.

I know that.

Your kind don't like to talk about what happend before the 20'th century.

Uh, the liberal veto wasn't exactly a great endorsement of democracy.

So true, Crow!