Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | yanhangyhy's commentslogin

its a system failure, you can write 100000 articles on ‘America has a xxx problem` from now on. find the root cause, solve it.eg: copy,war...anything that works.

a machine cannot understand the smell of a flower until it smells one..

I'm not sure? A person blind from birth has an understanding of color -- though it's a bit complicated: https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2019/02/making-sense-...

People forget that evolution has almost certainly hard-coded certain concepts and knowledge deep into our brains. That deep knowledge will probably not be easy to translate into language, and probably isn't linguistic either, but we know it has to be there for at least some things.

emm.. i will read this. intresting.

we call it the rich version of north korean

Who is "we"?

While the ugliness of Taiwanese justice (or lack thereof) makes it unappealing to me, from the other issues mentioned in these threads and the recent 3 year sentence for killing a little girl - https://jakartaglobe.id/news/sixyearold-indonesian-girl-kill..., I'm not sure it rises to the most troubling qualities of NK. eg The population doesn't starve en masse, no familial dynasty, and there is no alternate-fictional history.


> Who is "we"?

many chinese people, it's kind of joke but still..also true on many levels.

> I'm not sure it rises to the most troubling qualities of NK

its run by a dictator from the begining, with many strange laws to tell the people not to do this and not to do that. the major difference is that Singapore is pro-west (and pretend to be neutral) so no trash talk from the western media and its portrayed as a 'democracy'


This is the "dictator" that you're allowed to run for election against and the "no chewing gum" bylaws Singaporeans sell T-shirts joking about the system to foreigners, right?

Try doing that in mainland China...


There are many ways to keep yourself (and your son, after, like in SG). You can use arbitrary force and secret police, as it is the case in DPRK or China.

Or you can use the fact that you basically own the State to pit everything against your political opponents. There are various ways to do this, and at different intensities. SG's PAP is famous for using lawfare against political bloggers, newspapers and political opponents who question their rule.

Western democracies, where the selectorate is currently fearing for a populist takeover has started to do the same: German politicians filed more than 4,000 defamation cases, vague "hate speech laws" allow to selectively try your opponents, the State funds compliant press and NGOs, and so on. The EU functions in a way that democratic oversight and popular will is so dilluted that it isn't a real constraint, while keeping the "democratic" varnish and some legitimacy.

At least in SG, DPRK or China, things are clear and not hypocritical, maybe it's better for everyone.


so is USA and Trump, why people call Trump a dictator?

Trump tried to reverse the election last time he lost and enjoys suppressing protests with military units. But yeah, he isn't literally a dictator, just would like to be

i failed to understand the enthusiasm for politics memes.. it's a good point, i just dont undertand the fuss. in the end, you want to something changes in your life, not only something like 'i can joke about our system'. if it can change the system and the policy, i totally support them. but i dont see many cases. If i have to choose one, i will always choose the gum.

i read so many pepople complain the ICE on rednote and on reddit complain Trump and jokes about him, i just don't see the changes. Does Trump retreat any of his major polices? If not, are people just lives in the bubbles?


" so no trash talk from the western media and its portrayed as a 'democracy' "

Please provide sources


please give me a link said singpore is not democary and its run by a dictator


singaporeans can read that. in singapore. we can access the rsf.org website too.

ah shit.. i foget the essence of free world and free speech: you can speak and express, but we can make sure nobody hears you and your voice doens't matter..

you win! this website must make a huge diffrenece for the people all over the world or the western world so people think of singapore as non-democracy sometimes.


its certain, i ensure you. taiwan wont get the treat like Hong Kong before. Hong Kong proves the one country two system policy is a failure. the only result is war and taiwan will lose

> taiwan will lose

That depends on how cowardly the rest of the world acts if/when the time comes.


I don't think this is realistic. A few thoughts in no particular order:

- War is logistics and you're talking about trying to get involved in a war, that would necessitate supply lines thousands of miles long, between two countries that are separated by 80 miles.

- China is extremely technologically advanced with the largest military in the world, by a wide margin.

- China is the at-scale manufacturing king of the world. In a shift to a war economy, nobody would be able to come even remotely close to competing. They parallel the US in WW2 in a number of ways.

- China is a nuclear power, meaning getting involved is going to be Ukraine style indirect aid to try to avoid direct conflict and nuclear escalation.

- Any attempt to engage in things like sanctions would likely hurt the sanctioners significantly more than China.

- The "rest of the world" you're referring to is the anglosphere, EU, and a few oddballs like Japan or South Korea. This makes up less than 15% of the world, and declining.

- War fatigue is real. The US really wanted to invade Syria, but no matter how hard we beat the war drums, people just weren't down with it. I think this is because people saw major echoes of Iraq at the time, and Taiwan will have a far louder echo of Ukraine. This isn't a show many people will be enthusiastic about rerunning.


* The US has the largest military logistics system in the world and regularly uses it to fight wars. It's a well exercised muscle.

* Being close to the front lines is as much of a liability as an asset. China's ports and shipbuilding facilities will be bombed out, the US' will not.

* This will be a naval and air war. You can't march troops across the strait, and as we've seen in Ukraine, flying them is a no-go either.

* China hasn't fought a war within the living memory of anyone of fighting age.

* You have a weird way of trying to diminish what represents most of the economic power of the world. Let's also add the Philippines and Vietnam to those "oddballs". China will be alone. And don't forget that China's population is shrinking.

* War fatigue is not an issue here when it comes to Taiwan. Adventurism in Venezuela was emboldening. We'll see what happens with Iran. I live in the generally pacifist part of the US, and I think most folks would demand that we intervene.

The most likely start to hostilities will be if China declares a blockade. Someone in the US will call their bluff - with warships. If China starts shooting, we're in a war. Moral outrage is an (often unfortunate) American trait.


You're speaking of a hot war which isn't ever going to happen owing to nuclear weapons. And if it did happen it precludes many of your scenarios. For instance naval vessels are highly vulnerable to modern weapons technology. Aircraft carriers were constantly sunk in WW2. The main factor that shifted after WW2 is that nukes precluded direct war between major powers, so they ended up being exclusively used against places incapable of defending themselves. More generally Ukraine has provided many lessons in modern war, and among them is that experience in invading these sort of countries is not only useless but perhaps even harmful as it can contribute to flawed assumptions.

That 15% no longer has the majority of the economic power in the world, or anywhere near it. There's a great visualization of the G7 vs BRICS here. [1] That's obviously not all countries, but those omitted aren't going to change the result nor trend. Just as important is what "economy" means. When we speak of war we're referring to the ability to go from ploughshares to swords, but most of the 15% have neglected their core manufacturing competencies and transitioned to service economies where these large numbers don't really translate into economic might of the sort we might imagine. Again, yet another lesson from Ukraine.

[1] - https://www.statista.com/statistics/1412425/gdp-ppp-share-wo...


PPP is misapplied here; you literally get more PPP by having less economic power.

You think a hot war won't happen over Taiwan? I mean, I hope you are right. But if China wants to invade, it's going to turn into a hot war including the US and probably a number of other regional neighbors.

My guess is that MAD will keep the war conventional even though people have nukes. After all, Russia has nukes and they haven't used them despite their failure on the battlefield.

I'm curious where you are from? You don't sound like you understand the mentality of Americans. Your reasoning sounds quite a lot like the theories of victory circulating among Japanese leading up to the attack on Pearl Harbor.


PPP is the exchange rate normalized cost of a basket of goods in different countries. The way you have a high PPP is by having an economy where people can buy a lot with a little. Whether that lot happens to be eggs, steel, or artillery shells. The US is avoiding a hot war with Russia over Ukraine. They will never, ever, engage in a hot war with China over Taiwan. They'll feed weapons to Taiwan and let the Taiwanese fight to the last man, somehow try to frame the eventual defeat as a victory, wash our hands of it, and rapidly move on to the next war.

And if you think Russia is failing, then I'm not sure you know what victory looks like when fighting a competent adversary. The Ukrainian army is being fueled by endless and increasingly brutal forced conscription, and backed by Western weapons, tech, hardware, and intelligence. But instead of the present, let's go 4 years back after the invasion and when the West decided to get overtly involved. Imagine I came to you and said 'hey stickfigure not only with this war last for years, but in 4 years Russia will have the strategic initiative, control a massive chunk of Ukraine, and be continuing to push forward' -- what do you think you would have said? 'Russia must be failing' wouldn't really be a logical response then, or now.


  > Imagine I came to you and said 'hey stickfigure not only with this war last for years, but in 4 years Russia will have the strategic initiative, control a massive chunk of Ukraine, and be continuing to push forward' -- what do you think you would have said? 'Russia must be failing' wouldn't really be a logical response then, or now.
"Four years" alone would've raised eyebrows.

If four years ago anyone had said that Russia would invade Ukraine with everything it got and that four years later it would still stuck fighting for the first eastern provinces, with casualties exceeding a million and no end in sight, they would've been dismissed as an insane doomer. And yet here we are.

By now, the war against Ukraine is among the worst disasters in the entire military history of Russia, far worse than the 1979 invasion Afghanistan and the 1904 Russo-Japanese war, which until recently were regarded as the worst catastrophies of the modern era. Notable Russian fascist Maxim Kalashnikov goes much further. He says that Russia tried to subjugate Ukrainians, but failed, and Ukrainians will return for revenge. He calls it a "cultural and civilizational defeat": https://x.com/wartranslated/status/1985270960321130516


US military logistics minnow in Indopac vs PRC mainland logistics. Peak US war fighting capability was calibrated around adversaries with 50% of US GDP, even Iraq took 50% of USN CSGs + extremely favourable region basing in multi month surge operations. PRC conservatively 100x larger high-end target than Iraq, 150% US GDP by PPP, and more by actual industrial output. Before VZ uber trip, US was flexing and failing vs Houthis, i.e. shit tier adversary that actually bothered shooting US ships.

CONUS targets are on the menu, there's a reason China Military Report from last month included US west coast under PRC conventional fire, which TBH was years out of date, i.e. most of CONUS will be vulnerable, and PRC has more harden targets to attrite and more ability to deny US fires in the first place, i.e. PRC taking out exquisitely vulnerable CSG/unrep/tankers logistics tail drops US ability to deliver fires to PRC to zero, vs PRC global strikes complex chilling in hardened tunnels is extremely survivable.

You can aggregate everyone in 1IC and PRC still out manpower and out produce by magnitude. Hence most will stay neutral for the simple reason they're within PRC logistics backyard which US don't have remote capability to defend against. PRC simply that big in scale, i.e. their acquisition of 1m loitering munitions on top of 1m drones and cruise missile Gigafactory that can churn 1000 components (likely floor) per day makes any US posture in 1/2IC not survivable outside of cope war games. PRC has the fire power to literally fight everyone simultaneously, with domestic resources (no imports) to maintain war economy basically indefinitely.

Ultimately, if PRC starts TW blockading, US will likely look at ledger/force balance and bail because PRC sees through US bluff. Doesn't matter if pacifist muricans demand intervention if PRC throws every TWnese in torment nexus, ultimately US unlikely to out attrite PRC in backyard, and more fundamentally, cannot out reconstitute faster than PRC after the fact. US isn't gambling shipyards, energy infra, semi fabs, hyperscalers, payment processors, boeing/lockheed plants over TW. Now 10 years ago, when US could theoretically asymmetrically hit PRC without CONUS vulnerability, US intervention strategically likely, but this 2026, we see the new national security strategy. Much more sensible for US planners to retreat to hemisphere and accept spheres of influence arrangement. Americans being powerless to US foreign policy is an (often unfortunate) American trait.


> supply lines thousands of miles long, between two countries that are separated by 80 miles

I think this one is particularly important. IIRC, it's usually phrased something like "if the USA sends aircraft carriers across the pacific, then China has an unsinkable aircraft carrier 80 miles away: the mainland". It's a huge home turf advantage.

The USA seems to have a very low appetite for helping allies against bullies at present too. And no appetite for taking US soldier casualties.


Taiwan is also unsinkable.

I think that, if China tries to take Taiwan, rather than a direct military confrontation, the US might just block the Straits of Malacca against oil heading for China - or maybe against anything heading for China.

China would enforce a blockade against Taiwan. The US might or might not be able to break it. But China would have a very hard time breaking a US blockade down there.


You really believe that "the rest of the world" countries should conscript citizens and go to war to help Taiwan? Most people if faced with this choice would direct you to the place where the sun does not shine.

> That depends on how cowardly the rest of the world acts if/when the time comes.

Or how weary of not having access to TSMC the rest of the world is.


The PRC will happily sell chips to the West. I live in Taiwan, I don't want it to happen, but people need to stop acting like countries will prevent an invasion because it means the CPC will control chip manufacturing.

The choice is between possible nuclear war, or, the 5090s are more expensive and sometimes Americans can't buy them when the PRC is punishing the west for something.


Honestly, this is the most reasonable comment here, especially coming from someone in Taiwan. I hear similar views when I'm in Asia, which are very different from what I hear back in the West.

[flagged]


[flagged]


[flagged]


All you can muster to eek a gram of joy in your 996 life is internet trolling on foreign forums while you playact at being a communist - because you know as well as I that you can't even talk about communism on PRC social media.

The irony of enjoying the more open free speech of liberal democracies through a VPN while pretending to be a communist vanguard in a socialist paradise is absolutely beautiful to me, my friends and I are very much enjoying your comments. Please don't stop!


You both broke the site guidelines very badly in this thread. We ban accounts that do this, so please don't do it again, regardless of how wrong another commenter is or you feel they are, or how large the gap between you.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html


Sorry dang, you're right.

I get set off specifically by wumao/little pinks (the Mandarin term for PRC based nationalist netizens, not necessarily an insult), something about their arrogance while wishing death on me and my family is very personal and hard to resist engaging with.

I accept I broke the rules and will try to avoid doing so again in the future, but for perspective, just imagine if you were Ukrainian, it's 2018, and someone from Russia was posting about how they can't wait for their country to invade yours.

But, I like the site the way it is, and the rules make it that way, so I understand.


[flagged]


You both broke the site guidelines very badly in this thread. We ban accounts that do this, so please don't do it again, regardless of how wrong another commenter is or you feel they are, or how large the gap between you.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html


It's weirdly myopic how HN users always think of TSMC as the main factor here. In reality the greater concern has always been containing China within the first island chain. As long as mainland China doesn't control Taiwan they have no way to secure their sea lines of communication.

Based on how cowardly the world acted when Russia invaded Ukraine (and continues to act) I don't have much hope for Taiwan.

looks at Ukraine, its white people and NATO wont fight for it. how about another group of chinse vs chinese in far far away? and the global south supports china more?

That's a total non sequitur. Ukraine wasn't a NATO member so why would NATO fight for it? (Several NATO members have given substantial aid to Ukraine.) In terms of a potential conflict between mainland China and Taiwan, the only NATO member with the capacity to do anything is the USA. The other players will be Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, and Australia so the outcome will largely depend on whether they decide to get involved.

> Ukraine wasn't a NATO member so why would NATO fight for it?

so is taiwan.

> The other players will be Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, and Australia so the

i can ensure you Vietnam and SK wont. and we want Japan to join so much. Aus is like a bonus maybe


rightly or wrongly, I'm quite confident the US will not go to war with China if it invades Taiwan - the American people simply wouldn't support it. It's one thing to get public support for dropping a few bombs on a tiny opponent with little risk, as the US regularly does, it's another entirely to go to war with a major power with a very high casualty rate. The US wouldn't have even entered WW2 (as much as the administration may have wanted to) if the Japanese hadn't foolishly attacked Pearl Harbor and then Germany declared war as well. But unlike Japan and Germany, China has the manufacturing capacity and access to raw resources that would make it a very different enemy.

Not really. The world got other problems. Europe is out for now, since we got Fascists at our doorstep trying to conquer Ukraine. The US has the orange clown as president, who is cozy with Putin. I don't think you can ascribe it to others being cowards, if "the world" doesn't react to protect Taiwan. It is right at China's doorstep. The logistic imbalance of trying to protect Taiwan, being this close to China is insane.

In the end, if a war happens, it will be idiotic again, from an economical point of view and from a humanitarian point of view. Economically, of course it will cost huge amount of resources to conquer Taiwan, and it will only disturb trade and what is already established on Taiwan. From a humanitarian point of view, of course many people will die.

The smartest China could do, would be to return to a soft power approach, and continue to develop mainland China, to continue to rival and even surpass Taiwan/Taipei. There are many young people, who don't have the walls in their minds, that the older population has. They don't want war, they want their freedom, and they want a high living standard. All this would be theoretically possible, if China didn't let ideology rule, but instead went for the economically best route, which is most certainly not an invasion.


China's takeover of Hong Kong proved that any notion of "one country, two systems" is a total lie and assurances from the Chinese Communist Party are completely worthless. There's no coming back from that, at least as long as Xi Jinping remains in power. Young people in Taiwan are less supportive of reintegration with the mainland than ever before. Fewer of them even have direct family ties there now.

> Young people in Taiwan are less supportive of reintegration with the mainland than ever before.

Well, go figure, if you run military "exercises" at the doorstep of your neighbor, people are not gonna like you very much, duh. But there was a time before more recent escalations, when lots of young Taiwanese people did not think too badly about being part of China. That's why I said that the smartest move would be (or would have been) to continue an approach of soft power and development, to rival life in Taiwan. Give the people comfort and high living standard, and they are less likely to dislike you.


> China's takeover of Hong Kong proved that any notion of "one country, two systems" is a total lie...

Macau seems to be doing one country, two systems just fine.


This thread casually talks about Taiwan being a vassal state of the US during a civil war and Hong Kong being a colony of the British. Yet the world, largely the global south, should intervene and help the global north to exploit the rest of the world more?

Every one gets that far away countries across the world can’t put military bases right next to Europe or the US. However when it comes to China, that is not only acceptable but it’s the anti-cowardly move to support outsider aggressors.


> can’t put military bases right next to Europe or the US

Indeed, Japan and Korea and the Philippines have American military bases on them.

You mentioned Taiwan, curious why? It has no American military bases. Perhaps of all the countries in the region, it's the most sovereign in that sense.


Interesting. I didn’t know there were no US military bases there. Still Taiwan exists as it does because of the US meddling across the world.

This doesn't make any sense, the USA hasn't touched anything about Taiwan in any meaningful way ever since it became the ROC, and certainly not at all since the KMT was overthrown. In fact American overtures to control chip manufacturing here were rejected explicitly as "economic imperialism."

What's with this Americentric geopolitical analysis?


taiwan only exist because USA navy intervene in the war

You mean when the American ambassador escorted Mao to the signing of the Double Tenth agreement because the Americans were worried the KMT would go back on their word and assassinate him? Or in 1950 when Truman announced Taiwan as "Chinese territory" and directed that no American navy presence was to be permitted in the Taiwan strait?

Anyway take up your grievances with the KMT, don't worry, they're about to come crying back into the CPC's arms begging for a shred of political power now that their regime has been overthrown for 30 years, and their efforts to sell Taiwan to the CPC in exchange for a teaspoon of political legitimacy are failing spectacularly.


> Hong Kong proves the one country two system policy is a failure.

Does Macau prove one country two systems is a success?


Taiwanese politicians, like those under American-style democracy in many regions, only care about safeguarding their own interests and have no concern for how to protect the interests of the public. Once TSMC’s factories are completed in Japan and the United States and the technology is secured, Taiwan will no longer have any value worth protecting. Of course, the politicians can always take planes and leave in advance.

Not necessarily. If TSMC doesn’t build these fabs in Japan or USA, these governments might just mandate that chips are manufactured elsewhere. Intel could have a big comeback.

This keeps ppl locked in to the TSMC universe. The Japan and US fabs produce just a fraction of what these countries need.


Right now is an AI goldrush. They can get crazy lucrative investments and lock in amazing deals. In a decade the Chinese tech will catch up and the AI boom will slow down and the Taiwanese will have to coast on what they have. They have to capitalize on this moment as much as they can b/c it's not going to last long. Things are going to get much tougher very soon

If there aren't significant changes in the trajectory of world politics the people in charge might just be planning their exit to the fabs they're building in Japan and the US.

You speak like the Chinese catching up with the technology is inevitable. The Chinese aren't behind in semiconductor and airplane technology for lack of trying. They are constantly trying to catch up to a moving goal post.

There is an established playbook that the Chinese have used for decades when taking over an industrial sector from other countries. They funnel vast amounts of state funding into it, sell at or below cost for decades, win the low end market, and then slowly and gradually move up the technology chain. It's worked for almost everything, but it's this last part that just isn't working for them with semiconductors and aviation. They aren't capable of catching up fast enough in these two fields. These are sectors that are both too large for any one country to do well on their own. Even for someone as large as China. It requires a global supply chain.


PRC generating as much STEM/skilled talent than OECD combined... that's enough for entire semi supply chain and 2 civil aviation companies.

Aviation is functionally caught up, as in if PRC wants to throw together a narrow or wide body on domestic components short term, they can at scale and service domestic market with less fuel efficiently. The primary reason COMAC uses western components is for faster global certification.

PRC Semi progress beating western analysts of catchup, instead of 10 years to EUV they're looking ~7/8 years. Again global semi supply chain is just a handful of countries with fraction population as PRC. And all western semi players projected to have talent shortage in the 100,000s, so that moving goal post likely going to move slower and slower vs PRC convergence.

Semi easier medium/long term problem since PRC _only_ country projected without semi talent shortage, i.e. current trends and forces point to inevitable convergence and PRC.

Ironically aviation harder problem because exporting outside of PRC market is matter of geopolitics vs pure technical/state capacity.

Looking at trend lines, west simply not capable of staying ahead.


The US protected Taiwanese sovereignty for decades before they even had a single semiconductor fab. This idea of "the silicon shield" just shows a complete ignorance of the history of Taiwan and its place in the geopolitical order.

The US historically did not threaten military action against NATO allied nations as well.

The past is of no value in predicting the future right now.


Decades in which China started as peasant army(US admin view) and wasn't mostly a peer adversity. But, that changed almost a decade ago and defending Taiwan will become more costly and time passes. New American security document, mostly focusing on America, even acknowledges this.

> The US protected Taiwanese sovereignty for decades before they even had a single semiconductor fab.

That was before the current administration wiped out the very idea of "soft power" and put everything including NATO up for disposal.

There is, frankly, no way for anyone to trust the US again until the US undergoes steps similar to post-1945 Germany.


This isnt about soft power. Taiwan's location is too important for the US to not intervene in some way.

Trump has openly stated that there would be no military retaliation by the US in case of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. Only an economic one. And we have seen what that is worth after the Krim was taken. It lasted a few years and then sanctions started getting dropped.

So the time of military US protection is behind us.


I believe you mis remembered it. He didn't rule out military intervention.

In an interview reported by Reuters, he said he’d impose 150%–200% tariffs if China “went into Taiwan,” and when asked about using military force against a blockade he said it “would not come to that” because Xi “respects me” and knows he’s “crazy.”

https://www.reuters.com/world/trump-says-he-would-impose-tar...


TSMC can shut the fabs down whenever they want. If the US think they can take over a fab like it's a t-shirt factory and keep it running without TSMC's cooperation they are sorely mistaken. What are you going to do when none of the Taiwanese workers turn up for work, or worse they do turn up and sabotage the fab.

If you don’t think the US security apparatus will come up with a reasonable plan for doing just that within 2 months of it opening, I don’t think you’re thinking hard enough about this.

> What are you going to do when none of the Taiwanese workers turn up for work, or worse they do turn up and sabotage the fab.

You’re going to offer them a lot of money, citizenship, and exfiltration of their family to turn up at work, and threaten them with lifetime in supermax if they sabotage anything.

What US judge isn’t going to allow you to do what the hell you want under national security provisions if it comes to that?


> You’re going to offer them a lot of money, citizenship, and exfiltration of their family to turn up at work, and threaten them with lifetime in supermax if they sabotage anything.

This is exactly the attitude I'm talking about. You can't operate a fab based on coercion. It requires positive relationships. There are simply too many people involved doing things that the would-be coercers don't understand.

The idea that an entire TSMC fab is going to commit treason en mass is about as believable as thinking that NASA faked the moon landings and covered it up en mass. Large groups of people don't behave the same way as small groups of people.

If the US wants a fab, just give Intel money to build one. Trying to steal one from TSMC is a nonsensical plan. At least Intel would know how to operate their own fab.


> If you don’t think the US security apparatus will come up with a reasonable plan for doing just that within 2 months of it opening, I don’t think you’re thinking hard enough about this.

The current US security apparatus is led by highly incompetent and corrupt people willing to sell the country down the river, so I would not count on them coming up with a plan, much less a reasonable plan, for anything.


> If you don’t think the US security apparatus will come up with a reasonable plan

Have you seen the US security apparatus's track record at coming up with reasonable plans for what happens after the military victory? See Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.


I mean these things sit on opposite ends of the “organising a pissup in a brewery” to “teaching a fish to ride a bike” continuum.

Of course you’re right, but it’s a hell of a lot easier than when the fabs are located exclusively in Taiwan.

More so a damage control move. In the eventuality Taiwan, and its factually on Chinese land production sites get affected, it won't affect as much the supply chain as it otherwise would.

The U.S and Japan indeed will have less incentive to defend the sovereignty of Taiwan, but other reasons remain to ensure the statu quo remains. Purely geopolitical, not just industrial.


I would argue the chips don't even matter (important, but not as a reason for defending Taiwan.) It's a strategically important location that is a stone's throw from Japanese islands. If Japan feels the need, then nukes may be on the table. If that were to happen, S. Korea may not be far behind. And the cycle spirals.

America selectively gets into conflicts worldwide to deter China from invading China

As soon as we get the right semiconductor supply chain stateside can switch up on that island and reach parity with the rest of the world’s contribution to that issue: none.


Nobody was ever going to war with China over TSMC. Whoever believed that has been conned.

It is really hard to understand that this is a country that our nation’s media and KOLs have vigorously whitewashed for decades. They say the United States protects private property, that America is free and democratic, and that everyone owns guns, so they can guarantee their own freedom.

All of our people should feel ashamed of this—being deceived by the media day after day for decades. Too stupid. Even today, there are still many people who firmly believe it.


Ah yes the famous Constitutional freedom to gun down tyrants. It turns out nobody can agree on who the tyrant is!

> Taiwan All the Taiwanese workers at the table (about 3 or 4) said that the moon landing was a hoax.

People from small countries usually have only a single viewpoint and are deeply influenced by propaganda. They have almost no independent thought.

> I wonder what the average person in China thinks of the Apollo moon landings

we believe in science. most people believe it's true. it's just a shame how USA become today. we saw both ourselves and America some Rome kind of Empire. we like it before, we just feel sorry it will collapse and cannot even do something it did beofre.

also something related to USSR: We also believe that the Soviet Union achieved accomplishments in space exploration no less significant than those of the United States; it is just that Western propaganda has deliberately downplayed them.


> People from small countries usually have only a single viewpoint and are deeply influenced by propaganda. They have almost no independent thought.

Yikes.


i was going to say there are so many VIDEOS or disccuion around china's, saying china only have 6-7 B not 10 B not 14 B people...ok the comments already started this..

no suprise at all... isn't this the whole point for USA to control Tiktok? 'free world' or `democracy` countries love to control the media


> I sometimes have the image that Americans think that if the all Chinese got to read Western produced pamphlet detailing the particulars of what happened in Tiananmen square, they would march en-masse on the CCP HQ, and by the next week they'd turn into a Western style democracy.

We know what happened at Tiananmen. most educated young people in China all know. We just cannot talk about it publicly. We even know that the man standing in front of the tank did not die, they didn't kill him(you can find the full footage on the internet, it's just most posts only show a clip). Of course I would not deny that others died; I just don’t know the specific details.

But we do not reject the Communist Party because of this. We simply like Mao more, and comparatively dislike some other leaders.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: