331–340 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
“Our continued protection of you is contingent on your investment in us”. Taiwan is hugely reliant on US defense guarantees. The US has a protectionist president who likes big numbers in announcements and a base riled up about American production capacity. Long-term this is bad for Taiwan since it reduces its leverage with the US in administrations with short-term geopolitics (or no real geopolitical talent.) In the…
> The US has a protectionist president We do?
The T word...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would subsequent presidents allow Taiwan to maintain leverage over supply chains crucial to American national security?
Subsequent president might realize that America might want allies, and if so they'll attempt to appear reliable. Current administration is fast tracking nuclear prolifiacian. A future president might want to stop such trends.
This is correct. Gone are the days when countries could count on the US to provide some protection against illegal invasions. All nations without nukes have to be considering them seriously now. Sure, they signed the NPT. But agreements no longer mean what they used to. Russia violates most of the agreements it signs. US already trashed the Budapest memorandum that it signed in 1996. We were supposed to provide security to Ukraine in exchange for them giving up nukes.
What does this mean for Intel’s foundry efforts? Are they basically dead now?
Look at the recent rumor of Intel breakup - the large part is going to TSMC.
Seems more likely that the Trump admin was pressuring them to possibly invest in Intel, acquisition was briefly considered and instead this compromise of expanding their own US operations was chosen.
I expect INTC to retract back towards $18-19 from this news. Recent rally was largely based on hopium surrounding either TSMC investment/partnership or Broadcom/TSMC breakup and acquisition. Probably this kills the Broadcom deal as well. If I were Intel, I wouldn't wanna sell off the more successful chip design division if I couldn't also sell off the floundering foundry.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not a position they held until after ROC went to Taiwan. Then they changed their tune. Remember. PRC advocated for Taiwan independence and considered Taiwan an independent nation until around 1940s.
Taiwan today has exactly the same territorial claims as China does -- in fact, Taiwan's are more expansive, since they use the eleven-dash line instead of the nine-dash line. The difference is that Taiwan has little to no ability to project force. (My comment should not be read as an endorsement of the CCP's willingness to force Taiwan into a reunification.)
Pointing this out always looks like endorsement of the CPC as it’s always a point that is pointed out as justification to claim Taiwan is part of China.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even if the desire to absorb Taiwan is ideological, they would certainly also understand the severe practical implications of losing access to their chip production.
They already lost access.
It's a complete misreading of the situation; the US is in fact actively undermining Taiwan's national security, both 1) by coercing Taiwan to transfer its technology and human capital and 2) by banning chip trade between Taiwan and China.
The idea that the US protects Taiwan from a possible Chinese invasion over chips is one of those things that sounds believable but really isn't going to happen. From China’s perspective, the cost of war is much higher than the cost of developing these chips themselves. In the worst-case scenario, they would be 2-3 years behind the cutting edge, which is not mission-critical. Most electronics (civilian or military) do…
Even if Russia gets all of it's demands in the peacemaking process with Ukraine, that war has done permanent and lasting damage to it's economy and global position. For China to attack Taiwan, it would give up any hope of continuing it's healthy trends towards increased economic and political importance.
Eventually, Taiwan will re-join China when it is sufficiently strong. It's symbolism as a continued humiliation by the west is more useful as propaganda than an actual military target.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Moreover, a lot of other countries will totally provide "lethal aid" and intelligence to China, if it needs it, in hopes of taking the hegemon down a few pegs." This seems...not true. The Phillipines especially would like a word. Most of China's neighbors are begging for more American Hegemony (America is just not good at it anymore). China's industrial prowess is clear, but it's also true that. China (esp the CCP)…
See the comment above about the intellectual faculties of people who think like you do. We had to hightail out of Afghanistan. What on earth makes you believe that we could win against a peer adversary, let alone do so without a draft or millions of body bags?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I guess the same question was raised before the Korean War and the Vietnam War and it was also get downvoted I have to say, americans love wars, it's some kind of american spirit wars made american great, wars will make american great again
Someone seems to have crept your profile, @suraci, and it's not looking good: https://limewire.com/d/77690b9f-1ec3-4e43-a485-76c82bc67ddd#...
I'm a chinese living in china, i'm interest topics abt china, how strange
instead of reading some 'analysis reports' by sponsored medias and think tanks, now you leant to read ones by LLMs, such a progress
Do I look like a devil that tempts innocent Americans/Westerners to be corrupt to you?
be vigilant, we're everywhere