Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Critical Minerals: Reducing U.S. import reliance with substitution and recycling

gao.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 109 posts

Re: Critical Minerals: Reducing U.S. import reliance with substitution and recycling

#41

Post by GlickWick »

idiotsecant wrote: post #19
GlickWick wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While true, China's threat has been going on for a long time and they've been running repeated exercises on how to do it, how to take US warships out, etc. Additionally, US support for taking Greenland is virtually zero. Chinese support for taking Taiwan is frighteningly high.

China is not an irrational actor. They know that the most effective way to take Taiwan is slowly, through soft power and political subterfuge. There is no need or advantage to a full frontal assault.

Rational or not, they're building warships and an invasion fleet, along with the ability to stifle any US attempt to stop them. This is not the action of someone hoping for a slow victory.

The person at the top of the chain was asking why everyone is preparing for war. This behavior from China is why. It predates any of the Greenland Trump idiocy, too.

Re: Critical Minerals: Reducing U.S. import reliance with substitution and recycling

#42

Post by ceejayoz »

bluGill wrote: post #31
ceejayoz wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When both are true at the same time, one might reflect on why "because China" is given as the pat answer.

When the subject is China, the reflection isn't "because China". What we are seeing here is "Because US", which is very different.

The subject of "Why is everyone preparing for war so hard" would seem to be "everyone", no?

Re: Critical Minerals: Reducing U.S. import reliance with substitution and recycling

#43

Post by ceejayoz »

Jalad wrote: post #33
jandrewrogers wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A war with large geographic scope has been independently modeled as having a high probability of occurring circa 2030 by major governments for a decade or more. As time has passed, reality has not diverged from those models, so confidence in the conclusions have grown. It is worth noting that this pre-dates current political dramas, Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022, etc. The underlying strategic geopolitics drivi…

> A war with large geographic scope has been independently modeled as having a high probability of occurring circa 2030 by major governments for a decade or more Do you have more information about this, or a source?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/russia-nato-arms-germany-wa...

> Germany's defence minister is frank and plain-spoken, but also deliberate with his words and intention. When he talks about Russia, the future of the West and the possibility of another European war, the message however becomes stark: "Our experts say it can happen in 2029."

> In remarks published Wednesday, Generalleutnant Christian Freuding, the inspector of the German Army, said the 2029 date was not a figure pulled out of thin air by his government's national security establishment, but an actual consensus view among Western allies.

https://www.politico.eu/article/nato-mark-rutte-says-europe-...

> NATO Chief Mark Rutte urged member countries to do more to prepare for the possibility of large-scale war, warning that Russia may be ready to attack the alliance within five years.

Re: Critical Minerals: Reducing U.S. import reliance with substitution and recycling

#44

Post by s1artibartfast »

ta20240528 wrote: post #21
GlickWick wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While true, China's threat has been going on for a long time and they've been running repeated exercises on how to do it, how to take US warships out, etc. Additionally, US support for taking Greenland is virtually zero. Chinese support for taking Taiwan is frighteningly high.

The Europeans didn't think it was a bluff. But more generally, when the foundation of your country's morality is "all men are created equal" you really have given up the space to object to others doing what you do. If honour is a thing.

Nobody said bluff but you, and honour is long gone.

That just leaves the facts. Which do you think is more credible and likely?

Re: Critical Minerals: Reducing U.S. import reliance with substitution and recycling

#45

Post by pfdietz »

georgemcbay wrote: post #23
seydor wrote: post #5

Why is everyone preparing for war so hard

> Why is everyone preparing for war so hard Unfortunately I think the actual reason is because they know (despite what they say in public) that climate change is a real and present danger, and the resource and migration wars are coming. If you look at everything that seems strange through this lens (see for example: Trump talking about how the US needs to take Canada and Greenland) it looks a lot less strange. There'…

Canada needs a nuclear deterrent.

Re: Critical Minerals: Reducing U.S. import reliance with substitution and recycling

#46

Post by SoftTalker »

georgemcbay wrote: post #23
seydor wrote: post #5

Why is everyone preparing for war so hard

> Why is everyone preparing for war so hard Unfortunately I think the actual reason is because they know (despite what they say in public) that climate change is a real and present danger, and the resource and migration wars are coming. If you look at everything that seems strange through this lens (see for example: Trump talking about how the US needs to take Canada and Greenland) it looks a lot less strange. There'…

Humans have had major wars throughout history, it's unrealistic to really think that will change. It's in our nature.

Re: Critical Minerals: Reducing U.S. import reliance with substitution and recycling

#47

Post by weberer »

Jalad wrote: post #33
jandrewrogers wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A war with large geographic scope has been independently modeled as having a high probability of occurring circa 2030 by major governments for a decade or more. As time has passed, reality has not diverged from those models, so confidence in the conclusions have grown. It is worth noting that this pre-dates current political dramas, Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022, etc. The underlying strategic geopolitics drivi…

> A war with large geographic scope has been independently modeled as having a high probability of occurring circa 2030 by major governments for a decade or more Do you have more information about this, or a source?

The Atlantic Council and RAND corporation both report on this.

https://www.rand.org/topics/taiwan.html

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/content-series/atlantic-coun...

Re: Critical Minerals: Reducing U.S. import reliance with substitution and recycling

#48

Post by Ylpertnodi »

petcat wrote: post #35
jandrewrogers wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A war with large geographic scope has been independently modeled as having a high probability of occurring circa 2030 by major governments for a decade or more. As time has passed, reality has not diverged from those models, so confidence in the conclusions have grown. It is worth noting that this pre-dates current political dramas, Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022, etc. The underlying strategic geopolitics drivi…

There is a lot of nuance missing in public discourse about the US threats of leaving NATO, stopping direct arms support of Ukraine (except for intelligence), and generally scaring NATO members and Europe into funding their own defense. Every USA president since the fall of the Berlin Wall has implored NATO members take control of their own defense. The US has long since abandoned the two theater war doctrine. The US…

True about trump....but at a terrible (longtime) cost to the USA.

Re: Critical Minerals: Reducing U.S. import reliance with substitution and recycling

#49

Post by wojciii »

lardosaurusrex wrote: post #17
goalieca wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because China has stated they will take Taiwan, they have been threatening Philippines sovereignty too. Japan and others are on edge too. China currently has been behaving very adversarial and has a huge fraction of the minerals under their control that this article is posting about. I think sovereignty is a good thing. Plan for the worst, hope for the best.

The USA keeps threatening my country; Canada. I can say with a reasonable amount of confidence that going "but china" isn't going to help the US much going forward.

The usa is also threatening my country. The orange dude wants to buy a part of Denmark that is not even ours to sell.

Re: Critical Minerals: Reducing U.S. import reliance with substitution and recycling

#50

Post by s1artibartfast »

nemomarx wrote: post #36
petcat wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a lot of nuance missing in public discourse about the US threats of leaving NATO, stopping direct arms support of Ukraine (except for intelligence), and generally scaring NATO members and Europe into funding their own defense. Every USA president since the fall of the Berlin Wall has implored NATO members take control of their own defense. The US has long since abandoned the two theater war doctrine. The US…

How's the Iran thing figure in, then? That's a lot of the stockpile used up before China starts.

Possibly the first strike in the war with China.
Post reply on HN