comment: >
  
  I accuse China of wanting technological assistance only to bring war against the West.
  We should not kid ourselves that dictators will choose peace and properity over domination, even at the expense of their own citizens.
context: Correction “Washington has had technological hegemony for years. China big mad they won’t share.” >
  
  USA outsources majority of microchip manufacturing to TSMC 
  China eyes Taiwan enviously >
  
  Which is also why they stepped up their rhetoric about "regaining" Taiwan. 
  If they take TSMC, then they effectively has a leverage over the global economy that they can politically utilize.
  They are more likely to destroy TSMC in the process. Which is still not too bad because it would force shifting to China for alternatives, such as they are. It would also cause a major depression in global economy as supply chains collapse but China is willing to risk that (maybe).
  As long as TSMC remains free (under US protection), the current status quo is in effect. >
  
  Pretty sure America isn't willing, which is why we've partnered closer with Taiwan. Any move against Taiwan will trigger a response from America, Japan and S. Korea. Which would fuck the world economy even more. >
  
  There’s a reason TSMC is opening a chip fab in Arizona. 
  The reason that Taiwan is important is more because of their location. Japan and Korea contain the North China sea, the Ryukyu islands contain the East China Sea, and Indonesia and Malaysia contain the South China Sea and the Straight of Malacca. 
  All of them are US Allies. Right in the center of all of that is Taiwan; which protects the biggest water gap in the China Seas. This defensive perimeter effectively contains China militarily within its waters. Subs can’t pass though Non-international water into the Pacific with this perimeter.
  It becomes a significantly larger problem containing China without any of these key locations. With them, China could be effectively blockaded. Without Taiwan, it becomes virtually impossible. If China is able to escape this perimeter in any meaningful way, the risk is the capability of medium/short range missile strikes directly on US soil from submarines. >
  
  Island Chain Theory.
  Western doctrine has mostly abandoned the idea, but I believe it's still huge in Chinese strategic thinking. >
  
  It’s still the going theory it. Naval warfare has always been about access to land and denying your enemy. Missiles aircraft and CIWS/Iron Dome have only made this more true. >
  
  
  Naval warfare has always been about ...
  
  Yeah, and if we were at war or nearing a state of war with China, then setting up bases on those islands to help reinforce a naval blockade is absolutely something we might try to persuade those countries to let us do.
  But we're not at war, and we're certainly not trying to start one by doing anything as provocative as trying to impede China's access to the Pacific Ocean or (militarily) laying the groundwork to impede it in the future.   
  Which is why I said Island Chain Strategy isn't really something the west is pursuing, or even considering now that the Cold War is over, but the possibility is still quite dominant in Chinese thinking.
  Instead, we're just trying to cultivate influence in the region and building better and better navies, sonar nets, submarines, ASW, etc. so we can blockade China purely from sea-based assets if we have to. >
  
  
  Island Chain Strategy isn’t really something the West is pursuing 
  
  Not exactly. There’s a major forward sub base in Guam, and a major airbase on Okinawa (and a couple on the Japanese main islands + S. Korea).  These bases have the First Island Chain pretty well covered within their AOR, and more sub bases in Hawaii and the US West Coast can provide fairly rapid backup when needed, arriving in time to relieve the Guam-based assets after a tour in the area. Any of those subs can make port and receive supplies and service from existing naval supply depots in Okinawa, Sasebo, Yokosuka, Busan, Subic Bay, and Singapore, and probably a couple other locations I’m not thinking of, plus a dozen smaller ports where the US has standing agreements for port visits and purchase of supplies. 
  There are also air bases, Marines and Soldiers all over Japan and S. Korea as well as plenty of surface ships in Sasebo and Yokosuka.  Oh, and Australia isn’t too far away either, and easily covers the southern flank along Indonesia. 
  The US and it’s allies are certainly going to be very familiar with all the various routes through the islands, and can almost certainly provide choke point coverage within a few days if needed. There’s no need for a string of bases on the islands themselves. >
  
  The new US doctrine call for fire teams that can fire long range missiles then move. US and Japan are building high secured storage bunker  for these missles in these island. When war break out, fire team will be transport in, fire the missles then move to the next location. This make it difficult for China to take out US assets. >
  
  They give Washington way too much credit.
  See any congressional hearing on technology. >
  
  If anything, Washington deserves credit for Chinese success. They made a deal with megacorps to export our manufacturing industry and rot our country from the inside out. >
  
  But weren't we forced to make this deal? Asian markets started selling PCs in the US with much of the same functionality and yet thousands of dollars left. Companies had no choice but to use the same labour in Asian markets just to compete. >
  
  No, not forced.
  The other option was a trade war that added a tax on imports from any country that didn't meet specific standards on worker rights and pay.
  But that would hurt profits. >
  
  Yes this is how geopolitics works. You try to maintain advantages over your adversaries. China is bipolar af bouncing between saber rattling and accusing the US of being meanies 🥺 >
  
  This is also how nationalism works. You accuse other countries of being evil while pretending you are not doing anything wrong >
  
  Even better when you have an effective stick against domestic media. A language barrier against foreign media helps too. >
  
  The west should be thankful most chinese don't speak English. All the "fuck china" comments and inflammatory headlines over here will only make the chinese more nationalistic. >
  
  There are plenty of Chinese citizens that say fuck China. >
  
  People who can't separate a country's name and a country's government are either morons or being intentionally inflammatory. >
  
  But CCP is China. Saying CCP bad mean China bad. 
  U cant get out of this loophole. >
  
  Mentally dense teenagers are bad at realizing things. >
  
  And china doesn’t? >
  
  Not yet, but they want it.  The US has plenty of faults, but anyone who thinks that a China-dominated world would be better has to be nuts. >
  
  Disagree. I don't see a problem with a hyper nationalist authoritarian surveillance state being the world superpower. >
  
  The lack of a “/s” here actually makes it impossible to tell if you’re serious or not these days. >
  
  Lol, what I hear is:
  “China frustrated they cannot rip themselves off into technical advantage. Unable to comprehend why doing your own R&D would translate to a constant advantage in the field you research.” >
  
  I mean, if you didn't keep stealing IP's and didnt partake in unfair trading practices this wouldn't be a problem now would it? >
  
  Stealing IP is not the actual issue. The two main points of contention are with Huawei which is seen as a security risk and with ASML, a Dutch company that produces the most advanced chip-making machines and that is not allowed to export them to China. To a lesser degree the success of Tiktok is also seen as highly problematic. >
  
  They all stem from the same root cause though. Which is that China's ruling class sees the concept of rule of law as a threat to their power. Or, as China's chief justice put it, the rule of law is "a mistaken Western concept fundamentally incompatible with PRC culture."
  In their minds stealing is a noble act. Whether it's people's private data through TikTok, IP from foreign investors, or machines from ASML, is all the same. Steal from others to fuel the CCP. >
  
  It's not an East vs West issue nor is it considered noble, regardless of the BS claimed by the Chinese government. Chinese steal from each other constantly. You also see the phenomenon throughout Asia, although not nearly to the same extent.
  There are so many facets to it, from educational down to simple pragmatism. Iteration also comes into play. I mean, look at the sheer volume of derivative anime out there. And yet, a lot of it still manages to place an interesting spin on tired tropes.
  The distinction with China is that they actually believed they could copy their way to superpower status. >
  
  
  The distinction with China is that they actually believed they could copy their way to superpower status.
  
  It worked for the US so why wouldn't they? >
  
  If you think that’s how the US achieved its status then I don’t know what to tell you. 
  Immigration is a massively important factor, one which China has actively opposed. Unfortunately, the Chinese government has an irrational fixation on advancements being homegrown. So without that or a multigenerational legacy in tech their only recourse is to copy. >
  
  
  If you think that’s how the US achieved its status then I don’t know what to tell you. 
  
  Read some history..
  According to historian Doron Ben-Atar, in his book, Trade Secrets, “the United States emerged as the world's industrial leader by illicitly appropriating mechanical and scientific innovations from Europe.”
  Plenty of sources out there to confirm that it was an established policy and not something just done by a few individuals. >
  
  We dont "want" it. We HAVE it. And there's not a single thing China can do about it >
  
  I don't know why you're being downvoted. Hubris is the downfall of power. I agree, there's a lot China could do to catch up if they put more money into things. They're already doing moon landings and they have a ton of tech and they're EXCELLENT at stealing tech.
  It's a LOT easier to catch up than it is to pioneer. You know what the end result looks like and where to put your R&D and what hasn't worked out for other counties so you know where to save your money and time. 
  If this sounds pro CCP than people are in real denial about how fast things can change in the world. This is a warning, not propaganda. >
  
  If you have seen recent china and the state of the CCP, you would know why this is not going to happen. It would take a generation of change to make them able to operate as effectively and with competitive R&D. 
  China is going to moan because they want Taiwan and its semiconductor chip manufacturers. And it can't have it, so they moan louder. >
  
  
  It would take a generation of change to make them able to operate as effectively and with competitive R&D. 
  
  The generation is happening right now, that's why the u.s is acting tougher with the Chips ban. 
  Realistically, in the short term it will hit China but according to most experts it will just slow their progress until they get less reliant on the u.s. >
  
  Yeah, but they don’t have much time if the goal is to challenge the US. By the time they are even close to catching up, their population bubble will be exploding, and they’ll have domestic issues to worry about. >
  
  The population bubble will take multiple decades before exploding. Multiple countries in Western or Eastern Europe or East Asia have an equal or worst demographic and they don't have a population of 1 billion to compensate. >
  
  This is entirely untrue. Look at a population pyramid. A significant portion of the Chinese population is approaching retirement age now and will soon be out of the workforce. 
  Yes, some countries in Europe are in a similar predicament, but no European country has the same gender skewness that China is grappling with due to their one-child policy. This goes without saying that the US still has a comparatively healthy population pyramid. 
  It will not take multiple decades for this to become an issue for China. A population of 1 billion is a liability, not an asset, if a significant portion of people cannot work, and the gender skewness affects replenishment. >
  
  I think Covid may have an unpredictable affect on Chinese population concerns, sure it may lower there elderly population, but does having a younger population change political stability?