3 ms·

>>"Fighting a war over an industry reliant on large, immobile, extremely vulnerable factories/laboratories is really, really, really, really, really, really, re

>>"Fighting a war over an industry reliant on large, immobile, extremely vulnerable factories/laboratories is really, really, really, really, really, really, really stupid." Sounds like you just described the Oil/Gas industry, in which about a dozen wars have started over the last 100 years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_war https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_war

sisyphus_hill 5y ago
yes but in an oil/gas war the same resources can be tapped again with new infrastructure. If you destroy one of ASML's machines you need to recreate the entire global supply chain that constructed it.
somesortofthing 5y ago
The difference is that it's basically impossible to take control of a fab the same way you can for an oil well. No matter your military advantage, the people you're trying to take the fab from will just destroy it, and odds are good that you can't rebuild it yourself. You may as well skip the war altogether and begin researching how to build your own fabs since you need to do that anyway.
- JumpCrisscross 5y ago
  The people are also unique and essential to the fab in a way they aren’t for oil.
  - xxpor 5y ago
    And yet fabs aren't reliant on minerals that are rare and geographically concentrated (for the most part, I'm sure they rely on some rare earths. The point is silicon is hilariously common). Fabs also capture very little value. TSMC and Intel aren't the trillion dollar companies. Google, MS, Amazon, etc. are. So there's really no upside. Only the downside of a large fraction of the world's high end fab capacity disappearing overnight. It'd be one thing if one side of the US and China had their own backup capacity. But they don't. And they won't for at least a decade, in my non-expert opinion.
    - alberth 5y ago
      >>"SMC and Intel aren't the trillion dollar companies. Google, MS, Amazon, etc. are." MARKET CAP: Uber (2x) > Ford Airbnb (3x) > Hilton The entire gig economy is this premise, so what's your point?
      - LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
        'Gigs' burn, then flop.
ClumsyPilot 5y ago
Oil is a natural resource, its underground. It survives a war Fabs are a human resource, if you kill their staff or destroy them, their value is $0
- LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
  Not if it's spoiled by a really dirty nuke. Afaik this was a theme in 'James Blond - Ze World iz not enuff' (1999).
rhino369 5y ago
Beyond the points others are making about oil/gas being different, major powers don't fight each directly over oil and gas. At beat up on countries who can't fight back. And even then, its not really to steal oil, but just ensure that it is flowing. The only real attempt to seize foreign oilfields was the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. That didn't really go well for Iraq. And, on their way out, they scorched earth and lit 80% of the wells on fire.

sisyphus_hill 5y ago

yes but in an oil/gas war the same resources can be tapped again with new infrastructure. If you destroy one of ASML's machines you need to recreate the entire global supply chain that constructed it.

somesortofthing 5y ago

The difference is that it's basically impossible to take control of a fab the same way you can for an oil well. No matter your military advantage, the people you're trying to take the fab from will just destroy it, and odds are good that you can't rebuild it yourself. You may as well skip the war altogether and begin researching how to build your own fabs since you need to do that anyway.

JumpCrisscross 5y ago
The people are also unique and essential to the fab in a way they aren’t for oil.
- xxpor 5y ago
  And yet fabs aren't reliant on minerals that are rare and geographically concentrated (for the most part, I'm sure they rely on some rare earths. The point is silicon is hilariously common). Fabs also capture very little value. TSMC and Intel aren't the trillion dollar companies. Google, MS, Amazon, etc. are. So there's really no upside. Only the downside of a large fraction of the world's high end fab capacity disappearing overnight. It'd be one thing if one side of the US and China had their own backup capacity. But they don't. And they won't for at least a decade, in my non-expert opinion.
  - alberth 5y ago
    >>"SMC and Intel aren't the trillion dollar companies. Google, MS, Amazon, etc. are." MARKET CAP: Uber (2x) > Ford Airbnb (3x) > Hilton The entire gig economy is this premise, so what's your point?
    - LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
      'Gigs' burn, then flop.

ClumsyPilot 5y ago

Oil is a natural resource, its underground. It survives a war Fabs are a human resource, if you kill their staff or destroy them, their value is $0

LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
Not if it's spoiled by a really dirty nuke. Afaik this was a theme in 'James Blond - Ze World iz not enuff' (1999).

rhino369 5y ago

Beyond the points others are making about oil/gas being different, major powers don't fight each directly over oil and gas. At beat up on countries who can't fight back. And even then, its not really to steal oil, but just ensure that it is flowing. The only real attempt to seize foreign oilfields was the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. That didn't really go well for Iraq. And, on their way out, they scorched earth and lit 80% of the wells on fire.