3 ms·

The HN discussion isn't related to a "misleading video posted on Douyin"; it's based on accurate news reporting about an academic foreign policy paper (which do

The HN discussion isn't related to a "misleading video posted on Douyin"; it's based on accurate news reporting about an academic foreign policy paper (which doesn't speak for US foreign policy). https://www.theregister.com/2022/01/05/taiwan_should_destory_tsmc_paper/ https://www.theregister.com/2022/01/05/taiwan_should_destory... ("US Army journal's top paper from 2021 says Taiwan should destroy TSMC if China invades") https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31012442 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31012442 ("Taiwan should destroy TSMC if invaded, suggests US military paper (datacenterdynamics.com)"; 148 comments) Here's extended context of what the OP is discussing, a different thing: https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2023/05/12/2003799660 https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2023/05/12/... ("‘Selectively clipped’ video misrepresents US official’s TSMC comments") https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/05/12/microchips-us-taiwan-strategy/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/05/12/microchip... ("Opinion: Blow up the microchips? What a Taiwan spat says about U.S. strategy") edit: Moulton's quote is at 36:22 here—this is apparently its full and complete context: https://vimeo.com/817736553 https://vimeo.com/817736553 ("The United States and China: Navigating Strategic Competition"; Milken Institute, May 2, 2023)

arp242 3y ago
> an academic foreign policy paper (which doesn't speak for the US foreign policy). From two guys who seem to have no real influence. It's basically little more than a blog post. A lot of people say a lot of stuff. Sometimes that's pretty stupid. Sometimes even worse. That's kind of how it works in a free society. The most effective lie is the one with a kernel of truth.
- dundarious 3y ago
  Rep. Seth Moulton (Mass.) is in government. And if a Chinese military journal said something, the US press would have no qualms saying "Chinese military thinks/wants X". It's on the same level of "disinformation" as 99% of journalism, which is to say, it contains minor sensationalism but has meaningful factual basis, and with minor additional qualifiers, has a reasonable factual basis.
  - arp242 3y ago
    That's just a boring pedantic whataboutism, which is also incorrect as the type of "random people can say random stuff" blue-sky thinking free speech doesn't really exist in China.
    - dundarious 3y ago
      It's not whataboutism (a nebulous and mostly useless category) to talk about common journalistic practice, and how the claim falls well within norms of that practice. So it can hardly be described as "disinformation" except in the sense that it is unflattering information coming from an official enemy.
      - dundarious 3y ago
        Just heard Lyle Goldstein (visiting professor at the Watson Institute for International & Public Affairs at Brown, Director for Asian Engagement for Defense Priorities think tank, former professor for 20 years at US Naval War College), say on the Nonzero podcast that in the event of conflict in Taiwan, it's likely that China has securing TSMC facilities and staff as a goal (but not a primary goal), and that the US likely has TSMC on the target list to destroy: https://youtu.be/91QM9W0QAjo?feature=shared&t=1950 https://youtu.be/91QM9W0QAjo?feature=shared&t=1950
- hnfong 3y ago
  From one of the links from GP: > “I’m not promoting the idea. I’m not promoting the idea,” Moulton said. “What I’m saying is these are some of the things that are actually actively being debated among US policymakers.” The fun thing is this: if people like you keep denying this is a real thing until this becomes official policy, it would be too late for the people of Taiwan to object to it. Another win for the US again! "The most effective lie is the one with a kernel of truth" indeed. The US does a lot of stupid things, it doesn't make it unreal. This policy isn't even half stupid as long as you can deny it long enough to make it happen. I might even say it's smart to deny it on the surface but actually continuing to make the threat credible. Well done.

arp242 3y ago

> an academic foreign policy paper (which doesn't speak for the US foreign policy). From two guys who seem to have no real influence. It's basically little more than a blog post. A lot of people say a lot of stuff. Sometimes that's pretty stupid. Sometimes even worse. That's kind of how it works in a free society. The most effective lie is the one with a kernel of truth.

dundarious 3y ago
Rep. Seth Moulton (Mass.) is in government. And if a Chinese military journal said something, the US press would have no qualms saying "Chinese military thinks/wants X". It's on the same level of "disinformation" as 99% of journalism, which is to say, it contains minor sensationalism but has meaningful factual basis, and with minor additional qualifiers, has a reasonable factual basis.
- arp242 3y ago
  That's just a boring pedantic whataboutism, which is also incorrect as the type of "random people can say random stuff" blue-sky thinking free speech doesn't really exist in China.
  - dundarious 3y ago
    It's not whataboutism (a nebulous and mostly useless category) to talk about common journalistic practice, and how the claim falls well within norms of that practice. So it can hardly be described as "disinformation" except in the sense that it is unflattering information coming from an official enemy.
    - dundarious 3y ago
      Just heard Lyle Goldstein (visiting professor at the Watson Institute for International & Public Affairs at Brown, Director for Asian Engagement for Defense Priorities think tank, former professor for 20 years at US Naval War College), say on the Nonzero podcast that in the event of conflict in Taiwan, it's likely that China has securing TSMC facilities and staff as a goal (but not a primary goal), and that the US likely has TSMC on the target list to destroy: https://youtu.be/91QM9W0QAjo?feature=shared&t=1950 https://youtu.be/91QM9W0QAjo?feature=shared&t=1950
hnfong 3y ago
From one of the links from GP: > “I’m not promoting the idea. I’m not promoting the idea,” Moulton said. “What I’m saying is these are some of the things that are actually actively being debated among US policymakers.” The fun thing is this: if people like you keep denying this is a real thing until this becomes official policy, it would be too late for the people of Taiwan to object to it. Another win for the US again! "The most effective lie is the one with a kernel of truth" indeed. The US does a lot of stupid things, it doesn't make it unreal. This policy isn't even half stupid as long as you can deny it long enough to make it happen. I might even say it's smart to deny it on the surface but actually continuing to make the threat credible. Well done.