3 ms·

Once we get semiconductor fabs stateside we dont have to bother with Ukraine-Russia, Israel-Palestine-neighbors, or China-China The same way 180+ other countri

Once we get semiconductor fabs stateside we dont have to bother with Ukraine-Russia, Israel-Palestine-neighbors, or China-China The same way 180+ other countries approach the situation People really think the US supports their causes and they got another thing coming with that assumption.

notTooFarGone 3y ago
Ah so let's let Russia do its thing? Worst take I have seen, literally ever. Letting our allies to starve is a sure way to get invaded at some point
- appplication 3y ago
  America is at no risk of being invaded. However, should it let its allies go unaided, it will loose its footholds in Europe and Asia from which it projects its power (militarily, culturally, economically, etc). Geopolitics is not so simple as to be zero sum, but when it comes to Russian and US interests, it may as well be.
  - sam_goody 3y ago
    Was 9/11 a "invasion"? Iran has turned "Death to the Americans and Israelis" into a motto. If we stop projecting power, they will certainly attack again. Which may not justify Ukraine, but exiting world politics will just turn us into a target.
    - yieldcrv 3y ago
      [flagged]
    - yieldcrv 3y ago
      Iran didn't attack us, so who is "they" we're a target because of our recent approaches of the last 70 years. there are other approaches that other superpowers have taken that have been even more beneficial for them and don't turn them into a target from anyone, or an amorphous "they" nobody is after "our way of life" as some of our leaders famously said, and if they are they already live in the US "death to America" is a reaction to American intervention, it isn't arbitrarily created because of our ... alliances or predominant religion or musings or freedoms or anything else. the same for 9/11 which can easily be seen as a double crossing by someone the US courted who became disillusioned with America. America's "national security" approach is its biggest threat to national security.
  - pvaldes 3y ago
    > America is at no risk of being invaded ... the Capitol events suggest a different history
- dmitrygr 3y ago
  > a sure way to get invaded Tell me you do not understand logistics without saying you do not understand logistics. America cannot be invaded other than by mexico or canada. Do you have any idea what kind of effort it would take to support cross-ocean supply chains for a modern army? A modern army would run out of fuel in two days without constant resupply. And out of food in three.
  - type0 3y ago
    MAGA chanting populists would argue that US is already being invaded by illegal immigrants. There's enough hostility between political groups in US to start a civil conflict if it can be fueled by money from a couple of state actors.
- yieldcrv 3y ago
  that perspective relies on being completely unaware of the conflicts that we don't get involved in at all (along with every other country) first step is awareness, the second step is looking at the difference and the only difference is if they're a well paying client for our defense contractors the entire rationale of getting into a conflict just so an adversary there doesn't feel emboldened, or a completely different adversary elsewhere doesn't feel emboldened, is completely undermined by all the conflicts of allies that we don't get involved in geopolitically this rationale disintegrates when a disruption in semiconductor production aren't the biggest threat to the US supply chain what people need to understand that US support isn't about their cause. People seem to have misinterpreted that and are surprised by the reactions of the US people when they expected affirmation of their cause.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
lm28469 3y ago
You might want to open an history book or two if you think the US intervene in foreign countries for semiconductors
- yieldcrv 3y ago
  current support for US interventions is about not emboldening China to invade China and that's bolstered by reliance on semiconductors in the latter China. we'll find other rationale easily, our defense contractors and their warhawk friends will find other rationale. but right now, thats the resource we want to protect and it'll be clear when that has no legs to stand on.
cellis 3y ago
I disagree. Isolationism won’t work and we care about a A LOT more than just fans or even petrochemical region stability. We need to continue to “sue” (at the nation state level that means: maintain a military posture and cultural presence in the aforementioned regions) for freedom of trade in order to continue exporting our culture. The more our culture is exported the better off Americans tend to be.
- svilen_dobrev 3y ago
  > in order to continue exporting our culture. The more our culture is exported the better off Americans tend to be. ah. *deleted*

notTooFarGone 3y ago

Ah so let's let Russia do its thing? Worst take I have seen, literally ever. Letting our allies to starve is a sure way to get invaded at some point

appplication 3y ago
America is at no risk of being invaded. However, should it let its allies go unaided, it will loose its footholds in Europe and Asia from which it projects its power (militarily, culturally, economically, etc). Geopolitics is not so simple as to be zero sum, but when it comes to Russian and US interests, it may as well be.
- sam_goody 3y ago
  Was 9/11 a "invasion"? Iran has turned "Death to the Americans and Israelis" into a motto. If we stop projecting power, they will certainly attack again. Which may not justify Ukraine, but exiting world politics will just turn us into a target.
  - yieldcrv 3y ago
    [flagged]
  - yieldcrv 3y ago
    Iran didn't attack us, so who is "they" we're a target because of our recent approaches of the last 70 years. there are other approaches that other superpowers have taken that have been even more beneficial for them and don't turn them into a target from anyone, or an amorphous "they" nobody is after "our way of life" as some of our leaders famously said, and if they are they already live in the US "death to America" is a reaction to American intervention, it isn't arbitrarily created because of our ... alliances or predominant religion or musings or freedoms or anything else. the same for 9/11 which can easily be seen as a double crossing by someone the US courted who became disillusioned with America. America's "national security" approach is its biggest threat to national security.
- pvaldes 3y ago
  > America is at no risk of being invaded ... the Capitol events suggest a different history
dmitrygr 3y ago
> a sure way to get invaded Tell me you do not understand logistics without saying you do not understand logistics. America cannot be invaded other than by mexico or canada. Do you have any idea what kind of effort it would take to support cross-ocean supply chains for a modern army? A modern army would run out of fuel in two days without constant resupply. And out of food in three.
- type0 3y ago
  MAGA chanting populists would argue that US is already being invaded by illegal immigrants. There's enough hostility between political groups in US to start a civil conflict if it can be fueled by money from a couple of state actors.
yieldcrv 3y ago
that perspective relies on being completely unaware of the conflicts that we don't get involved in at all (along with every other country) first step is awareness, the second step is looking at the difference and the only difference is if they're a well paying client for our defense contractors the entire rationale of getting into a conflict just so an adversary there doesn't feel emboldened, or a completely different adversary elsewhere doesn't feel emboldened, is completely undermined by all the conflicts of allies that we don't get involved in geopolitically this rationale disintegrates when a disruption in semiconductor production aren't the biggest threat to the US supply chain what people need to understand that US support isn't about their cause. People seem to have misinterpreted that and are surprised by the reactions of the US people when they expected affirmation of their cause.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

lm28469 3y ago

You might want to open an history book or two if you think the US intervene in foreign countries for semiconductors

yieldcrv 3y ago
current support for US interventions is about not emboldening China to invade China and that's bolstered by reliance on semiconductors in the latter China. we'll find other rationale easily, our defense contractors and their warhawk friends will find other rationale. but right now, thats the resource we want to protect and it'll be clear when that has no legs to stand on.

cellis 3y ago

I disagree. Isolationism won’t work and we care about a A LOT more than just fans or even petrochemical region stability. We need to continue to “sue” (at the nation state level that means: maintain a military posture and cultural presence in the aforementioned regions) for freedom of trade in order to continue exporting our culture. The more our culture is exported the better off Americans tend to be.

svilen_dobrev 3y ago
> in order to continue exporting our culture. The more our culture is exported the better off Americans tend to be. ah. *deleted*