3 ms·

I hear that statement repeated a lot, but I'm not so sure. What is the incentive? If China invades, anyone involved in destroying that asset will have a huge p

I hear that statement repeated a lot, but I'm not so sure. What is the incentive? If China invades, anyone involved in destroying that asset will have a huge problem for themselves afterwards, China won't forgive. On the other hand, see what happened in Ukraine, where in the initial invasion there was quite a bit of collaboration of some Ukrainians, for example Antonov leadership ("Antonov's leadership sabotaged defense of Hostomel airport" -- https://english.nv.ua/nation/antonov-s-leadership-sabotaged-hostomel-defense-efforts-news-50316938.html https://english.nv.ua/nation/antonov-s-leadership-sabotaged-...). If they will have to live under China's rule, the incentive for the individuals is to cooperate with them and be richly rewarded for it. Who wants to sacrifice themselves - and likely their families too - to benefit some outsiders? Who are leaving you behind to fight for yourself? Which at that point is against your own interest if you don't think you can win. Especially when the invaders are from one's own greater "tribe", so that it is not as bad as being invaded by another people (like the French or the Americans in Vietnam).

adgjlsfhk1 2y ago
this is forgetting that the US exists. The US doesn't want China to invade Taiwan or to control TSMC. if China invades, is very much in the US interest to fly everyone important at TSMC and their families to the US, and to blow up the buildings. it's also in the TSMC employees interest because living in a warzone sucks. Furthermore, this policy is a dissinsentive for China to invade since it means that invading won't provide an economic benefit.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- nosianu 2y ago
  > this is forgetting that the US exists. I did not forget this. I think you overestimate what the US can and is willing to do there, and also what the incentives would be for people to escape to the US. This is not Vietnam in the 1970s, staying right there may very well be the preferred choice, even if China takes over. Especially if they make a very nice offer in advance. Should Trump win that may look even worse.
  - EmptyCoffeeCup 2y ago
    You're thinking too literally. The USA do not need any co-operation with from the operators of TMSC to deny China the asset. They have enough bombs. The Americans will want the experience of the operators. If those operators refuse to go to America, they'll be unalived with the plant itself.
baybal2 2y ago
[dead]

adgjlsfhk1 2y ago

this is forgetting that the US exists. The US doesn't want China to invade Taiwan or to control TSMC. if China invades, is very much in the US interest to fly everyone important at TSMC and their families to the US, and to blow up the buildings. it's also in the TSMC employees interest because living in a warzone sucks. Furthermore, this policy is a dissinsentive for China to invade since it means that invading won't provide an economic benefit.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
nosianu 2y ago
> this is forgetting that the US exists. I did not forget this. I think you overestimate what the US can and is willing to do there, and also what the incentives would be for people to escape to the US. This is not Vietnam in the 1970s, staying right there may very well be the preferred choice, even if China takes over. Especially if they make a very nice offer in advance. Should Trump win that may look even worse.
- EmptyCoffeeCup 2y ago
  You're thinking too literally. The USA do not need any co-operation with from the operators of TMSC to deny China the asset. They have enough bombs. The Americans will want the experience of the operators. If those operators refuse to go to America, they'll be unalived with the plant itself.

baybal2 2y ago

[dead]