5 ms·

America's National Security Wonderland

44 points by yo_yo_yo-yo 2y ago

roenxi 2y ago
Something like 40% of the US GDP is accounted for by direct government spending [0]. Then some % of the GDP is on things that are really non-discretionary, like food and shelter and a further % is private spending by people who are actually government employees. Noting that, it is conceivable that the US is undergoing a much softer version of Soviet-style dissolution. Overstretched, unable to pay for military needs that have been mis-assessed by central planners, no safety valve provided by a healthy decentralised market. America's gentle deindustrialisation has been noticed. Everyone seems to know about it. The problem is that nobody seems willing to put the legwork in to maintain the US as a global hegemon and - simultaneously and in contradiction - nobody has briefed the military planners that they have to pull back a bit. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_spending_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_spending_in_the_Uni...
- actionfromafar 2y ago
  I rarely agree with you, but I do on this one. I don't think it's only the military planners either, who could have benefited from a heads up.
- soco 2y ago
  If the persons in charge prefer to increase their own and their friends' wealth, instead of looking what would be better for the country? Or maybe there's simply a different understanding of "country": for some the homeless aren't real citizens (or real humans), for other the workers are second class at best... so why would the leadership do things for those?
beeflet 2y ago
The discussion of what we're going to do about taiwan was totally absent this presidential election. It's the most important matter of our time and no one is addressing the elephant in the pacific. Instead, there is no primary election for either major party, and the minor parties don't even show up. What a joke of a system.
- DanielHB 2y ago
  China will 100% invade Taiwan if it looks like Trump won't win the next elections, will likely do it anyway even in that case.
  - beeflet 2y ago
    This is trump's last term in office
    - DanielHB 2y ago
      Well, unless it isn't? But even beyond that prospect just replace Trump with Trump's successor whoever it is.
      - actionfromafar 2y ago
        Jr?
    - actionfromafar 2y ago
      Right, but how long is the term? And which one of the Trumps, exactly?
    - red-iron-pine 2y ago
      they are already aggressively campaigning for 2028
  - actionfromafar 2y ago
    Maybe the US can make a deal and get the "mineral" rights of Taiwan and China and the US cuts the Taiwain cake? Afterall, that seems to be the model for Ukraine.
  - throwaway69123 2y ago
    china will invade taiwan when the world moves away from their chip dependency
yo_yo_yo-yo 2y ago
It’ll be interesting to see how hands-off the present administration will be with the military. Certainly the aura of a consistent US foreign policy posture has been shattered by recent realignment regarding Ukraine. Foreign powers will naturally now be tempted to test how much of an actual threat any future US military action may be. That calculus has certainly shifted. I think the goal of the administration is to let China take Taiwan, but before this happens poach as much talent and knowledge from TSMC (hence the overtures of splitting Intel) so that when Taiwan destroys its capacity on attack it’ll be business as usual for the US. Taiwan is certainly in an extremely unenviable situation. But that’s the plan, I fully believe, to make America great yet again, all that Taiwanese industry will get reshored here in the USofA.
- paleotrope 2y ago
  If you assume the PRC is going to try Taiwan one way or another, wouldn't your actions be exactly the same regardless if your plan was re-shore manufacturing here for domestic politics or you were trying to re-shore for military strategic reasons? The position of Taiwan isn't enviable at all. If I were Taiwanese based, I would make sure you pay close attention to the internal politics of the nation. You might not have much time in the event someone makes a different choice. The PRC wants Taiwan whole and intact if possible.
  - yo_yo_yo-yo 2y ago
    I don’t think China cared about Taiwan, apart from posturing, until ChatGPT happened and the US started restricting ML hardware sales. Then the US started pressuring ASML. My, unpopular, opinion is that ML will not be successfully applied by the US military, because the culture of US tech is to exploit the customer, in this case the Pentagon. I expect the Chinese will be far more organized and thoughtful about integrating ML into a broad warfare strategy that isn’t just expensive razzle-dazzle. That’s why I’m super curious as to when and if the current administration will touch military spending and organization.
    - wiggidy 2y ago
lq9AJ8yrfs 2y ago
Can someone explain the root of tension between the US and China? Is it just vanity and inevitable that two major powers will fight? Resource scarcity? Beneath a few layers of culture it seems the internal values of the two countries are very similar and fairly compatible. Maybe that breeds contempt but seems like there is plenty of room for the two countries to play together nicely especially if they make progress on their faults. In spite of the online acrimony, each side seems to understand well enough its own and the other's faults, and they generally seem to be trying to work on their own faults as much as working on each others'. This seems like a relationship that may come to blows but should be salvageable, especially if the blows can be softened or avoided perhaps altogether.
- throwaind29k 2y ago
  Perhaps one reason is that US thought that the globalized free trade world system will always benefit it more than other nations. However in the last few years China grew big, and figured out how to make that system work in a manner advantageous to them. So US is under-cutting that system, or in other words changing the rules of the game so that China can't make progress easily. Fundamental question is will US be ever able to come to terms with a world in which US is not the dominant world power? Practically if you look at the British or Russians, it doesn't seem to make much difference to the lives of ordinary people, the losing of 'world power' status.
  - lq9AJ8yrfs 2y ago
    In history class I was taught in the 60s and 70s the US preferred and encouraged China to develop itself, partly (or mainly I guess depending on your view) as a foil to the Soviet Union, partly because of internal humanistic values and belief that prosperity is good for people. From a 50+ year historical standpoint it seems even more than philosophy that the two should get along. Not confident in my understanding though, isn't there more to current politics than recent events and the last 30 years? Wondering if and suspecting there's something with more predictive value than online headlines and pundits. Demographics clearly -- TFR types of analysis seem compelling, although that's on a longer time frame than current tensions.

44 points by yo_yo_yo-yo 2y ago

Something like 40% of the US GDP is accounted for by direct government spending [0]. Then some % of the GDP is on things that are really non-discretionary, like food and shelter and a further % is private spending by people who are actually government employees. Noting that, it is conceivable that the US is undergoing a much softer version of Soviet-style dissolution. Overstretched, unable to pay for military needs that have been mis-assessed by central planners, no safety valve provided by a healthy decentralised market. America's gentle deindustrialisation has been noticed. Everyone seems to know about it. The problem is that nobody seems willing to put the legwork in to maintain the US as a global hegemon and - simultaneously and in contradiction - nobody has briefed the military planners that they have to pull back a bit. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_spending_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_spending_in_the_Uni...

actionfromafar 2y ago
I rarely agree with you, but I do on this one. I don't think it's only the military planners either, who could have benefited from a heads up.
soco 2y ago
If the persons in charge prefer to increase their own and their friends' wealth, instead of looking what would be better for the country? Or maybe there's simply a different understanding of "country": for some the homeless aren't real citizens (or real humans), for other the workers are second class at best... so why would the leadership do things for those?

beeflet 2y ago

The discussion of what we're going to do about taiwan was totally absent this presidential election. It's the most important matter of our time and no one is addressing the elephant in the pacific. Instead, there is no primary election for either major party, and the minor parties don't even show up. What a joke of a system.

DanielHB 2y ago
China will 100% invade Taiwan if it looks like Trump won't win the next elections, will likely do it anyway even in that case.
- beeflet 2y ago
  This is trump's last term in office
  - DanielHB 2y ago
    Well, unless it isn't? But even beyond that prospect just replace Trump with Trump's successor whoever it is.
    - actionfromafar 2y ago
      Jr?
  - actionfromafar 2y ago
    Right, but how long is the term? And which one of the Trumps, exactly?
  - red-iron-pine 2y ago
    they are already aggressively campaigning for 2028
- actionfromafar 2y ago
  Maybe the US can make a deal and get the "mineral" rights of Taiwan and China and the US cuts the Taiwain cake? Afterall, that seems to be the model for Ukraine.
- throwaway69123 2y ago
  china will invade taiwan when the world moves away from their chip dependency

yo_yo_yo-yo 2y ago

It’ll be interesting to see how hands-off the present administration will be with the military. Certainly the aura of a consistent US foreign policy posture has been shattered by recent realignment regarding Ukraine. Foreign powers will naturally now be tempted to test how much of an actual threat any future US military action may be. That calculus has certainly shifted. I think the goal of the administration is to let China take Taiwan, but before this happens poach as much talent and knowledge from TSMC (hence the overtures of splitting Intel) so that when Taiwan destroys its capacity on attack it’ll be business as usual for the US. Taiwan is certainly in an extremely unenviable situation. But that’s the plan, I fully believe, to make America great yet again, all that Taiwanese industry will get reshored here in the USofA.

paleotrope 2y ago
If you assume the PRC is going to try Taiwan one way or another, wouldn't your actions be exactly the same regardless if your plan was re-shore manufacturing here for domestic politics or you were trying to re-shore for military strategic reasons? The position of Taiwan isn't enviable at all. If I were Taiwanese based, I would make sure you pay close attention to the internal politics of the nation. You might not have much time in the event someone makes a different choice. The PRC wants Taiwan whole and intact if possible.
- yo_yo_yo-yo 2y ago
  I don’t think China cared about Taiwan, apart from posturing, until ChatGPT happened and the US started restricting ML hardware sales. Then the US started pressuring ASML. My, unpopular, opinion is that ML will not be successfully applied by the US military, because the culture of US tech is to exploit the customer, in this case the Pentagon. I expect the Chinese will be far more organized and thoughtful about integrating ML into a broad warfare strategy that isn’t just expensive razzle-dazzle. That’s why I’m super curious as to when and if the current administration will touch military spending and organization.
  - wiggidy 2y ago

lq9AJ8yrfs 2y ago

Can someone explain the root of tension between the US and China? Is it just vanity and inevitable that two major powers will fight? Resource scarcity? Beneath a few layers of culture it seems the internal values of the two countries are very similar and fairly compatible. Maybe that breeds contempt but seems like there is plenty of room for the two countries to play together nicely especially if they make progress on their faults. In spite of the online acrimony, each side seems to understand well enough its own and the other's faults, and they generally seem to be trying to work on their own faults as much as working on each others'. This seems like a relationship that may come to blows but should be salvageable, especially if the blows can be softened or avoided perhaps altogether.

throwaind29k 2y ago
Perhaps one reason is that US thought that the globalized free trade world system will always benefit it more than other nations. However in the last few years China grew big, and figured out how to make that system work in a manner advantageous to them. So US is under-cutting that system, or in other words changing the rules of the game so that China can't make progress easily. Fundamental question is will US be ever able to come to terms with a world in which US is not the dominant world power? Practically if you look at the British or Russians, it doesn't seem to make much difference to the lives of ordinary people, the losing of 'world power' status.
- lq9AJ8yrfs 2y ago
  In history class I was taught in the 60s and 70s the US preferred and encouraged China to develop itself, partly (or mainly I guess depending on your view) as a foil to the Soviet Union, partly because of internal humanistic values and belief that prosperity is good for people. From a 50+ year historical standpoint it seems even more than philosophy that the two should get along. Not confident in my understanding though, isn't there more to current politics than recent events and the last 30 years? Wondering if and suspecting there's something with more predictive value than online headlines and pundits. Demographics clearly -- TFR types of analysis seem compelling, although that's on a longer time frame than current tensions.