4 ms·

> Taiwan is hugely reliant on US defense guarantees. What I don't get is, in what universe is any US president going to engage militarily against China across

> Taiwan is hugely reliant on US defense guarantees. What I don't get is, in what universe is any US president going to engage militarily against China across the ocean, let alone the current one? The US population does not seem ecstatic to enter something that could turn into WWIII, which makes me feel that even a president in favor of this would quickly fail to do anything.

Shank 2y ago
> What I don't get is, in what universe is any US president going to engage militarily against China across the ocean The whole premise of TSMC is that losing TSMC would cause such a global economic collapse that defending Taiwan is the only option to prevent this from happening. All high-performance computing is dependent on TSMC right now.
- shipp02 2y ago
  Intel/Samsung are behind. That is a fact. The question is, is it better to wage a massive war that will cost hundreds of billions of dollars and many lives than to make an equal investment into the semi-conductor industry.
- re-thc 2y ago
  > The whole premise of TSMC is that losing TSMC would cause such a global economic collapse that defending Taiwan is the only option to prevent this from happening. TSMC just hits the media often. If Taiwan goes the global economy will have way more problems than just TSMC. There is a long list of companies in many supply chains that would be impacted (not just computing).
- agumonkey 2y ago
  Is this all because US are afraid China will own the world through HPC/AI ? How many of us really depend on the latest cpu to survive ?
- roenxi 2y ago
  We could be plunged back into the horrible era that was ... the 2010s! There wouldn't be a global collapse if TSMC was lost. It'd be an inconvenience that sets the semiconductor industry back a decade or so. Most advanced technology hasn't had time to have an impact on the global economy yet and 98% of people won't notice much in practice if all the TSMC foundries exploded tomorrow. There'd maybe be some shortages while other companies build new foundries - although even then it isn't a given people would care. China seems to be about to flood the market with manufacturing capacity.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > whole premise of TSMC is that losing TSMC would cause such a global economic collapse that defending Taiwan is the only option to prevent this This never works. The security through economy pitch. It has never, ever worked. America was a reliable security guarantor. We promised to protect and had honour. Honour isn’t in the American cultural vocabulary anymore. So the guarantees are proven useless and everyone has to scramble back into realpolitik.
- willvarfar 2y ago
  The US cannot realistically technically stop missiles raining down on the fabs on Taiwan should China decide to do that.
petesergeant 2y ago
> across the ocean It is, but it also isn't, given the US forces on Okinawa, and also just generally in the region. The US military is not a force that exists for homeland defense, it's a force designed purely to project power across the ocean. > engage militarily This can mean a lot of things though. A steady flow of matériel and intelligence given to an island that's basically a giant and highly-defended mountain-range is going to go a very long way. > is any US president I mean in the last 150 years they've shown a remarkable willingness to intervene, more than once in proxy wars against the Chinese.
- DeathArrow 2y ago
  >The US military is not a force that exists for homeland defense, it's a force designed purely to project power across the ocean How will they project power? With aircraft carriers? China can destroy those in hours once in close range. China has more ships than US and 100x shipbuilding capacity.
  - petesergeant 2y ago
    > How will they project power https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/16h4gw8/us_military_bases_in_the_west_pacific_2023/ https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/16h4gw8/us_militar...
jopsen 2y ago
> What I don't get is, in what universe is any US president going to engage militarily against China across the ocean, let alone the current one? A managed escalation would blockade China, or at least ensure the rest of the free world never trades with China again. Similarly, a local conflict could ensure chip facilities in Taiwan aren't surrendered intact. The US doesn't have to win a hot conflict. Just start a cold war. I still think the US has allies in Europe that would sanction China indefinitely. They'd probably also show up with something, if called.
- chii 2y ago
  > blockade China which is why china is pre-emptively claiming ownership of the south china sea, in an attempt to prevent the ability for any blockades to form in the first place! While on paper, the US makes "guarantees" about freedom of navigation, this is even less reliable than the toilet paper it is written on.
- jurip 2y ago
  > I still think the US has allies in Europe that would sanction China indefinitely. They'd probably also show up with something, if called. China only needs to wait for a couple of years for Musk, Trump and Vance to have destroyed any remnants of the alliances, though.
- somenameforme 2y ago
  I don't think this is quite how it would work. Taiwan isn't even remotely close to self sufficient on many critical things including food and energy. This means they are extremely vulnerable to a naval blockade, with no realistic means of combating it. And breaking such a blockade would probably be impossible. It's not just that they're a tiny little island right off the coast of China, but the geography of the island itself makes a blockade even more unstoppable. Most of the island is made up of inhospitable mountains, with a sliver of hospitable land mostly on one side, the side that faces China. This [1] is a population density map of Taiwan. China is as little as 80 miles to their West. And by "free world" I guess you mean the anglosphere, gradually shrinking globalist parts of the EU, and perhaps Japan/South Korea. That's now less than 15% of the global population and declining. Economically BRICS overcame the G7 back in 2018 [2], and the difference has only grown far more stark since. The times have really changed a lot over the past ~20 years. I think the collapse of the USSR was probably the worst thing to ever happen to the US, because it gave us a taste of global hegemony that was never sustainable, yet left us addicted to its fleeting flavor. [1] - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Population_density_of_Taiwan_by_district.svg https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Population_density_of_T... [2] - https://www.statista.com/statistics/1412425/gdp-ppp-share-world-gdp-g7-brics/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1412425/gdp-ppp-share-wo...
PeterStuer 2y ago
The US and the EU globalists have outsourced nearly all manufacturing to the east. Waging war on China is basically shooting yourself. As if you needed more proof, covid hickup disruption of the supply chains were an ample demonstration. The US gets this, and has now turned towards being less dependant. The EU still doesn't understand, or is willfully blind as an acknowledgement would mean giving up some fantasies they have. Since the 70's the US' main export has been printed money, 'IP' and war. The first two are worthless if not backed by the threat of the third. Weapons is about the only thing dollars can buy if oil can be traded in other currencies. BRICS is rapidly becoming a contender for a trade platform that they failed to stop. You can't wage war in the manufacturer you rely on. This means drastic changes in US policy are needed. This means returning to self sufficiency. This will take time even when you try to speedrun it.

Shank 2y ago

> What I don't get is, in what universe is any US president going to engage militarily against China across the ocean The whole premise of TSMC is that losing TSMC would cause such a global economic collapse that defending Taiwan is the only option to prevent this from happening. All high-performance computing is dependent on TSMC right now.

shipp02 2y ago
Intel/Samsung are behind. That is a fact. The question is, is it better to wage a massive war that will cost hundreds of billions of dollars and many lives than to make an equal investment into the semi-conductor industry.
re-thc 2y ago
> The whole premise of TSMC is that losing TSMC would cause such a global economic collapse that defending Taiwan is the only option to prevent this from happening. TSMC just hits the media often. If Taiwan goes the global economy will have way more problems than just TSMC. There is a long list of companies in many supply chains that would be impacted (not just computing).
agumonkey 2y ago
Is this all because US are afraid China will own the world through HPC/AI ? How many of us really depend on the latest cpu to survive ?
roenxi 2y ago
We could be plunged back into the horrible era that was ... the 2010s! There wouldn't be a global collapse if TSMC was lost. It'd be an inconvenience that sets the semiconductor industry back a decade or so. Most advanced technology hasn't had time to have an impact on the global economy yet and 98% of people won't notice much in practice if all the TSMC foundries exploded tomorrow. There'd maybe be some shortages while other companies build new foundries - although even then it isn't a given people would care. China seems to be about to flood the market with manufacturing capacity.
JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> whole premise of TSMC is that losing TSMC would cause such a global economic collapse that defending Taiwan is the only option to prevent this This never works. The security through economy pitch. It has never, ever worked. America was a reliable security guarantor. We promised to protect and had honour. Honour isn’t in the American cultural vocabulary anymore. So the guarantees are proven useless and everyone has to scramble back into realpolitik.
willvarfar 2y ago
The US cannot realistically technically stop missiles raining down on the fabs on Taiwan should China decide to do that.

petesergeant 2y ago

> across the ocean It is, but it also isn't, given the US forces on Okinawa, and also just generally in the region. The US military is not a force that exists for homeland defense, it's a force designed purely to project power across the ocean. > engage militarily This can mean a lot of things though. A steady flow of matériel and intelligence given to an island that's basically a giant and highly-defended mountain-range is going to go a very long way. > is any US president I mean in the last 150 years they've shown a remarkable willingness to intervene, more than once in proxy wars against the Chinese.

DeathArrow 2y ago
>The US military is not a force that exists for homeland defense, it's a force designed purely to project power across the ocean How will they project power? With aircraft carriers? China can destroy those in hours once in close range. China has more ships than US and 100x shipbuilding capacity.
- petesergeant 2y ago
  > How will they project power https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/16h4gw8/us_military_bases_in_the_west_pacific_2023/ https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/16h4gw8/us_militar...

jopsen 2y ago

> What I don't get is, in what universe is any US president going to engage militarily against China across the ocean, let alone the current one? A managed escalation would blockade China, or at least ensure the rest of the free world never trades with China again. Similarly, a local conflict could ensure chip facilities in Taiwan aren't surrendered intact. The US doesn't have to win a hot conflict. Just start a cold war. I still think the US has allies in Europe that would sanction China indefinitely. They'd probably also show up with something, if called.

chii 2y ago
> blockade China which is why china is pre-emptively claiming ownership of the south china sea, in an attempt to prevent the ability for any blockades to form in the first place! While on paper, the US makes "guarantees" about freedom of navigation, this is even less reliable than the toilet paper it is written on.
jurip 2y ago
> I still think the US has allies in Europe that would sanction China indefinitely. They'd probably also show up with something, if called. China only needs to wait for a couple of years for Musk, Trump and Vance to have destroyed any remnants of the alliances, though.
somenameforme 2y ago
I don't think this is quite how it would work. Taiwan isn't even remotely close to self sufficient on many critical things including food and energy. This means they are extremely vulnerable to a naval blockade, with no realistic means of combating it. And breaking such a blockade would probably be impossible. It's not just that they're a tiny little island right off the coast of China, but the geography of the island itself makes a blockade even more unstoppable. Most of the island is made up of inhospitable mountains, with a sliver of hospitable land mostly on one side, the side that faces China. This [1] is a population density map of Taiwan. China is as little as 80 miles to their West. And by "free world" I guess you mean the anglosphere, gradually shrinking globalist parts of the EU, and perhaps Japan/South Korea. That's now less than 15% of the global population and declining. Economically BRICS overcame the G7 back in 2018 [2], and the difference has only grown far more stark since. The times have really changed a lot over the past ~20 years. I think the collapse of the USSR was probably the worst thing to ever happen to the US, because it gave us a taste of global hegemony that was never sustainable, yet left us addicted to its fleeting flavor. [1] - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Population_density_of_Taiwan_by_district.svg https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Population_density_of_T... [2] - https://www.statista.com/statistics/1412425/gdp-ppp-share-world-gdp-g7-brics/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1412425/gdp-ppp-share-wo...

PeterStuer 2y ago

The US and the EU globalists have outsourced nearly all manufacturing to the east. Waging war on China is basically shooting yourself. As if you needed more proof, covid hickup disruption of the supply chains were an ample demonstration. The US gets this, and has now turned towards being less dependant. The EU still doesn't understand, or is willfully blind as an acknowledgement would mean giving up some fantasies they have. Since the 70's the US' main export has been printed money, 'IP' and war. The first two are worthless if not backed by the threat of the third. Weapons is about the only thing dollars can buy if oil can be traded in other currencies. BRICS is rapidly becoming a contender for a trade platform that they failed to stop. You can't wage war in the manufacturer you rely on. This means drastic changes in US policy are needed. This means returning to self sufficiency. This will take time even when you try to speedrun it.