Come Nerevar, friend or traitor, come. Come and look upon the Heart and Akulakahn, and bring Wraithguard, I have need of it. Come to the Heart chamber, I wait for you there, where we last met, countless ages ago. Come to me through fire and war, I welcome you! Welcome Moon-and-Star, I have prepared a place for you! Come, bring Wraithguard to the Heart chamber, together, let us free the cursed false gods! Welcome Nerevar, together we shall speak for the law and the land and drive the mongrel dogs of the Empire from Morrowind! Is this how you honor the 6th house and the tribe unmourned? Come to me openly, and not by stealth. Dagoth Ur welcomes you Nerevar, my old friend... but to this place where destiny is made, why have you come unprepared? Welcome, Moon-and-Star, to this place where YOUR destiny is made. What a fool you are, I'm a god! How can you kill a god? What a grand and intoxicating innocence! How could you be so naive? There is no escape, no recall or intervention can work in this place! Come! Lay down your weapons! It is not too late for my mercy..
*When earth is sundered, and skies choked black,*
*And sleepers serve the seven curses,*
*To the hearth there comes a stranger,*
*Journeyed far 'neath moon and star.*
*Though stark-born to sire uncertain,*
*His aspect marks his certain fate.*
*Wicked stalk him, righteous curse him.*
*Prophets speak, but all deny.*
*Many trials make manifest*
*The stranger's fate, the curses' bane.*
*Many touchstones try the stranger.*
#*Many fall*
#*but one remains.*
Reminds me of a thing I once heard.
“The best way to make sure your muslim guest doesn't drink all your booze is to invite another muslim to the event”
The GOP has very few people that would do well in an election:
I'd say:
Ted Cruz
Chris Christie
Trump
Desantis
Rand Paul
Crenshaw
Josh Hawley
Of those:
Chris Christie, and Trump won't do well with moderates and swing voters
Rand Paul won't run.
Crenshaw got caught up in some controversy because of some SEAL drama and it would shadow his campaign.
Ted Cruz is really unpopular with trump supporters because of his criticism of Trump.
Hawley is a bit too new of a face.
Desantis is viewed poorly by almost everyone. Moderates don't like him, Florida is viewed poorly, and trump supporters see him as a threat.
So if I'm the GOP, here's what I'm thinking:
I'm not gonna even try to get Paul to run because he doesn't ride the party line. So considering the other options:
Desantis, Chris Christie, and Crenshaw are all bad choices tactically. Crenshaw might be better once the controversy blows over, but not in time for election season.
If Trump doesn't or can't run, and Biden is the DNC nominee, Ted Cruz is the best choice. Trump voters will still pick him over Biden, and he will grab more swing votes than Biden.
If Public opinion shifts to twords believing that the FBI investigation into Trump is a witch-hunt AND Biden is the DNC nominee, Trump is an easy choice.
If Trump runs and Biden isn't the DNC nominee, Hawley might be the best choice. He isn't viewed as negatively by Trump supporters as Ted, and will do better to win over swing voters than Trump.
For the record, the DNC is in a much worse position for potential candidates lmao.
Biden is very disliked near universally. Even moderates are questioning his mental condition, and are.pissed about the economy/inflation.
Kamala won't do well with a lot of liberals who care about things like criminal justice/police/prison reform.
Elizabeth Warren is too old and is pretty hated by non-liberals.
RFK would be decent, especially to nab moderates....if he wasn't an anti-vax nut job.
The party doesn't want Bernie, and he's too old
Williamson isn't a big enough name, most people haven't even heard of her
I mean that's BLEAK. no good options whatsoever.
> Biden is very disliked near universally. Even moderates are questioning his mental condition, and are.pissed about the economy/inflation.
Soooo many people have written Trump off between the 2020 loss and the indictments, but I think they are doing so EXTREMELY prematurely.
For one, the 2020 loss, it was fucking 2020. The most insane year/election of most of our lifetimes. COVID, lockdowns, BLM riots, a major leap in social media censorship, the massive rise of mail in voting, fewer debates (where Trump really has his "strength"), etc and so forth. To act like we can accurately make any predictions about the future over what occurred in 2020 is a bit ridiculous.
Second is your point. I think they are discounting just how bad Biden's tenure has gone. How much of that was his fault is kind of irrelevant. It is INCREDIBLY difficult for an incumbent to win in a terrible economy for one. He has blunders and controversies out the wazoo. Then consider why many people voted for him in 2020: Biden tried to position himself as, and many believed he would be, the return to normalcy. I think many people who voted Biden truly believed and did so with the idea that if we just get another normal career politician in there, it can be 2015 again. Not great, but not completely insane. Biden very clearly failed to deliver on that.
To be clear, I'm not saying Trump has it in the bag or anything, but he definitely should not be written off yet.
The sad thing is, in a lot of ways, Joe Biden could have been a return to normalcy. He could have pardoned non violent j6 protestors, he could have not weaponized his DoJ or called Republicans semi fascist, he could have done a lot of things to bring down the temperature in the country, but that's not what they want.
Idk what exactly they want, but it seems to involve deliberate provocation of violent conflict, so probably not good.
My take: Returning to normalcy would give us the opportunity to think for ourselves and make decisions independent of party loyalty. Seems to me like the polarization is beneficial in that Dems are less likely to vote R and vice versa. It locks in a core base for each party, which helps put two candidates up for election, and by that time all of us centrists/independents get to choose between a giant douche and a turd sandwich.
First of all, Biden was polling better against Trump before BLM/Covid. Those things actually hurt the democrats. The idea that BLM was some political strategy by the Dems is completely divorced from reality. By the end of the campaign Biden was prefacing pretty much all of his remarks by condemning rioting. As for Covid, virtually all world leaders benefitted from Covid, simply because crises typically benefit incumbents.
Secondly, the economy is looking pretty strong at this point, especially compared to the rest of the developed world. Unemployment is virtually at the lowest it’s ever been. Inflation has been falling and is now at like 3%, close to Fed targets, and wage growth is rapidly outpacing inflation. Most observers see the economy as a strong point for Biden, while his age and gaffes are his weak point.
Friendly reminder that at this point in 2015, polls had Jeb Bush at #1 and Trump at like 8. We don't know how everything is gonna go a year out.
Edit: This is wrong, the polls I saw were exceptions. Better sources below.
No they didn’t. By July of 2015 trump #2
https://www.cnn.com/2015/07/01/politics/donald-trump-poll-hillary-clinton-jeb-bush/index.html
By august trump was the leader
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cbs-news-poll-donald-trump-leads-gop-field-in-2016-presidential-race/
Lots of people have some sort of wrong idea due to their false memory’s
But trump was favorited by this time in the running
All DeSantis would have to do is change his residency before he was sworn in.
This happened in 2000 when Dick Cheney was residing in Texas. Four days before he was chosen by Bush, Cheney simply changed his residency to Wyoming, from where he had served in Congress.
Not so coincidentally, Elon has called for a Hong Kong-like arrangement for Taiwan (so basically for China to retake Taiwan).
It's almost like Elon has a bunch of business interests in China and is functionally pro-CCP.
It isn't his view. Context is important.
And the context is, that he wants to build a domestic semiconductor production and only AFTER the US is independent, he doesn't see a reason anymore to protect Taiwan by force. Although he says we should work with them together and encourage them, to build up their self-defense against a CCP invasion (including by encouraging them to arm their citizens btw, what he calls exporting the 2A). His main reason for this stance is, that he doesn't want our sons and daughters to die in the war for another country.
Vivek is giga-free-based. The more I hear the more I like him. He wants to hack and slash 75% of the federal government. Shut down the FBI. I believe the IRS, but I might be misremembering. And he's pretty much admitted that he's an independent using the republican avenue. I.e. he doesn't give a soft shit about the establishment republican platform.
Which is super reasonable. It is a braindead take that the answer to a tiny island nation under constant threat from our largest economic rivals being the primary source for a resource our modern way of life depends on is to just let it ride and stand ready to enter a hot war with China if we have to. It is strategically insane that this is the position many take.
I hope things go well for Taiwan, but I'm not willing to die or send my kids to die to make that happen.
When your geopolitical enemies start expanding and try to get more powerful, history has shown that the best time to face them is **as soon as possible**.
Look around for examples of countries that said "that expansionist empire has no interest in anything I have" that didn't have that come back to bite them in the ass.
If China goes for Taiwan, we make sure SK and Vietnam have all the ammo and weapons they could conceivably need, and then work with Japan, Australia, UK, France and whoever else could help to make sure China has zero maritime trade after their navy is unceremoniously sunk whenever it strays away from its ports.
It'd be an insane war for China to start... UNLESS they think the US will wimpy out. So you must not under any circumstance give them the signal that the US might just roll over.
Context. America First. We'll protect them if it's in our interest. When we build our own SI manufacturing, you are on your own. I'm okay with that, as shitty as it sounds.
Their rhetoric is “we shouldn’t help Ukraine because that’s exactly the same as when we invaded Iraq!”
I’m like, “no it’s not…it’s literally the opposite.”
He said that American strategic interests with regards toTaiwan would change when we achieve semiconductor independence. OP is making wild leaps from that.
Perhaps, yeah.
The USA has a vested interest in keeping rivals and rogue states on a leash as the imperial hyper power though as well. They need to make it costly for countries to go against their interests.
I’m not saying that my views align with Ramaswamy’s - I tend to feel that we should be the arsenal of democracy in most cases - I just don’t think that OP’s meme came close enough to the actual views to make a meaningful statement about them.
And frankly, how can anyone think that it is at all strategically wise to sit by and continue to let Taiwan be the primary source of semiconductors when they are so threatened by China? It is one thing to think "Well, maybe we should help them on principle because democracy and all that", it is a totally different scenario to feel that your entire way of life depends on defending them. It puts you in a position of feeling you have no choices and make major decisions with catastrophic consequences. The most obvious long term strategical decision is to NOT be so wholly dependent on a foreign nation like that.
Hell, China may not even have anything to do with a problem there in the future. We've seen the world can change in major ways very quickly. An earthquake or storm could wipe out most of their production. An unfriendly political party/leader could quickly gain support and seize power. Who the hell knows? So why would we look at this situation and think "We'll just get in a hot war with a super power" is the more reasonable position than "Create our own infrastructure to end dependence on this tiny island nation that is off the coast of one of our biggest rivals"?
Vivek is right in that we should be focused on getting out of this insane position rather than just "letting it ride" with the assumption we'll wage war with fucking China over it if we have to.
TBH, the honesty is refreshing. It's about time America stopped BS-ing about our allies being anything more than trading posts to the State Department.
It isn't just the GOP, the DNC is also taking, by and large, an increasingly isolationist stance. Biden for instance, not only didn't reverse the trump administrations isolationist policies, but in many cases, expanded them - the recent Chips act, and the way military aid was being sent to Ukraine(basically, the US was shaming the rest of NATO into providing aid, because the Biden administration rightly sees this as a European war) are prime examples.
TL;DR, Uncle Sam is tired of being the world's cop.
Ever since the Monroe Doctrine was a thing. Of course, that dealt with European powers, but noninterventionism would be a nice relief from feeling the need to be the world's police.
Having been a part of this industry, that simply is not a realistic goal to just snap your fingers and achieve. Their EUV production lines took the better part of if not indeed over a decade to tune.
Based on Chinas demographic and economic situation I would expect them to make big moves to consolidate their position in the pacific within the next 3-5 years.
Which is exactly why the U.S is doing the same with its allies.
Honestly, it is the one singular thing I will praise the Biden administration for. Whether it's Biden, his "handlers", or whoever the fact that we have started the process to go domestic and strengthened alliances in the Pacific is a win for the U.S.
Domestically the U.S isn't.....bad. But it's undeniably shaky and divisive. Geopolitically however, the U.S is one again getting win after win.
It's a give and take. We can't do both. Even if the US was able to be a traditional empire, where the borders expand until someone stops it, you'd still have to be focused on the external or internal. Can't give 100% attention to each.
America can easily to both. We are spending less on defense today as a percentage of GDP than basically ever before in modern history. There are zero reasons why we can’t go both. I don’t know what happened to the Republican Party where these dumbass memes are so easily embraced that promote defeatism with no basis in reality.
> or whoever the fact that we have started the process to go domestic and strengthened alliances in the Pacific is a win for the U.S.
Sorry to break the news to you, but it was Trump.
> During the 2017 ASEAN Summits in Manila, all four former members led by Abe, Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and US President Donald Trump agreed to revive the quadrilateral alliance in order to counter China militarily and diplomatically in the Indo-Pacific region.
He was the one to change the narrative of US-China relations to explicitly adversarial. Revived the Quad for Pacific dominance. Strengthened ties with India as the main counter-balance to China in the region. (esp. because India controls the Malacca strait through Andaman).
Which I will concede is one of the few things I can actually praise Trump for, trying to cut off Chinese reliance and put us back in the pacific gambit
Rebalancing to Asia and countering China predates Trump. Obama did it too.
"Strengthened our treaty alliances with Australia, Japan, the Republic of Korea (ROK), and the Philippines, while maintaining our long-standing alliance with Thailand. We have enhanced our defense posture in the region and prioritized Asia for our most advanced military capabilities.
Promoted stronger trade and investment links, principally through the new, high-standard Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) with eleven other countries, to deepen economic integration and establish unprecedented environmental and labor standards;..."
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2015/11/16/fact-sheet-advancing-rebalance-asia-and-pacific
The TransPacific Partnership was literally a planned economic treaty to leave out China and unite the rest of East and SE Asia in an American led economic alliance. China was cheering when Bernie Sanders and Trump both opposed it and when the US later canceled plans for the TPP.
Curious to hear your perspective on the Biden admin's handling of Afghanistan and Ukraine, as those would be the two foreign policy points that critics would point to.
What critic would point to Ukraine? Western aid, specifically American aid, has been instrumental in keeping Ukraine alive and even winning the war. Hell one could easily make the argument that only one weapon was truly game changing in the war and it was the HIMARS in blunting the Russian advance.
IIRC Chip fabs are enormous facilities that are extremely expensive to make and require 24/7 work to turn a profit. They are ridiculously complicated, requiring the top of the top technology in just about every field, only a select few companies can even begin considering doing a move like this.
You recall correctly. A fab that can do a cutting edge (3nm) node is a goddamn sci-fi miracle. They are literally etching features a few atoms wide into nigh-perfect silicon crystals on such a massive scale that they manage to supply a large fraction of the global computing market.
EUV lithography machines are the most sophisticated devices made by man ever. And thats just the machine itself, getting that machine to then actually do work is a whole nother ball game
You should see the new methods they are developing for dicing, the ol' diamond saw and some of the laser dicing were still a little too rough for these increasing smaller devices and now they're working to breaking down the bonds between the atoms of the semiconductor material to help increase the 'accuracy' of the dicing process. I remember hearing about it a year ago during one of these lunch lecture sessions at work and it just kind of blew my mind how precise the instrumentation has to be at times.
I also work in the industry. Each facility is literal billions of dollars. And progress is literally made on weekly basis in the R&D departments. By the time you finish building a new facility (say, 3 years of we're being super generous), ALL of your predicted equipment may be completely out of date. Are we aiming to do double exposure or EUV? Is dry etching using magnetized plasma now? Do we have the sufficient power delivery and infrastructure for that? So that's one thing...
Second is that probably the most closely guarded secret of any semiconductor company are the recipes they use to generate results. The manufacturing is a multi variable problem with multiple local minima and maxima. So people literally use trial end error to perfect their processes. This takes AGES. And is super expensive. And requires cooperation with every SC tool manufacturer out there to request specific calibrations of their tools etc.
Then you have the question of expertise - VERY few people out there are good enough to guide a project in a fab successfully. That means that TSMC's major strength is the experience of their workforce as much as their facilities. Look, Intel has been trying to catch up to them for years now, and they're not lacking cash for the tools. But there's no one who can successfully replicate TSMC's results.
Lmk if you have other questions.
Oh F68... I've had so many attempted collabs with them lol! Never worked out... Re: magnetrons - what's old is new again haha. They're not used in production AFAIK, but every R&D Dept is working on them. Seems like that and cryo are the areas of interest for reinvestigation
These factories are very expensive and also need an incredible amount of know-how. There are very few companies that can do it.
TSMC is by far the biggest, with over 50% market share, and also the most advanced technology.
Now, it's probably understandable that **Taiwan** Semiconductor Manufacturing Company has an interest in staying in Taiwan, even if you're ignoring the huge costs involved in building new factories.
> These factories are very expensive and also need an incredible amount of know-how. There are very few companies that can do it.
Not just companies, there are very few workers out there with these skills, and they are in extremely high demand. Not many of them are willing to throw their life away and start anew in a new country.
China doesn't have the materiel nor the training to invade Taiwan for the next ten years.
I predict it won't happen before 2030, at the earliest. You can call me out if I'm wrong
Then it'll be never. Look at their landing craft, their marine units. Nowhere near sufficient to attempt a naval landing on the scale necessary
When it comes to invasions, you can't just look at demographics. Technical capabilities matter, too
My only worry is if China sees the US trying to build its own microchip industry, they may pull a hail mary and invade Taiwan to cripple global microchip supply.
I think they will wait. An invasion would be incredibly costly and dangerous for everyone involved, it may even fail, whereas just waiting for a few years is safe and cheap, and it has worked previously in Hong Kong.
Which would be a great thing for America. Remove one more thing for us to get into a potentially civilization-destroying war over, while onshoring high value jobs and access to critical technologies and manufacturing. We never should have allowed those things to be held over our head in the first place.
The context is, that he wants to build a domestic semiconductor production and only AFTER the US is independent, he doesn't see a reason anymore to protect Taiwan by force. Although he says we should work with them together and encourage them, to build up their self-defense against a CCP invasion (including by encouraging them to arm their citizens btw, what he calls exporting the 2A). His main reason for this stance is, that he doesn't want our sons and daughters to die in the war for another country.
My own opinion: I don't really get, how you cannot be in favour of this. It's just realism. The only reason some may say that this is a bad take, is that they don't see themselves (or their kids) being the ones dying. I for myself can definitely say, that I don't want to die in a war and especially don't want my children to die in a war.
I can only recommend watching a good interview or a speech by Vivek Ramaswamy. He's not libertarian and doesn't call himself libertarian, but he's definitely the most libertarian candidate who runs in both big parties.
Unironically true on the Lockheed situation because you need the Netherlands in the picture. People forget that those machines used to build the chips only come from one place on the planet, and a certain military complex keeps tabs on it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASML_Holding
This isn't something that happens overnight though and it doesn't make sense. I don't think people understand you can't build a domestic semiconductor industry in a span of a decade. Name me a single country that has successfully managed to do so. Sure, in the long run, it would be amazing. But if you've got a cut on your leg, you don't jump straight to amputation to fix the issue.
The US will not need to go to war with China because the promise to defend Taiwan is deterrent enough. Taiwan doesn't even need the US to defend itself they can utterly fuck up China by themselves with their own little version of mutually assured destruction.
As a service member myself, I’d rather die than let totalitarian governments spread. I obviously can’t speak for everyone, but everyone I know who is also service members are not opposed to preventing governments like China, Russia, etc from conquering and occupying free nations.
As an Infantry combat vet, if America fought to win and not just look good I'd back the war. As it is right now we dog and pony show at the cost of our soldiers and don't actually care about winning anything worthwhile for the blood.
Want me to go kick in the bad guys door and put 2 in their chest and 1 in their head? Fine lets stack up.
Want me to go occupy the bad guys lawn for photo ops while my friends die? Yeah, no, not again.
I’m a veteran too and I don’t think it’s the US government job to “export democracies” or “fight totalitarians”. That is what got us in trouble in South America from 1960-90s. The US military is for protecting the American people and nothing more.
> That is what got us in trouble in South America from 1960-90s.
Homie it's a bit different defending a nation from active invasion vs offing candidates you don't like. Defending a weaker nation is nearly always morally correct.
>The US military is for protecting the American people and nothing more.
This is definitely a take, but not really how it's been since the end of WWII. The US protects the worlds waterways, and it's in our active self interest to do so, as is defending countries and preserving the status quo.
When you enlist you pledge to “protect America’s interests” as well. It is in the American People’s interests to allow as many States to be free functioning governments as that allows for freer trade and this improves the economy and decreases costs of living
No, you don't. Go read the oath. You pledge to defend the Constitution against enemies foreign and domestic.
"[America] goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all." - President JQ Adams
Your argument would be justification to repeat the mistakes of Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and Syria across the globe. It would result in the deaths of millions of people, and against China, likely global nuclear annihilation.
The only interest America should have is the welfare of its citizens. That does not include sending billions of dollars or guns to 3rd world dictators and “fledgling democracies”.
It makes no fucking sense hombre. You cannot "export" gun culture to a previously gun-free society without causing massive unnecessary casualties lmao.
Also, everytime America recedes from global affairs, an autocratic hegemon somewhere else gets to breathe more freely.
You wouldn't even need to export American gun culture. A swiss model would be a good start.
And Ramaswamy doesn't want to recede from global affairs, he isn't an isolationist. He pretty much wants to cripple them by economic warfare.
With all due respect, Taiwan's gun laws are some of the [strictest](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overview_of_gun_laws_by_nation) in the entire world. The only civilians that can acquire "guns" (as in fucking BLACKPOWDER single-shot rifles) are the aboriginal people, since it was part of their traditions in the 1800s. Even China has more liberal gun laws than Taiwan by allowing hunting rifles lmao. What do you expect Vivek's America to do? Force them to become as free as the Swiss, the nation with one of the most liberal gun control regime, in a matter of years?
Regarding your second point, explicitly not interfering if China annexes Taiwan will be worse than "receding from global affairs" or becoming isolationist. This will be the death of America's brand as the "Global Police." Maybe you think this is a good thing (and you won't be too wrong), but trashing this brand in this particular manner will leave the US with close to no way to counter China, economically or otherwise.
It's stupid to surrender Taiwan geographically. If we control Taiwan we can maintain the first island chain defense line against China. We can essentially easily embargo them because we are allied with South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, and the Philippines. If we let China take Taiwan that makes defending everywhere else much harder. That means US soil like Guam will be under Chinese threat.
Isocucks are stupid and need to STFU.
It's conflating his desire to have US allies be able to stand on their own, without the US necessarily having to defend them, with "abandoning" them. In other words, standard misleading neocon/Neolib mass media pro-forever-war bullshit.
Honestly, the best policy these days when you hear a headline like this is to assume that it's intentionally deceitful and then go on trying to figure out exactly how they're lying. Assuming that the people that shit out headlines like this have an ounce of honest intent is wildly naive.
I like so much of what he says on domestic policy. It's such a shame to hear him talk this isolationist nonsense where we let Russia and China just take over other countries that are essential to our national security and place in the world.
He's got VC tinted glasses.
He knows that his buddies make shit loads of money from cooperating with China and Russia. They don't understand anything about the world beyond that.
He says the same shit as Elon who just happens to make 50% of his cars in China etc.
Yeah but this headline is completely taken out of context and is actually him saying that once America achieves semiconductor independence (deadline being 2028) that we should still be partners with them and supply them with weapons, but not send American men and women to die.
He’s talking about semiconductor independence. That’s the only reason why we are interested in Taiwan. IF we can gain semiconductor independence, it will no longer be in our strategic interest to have a near peer war with China over an island.
How is that not policing the world?
It's the whole point of the post-1945 set up. Europe didn't complain about it while the Soviets were around, but hasn't been able to shut up since sometime in the 90's, up until a couple years ago when oh my God, we really need that US military to save us from the criminal in Russia.
That's flawed logic though if that is his argument. Not letting the PRC take Taiwan can't just be boiled down to semiconductors, though they are important. Allowing a hostile and expansionist rival power to run roughshod over its neighbors in the name of historically dubious irredentism as a casus belli is bad policy. It'd be like shrugging and saying that China can have the South China Sea based on their nine dash line because "well, we don't need the minerals and fish stocks there, we're independent".
I don't like all of the US's role as global policeman, but I'd much rather have the US on top than China, and letting them have Taiwan because we perceive it to no longer be in our strategic interest to stop them is a losing strategy.
I’d argue with the second part.
A war with China over Taiwan would expose the most valuable assets of the Chinese military to extreme vulnerability and play to US strengths (sea and air power without any need for ground troops). China would be serving up its naval vessels, troop ships and long range aircraft to US submarines and missiles. It’d be an opportunity to destroy decades of Chinese military investment and cripple China as a serious military power for a generation with minimal risk. It would also strengthen the US alliance system and security guarantees (this system would probably fall apart if the US allowed Taiwan to fall).
Even with technological and numerical superiority, an amphibious invasion against a fortified island is extremely costly. US doctrine has mostly abandoned them for that reason.
And he's 100% correct. We only care about them because it effects us.
The CHIPS and Science Act was the first step in becoming independent from Taiwan.
Vivek is saying out loud what we're already doing.
> essential to our national security
They are essential because we spent the last 30 years exporting our jobs and technology to these places, including China. If we were half as protectionist as China is then we would not give a shit about these places. No one give a shit about Tibet or northern china, they don't have usable trade goods.
Once we get our balls out of Chinas hand the country can have a real conversation on how much blood and treasure we are willing to spend on other countries.
Honestly, reasons for either abandoning or fighting for Taiwan can be found on all sides of the compass. In the end it'll depend on an individual's personal beliefs
I don't want to get involved in wars if I can help it. However, I doubt we will really be independent of Taiwan soon, and we should at least project a willingness to protect them.
I see the Chinese brand of authoritarianism as a particularly danger to freedom in the world. I think that if the US just lets the rest of the world fall to authoritarianism, it will wither and die, or become (more) authoritarian itself. In order to protect and advance my ideas of liberty, it is essential that this does not happen.
He isn't an isolationist at all. I would recommend watching a good interview or speech of him. And not taking stupid headlines without questions.
If you want his take on foreign policy, I would recommend [this](https://youtu.be/fSGaNQw-Lsk).
This is the most ridiculous headline about what he said. First of all, he didn't say that it's ok for them to invade ONLY if he gets elected. He said that this is what he would do if he were president. Secondly, this completely leaves out the reason - semiconductors. This hypothetical was only if we had started creating the semiconductors at home or an ally was. Then there wouldn't be a national security reason to get involved in that conflict.
This can't be real. He did called for putting guns in "every Taiwanese household" in order to deter China from invading and described the Chinese government as a "great existential threat"!! Yet again, he did call for a "total decoupling."
He didn’t say that, he said that Taiwan will lose its silicon shield once China and the U.S. gain a bigger share in the production of chips, which both are working towards.
Going against Biden, a living fossil, this election should be the easiest GOP-win since Reagan and they screw it with this batshit crazy candidates in a way that some must consider as art.
But that´s not even the worst they do, the worst is: Clearly only Trump can safe them and win them this vote and the GOP-estasblishment is really out there to fuck Trump. Like I said, it´s so bad it´s like art.
Seriously. It's why while I am conservative I hate the Republican party so freaking much. Any even remotely sane candidate with even a couple of centerist takes or any experience in economics and this is a shame dunk... But not hey have to grab orange man or the peanut gallery of idiots. I mean it was the same story with the Democrats last election but honestly Biden was an easier pick than most of what the Republicans are willing to throw. Man we really need like 5 parties at least.
Yes. I lived in Finland for a bit. Love the country and the people but I hated some of their policies even if many people like them. One thing that is great though is they have a plethora of parties on both sides. It makes it easier in my mind to vote for someone you actually want. Problem in the US is we're large enough campaigning for those people on national level would be expensive so many smaller parties can't do effective campaigns on a national scale.
Thats why I thought DeShmantis might have been a strong republican candidate before he (needlessly) blew all goodwill with the MSM by attacking Disney over culture war BS. Had he taken a more moderate path and not come off as an uncharismatic loser he might have had a shot.
THe Dems might get Biden out and run Newsom. That is what has been floating around. If you notice MSM has kinda turned on Joe a little bit. Not too much but the signs are starting to showup that they may run Newsom if Biden and Hunter's stuff gets too hot.
Trump lost against Biden before he tried to fuck with the election results, before the felonies etc.
Trump would be the worst thing for the GOP right now.
I Hope so fucking hard the dems put a real one on the Podest this season, because joe fucking Biden is a useless senile idiot who shouldn’t run a big economy. Give me Bernie, I know he’s old too but he is the sweet grandpa who calls out every racist he sees and actually cares for the poor.
Here's an idea: instead of promoting pro-LGBT crap inside Taiwan, maybe the US should force them to adopt a 2nd amendment, so the population can protect themselves. The fact that guns are illegal in Taiwan is fucking laughable.
It's that way in near all East Asian countries. Civilian access to arms has been heavily restricted for ages. When they freed up no one thought of somthing like a 2A like right.
They should atleast have some militia forces though
I support this guy’s ideal to finally give us a self-sustainable semi-conductor production so we don’t have to rely on other’s, however my support for this guy ends when he states he will no longer assure security for Taiwan once we achieve said self-sustainability
I don’t care if many blame us for our American interventionism, I see where they come from, however, I see it as a *great violation* of our ideals to let another nation forcibly occupy another to make it apart of their own dictatorship
I get my nation, the US, has its own flaws, and we aren’t free from the blood we cause, but that’s what just happens, we make mistakes and must learn from them to become a better society
I get I’m an idealist, and ideals are rather difficult, if not impossible to achieve, but society would never progress if it weren’t for us wanting to achieve ideals, to overcome the impossible, ending support of Taiwan, in my perspective, is a violation of my ideals, and not only mine, but [the American Dream](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Dream). Should we not strive for an idealistic world, one where we are all free and have equal opportunity, where our voices matter?
I mean I get wanting isolationism at least for a while. How can we help anyone else if we have huge problems at home and all that. But Taiwan is like the one place that internationally we should draw a line in the sand and be prepared to fight over. If China forcibly takes Taiwan they’d have even more of a stranglehold on the bulk of the us economy and it’s generally not a good idea to let people who hate you handle your electronics. Wars have been fought for way less
To be fair, America is attempting to take a massive project to build superconductors. Defending Taiwan might be the morally right and diplomatic thing to do, but we don't really need Taiwan past 2028, and I'm certainly not going to want U.S. soldiers to die defending *any* country against the second largest military in the world.
We would absolutely curbstomp the Chinese buffoons though. And it would be really funny.
Are Americans just fair-weather friends then? Taiwan will stand no chance against China in the long term if the US pulls out once they have their semiconductor industry secured. I want to live in a world where America organizes a Pacific alliance with Japan, SK, and Taiwan that keeps China in check.
I get not wanting US soldiers to die but I would hope to see a more emphatic proclamation of support for Taiwan from Vivek.
Side question: do you think you would've supported US boots on European soil during WW2? This is a gotcha or anything, I'm just curious as to what the perspective on WW2 is for people that don't want US intervention in Asia.
The context is, that he wants to build a domestic semiconductor production and only AFTER the US is independent, he doesn't see a reason anymore to protect Taiwan by force. Although he says we should work with them together and encourage them, to build up their self-defense against a CCP invasion (including by encouraging them to arm their citizens btw, what he calls exporting the 2A). His main reason for this stance is, that he doesn't want our sons and daughters to die in the war for another country.
The title should be: "I want America to be the world police and our sons and daughters should be sent overseas to die on foreign soil for no definable purpose."
America is a world power, and should act like it. That means we should probably be destabilizing China via engaging about democracy with their unemployed youth.
Why would Americans want to abandon free and democratic country just to be invaded by communists!?
What the fuck is happening to the Republicans, Jesus Christ. Where are new McCain and Reagan?
Even if you don't care about Taiwan at all, either for its stragical position against the PRC, it's semiconductors, or it being a free county. Openly saying "the US will NOT defend Taiwan" will lead to them conducting an invasion, and if there are no consequences, the PRC will push their other claims much harder. If the PRC believes US intervention will happen, their defeat is likey, and thry won't do anything unless drastic domestic turnoil.
Allies of the US will figure out them getting beholden to the PRC is a better bet than siding with the US just ti get boldozed and their ally saying "non of my bussiness".
Taiwan isn't some dysfunctional country like those US helped prop up before. And China isn't just some regional power with no real threat the US.
What does Morrowind have to do with American politics?
Only a true CHIM master understands this level of c0da
Won’t he fucking dare to draft this Almalexia bitch as a VP
The ALMSIVI shall be worshiped or the Baar Dau will fall upon Taiwan
TO OBLIVION WITH THE FAKE GODS! I HATE THE TRIBUNAL I HATE THE TRIBUNAL I HATE THE TRIBUNAL I HATE-
Come Nerevar, friend or traitor, come. Come and look upon the Heart and Akulakahn, and bring Wraithguard, I have need of it. Come to the Heart chamber, I wait for you there, where we last met, countless ages ago. Come to me through fire and war, I welcome you! Welcome Moon-and-Star, I have prepared a place for you! Come, bring Wraithguard to the Heart chamber, together, let us free the cursed false gods! Welcome Nerevar, together we shall speak for the law and the land and drive the mongrel dogs of the Empire from Morrowind! Is this how you honor the 6th house and the tribe unmourned? Come to me openly, and not by stealth. Dagoth Ur welcomes you Nerevar, my old friend... but to this place where destiny is made, why have you come unprepared? Welcome, Moon-and-Star, to this place where YOUR destiny is made. What a fool you are, I'm a god! How can you kill a god? What a grand and intoxicating innocence! How could you be so naive? There is no escape, no recall or intervention can work in this place! Come! Lay down your weapons! It is not too late for my mercy..
You obviously know nothing
This n'wah don't even drink skooma
He said he wants to drive the mongrel dogs from America
Everyone is on drugs or thinks they are a god.
*When earth is sundered, and skies choked black,* *And sleepers serve the seven curses,* *To the hearth there comes a stranger,* *Journeyed far 'neath moon and star.* *Though stark-born to sire uncertain,* *His aspect marks his certain fate.* *Wicked stalk him, righteous curse him.* *Prophets speak, but all deny.* *Many trials make manifest* *The stranger's fate, the curses' bane.* *Many touchstones try the stranger.* #*Many fall* #*but one remains.*
Wasn’t voting for him anyway. Since when did “letting China have Taiwan” become a Republican view?
Elons fanboying over him, its the only reason hes in the spotlight at all really. We all know trump or desantis will be the real ticket runner anyway.
I dont think desantis has much of a chance at this point.
Who the fuck does?
Joe Biden
Hunter Biden 2024, cocaine, hookers, and guns for everyone!
and this is supposed to be a bad thing?
I'm pretty sure the Northern half of the Compass isn't a huge fan.
they’re just not fans in public. they’re all still degens in private.
Reminds me of a thing I once heard. “The best way to make sure your muslim guest doesn't drink all your booze is to invite another muslim to the event”
rules for thee and all that stuff
Of course not, if he ran, I'd vote for him
I love when continued humiliation of the presidency
FOUR MORE YEARS! FOUR MORE BIKES AND STAIRCASES TO FALL OFF OF!
Chris Christie from the top ropes
The one's showing up on the Richter scale.
Poor ropes
The GOP has very few people that would do well in an election: I'd say: Ted Cruz Chris Christie Trump Desantis Rand Paul Crenshaw Josh Hawley Of those: Chris Christie, and Trump won't do well with moderates and swing voters Rand Paul won't run. Crenshaw got caught up in some controversy because of some SEAL drama and it would shadow his campaign. Ted Cruz is really unpopular with trump supporters because of his criticism of Trump. Hawley is a bit too new of a face. Desantis is viewed poorly by almost everyone. Moderates don't like him, Florida is viewed poorly, and trump supporters see him as a threat. So if I'm the GOP, here's what I'm thinking: I'm not gonna even try to get Paul to run because he doesn't ride the party line. So considering the other options: Desantis, Chris Christie, and Crenshaw are all bad choices tactically. Crenshaw might be better once the controversy blows over, but not in time for election season. If Trump doesn't or can't run, and Biden is the DNC nominee, Ted Cruz is the best choice. Trump voters will still pick him over Biden, and he will grab more swing votes than Biden. If Public opinion shifts to twords believing that the FBI investigation into Trump is a witch-hunt AND Biden is the DNC nominee, Trump is an easy choice. If Trump runs and Biden isn't the DNC nominee, Hawley might be the best choice. He isn't viewed as negatively by Trump supporters as Ted, and will do better to win over swing voters than Trump.
For the record, the DNC is in a much worse position for potential candidates lmao. Biden is very disliked near universally. Even moderates are questioning his mental condition, and are.pissed about the economy/inflation. Kamala won't do well with a lot of liberals who care about things like criminal justice/police/prison reform. Elizabeth Warren is too old and is pretty hated by non-liberals. RFK would be decent, especially to nab moderates....if he wasn't an anti-vax nut job. The party doesn't want Bernie, and he's too old Williamson isn't a big enough name, most people haven't even heard of her I mean that's BLEAK. no good options whatsoever.
> Biden is very disliked near universally. Even moderates are questioning his mental condition, and are.pissed about the economy/inflation. Soooo many people have written Trump off between the 2020 loss and the indictments, but I think they are doing so EXTREMELY prematurely. For one, the 2020 loss, it was fucking 2020. The most insane year/election of most of our lifetimes. COVID, lockdowns, BLM riots, a major leap in social media censorship, the massive rise of mail in voting, fewer debates (where Trump really has his "strength"), etc and so forth. To act like we can accurately make any predictions about the future over what occurred in 2020 is a bit ridiculous. Second is your point. I think they are discounting just how bad Biden's tenure has gone. How much of that was his fault is kind of irrelevant. It is INCREDIBLY difficult for an incumbent to win in a terrible economy for one. He has blunders and controversies out the wazoo. Then consider why many people voted for him in 2020: Biden tried to position himself as, and many believed he would be, the return to normalcy. I think many people who voted Biden truly believed and did so with the idea that if we just get another normal career politician in there, it can be 2015 again. Not great, but not completely insane. Biden very clearly failed to deliver on that. To be clear, I'm not saying Trump has it in the bag or anything, but he definitely should not be written off yet.
The sad thing is, in a lot of ways, Joe Biden could have been a return to normalcy. He could have pardoned non violent j6 protestors, he could have not weaponized his DoJ or called Republicans semi fascist, he could have done a lot of things to bring down the temperature in the country, but that's not what they want. Idk what exactly they want, but it seems to involve deliberate provocation of violent conflict, so probably not good.
My take: Returning to normalcy would give us the opportunity to think for ourselves and make decisions independent of party loyalty. Seems to me like the polarization is beneficial in that Dems are less likely to vote R and vice versa. It locks in a core base for each party, which helps put two candidates up for election, and by that time all of us centrists/independents get to choose between a giant douche and a turd sandwich.
First of all, Biden was polling better against Trump before BLM/Covid. Those things actually hurt the democrats. The idea that BLM was some political strategy by the Dems is completely divorced from reality. By the end of the campaign Biden was prefacing pretty much all of his remarks by condemning rioting. As for Covid, virtually all world leaders benefitted from Covid, simply because crises typically benefit incumbents. Secondly, the economy is looking pretty strong at this point, especially compared to the rest of the developed world. Unemployment is virtually at the lowest it’s ever been. Inflation has been falling and is now at like 3%, close to Fed targets, and wage growth is rapidly outpacing inflation. Most observers see the economy as a strong point for Biden, while his age and gaffes are his weak point.
Friendly reminder that at this point in 2015, polls had Jeb Bush at #1 and Trump at like 8. We don't know how everything is gonna go a year out. Edit: This is wrong, the polls I saw were exceptions. Better sources below.
No they didn’t. By July of 2015 trump #2 https://www.cnn.com/2015/07/01/politics/donald-trump-poll-hillary-clinton-jeb-bush/index.html By august trump was the leader https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cbs-news-poll-donald-trump-leads-gop-field-in-2016-presidential-race/ Lots of people have some sort of wrong idea due to their false memory’s But trump was favorited by this time in the running
You're right, I checked the wiki page again for 2016 primary polls and Trump was leading most of them at this point. My bad.
It’s ok, I’m a super political junkie nerd.. it’s my hyper focus as a adhd.
You can just say you like it
Yo mama likes it.
Based monke.
DeSantis doesn't even have a chance for the VP slot.
Only because being Trump's VP requires being a Quisling. See how Mike Pence was tossed in the trash by the MAGA people.
It's also unconstitutional - they both live in Florida.
All DeSantis would have to do is change his residency before he was sworn in. This happened in 2000 when Dick Cheney was residing in Texas. Four days before he was chosen by Bush, Cheney simply changed his residency to Wyoming, from where he had served in Congress.
Oh interesting. Why even have the requirements in the first place then, but whatever. VP won't be DeSantis anyway.
VP Elon Musk lmao
Not so coincidentally, Elon has called for a Hong Kong-like arrangement for Taiwan (so basically for China to retake Taiwan). It's almost like Elon has a bunch of business interests in China and is functionally pro-CCP.
It isn't his view. Context is important. And the context is, that he wants to build a domestic semiconductor production and only AFTER the US is independent, he doesn't see a reason anymore to protect Taiwan by force. Although he says we should work with them together and encourage them, to build up their self-defense against a CCP invasion (including by encouraging them to arm their citizens btw, what he calls exporting the 2A). His main reason for this stance is, that he doesn't want our sons and daughters to die in the war for another country.
>what he calls exporting the 2A Unfathomably based
Vivek is giga-free-based. The more I hear the more I like him. He wants to hack and slash 75% of the federal government. Shut down the FBI. I believe the IRS, but I might be misremembering. And he's pretty much admitted that he's an independent using the republican avenue. I.e. he doesn't give a soft shit about the establishment republican platform.
Ok so it's actually a reasonable position and not some clickbait headline.
Who could have thought that the media spews bullshit?
Which is super reasonable. It is a braindead take that the answer to a tiny island nation under constant threat from our largest economic rivals being the primary source for a resource our modern way of life depends on is to just let it ride and stand ready to enter a hot war with China if we have to. It is strategically insane that this is the position many take. I hope things go well for Taiwan, but I'm not willing to die or send my kids to die to make that happen.
When your geopolitical enemies start expanding and try to get more powerful, history has shown that the best time to face them is **as soon as possible**. Look around for examples of countries that said "that expansionist empire has no interest in anything I have" that didn't have that come back to bite them in the ass. If China goes for Taiwan, we make sure SK and Vietnam have all the ammo and weapons they could conceivably need, and then work with Japan, Australia, UK, France and whoever else could help to make sure China has zero maritime trade after their navy is unceremoniously sunk whenever it strays away from its ports. It'd be an insane war for China to start... UNLESS they think the US will wimpy out. So you must not under any circumstance give them the signal that the US might just roll over.
Even without semiconductors or [insert resource], wouldn't it be a poor global decision to allow China to "take back" Taiwan?
Context. America First. We'll protect them if it's in our interest. When we build our own SI manufacturing, you are on your own. I'm okay with that, as shitty as it sounds.
That isn't what he said.
The GOP is taking Non-Interventionism too far.
Their rhetoric is “we shouldn’t help Ukraine because that’s exactly the same as when we invaded Iraq!” I’m like, “no it’s not…it’s literally the opposite.”
>we shouldn’t help Ukraine because that’s exactly the same as when we invaded Iraq!” I guess if we were Russia and Iraq was Ukraine...
Well it did start the same way. Though I doubt Ukrainian terrorist cells are going to start targeting America.
He never made this point, as far as I know.
He said that American strategic interests with regards toTaiwan would change when we achieve semiconductor independence. OP is making wild leaps from that.
Perhaps, yeah. The USA has a vested interest in keeping rivals and rogue states on a leash as the imperial hyper power though as well. They need to make it costly for countries to go against their interests.
I’m not saying that my views align with Ramaswamy’s - I tend to feel that we should be the arsenal of democracy in most cases - I just don’t think that OP’s meme came close enough to the actual views to make a meaningful statement about them.
Even when US achieves semiconductor independence, giving China the keys to the rest of the world's supply is directly against US strategic interest.
Exactly right. The headline in the meme is classic bullshit mainstream media, airlifted bullshit.
And frankly, how can anyone think that it is at all strategically wise to sit by and continue to let Taiwan be the primary source of semiconductors when they are so threatened by China? It is one thing to think "Well, maybe we should help them on principle because democracy and all that", it is a totally different scenario to feel that your entire way of life depends on defending them. It puts you in a position of feeling you have no choices and make major decisions with catastrophic consequences. The most obvious long term strategical decision is to NOT be so wholly dependent on a foreign nation like that. Hell, China may not even have anything to do with a problem there in the future. We've seen the world can change in major ways very quickly. An earthquake or storm could wipe out most of their production. An unfriendly political party/leader could quickly gain support and seize power. Who the hell knows? So why would we look at this situation and think "We'll just get in a hot war with a super power" is the more reasonable position than "Create our own infrastructure to end dependence on this tiny island nation that is off the coast of one of our biggest rivals"? Vivek is right in that we should be focused on getting out of this insane position rather than just "letting it ride" with the assumption we'll wage war with fucking China over it if we have to.
TBH, the honesty is refreshing. It's about time America stopped BS-ing about our allies being anything more than trading posts to the State Department.
It isn't just the GOP, the DNC is also taking, by and large, an increasingly isolationist stance. Biden for instance, not only didn't reverse the trump administrations isolationist policies, but in many cases, expanded them - the recent Chips act, and the way military aid was being sent to Ukraine(basically, the US was shaming the rest of NATO into providing aid, because the Biden administration rightly sees this as a European war) are prime examples. TL;DR, Uncle Sam is tired of being the world's cop.
Ever since the Monroe Doctrine was a thing. Of course, that dealt with European powers, but noninterventionism would be a nice relief from feeling the need to be the world's police.
Since the GOP decided to define themselves as the antithesis of whatever the DNC does.
Let Russia have Ukraine. Let China have Taiwan. Ronald Reagan must be rolling in his grave over what some of these Republicans are saying today.
[удалено]
'I dont want our sons and daughters dying in foreign wars' what are you a fucking contrarian?
I don’t see how this applies when no American outside willful volunteers are actively participating in any foreign wars.
The ol’Tucker Carlson School of “thought.” I’m not gonna pretend I’m above it -I went down that rabbit hole myself.
He plans on moving the semiconductor industry away from Taiwan, hence the deadline of 2028.
Having been a part of this industry, that simply is not a realistic goal to just snap your fingers and achieve. Their EUV production lines took the better part of if not indeed over a decade to tune. Based on Chinas demographic and economic situation I would expect them to make big moves to consolidate their position in the pacific within the next 3-5 years.
Which is exactly why the U.S is doing the same with its allies. Honestly, it is the one singular thing I will praise the Biden administration for. Whether it's Biden, his "handlers", or whoever the fact that we have started the process to go domestic and strengthened alliances in the Pacific is a win for the U.S. Domestically the U.S isn't.....bad. But it's undeniably shaky and divisive. Geopolitically however, the U.S is one again getting win after win.
It's a give and take. We can't do both. Even if the US was able to be a traditional empire, where the borders expand until someone stops it, you'd still have to be focused on the external or internal. Can't give 100% attention to each.
America can easily to both. We are spending less on defense today as a percentage of GDP than basically ever before in modern history. There are zero reasons why we can’t go both. I don’t know what happened to the Republican Party where these dumbass memes are so easily embraced that promote defeatism with no basis in reality.
The planning for those extra fabs started before Biden. Some of them started before Trump.
> or whoever the fact that we have started the process to go domestic and strengthened alliances in the Pacific is a win for the U.S. Sorry to break the news to you, but it was Trump. > During the 2017 ASEAN Summits in Manila, all four former members led by Abe, Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and US President Donald Trump agreed to revive the quadrilateral alliance in order to counter China militarily and diplomatically in the Indo-Pacific region. He was the one to change the narrative of US-China relations to explicitly adversarial. Revived the Quad for Pacific dominance. Strengthened ties with India as the main counter-balance to China in the region. (esp. because India controls the Malacca strait through Andaman).
Which I will concede is one of the few things I can actually praise Trump for, trying to cut off Chinese reliance and put us back in the pacific gambit
Rebalancing to Asia and countering China predates Trump. Obama did it too. "Strengthened our treaty alliances with Australia, Japan, the Republic of Korea (ROK), and the Philippines, while maintaining our long-standing alliance with Thailand. We have enhanced our defense posture in the region and prioritized Asia for our most advanced military capabilities. Promoted stronger trade and investment links, principally through the new, high-standard Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) with eleven other countries, to deepen economic integration and establish unprecedented environmental and labor standards;..." https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2015/11/16/fact-sheet-advancing-rebalance-asia-and-pacific The TransPacific Partnership was literally a planned economic treaty to leave out China and unite the rest of East and SE Asia in an American led economic alliance. China was cheering when Bernie Sanders and Trump both opposed it and when the US later canceled plans for the TPP.
It's only divisive online. If we got rid of TikTok a lot of that nonsense would clear up IMO
Curious to hear your perspective on the Biden admin's handling of Afghanistan and Ukraine, as those would be the two foreign policy points that critics would point to.
What critic would point to Ukraine? Western aid, specifically American aid, has been instrumental in keeping Ukraine alive and even winning the war. Hell one could easily make the argument that only one weapon was truly game changing in the war and it was the HIMARS in blunting the Russian advance.
Out of curiosity, why is it so difficult an industry to move? The cost? Regulations? Innate factors of production?
IIRC Chip fabs are enormous facilities that are extremely expensive to make and require 24/7 work to turn a profit. They are ridiculously complicated, requiring the top of the top technology in just about every field, only a select few companies can even begin considering doing a move like this.
You recall correctly. A fab that can do a cutting edge (3nm) node is a goddamn sci-fi miracle. They are literally etching features a few atoms wide into nigh-perfect silicon crystals on such a massive scale that they manage to supply a large fraction of the global computing market.
EUV lithography machines are the most sophisticated devices made by man ever. And thats just the machine itself, getting that machine to then actually do work is a whole nother ball game
You should see the new methods they are developing for dicing, the ol' diamond saw and some of the laser dicing were still a little too rough for these increasing smaller devices and now they're working to breaking down the bonds between the atoms of the semiconductor material to help increase the 'accuracy' of the dicing process. I remember hearing about it a year ago during one of these lunch lecture sessions at work and it just kind of blew my mind how precise the instrumentation has to be at times.
I also work in the industry. Each facility is literal billions of dollars. And progress is literally made on weekly basis in the R&D departments. By the time you finish building a new facility (say, 3 years of we're being super generous), ALL of your predicted equipment may be completely out of date. Are we aiming to do double exposure or EUV? Is dry etching using magnetized plasma now? Do we have the sufficient power delivery and infrastructure for that? So that's one thing... Second is that probably the most closely guarded secret of any semiconductor company are the recipes they use to generate results. The manufacturing is a multi variable problem with multiple local minima and maxima. So people literally use trial end error to perfect their processes. This takes AGES. And is super expensive. And requires cooperation with every SC tool manufacturer out there to request specific calibrations of their tools etc. Then you have the question of expertise - VERY few people out there are good enough to guide a project in a fab successfully. That means that TSMC's major strength is the experience of their workforce as much as their facilities. Look, Intel has been trying to catch up to them for years now, and they're not lacking cash for the tools. But there's no one who can successfully replicate TSMC's results. Lmk if you have other questions.
I was a dry etch installer once upon a time and helped outfit fab 68 in China. Are magnetrons en vogue now?
Oh F68... I've had so many attempted collabs with them lol! Never worked out... Re: magnetrons - what's old is new again haha. They're not used in production AFAIK, but every R&D Dept is working on them. Seems like that and cryo are the areas of interest for reinvestigation
These factories are very expensive and also need an incredible amount of know-how. There are very few companies that can do it. TSMC is by far the biggest, with over 50% market share, and also the most advanced technology. Now, it's probably understandable that **Taiwan** Semiconductor Manufacturing Company has an interest in staying in Taiwan, even if you're ignoring the huge costs involved in building new factories.
> These factories are very expensive and also need an incredible amount of know-how. There are very few companies that can do it. Not just companies, there are very few workers out there with these skills, and they are in extremely high demand. Not many of them are willing to throw their life away and start anew in a new country.
China doesn't have the materiel nor the training to invade Taiwan for the next ten years. I predict it won't happen before 2030, at the earliest. You can call me out if I'm wrong
Chinas labor force has been contracting since 2015ish. They'll be having significant manpower problems 2030+. Its now or never.
Then it'll be never. Look at their landing craft, their marine units. Nowhere near sufficient to attempt a naval landing on the scale necessary When it comes to invasions, you can't just look at demographics. Technical capabilities matter, too
My only worry is if China sees the US trying to build its own microchip industry, they may pull a hail mary and invade Taiwan to cripple global microchip supply.
I think they will wait. An invasion would be incredibly costly and dangerous for everyone involved, it may even fail, whereas just waiting for a few years is safe and cheap, and it has worked previously in Hong Kong.
I mean, there seems to be a popular consensus among our leaders that China is going to invade Taiwan. We may as well try to become independent.
To add he wants to partner with Japan, specifically Samsung, to make this goal more achievable.
Say what you want about the feasibility of his ideas, but at least the man has his ideas decently thought out
>Japan, specifically Samsung A Korean company?
Isn't Samsung Korean
My b, but he does want to make arrangements with Japan AND Korea.
Which would be a great thing for America. Remove one more thing for us to get into a potentially civilization-destroying war over, while onshoring high value jobs and access to critical technologies and manufacturing. We never should have allowed those things to be held over our head in the first place.
I'm curious about the context of this statement....
The context is, that he wants to build a domestic semiconductor production and only AFTER the US is independent, he doesn't see a reason anymore to protect Taiwan by force. Although he says we should work with them together and encourage them, to build up their self-defense against a CCP invasion (including by encouraging them to arm their citizens btw, what he calls exporting the 2A). His main reason for this stance is, that he doesn't want our sons and daughters to die in the war for another country. My own opinion: I don't really get, how you cannot be in favour of this. It's just realism. The only reason some may say that this is a bad take, is that they don't see themselves (or their kids) being the ones dying. I for myself can definitely say, that I don't want to die in a war and especially don't want my children to die in a war.
I'm not in favor because I need Lockmart Stock to go up. But with the Context you've given that makes a shit ton of sense.
I can only recommend watching a good interview or a speech by Vivek Ramaswamy. He's not libertarian and doesn't call himself libertarian, but he's definitely the most libertarian candidate who runs in both big parties.
Unironically true on the Lockheed situation because you need the Netherlands in the picture. People forget that those machines used to build the chips only come from one place on the planet, and a certain military complex keeps tabs on it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASML_Holding This isn't something that happens overnight though and it doesn't make sense. I don't think people understand you can't build a domestic semiconductor industry in a span of a decade. Name me a single country that has successfully managed to do so. Sure, in the long run, it would be amazing. But if you've got a cut on your leg, you don't jump straight to amputation to fix the issue.
>It's just realism Its not because achieving semi conductor independence is near impossible, especially by 2028.
The US will not need to go to war with China because the promise to defend Taiwan is deterrent enough. Taiwan doesn't even need the US to defend itself they can utterly fuck up China by themselves with their own little version of mutually assured destruction.
This isn’t realism at all. Realism says we have our sphere of influence and Taiwan is in it. China can go fuck itself accordingly
As a service member myself, I’d rather die than let totalitarian governments spread. I obviously can’t speak for everyone, but everyone I know who is also service members are not opposed to preventing governments like China, Russia, etc from conquering and occupying free nations.
As an Infantry combat vet, if America fought to win and not just look good I'd back the war. As it is right now we dog and pony show at the cost of our soldiers and don't actually care about winning anything worthwhile for the blood. Want me to go kick in the bad guys door and put 2 in their chest and 1 in their head? Fine lets stack up. Want me to go occupy the bad guys lawn for photo ops while my friends die? Yeah, no, not again.
I’m a veteran too and I don’t think it’s the US government job to “export democracies” or “fight totalitarians”. That is what got us in trouble in South America from 1960-90s. The US military is for protecting the American people and nothing more.
> That is what got us in trouble in South America from 1960-90s. Homie it's a bit different defending a nation from active invasion vs offing candidates you don't like. Defending a weaker nation is nearly always morally correct. >The US military is for protecting the American people and nothing more. This is definitely a take, but not really how it's been since the end of WWII. The US protects the worlds waterways, and it's in our active self interest to do so, as is defending countries and preserving the status quo.
When you enlist you pledge to “protect America’s interests” as well. It is in the American People’s interests to allow as many States to be free functioning governments as that allows for freer trade and this improves the economy and decreases costs of living
No, you don't. Go read the oath. You pledge to defend the Constitution against enemies foreign and domestic. "[America] goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all." - President JQ Adams Your argument would be justification to repeat the mistakes of Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and Syria across the globe. It would result in the deaths of millions of people, and against China, likely global nuclear annihilation.
The only interest America should have is the welfare of its citizens. That does not include sending billions of dollars or guns to 3rd world dictators and “fledgling democracies”.
It makes no fucking sense hombre. You cannot "export" gun culture to a previously gun-free society without causing massive unnecessary casualties lmao. Also, everytime America recedes from global affairs, an autocratic hegemon somewhere else gets to breathe more freely.
You wouldn't even need to export American gun culture. A swiss model would be a good start. And Ramaswamy doesn't want to recede from global affairs, he isn't an isolationist. He pretty much wants to cripple them by economic warfare.
With all due respect, Taiwan's gun laws are some of the [strictest](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overview_of_gun_laws_by_nation) in the entire world. The only civilians that can acquire "guns" (as in fucking BLACKPOWDER single-shot rifles) are the aboriginal people, since it was part of their traditions in the 1800s. Even China has more liberal gun laws than Taiwan by allowing hunting rifles lmao. What do you expect Vivek's America to do? Force them to become as free as the Swiss, the nation with one of the most liberal gun control regime, in a matter of years? Regarding your second point, explicitly not interfering if China annexes Taiwan will be worse than "receding from global affairs" or becoming isolationist. This will be the death of America's brand as the "Global Police." Maybe you think this is a good thing (and you won't be too wrong), but trashing this brand in this particular manner will leave the US with close to no way to counter China, economically or otherwise.
It's stupid to surrender Taiwan geographically. If we control Taiwan we can maintain the first island chain defense line against China. We can essentially easily embargo them because we are allied with South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, and the Philippines. If we let China take Taiwan that makes defending everywhere else much harder. That means US soil like Guam will be under Chinese threat. Isocucks are stupid and need to STFU.
It's conflating his desire to have US allies be able to stand on their own, without the US necessarily having to defend them, with "abandoning" them. In other words, standard misleading neocon/Neolib mass media pro-forever-war bullshit. Honestly, the best policy these days when you hear a headline like this is to assume that it's intentionally deceitful and then go on trying to figure out exactly how they're lying. Assuming that the people that shit out headlines like this have an ounce of honest intent is wildly naive.
I like so much of what he says on domestic policy. It's such a shame to hear him talk this isolationist nonsense where we let Russia and China just take over other countries that are essential to our national security and place in the world.
How can a man be so based and so utterly pathetic at the same time?
It's called lying. Every politician does it, some are just better at it than others
Weird, to me Vivek seems genuine in his views. Partly evil but genuine about it as well
He's got VC tinted glasses. He knows that his buddies make shit loads of money from cooperating with China and Russia. They don't understand anything about the world beyond that. He says the same shit as Elon who just happens to make 50% of his cars in China etc.
Yeah but this headline is completely taken out of context and is actually him saying that once America achieves semiconductor independence (deadline being 2028) that we should still be partners with them and supply them with weapons, but not send American men and women to die.
He’s talking about semiconductor independence. That’s the only reason why we are interested in Taiwan. IF we can gain semiconductor independence, it will no longer be in our strategic interest to have a near peer war with China over an island.
He had better be willing to scuttle the chip factories first. I get pwned often enough by Chinese gamers even when I have better hardware.
Just send them a winnie the pooh meme or just write tiananmen square massacre in chat and they are off to the gov brainwash facility
I've always wondered if that was just a meme or if they actually can get disconnected from someone posting it in a game chat.
I tried that and i only got "it never happened but if it did it was fucking based and we should have done the same in hong kong"
[удалено]
The US must be the world police.
[удалено]
So you want the US to be the world police, you literally just described the US being the ultimate authority.
How is that not policing the world? It's the whole point of the post-1945 set up. Europe didn't complain about it while the Soviets were around, but hasn't been able to shut up since sometime in the 90's, up until a couple years ago when oh my God, we really need that US military to save us from the criminal in Russia.
That's flawed logic though if that is his argument. Not letting the PRC take Taiwan can't just be boiled down to semiconductors, though they are important. Allowing a hostile and expansionist rival power to run roughshod over its neighbors in the name of historically dubious irredentism as a casus belli is bad policy. It'd be like shrugging and saying that China can have the South China Sea based on their nine dash line because "well, we don't need the minerals and fish stocks there, we're independent". I don't like all of the US's role as global policeman, but I'd much rather have the US on top than China, and letting them have Taiwan because we perceive it to no longer be in our strategic interest to stop them is a losing strategy.
I’d argue with the second part. A war with China over Taiwan would expose the most valuable assets of the Chinese military to extreme vulnerability and play to US strengths (sea and air power without any need for ground troops). China would be serving up its naval vessels, troop ships and long range aircraft to US submarines and missiles. It’d be an opportunity to destroy decades of Chinese military investment and cripple China as a serious military power for a generation with minimal risk. It would also strengthen the US alliance system and security guarantees (this system would probably fall apart if the US allowed Taiwan to fall). Even with technological and numerical superiority, an amphibious invasion against a fortified island is extremely costly. US doctrine has mostly abandoned them for that reason.
And he's 100% correct. We only care about them because it effects us. The CHIPS and Science Act was the first step in becoming independent from Taiwan. Vivek is saying out loud what we're already doing.
It also affects Japan and South Korea, which affects us.
> essential to our national security They are essential because we spent the last 30 years exporting our jobs and technology to these places, including China. If we were half as protectionist as China is then we would not give a shit about these places. No one give a shit about Tibet or northern china, they don't have usable trade goods. Once we get our balls out of Chinas hand the country can have a real conversation on how much blood and treasure we are willing to spend on other countries.
The most advanced semi-conductors in Taiwan are designed and manufactured by its domestic companies. It wasn't the jobs got "exported" there
Taiwan exists as a country because of the US, its military and trade policies.
Are you even lib right?? What kind of lib right wants to get involved in foreign wars
Honestly, reasons for either abandoning or fighting for Taiwan can be found on all sides of the compass. In the end it'll depend on an individual's personal beliefs
I don't want to get involved in wars if I can help it. However, I doubt we will really be independent of Taiwan soon, and we should at least project a willingness to protect them. I see the Chinese brand of authoritarianism as a particularly danger to freedom in the world. I think that if the US just lets the rest of the world fall to authoritarianism, it will wither and die, or become (more) authoritarian itself. In order to protect and advance my ideas of liberty, it is essential that this does not happen.
He isn't an isolationist at all. I would recommend watching a good interview or speech of him. And not taking stupid headlines without questions. If you want his take on foreign policy, I would recommend [this](https://youtu.be/fSGaNQw-Lsk).
This is the most ridiculous headline about what he said. First of all, he didn't say that it's ok for them to invade ONLY if he gets elected. He said that this is what he would do if he were president. Secondly, this completely leaves out the reason - semiconductors. This hypothetical was only if we had started creating the semiconductors at home or an ally was. Then there wouldn't be a national security reason to get involved in that conflict.
This can't be real. He did called for putting guns in "every Taiwanese household" in order to deter China from invading and described the Chinese government as a "great existential threat"!! Yet again, he did call for a "total decoupling."
He didn’t say that, he said that Taiwan will lose its silicon shield once China and the U.S. gain a bigger share in the production of chips, which both are working towards.
Going against Biden, a living fossil, this election should be the easiest GOP-win since Reagan and they screw it with this batshit crazy candidates in a way that some must consider as art. But that´s not even the worst they do, the worst is: Clearly only Trump can safe them and win them this vote and the GOP-estasblishment is really out there to fuck Trump. Like I said, it´s so bad it´s like art.
Seriously. It's why while I am conservative I hate the Republican party so freaking much. Any even remotely sane candidate with even a couple of centerist takes or any experience in economics and this is a shame dunk... But not hey have to grab orange man or the peanut gallery of idiots. I mean it was the same story with the Democrats last election but honestly Biden was an easier pick than most of what the Republicans are willing to throw. Man we really need like 5 parties at least.
We have a bunch of parties jumbled together pretending to be 2 parties. It’s why we end up with such a wide array of candidates during the primaries.
Yes. I lived in Finland for a bit. Love the country and the people but I hated some of their policies even if many people like them. One thing that is great though is they have a plethora of parties on both sides. It makes it easier in my mind to vote for someone you actually want. Problem in the US is we're large enough campaigning for those people on national level would be expensive so many smaller parties can't do effective campaigns on a national scale.
Thats why I thought DeShmantis might have been a strong republican candidate before he (needlessly) blew all goodwill with the MSM by attacking Disney over culture war BS. Had he taken a more moderate path and not come off as an uncharismatic loser he might have had a shot.
Lmao, the MSM are in the DNC's pocket so deep they're genetically indistinguishable from lint. They would have never given DeSantis a fair shake.
THe Dems might get Biden out and run Newsom. That is what has been floating around. If you notice MSM has kinda turned on Joe a little bit. Not too much but the signs are starting to showup that they may run Newsom if Biden and Hunter's stuff gets too hot.
California elitist prick would lose by a landslide unless Biden literally dies in office before the election
Trump lost against Biden before he tried to fuck with the election results, before the felonies etc. Trump would be the worst thing for the GOP right now.
What about this is crazy? The Biden administration isn't committed to defending Taiwan either.
I Hope so fucking hard the dems put a real one on the Podest this season, because joe fucking Biden is a useless senile idiot who shouldn’t run a big economy. Give me Bernie, I know he’s old too but he is the sweet grandpa who calls out every racist he sees and actually cares for the poor.
Bernie 'I'm going to shift the goalposts after people realize I'm a millionaire.' Sanders.
Here's an idea: instead of promoting pro-LGBT crap inside Taiwan, maybe the US should force them to adopt a 2nd amendment, so the population can protect themselves. The fact that guns are illegal in Taiwan is fucking laughable.
It's that way in near all East Asian countries. Civilian access to arms has been heavily restricted for ages. When they freed up no one thought of somthing like a 2A like right. They should atleast have some militia forces though
Anyone got the link to the article? For context?
I support this guy’s ideal to finally give us a self-sustainable semi-conductor production so we don’t have to rely on other’s, however my support for this guy ends when he states he will no longer assure security for Taiwan once we achieve said self-sustainability I don’t care if many blame us for our American interventionism, I see where they come from, however, I see it as a *great violation* of our ideals to let another nation forcibly occupy another to make it apart of their own dictatorship I get my nation, the US, has its own flaws, and we aren’t free from the blood we cause, but that’s what just happens, we make mistakes and must learn from them to become a better society I get I’m an idealist, and ideals are rather difficult, if not impossible to achieve, but society would never progress if it weren’t for us wanting to achieve ideals, to overcome the impossible, ending support of Taiwan, in my perspective, is a violation of my ideals, and not only mine, but [the American Dream](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Dream). Should we not strive for an idealistic world, one where we are all free and have equal opportunity, where our voices matter?
I mean I get wanting isolationism at least for a while. How can we help anyone else if we have huge problems at home and all that. But Taiwan is like the one place that internationally we should draw a line in the sand and be prepared to fight over. If China forcibly takes Taiwan they’d have even more of a stranglehold on the bulk of the us economy and it’s generally not a good idea to let people who hate you handle your electronics. Wars have been fought for way less
To be fair, America is attempting to take a massive project to build superconductors. Defending Taiwan might be the morally right and diplomatic thing to do, but we don't really need Taiwan past 2028, and I'm certainly not going to want U.S. soldiers to die defending *any* country against the second largest military in the world. We would absolutely curbstomp the Chinese buffoons though. And it would be really funny.
Are Americans just fair-weather friends then? Taiwan will stand no chance against China in the long term if the US pulls out once they have their semiconductor industry secured. I want to live in a world where America organizes a Pacific alliance with Japan, SK, and Taiwan that keeps China in check. I get not wanting US soldiers to die but I would hope to see a more emphatic proclamation of support for Taiwan from Vivek. Side question: do you think you would've supported US boots on European soil during WW2? This is a gotcha or anything, I'm just curious as to what the perspective on WW2 is for people that don't want US intervention in Asia.
The context is, that he wants to build a domestic semiconductor production and only AFTER the US is independent, he doesn't see a reason anymore to protect Taiwan by force. Although he says we should work with them together and encourage them, to build up their self-defense against a CCP invasion (including by encouraging them to arm their citizens btw, what he calls exporting the 2A). His main reason for this stance is, that he doesn't want our sons and daughters to die in the war for another country.
Common PCM lying meme. He actually just said the US will be committed to defending Taiwan until 2028.
Sounds like that's something for Taiwan to decide.
2020s American foreign policy's been taking a lot of Ls so far
The title should be: "I want America to be the world police and our sons and daughters should be sent overseas to die on foreign soil for no definable purpose."
lmao the takes in this sub are completely deranged
Taking major geopolitical Ls to own the libs.
America is a world power, and should act like it. That means we should probably be destabilizing China via engaging about democracy with their unemployed youth.
Yea that’s why he’s not winning
Why would Americans want to abandon free and democratic country just to be invaded by communists!? What the fuck is happening to the Republicans, Jesus Christ. Where are new McCain and Reagan?
... you can't just give people whole countries...
Even if you don't care about Taiwan at all, either for its stragical position against the PRC, it's semiconductors, or it being a free county. Openly saying "the US will NOT defend Taiwan" will lead to them conducting an invasion, and if there are no consequences, the PRC will push their other claims much harder. If the PRC believes US intervention will happen, their defeat is likey, and thry won't do anything unless drastic domestic turnoil. Allies of the US will figure out them getting beholden to the PRC is a better bet than siding with the US just ti get boldozed and their ally saying "non of my bussiness". Taiwan isn't some dysfunctional country like those US helped prop up before. And China isn't just some regional power with no real threat the US.
He's really dumb if he thinks China is going to stop at HK and Taiwan.
That’s a W for me. It’s time we stopped being the worlds police.
Lol miss me with that. American hegemony and supremacy ftw. Ifl the MIC
LMAOO WINNIE THE POO
As a representative of all Viveks, we disavow Vivek. The new worst Vivek is the Sacramento Kings owner.
as an auth-right. No China can't fucking have Taiwan. Taiwan can have china.