And turn a blind eye to the atrocities in Palestine. Hypocrisy at its finest.
BeIt's not about justice or attrocities (as if the US, who has sponsored, done, and still sponsors and does all kinds of attrocities, even downrigh i8t invations and occupations) cared.
It's about the trade war.
Simply put, DJI does too well, and can get even bigger in the future. They'd rather have an American company get that market...
That is pretty much it.
The US has gone on record numerous times (sometimes unwittingly) as fearing being displaced by China as it sees it as a threat to US technological hegemony and influence.
That China is making huge technological strides and is likely to become a technological powerhouse is a widely accepted scenario.
However, the 'threat' isn't only Chinese. The EU also has a stated goal of becoming technologically independent (or in other words, not reliant on US influence, control, and restrictions).
As with China, those plans were in place long before Trump became president.
All Trump has achieved is to push governments to accelerate those independence plans, worsening the situation for US companies.
The US is now seen as unreliable and, logically, companies around the world (and governments) resent being 'told' what to do via executive orders issued under the guise of 'national security' simply because their companies (or their products) use a percentage of US technology.
These actions are mainly 'protectionist' in intent but are only serving to harm US technology interests in the long term.
Perhaps it is China's intellectual property theft that is the basis of its military expansionism that is the issue, and why the West is less willing to cede technological leadership to China. Perhaps it is China's "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy". There are numerous reasons that China is now seen as a threat.
You and you ilk believe that China has peaceful intentions; I do not. There is quite a bit of evidence to the effect that China's militarization is a threat to the West, and the current Rules of Order established at the end of WWII. These rules, for the most part, are the reason that the Global Economy works as well as it does.
Heck, even the EU's position on China is changing to recognize the threat that China poses, and at the same time, is more friendly to Taiwan.
However, the change in public opinion toward China is filtering through to Europe's leadership. Fallon believes that in countries which have historically been in favor of economic partnerships with China like France and Hungary -- which both have elections soon -- political opposition will be able to leverage public hostility.
The danger isn't that there won't be a coherent China strategy, but that a plan gets watered down so much it isn't worth the paper it's written on.
In the case of the Global Gateway, that could be private sector companies not keen to fund huge infrastructure projects that don't make money. On security, it might be that countries in southern Europe enjoy Chinese money and don't geographically see it as a threat. ***that sounds like your country of Spain...
For now, China hawks are happy that Brussels is attempting to stop trampling over its lofty ambitions of promoting democracy, human rights, and free trade, blinded by the Chinese yuan signs in their eyes.
What remains to be seen is whether the EU's own red tape and processes suffocate that ambition, and if once the pandemic begins to recede, Europe returns to its former bad habit of turning a blind eye, even when doing so hurts its own long-term interests.
The tide is turning against China's expansionism, and it isn't soon enough.
What did any of that have to do with what I said?
I'm talking about official statements, not opinion pieces.
William Barr said the US had to do something to stop Huawei and it's dominance in 5G for fear of "surrendering supremecy" to China.
He noted that 5G would form the backbone of countless new technologies and China was already making great strides in developing them.
As the US has nothing of its own to counter that situation, he even suggested the US should consider taking a controlling stake in Ericcson. Another wacky statement seeing as studies suggest that, even under 'sanctions', Huawei in 2021 had business in 5G that is equivalent to that of Ericcson and Nokia combined. Not to mention that the US has continually criticised alleged subsidies to Huawei from government. Huawei itself debunked those claims and it hasn't been brought up since.
The US has also used the terms destroy, kill and choke to refer to its stance on Huawei.
And if you bother to pay attention, even the latest, ehem, 'in depth' investigation on Huawei by Bloomberg, manages to spend much of the latter part of the article blowing holes in its own claims!
There's a lot of clutching at straws going on and desperate moves, but the CEO of ASML made things clear. The US approach will fail.
I have stated many times, that telecom is critical infrastructure, a National Security issue, and had been a concern of the U.S since the Obama Administration. That Huawei is notably working directly with the PRC to provide surveillance of minorities was found much later.
Evidently, people don't believe Huawei nor the PRC, and have made demands on their governments to mitigate that my restricting or outright banning Huawei infrastructure. Now that Merkel is out, I expect Germany to be much tougher on China as well.
As for ASML, the U.S. continues to deny a license to sell leading edge devices to China;
I’ve written several Seeking Alpha articles about China’s equipment industry which, after a decade of attempts, have less than a 5% share of the overall equipment market, according to The Information Network's report entitled "Global Semiconductor Equipment: Markets, Market Share, Market Forecasts." So this means that Taiwan will need to buy equipment from Japan, equipment from Mainland China, or build their own. But recall that in mid-2019, Japan embargoed semiconductor materials to Taiwan, particularly e-beam photoresist. I discussed this in a July 15, 2019 Seeking Alpha article entitled “Sorry, But Japan's Material Embargo Won't Help Micron Technology.”
The overreach of the sanctions by the U.S. government, started by President Trump, have been expanded under President Biden. But like it or not, the U.S. spends a lot of money protecting countries like Korea and Japan. Currently, there are approximately 55,000 U.S. troops in Japan and 26,500 U.S. troops in South Korea.
In 2019, the U.S. and South Korea negotiated an agreement calling for South Korea to contribute approximately $893 million. Japan’s current support amounts to approximately $1.7 billion. By comparison, the Department of Defense currently estimates the total cost of maintaining the U.S. presence in South Korea and Japan at $4.5 billion and $5.7 billion, respectively.
And if sanctions and blacklists function as another strategy in protecting foreign countries, so be it. As China continues to advance militarily and technologically, these sanctions will only be broader based. This will only put sales of DUV lithography systems further in jeopardy and negatively impact ASML.
And turn a blind eye to the atrocities in Palestine. Hypocrisy at its finest.
BeIt's not about justice or attrocities (as if the US, who has sponsored, done, and still sponsors and does all kinds of attrocities, even downrigh i8t invations and occupations) cared.
It's about the trade war.
Simply put, DJI does too well, and can get even bigger in the future. They'd rather have an American company get that market...
That is pretty much it.
The US has gone on record numerous times (sometimes unwittingly) as fearing being displaced by China as it sees it as a threat to US technological hegemony and influence.
That China is making huge technological strides and is likely to become a technological powerhouse is a widely accepted scenario.
However, the 'threat' isn't only Chinese. The EU also has a stated goal of becoming technologically independent (or in other words, not reliant on US influence, control, and restrictions).
As with China, those plans were in place long before Trump became president.
All Trump has achieved is to push governments to accelerate those independence plans, worsening the situation for US companies.
The US is now seen as unreliable and, logically, companies around the world (and governments) resent being 'told' what to do via executive orders issued under the guise of 'national security' simply because their companies (or their products) use a percentage of US technology.
These actions are mainly 'protectionist' in intent but are only serving to harm US technology interests in the long term.
Perhaps it is China's intellectual property theft that is the basis of its military expansionism that is the issue, and why the West is less willing to cede technological leadership to China. Perhaps it is China's "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy". There are numerous reasons that China is now seen as a threat.
You and you ilk believe that China has peaceful intentions; I do not. There is quite a bit of evidence to the effect that China's militarization is a threat to the West, and the current Rules of Order established at the end of WWII. These rules, for the most part, are the reason that the Global Economy works as well as it does.
Heck, even the EU's position on China is changing to recognize the threat that China poses, and at the same time, is more friendly to Taiwan.
However, the change in public opinion toward China is filtering through to Europe's leadership. Fallon believes that in countries which have historically been in favor of economic partnerships with China like France and Hungary -- which both have elections soon -- political opposition will be able to leverage public hostility.
The danger isn't that there won't be a coherent China strategy, but that a plan gets watered down so much it isn't worth the paper it's written on.
In the case of the Global Gateway, that could be private sector companies not keen to fund huge infrastructure projects that don't make money. On security, it might be that countries in southern Europe enjoy Chinese money and don't geographically see it as a threat. ***that sounds like your country of Spain...
For now, China hawks are happy that Brussels is attempting to stop trampling over its lofty ambitions of promoting democracy, human rights, and free trade, blinded by the Chinese yuan signs in their eyes.
What remains to be seen is whether the EU's own red tape and processes suffocate that ambition, and if once the pandemic begins to recede, Europe returns to its former bad habit of turning a blind eye, even when doing so hurts its own long-term interests.
The tide is turning against China's expansionism, and it isn't soon enough.
What did any of that have to do with what I said?
I'm talking about official statements, not opinion pieces.
William Barr said the US had to do something to stop Huawei and it's dominance in 5G for fear of "surrendering supremecy" to China.
He noted that 5G would form the backbone of countless new technologies and China was already making great strides in developing them.
As the US has nothing of its own to counter that situation, he even suggested the US should consider taking a controlling stake in Ericcson. Another wacky statement seeing as studies suggest that, even under 'sanctions', Huawei in 2021 had business in 5G that is equivalent to that of Ericcson and Nokia combined. Not to mention that the US has continually criticised alleged subsidies to Huawei from government. Huawei itself debunked those claims and it hasn't been brought up since.
The US has also used the terms destroy, kill and choke to refer to its stance on Huawei.
And if you bother to pay attention, even the latest, ehem, 'in depth' investigation on Huawei by Bloomberg, manages to spend much of the latter part of the article blowing holes in its own claims!
There's a lot of clutching at straws going on and desperate moves, but the CEO of ASML made things clear. The US approach will fail.
I have stated many times, that telecom is critical infrastructure, a National Security issue, and had been a concern of the U.S since the Obama Administration. That Huawei is notably working directly with the PRC to provide surveillance of minorities was found much later.
Evidently, people don't believe Huawei nor the PRC, and have made demands on their governments to mitigate that my restricting or outright banning Huawei infrastructure. Now that Merkel is out, I expect Germany to be much tougher on China as well.
As for ASML, the U.S. continues to deny a license to sell leading edge devices to China;
I’ve written several Seeking Alpha articles about China’s equipment industry which, after a decade of attempts, have less than a 5% share of the overall equipment market, according to The Information Network's report entitled "Global Semiconductor Equipment: Markets, Market Share, Market Forecasts." So this means that Taiwan will need to buy equipment from Japan, equipment from Mainland China, or build their own. But recall that in mid-2019, Japan embargoed semiconductor materials to Taiwan, particularly e-beam photoresist. I discussed this in a July 15, 2019 Seeking Alpha article entitled “Sorry, But Japan's Material Embargo Won't Help Micron Technology.”
The overreach of the sanctions by the U.S. government, started by President Trump, have been expanded under President Biden. But like it or not, the U.S. spends a lot of money protecting countries like Korea and Japan. Currently, there are approximately 55,000 U.S. troops in Japan and 26,500 U.S. troops in South Korea.
In 2019, the U.S. and South Korea negotiated an agreement calling for South Korea to contribute approximately $893 million. Japan’s current support amounts to approximately $1.7 billion. By comparison, the Department of Defense currently estimates the total cost of maintaining the U.S. presence in South Korea and Japan at $4.5 billion and $5.7 billion, respectively.
And if sanctions and blacklists function as another strategy in protecting foreign countries, so be it. As China continues to advance militarily and technologically, these sanctions will only be broader based. This will only put sales of DUV lithography systems further in jeopardy and negatively impact ASML.
Erm, I can only imagine that you are being wilfully obtuse.
Yes. Huawei works directly with the Chinese government. It is an infrastructure supplier!
Huawei works directly with all its customers. Does that surprise you?
'The US is protecting so and so'. You mean like it protected Afghanistan and Iraq?
Nope! The US has strategic interests. That's it. When those strategic interests change, so so does the 'protection' mantra.
Let me say it straight. ASML is a business that wants to sell equipment to China. It is not happy that an external sovereign state is meddling in its ability to trade and it's CEO has spoken out on the subject many times.
He knows that this external limitation will lead to China creating homegrown competitors to his business interests.
You stepped around the facts with yet more opinion pieces and simply roll on with your anti China rhetoric.
The US doesn't want DJI to prosper, just like it didn't want Huawei to prosper.
Going about it the way they have, will not change anything. On the contrary, it will speed up the demise of US technological interests.
And turn a blind eye to the atrocities in Palestine. Hypocrisy at its finest.
BeIt's not about justice or attrocities (as if the US, who has sponsored, done, and still sponsors and does all kinds of attrocities, even downrigh i8t invations and occupations) cared.
It's about the trade war.
Simply put, DJI does too well, and can get even bigger in the future. They'd rather have an American company get that market...
That is pretty much it.
The US has gone on record numerous times (sometimes unwittingly) as fearing being displaced by China as it sees it as a threat to US technological hegemony and influence.
That China is making huge technological strides and is likely to become a technological powerhouse is a widely accepted scenario.
However, the 'threat' isn't only Chinese. The EU also has a stated goal of becoming technologically independent (or in other words, not reliant on US influence, control, and restrictions).
As with China, those plans were in place long before Trump became president.
All Trump has achieved is to push governments to accelerate those independence plans, worsening the situation for US companies.
The US is now seen as unreliable and, logically, companies around the world (and governments) resent being 'told' what to do via executive orders issued under the guise of 'national security' simply because their companies (or their products) use a percentage of US technology.
These actions are mainly 'protectionist' in intent but are only serving to harm US technology interests in the long term.
Perhaps it is China's intellectual property theft that is the basis of its military expansionism that is the issue, and why the West is less willing to cede technological leadership to China. Perhaps it is China's "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy". There are numerous reasons that China is now seen as a threat.
You and you ilk believe that China has peaceful intentions; I do not. There is quite a bit of evidence to the effect that China's militarization is a threat to the West, and the current Rules of Order established at the end of WWII. These rules, for the most part, are the reason that the Global Economy works as well as it does.
Heck, even the EU's position on China is changing to recognize the threat that China poses, and at the same time, is more friendly to Taiwan.
However, the change in public opinion toward China is filtering through to Europe's leadership. Fallon believes that in countries which have historically been in favor of economic partnerships with China like France and Hungary -- which both have elections soon -- political opposition will be able to leverage public hostility.
The danger isn't that there won't be a coherent China strategy, but that a plan gets watered down so much it isn't worth the paper it's written on.
In the case of the Global Gateway, that could be private sector companies not keen to fund huge infrastructure projects that don't make money. On security, it might be that countries in southern Europe enjoy Chinese money and don't geographically see it as a threat. ***that sounds like your country of Spain...
For now, China hawks are happy that Brussels is attempting to stop trampling over its lofty ambitions of promoting democracy, human rights, and free trade, blinded by the Chinese yuan signs in their eyes.
What remains to be seen is whether the EU's own red tape and processes suffocate that ambition, and if once the pandemic begins to recede, Europe returns to its former bad habit of turning a blind eye, even when doing so hurts its own long-term interests.
The tide is turning against China's expansionism, and it isn't soon enough.
What did any of that have to do with what I said?
I'm talking about official statements, not opinion pieces.
William Barr said the US had to do something to stop Huawei and it's dominance in 5G for fear of "surrendering supremecy" to China.
He noted that 5G would form the backbone of countless new technologies and China was already making great strides in developing them.
As the US has nothing of its own to counter that situation, he even suggested the US should consider taking a controlling stake in Ericcson. Another wacky statement seeing as studies suggest that, even under 'sanctions', Huawei in 2021 had business in 5G that is equivalent to that of Ericcson and Nokia combined. Not to mention that the US has continually criticised alleged subsidies to Huawei from government. Huawei itself debunked those claims and it hasn't been brought up since.
The US has also used the terms destroy, kill and choke to refer to its stance on Huawei.
And if you bother to pay attention, even the latest, ehem, 'in depth' investigation on Huawei by Bloomberg, manages to spend much of the latter part of the article blowing holes in its own claims!
There's a lot of clutching at straws going on and desperate moves, but the CEO of ASML made things clear. The US approach will fail.
I have stated many times, that telecom is critical infrastructure, a National Security issue, and had been a concern of the U.S since the Obama Administration. That Huawei is notably working directly with the PRC to provide surveillance of minorities was found much later.
Evidently, people don't believe Huawei nor the PRC, and have made demands on their governments to mitigate that my restricting or outright banning Huawei infrastructure. Now that Merkel is out, I expect Germany to be much tougher on China as well.
As for ASML, the U.S. continues to deny a license to sell leading edge devices to China;
I’ve written several Seeking Alpha articles about China’s equipment industry which, after a decade of attempts, have less than a 5% share of the overall equipment market, according to The Information Network's report entitled "Global Semiconductor Equipment: Markets, Market Share, Market Forecasts." So this means that Taiwan will need to buy equipment from Japan, equipment from Mainland China, or build their own. But recall that in mid-2019, Japan embargoed semiconductor materials to Taiwan, particularly e-beam photoresist. I discussed this in a July 15, 2019 Seeking Alpha article entitled “Sorry, But Japan's Material Embargo Won't Help Micron Technology.”
The overreach of the sanctions by the U.S. government, started by President Trump, have been expanded under President Biden. But like it or not, the U.S. spends a lot of money protecting countries like Korea and Japan. Currently, there are approximately 55,000 U.S. troops in Japan and 26,500 U.S. troops in South Korea.
In 2019, the U.S. and South Korea negotiated an agreement calling for South Korea to contribute approximately $893 million. Japan’s current support amounts to approximately $1.7 billion. By comparison, the Department of Defense currently estimates the total cost of maintaining the U.S. presence in South Korea and Japan at $4.5 billion and $5.7 billion, respectively.
And if sanctions and blacklists function as another strategy in protecting foreign countries, so be it. As China continues to advance militarily and technologically, these sanctions will only be broader based. This will only put sales of DUV lithography systems further in jeopardy and negatively impact ASML.
Erm, I can only imagine that you are being wilfully obtuse.
Yes. Huawei works directly with the Chinese government. It is an infrastructure supplier!
Huawei works directly with all its customers. Does that surprise you?
'The US is protecting so and so'. You mean like it protected Afghanistan and Iraq?
Nope! The US has strategic interests. That's it. When those strategic interests change, so so does the 'protection' mantra.
Let me say it straight. ASML is a business that wants to sell equipment to China. It is not happy that an external sovereign state is meddling in its ability to trade and it's CEO has spoken out on the subject many times.
He knows that this external limitation will lead to China creating homegrown competitors to his business interests.
You stepped around the facts with yet more opinion pieces and simply roll on with your anti China rhetoric.
The US doesn't want DJI to prosper, just like it didn't want Huawei to prosper.
Going about it the way they have, will not change anything. On the contrary, it will speed up the demise of US technological interests.
His line of thoughts are based on the right wing anti-China ideology. Their premise is China is US adversary. US doing similar things it is ok because it is us. China doing similar thins is not ok because China is an adversary thus a threat. Trump administration used four years to portray China as an adversary. US-China relation is in a downward trend because of this premise. Biden is unwilling or unable to change this sentiment. His hands are tied by this premise. Worse of all, China under Xi has decided to respond directly toward the attacks originated by this premise.
And turn a blind eye to the atrocities in Palestine. Hypocrisy at its finest.
BeIt's not about justice or attrocities (as if the US, who has sponsored, done, and still sponsors and does all kinds of attrocities, even downrigh i8t invations and occupations) cared.
It's about the trade war.
Simply put, DJI does too well, and can get even bigger in the future. They'd rather have an American company get that market...
That is pretty much it.
The US has gone on record numerous times (sometimes unwittingly) as fearing being displaced by China as it sees it as a threat to US technological hegemony and influence.
That China is making huge technological strides and is likely to become a technological powerhouse is a widely accepted scenario.
However, the 'threat' isn't only Chinese. The EU also has a stated goal of becoming technologically independent (or in other words, not reliant on US influence, control, and restrictions).
As with China, those plans were in place long before Trump became president.
All Trump has achieved is to push governments to accelerate those independence plans, worsening the situation for US companies.
The US is now seen as unreliable and, logically, companies around the world (and governments) resent being 'told' what to do via executive orders issued under the guise of 'national security' simply because their companies (or their products) use a percentage of US technology.
These actions are mainly 'protectionist' in intent but are only serving to harm US technology interests in the long term.
Perhaps it is China's intellectual property theft that is the basis of its military expansionism that is the issue, and why the West is less willing to cede technological leadership to China. Perhaps it is China's "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy". There are numerous reasons that China is now seen as a threat.
You and you ilk believe that China has peaceful intentions; I do not. There is quite a bit of evidence to the effect that China's militarization is a threat to the West, and the current Rules of Order established at the end of WWII. These rules, for the most part, are the reason that the Global Economy works as well as it does.
Heck, even the EU's position on China is changing to recognize the threat that China poses, and at the same time, is more friendly to Taiwan.
However, the change in public opinion toward China is filtering through to Europe's leadership. Fallon believes that in countries which have historically been in favor of economic partnerships with China like France and Hungary -- which both have elections soon -- political opposition will be able to leverage public hostility.
The danger isn't that there won't be a coherent China strategy, but that a plan gets watered down so much it isn't worth the paper it's written on.
In the case of the Global Gateway, that could be private sector companies not keen to fund huge infrastructure projects that don't make money. On security, it might be that countries in southern Europe enjoy Chinese money and don't geographically see it as a threat. ***that sounds like your country of Spain...
For now, China hawks are happy that Brussels is attempting to stop trampling over its lofty ambitions of promoting democracy, human rights, and free trade, blinded by the Chinese yuan signs in their eyes.
What remains to be seen is whether the EU's own red tape and processes suffocate that ambition, and if once the pandemic begins to recede, Europe returns to its former bad habit of turning a blind eye, even when doing so hurts its own long-term interests.
The tide is turning against China's expansionism, and it isn't soon enough.
What did any of that have to do with what I said?
I'm talking about official statements, not opinion pieces.
William Barr said the US had to do something to stop Huawei and it's dominance in 5G for fear of "surrendering supremecy" to China.
He noted that 5G would form the backbone of countless new technologies and China was already making great strides in developing them.
As the US has nothing of its own to counter that situation, he even suggested the US should consider taking a controlling stake in Ericcson. Another wacky statement seeing as studies suggest that, even under 'sanctions', Huawei in 2021 had business in 5G that is equivalent to that of Ericcson and Nokia combined. Not to mention that the US has continually criticised alleged subsidies to Huawei from government. Huawei itself debunked those claims and it hasn't been brought up since.
The US has also used the terms destroy, kill and choke to refer to its stance on Huawei.
And if you bother to pay attention, even the latest, ehem, 'in depth' investigation on Huawei by Bloomberg, manages to spend much of the latter part of the article blowing holes in its own claims!
There's a lot of clutching at straws going on and desperate moves, but the CEO of ASML made things clear. The US approach will fail.
I have stated many times, that telecom is critical infrastructure, a National Security issue, and had been a concern of the U.S since the Obama Administration. That Huawei is notably working directly with the PRC to provide surveillance of minorities was found much later.
Evidently, people don't believe Huawei nor the PRC, and have made demands on their governments to mitigate that my restricting or outright banning Huawei infrastructure. Now that Merkel is out, I expect Germany to be much tougher on China as well.
As for ASML, the U.S. continues to deny a license to sell leading edge devices to China;
I’ve written several Seeking Alpha articles about China’s equipment industry which, after a decade of attempts, have less than a 5% share of the overall equipment market, according to The Information Network's report entitled "Global Semiconductor Equipment: Markets, Market Share, Market Forecasts." So this means that Taiwan will need to buy equipment from Japan, equipment from Mainland China, or build their own. But recall that in mid-2019, Japan embargoed semiconductor materials to Taiwan, particularly e-beam photoresist. I discussed this in a July 15, 2019 Seeking Alpha article entitled “Sorry, But Japan's Material Embargo Won't Help Micron Technology.”
The overreach of the sanctions by the U.S. government, started by President Trump, have been expanded under President Biden. But like it or not, the U.S. spends a lot of money protecting countries like Korea and Japan. Currently, there are approximately 55,000 U.S. troops in Japan and 26,500 U.S. troops in South Korea.
In 2019, the U.S. and South Korea negotiated an agreement calling for South Korea to contribute approximately $893 million. Japan’s current support amounts to approximately $1.7 billion. By comparison, the Department of Defense currently estimates the total cost of maintaining the U.S. presence in South Korea and Japan at $4.5 billion and $5.7 billion, respectively.
And if sanctions and blacklists function as another strategy in protecting foreign countries, so be it. As China continues to advance militarily and technologically, these sanctions will only be broader based. This will only put sales of DUV lithography systems further in jeopardy and negatively impact ASML.
Erm, I can only imagine that you are being wilfully obtuse.
Yes. Huawei works directly with the Chinese government. It is an infrastructure supplier!
Huawei works directly with all its customers. Does that surprise you?
'The US is protecting so and so'. You mean like it protected Afghanistan and Iraq?
Nope! The US has strategic interests. That's it. When those strategic interests change, so so does the 'protection' mantra.
Let me say it straight. ASML is a business that wants to sell equipment to China. It is not happy that an external sovereign state is meddling in its ability to trade and it's CEO has spoken out on the subject many times.
He knows that this external limitation will lead to China creating homegrown competitors to his business interests.
You stepped around the facts with yet more opinion pieces and simply roll on with your anti China rhetoric.
The US doesn't want DJI to prosper, just like it didn't want Huawei to prosper.
Going about it the way they have, will not change anything. On the contrary, it will speed up the demise of US technological interests.
The U.S. doesn't want China hoovering up data, especially sensitive military data, which is what drones are known for.
Still, if I'm was a harbinger of how the world responds to the PRC military expansionism, I'm still late to the party.
And turn a blind eye to the atrocities in Palestine. Hypocrisy at its finest.
BeIt's not about justice or attrocities (as if the US, who has sponsored, done, and still sponsors and does all kinds of attrocities, even downrigh i8t invations and occupations) cared.
It's about the trade war.
Simply put, DJI does too well, and can get even bigger in the future. They'd rather have an American company get that market...
That is pretty much it.
The US has gone on record numerous times (sometimes unwittingly) as fearing being displaced by China as it sees it as a threat to US technological hegemony and influence.
That China is making huge technological strides and is likely to become a technological powerhouse is a widely accepted scenario.
However, the 'threat' isn't only Chinese. The EU also has a stated goal of becoming technologically independent (or in other words, not reliant on US influence, control, and restrictions).
As with China, those plans were in place long before Trump became president.
All Trump has achieved is to push governments to accelerate those independence plans, worsening the situation for US companies.
The US is now seen as unreliable and, logically, companies around the world (and governments) resent being 'told' what to do via executive orders issued under the guise of 'national security' simply because their companies (or their products) use a percentage of US technology.
These actions are mainly 'protectionist' in intent but are only serving to harm US technology interests in the long term.
Perhaps it is China's intellectual property theft that is the basis of its military expansionism that is the issue, and why the West is less willing to cede technological leadership to China. Perhaps it is China's "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy". There are numerous reasons that China is now seen as a threat.
You and you ilk believe that China has peaceful intentions; I do not. There is quite a bit of evidence to the effect that China's militarization is a threat to the West, and the current Rules of Order established at the end of WWII. These rules, for the most part, are the reason that the Global Economy works as well as it does.
Heck, even the EU's position on China is changing to recognize the threat that China poses, and at the same time, is more friendly to Taiwan.
However, the change in public opinion toward China is filtering through to Europe's leadership. Fallon believes that in countries which have historically been in favor of economic partnerships with China like France and Hungary -- which both have elections soon -- political opposition will be able to leverage public hostility.
The danger isn't that there won't be a coherent China strategy, but that a plan gets watered down so much it isn't worth the paper it's written on.
In the case of the Global Gateway, that could be private sector companies not keen to fund huge infrastructure projects that don't make money. On security, it might be that countries in southern Europe enjoy Chinese money and don't geographically see it as a threat. ***that sounds like your country of Spain...
For now, China hawks are happy that Brussels is attempting to stop trampling over its lofty ambitions of promoting democracy, human rights, and free trade, blinded by the Chinese yuan signs in their eyes.
What remains to be seen is whether the EU's own red tape and processes suffocate that ambition, and if once the pandemic begins to recede, Europe returns to its former bad habit of turning a blind eye, even when doing so hurts its own long-term interests.
The tide is turning against China's expansionism, and it isn't soon enough.
What did any of that have to do with what I said?
I'm talking about official statements, not opinion pieces.
William Barr said the US had to do something to stop Huawei and it's dominance in 5G for fear of "surrendering supremecy" to China.
He noted that 5G would form the backbone of countless new technologies and China was already making great strides in developing them.
As the US has nothing of its own to counter that situation, he even suggested the US should consider taking a controlling stake in Ericcson. Another wacky statement seeing as studies suggest that, even under 'sanctions', Huawei in 2021 had business in 5G that is equivalent to that of Ericcson and Nokia combined. Not to mention that the US has continually criticised alleged subsidies to Huawei from government. Huawei itself debunked those claims and it hasn't been brought up since.
The US has also used the terms destroy, kill and choke to refer to its stance on Huawei.
And if you bother to pay attention, even the latest, ehem, 'in depth' investigation on Huawei by Bloomberg, manages to spend much of the latter part of the article blowing holes in its own claims!
There's a lot of clutching at straws going on and desperate moves, but the CEO of ASML made things clear. The US approach will fail.
I have stated many times, that telecom is critical infrastructure, a National Security issue, and had been a concern of the U.S since the Obama Administration. That Huawei is notably working directly with the PRC to provide surveillance of minorities was found much later.
Evidently, people don't believe Huawei nor the PRC, and have made demands on their governments to mitigate that my restricting or outright banning Huawei infrastructure. Now that Merkel is out, I expect Germany to be much tougher on China as well.
As for ASML, the U.S. continues to deny a license to sell leading edge devices to China;
I’ve written several Seeking Alpha articles about China’s equipment industry which, after a decade of attempts, have less than a 5% share of the overall equipment market, according to The Information Network's report entitled "Global Semiconductor Equipment: Markets, Market Share, Market Forecasts." So this means that Taiwan will need to buy equipment from Japan, equipment from Mainland China, or build their own. But recall that in mid-2019, Japan embargoed semiconductor materials to Taiwan, particularly e-beam photoresist. I discussed this in a July 15, 2019 Seeking Alpha article entitled “Sorry, But Japan's Material Embargo Won't Help Micron Technology.”
The overreach of the sanctions by the U.S. government, started by President Trump, have been expanded under President Biden. But like it or not, the U.S. spends a lot of money protecting countries like Korea and Japan. Currently, there are approximately 55,000 U.S. troops in Japan and 26,500 U.S. troops in South Korea.
In 2019, the U.S. and South Korea negotiated an agreement calling for South Korea to contribute approximately $893 million. Japan’s current support amounts to approximately $1.7 billion. By comparison, the Department of Defense currently estimates the total cost of maintaining the U.S. presence in South Korea and Japan at $4.5 billion and $5.7 billion, respectively.
And if sanctions and blacklists function as another strategy in protecting foreign countries, so be it. As China continues to advance militarily and technologically, these sanctions will only be broader based. This will only put sales of DUV lithography systems further in jeopardy and negatively impact ASML.
Erm, I can only imagine that you are being wilfully obtuse.
Yes. Huawei works directly with the Chinese government. It is an infrastructure supplier!
Huawei works directly with all its customers. Does that surprise you?
'The US is protecting so and so'. You mean like it protected Afghanistan and Iraq?
Nope! The US has strategic interests. That's it. When those strategic interests change, so so does the 'protection' mantra.
Let me say it straight. ASML is a business that wants to sell equipment to China. It is not happy that an external sovereign state is meddling in its ability to trade and it's CEO has spoken out on the subject many times.
He knows that this external limitation will lead to China creating homegrown competitors to his business interests.
You stepped around the facts with yet more opinion pieces and simply roll on with your anti China rhetoric.
The US doesn't want DJI to prosper, just like it didn't want Huawei to prosper.
Going about it the way they have, will not change anything. On the contrary, it will speed up the demise of US technological interests.
The U.S. doesn't want China hoovering up data, especially sensitive military data, which is what drones are known for.
Still, if I'm was a harbinger of how the world responds to the PRC military expansionism, I'm still late to the party.
Huawei sells to the Chinese military.
Microsoft and Apple sell to the U.S. military.
If you ban one for that you have to ban them all.
As for "collecting data", that's a U.S. specialty. We do more of it than any other country.
And turn a blind eye to the atrocities in Palestine. Hypocrisy at its finest.
BeIt's not about justice or attrocities (as if the US, who has sponsored, done, and still sponsors and does all kinds of attrocities, even downrigh i8t invations and occupations) cared.
It's about the trade war.
Simply put, DJI does too well, and can get even bigger in the future. They'd rather have an American company get that market...
That is pretty much it.
The US has gone on record numerous times (sometimes unwittingly) as fearing being displaced by China as it sees it as a threat to US technological hegemony and influence.
That China is making huge technological strides and is likely to become a technological powerhouse is a widely accepted scenario.
However, the 'threat' isn't only Chinese. The EU also has a stated goal of becoming technologically independent (or in other words, not reliant on US influence, control, and restrictions).
As with China, those plans were in place long before Trump became president.
All Trump has achieved is to push governments to accelerate those independence plans, worsening the situation for US companies.
The US is now seen as unreliable and, logically, companies around the world (and governments) resent being 'told' what to do via executive orders issued under the guise of 'national security' simply because their companies (or their products) use a percentage of US technology.
These actions are mainly 'protectionist' in intent but are only serving to harm US technology interests in the long term.
Perhaps it is China's intellectual property theft that is the basis of its military expansionism that is the issue, and why the West is less willing to cede technological leadership to China. Perhaps it is China's "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy". There are numerous reasons that China is now seen as a threat.
You and you ilk believe that China has peaceful intentions; I do not. There is quite a bit of evidence to the effect that China's militarization is a threat to the West, and the current Rules of Order established at the end of WWII. These rules, for the most part, are the reason that the Global Economy works as well as it does.
Heck, even the EU's position on China is changing to recognize the threat that China poses, and at the same time, is more friendly to Taiwan.
However, the change in public opinion toward China is filtering through to Europe's leadership. Fallon believes that in countries which have historically been in favor of economic partnerships with China like France and Hungary -- which both have elections soon -- political opposition will be able to leverage public hostility.
The danger isn't that there won't be a coherent China strategy, but that a plan gets watered down so much it isn't worth the paper it's written on.
In the case of the Global Gateway, that could be private sector companies not keen to fund huge infrastructure projects that don't make money. On security, it might be that countries in southern Europe enjoy Chinese money and don't geographically see it as a threat. ***that sounds like your country of Spain...
For now, China hawks are happy that Brussels is attempting to stop trampling over its lofty ambitions of promoting democracy, human rights, and free trade, blinded by the Chinese yuan signs in their eyes.
What remains to be seen is whether the EU's own red tape and processes suffocate that ambition, and if once the pandemic begins to recede, Europe returns to its former bad habit of turning a blind eye, even when doing so hurts its own long-term interests.
The tide is turning against China's expansionism, and it isn't soon enough.
What did any of that have to do with what I said?
I'm talking about official statements, not opinion pieces.
William Barr said the US had to do something to stop Huawei and it's dominance in 5G for fear of "surrendering supremecy" to China.
He noted that 5G would form the backbone of countless new technologies and China was already making great strides in developing them.
As the US has nothing of its own to counter that situation, he even suggested the US should consider taking a controlling stake in Ericcson. Another wacky statement seeing as studies suggest that, even under 'sanctions', Huawei in 2021 had business in 5G that is equivalent to that of Ericcson and Nokia combined. Not to mention that the US has continually criticised alleged subsidies to Huawei from government. Huawei itself debunked those claims and it hasn't been brought up since.
The US has also used the terms destroy, kill and choke to refer to its stance on Huawei.
And if you bother to pay attention, even the latest, ehem, 'in depth' investigation on Huawei by Bloomberg, manages to spend much of the latter part of the article blowing holes in its own claims!
There's a lot of clutching at straws going on and desperate moves, but the CEO of ASML made things clear. The US approach will fail.
I have stated many times, that telecom is critical infrastructure, a National Security issue, and had been a concern of the U.S since the Obama Administration. That Huawei is notably working directly with the PRC to provide surveillance of minorities was found much later.
Evidently, people don't believe Huawei nor the PRC, and have made demands on their governments to mitigate that my restricting or outright banning Huawei infrastructure. Now that Merkel is out, I expect Germany to be much tougher on China as well.
As for ASML, the U.S. continues to deny a license to sell leading edge devices to China;
I’ve written several Seeking Alpha articles about China’s equipment industry which, after a decade of attempts, have less than a 5% share of the overall equipment market, according to The Information Network's report entitled "Global Semiconductor Equipment: Markets, Market Share, Market Forecasts." So this means that Taiwan will need to buy equipment from Japan, equipment from Mainland China, or build their own. But recall that in mid-2019, Japan embargoed semiconductor materials to Taiwan, particularly e-beam photoresist. I discussed this in a July 15, 2019 Seeking Alpha article entitled “Sorry, But Japan's Material Embargo Won't Help Micron Technology.”
The overreach of the sanctions by the U.S. government, started by President Trump, have been expanded under President Biden. But like it or not, the U.S. spends a lot of money protecting countries like Korea and Japan. Currently, there are approximately 55,000 U.S. troops in Japan and 26,500 U.S. troops in South Korea.
In 2019, the U.S. and South Korea negotiated an agreement calling for South Korea to contribute approximately $893 million. Japan’s current support amounts to approximately $1.7 billion. By comparison, the Department of Defense currently estimates the total cost of maintaining the U.S. presence in South Korea and Japan at $4.5 billion and $5.7 billion, respectively.
And if sanctions and blacklists function as another strategy in protecting foreign countries, so be it. As China continues to advance militarily and technologically, these sanctions will only be broader based. This will only put sales of DUV lithography systems further in jeopardy and negatively impact ASML.
Erm, I can only imagine that you are being wilfully obtuse.
Yes. Huawei works directly with the Chinese government. It is an infrastructure supplier!
Huawei works directly with all its customers. Does that surprise you?
'The US is protecting so and so'. You mean like it protected Afghanistan and Iraq?
Nope! The US has strategic interests. That's it. When those strategic interests change, so so does the 'protection' mantra.
Let me say it straight. ASML is a business that wants to sell equipment to China. It is not happy that an external sovereign state is meddling in its ability to trade and it's CEO has spoken out on the subject many times.
He knows that this external limitation will lead to China creating homegrown competitors to his business interests.
You stepped around the facts with yet more opinion pieces and simply roll on with your anti China rhetoric.
The US doesn't want DJI to prosper, just like it didn't want Huawei to prosper.
Going about it the way they have, will not change anything. On the contrary, it will speed up the demise of US technological interests.
His line of thoughts are based on the right wing anti-China ideology. Their premise is China is US adversary. US doing similar things it is ok because it is us. China doing similar thins is not ok because China is an adversary thus a threat. Trump administration used four years to portray China as an adversary. US-China relation is in a downward trend because of this premise. Biden is unwilling or unable to change this sentiment. His hands are tied by this premise. Worse of all, China under Xi has decided to respond directly toward the attacks originated by this premise.
You are correct about his right wing/Trumpian approach: Anybody who stands in the way of their agenda is considered a "bad guy" to be destroyed by whatever means necessary and available.
As George Bush famously (or infamously?) said: "You're either for me Or you're agin' me".
There is no nuance or shades of grey in that world. Pure black & white, good vs bad.
And turn a blind eye to the atrocities in Palestine. Hypocrisy at its finest.
BeIt's not about justice or attrocities (as if the US, who has sponsored, done, and still sponsors and does all kinds of attrocities, even downrigh i8t invations and occupations) cared.
It's about the trade war.
Simply put, DJI does too well, and can get even bigger in the future. They'd rather have an American company get that market...
That is pretty much it.
The US has gone on record numerous times (sometimes unwittingly) as fearing being displaced by China as it sees it as a threat to US technological hegemony and influence.
That China is making huge technological strides and is likely to become a technological powerhouse is a widely accepted scenario.
However, the 'threat' isn't only Chinese. The EU also has a stated goal of becoming technologically independent (or in other words, not reliant on US influence, control, and restrictions).
As with China, those plans were in place long before Trump became president.
All Trump has achieved is to push governments to accelerate those independence plans, worsening the situation for US companies.
The US is now seen as unreliable and, logically, companies around the world (and governments) resent being 'told' what to do via executive orders issued under the guise of 'national security' simply because their companies (or their products) use a percentage of US technology.
These actions are mainly 'protectionist' in intent but are only serving to harm US technology interests in the long term.
Perhaps it is China's intellectual property theft that is the basis of its military expansionism that is the issue, and why the West is less willing to cede technological leadership to China. Perhaps it is China's "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy". There are numerous reasons that China is now seen as a threat.
You and you ilk believe that China has peaceful intentions; I do not. There is quite a bit of evidence to the effect that China's militarization is a threat to the West, and the current Rules of Order established at the end of WWII. These rules, for the most part, are the reason that the Global Economy works as well as it does.
Heck, even the EU's position on China is changing to recognize the threat that China poses, and at the same time, is more friendly to Taiwan.
However, the change in public opinion toward China is filtering through to Europe's leadership. Fallon believes that in countries which have historically been in favor of economic partnerships with China like France and Hungary -- which both have elections soon -- political opposition will be able to leverage public hostility.
The danger isn't that there won't be a coherent China strategy, but that a plan gets watered down so much it isn't worth the paper it's written on.
In the case of the Global Gateway, that could be private sector companies not keen to fund huge infrastructure projects that don't make money. On security, it might be that countries in southern Europe enjoy Chinese money and don't geographically see it as a threat. ***that sounds like your country of Spain...
For now, China hawks are happy that Brussels is attempting to stop trampling over its lofty ambitions of promoting democracy, human rights, and free trade, blinded by the Chinese yuan signs in their eyes.
What remains to be seen is whether the EU's own red tape and processes suffocate that ambition, and if once the pandemic begins to recede, Europe returns to its former bad habit of turning a blind eye, even when doing so hurts its own long-term interests.
The tide is turning against China's expansionism, and it isn't soon enough.
What did any of that have to do with what I said?
I'm talking about official statements, not opinion pieces.
William Barr said the US had to do something to stop Huawei and it's dominance in 5G for fear of "surrendering supremecy" to China.
He noted that 5G would form the backbone of countless new technologies and China was already making great strides in developing them.
As the US has nothing of its own to counter that situation, he even suggested the US should consider taking a controlling stake in Ericcson. Another wacky statement seeing as studies suggest that, even under 'sanctions', Huawei in 2021 had business in 5G that is equivalent to that of Ericcson and Nokia combined. Not to mention that the US has continually criticised alleged subsidies to Huawei from government. Huawei itself debunked those claims and it hasn't been brought up since.
The US has also used the terms destroy, kill and choke to refer to its stance on Huawei.
And if you bother to pay attention, even the latest, ehem, 'in depth' investigation on Huawei by Bloomberg, manages to spend much of the latter part of the article blowing holes in its own claims!
There's a lot of clutching at straws going on and desperate moves, but the CEO of ASML made things clear. The US approach will fail.
I have stated many times, that telecom is critical infrastructure, a National Security issue, and had been a concern of the U.S since the Obama Administration. That Huawei is notably working directly with the PRC to provide surveillance of minorities was found much later.
Evidently, people don't believe Huawei nor the PRC, and have made demands on their governments to mitigate that my restricting or outright banning Huawei infrastructure. Now that Merkel is out, I expect Germany to be much tougher on China as well.
As for ASML, the U.S. continues to deny a license to sell leading edge devices to China;
I’ve written several Seeking Alpha articles about China’s equipment industry which, after a decade of attempts, have less than a 5% share of the overall equipment market, according to The Information Network's report entitled "Global Semiconductor Equipment: Markets, Market Share, Market Forecasts." So this means that Taiwan will need to buy equipment from Japan, equipment from Mainland China, or build their own. But recall that in mid-2019, Japan embargoed semiconductor materials to Taiwan, particularly e-beam photoresist. I discussed this in a July 15, 2019 Seeking Alpha article entitled “Sorry, But Japan's Material Embargo Won't Help Micron Technology.”
The overreach of the sanctions by the U.S. government, started by President Trump, have been expanded under President Biden. But like it or not, the U.S. spends a lot of money protecting countries like Korea and Japan. Currently, there are approximately 55,000 U.S. troops in Japan and 26,500 U.S. troops in South Korea.
In 2019, the U.S. and South Korea negotiated an agreement calling for South Korea to contribute approximately $893 million. Japan’s current support amounts to approximately $1.7 billion. By comparison, the Department of Defense currently estimates the total cost of maintaining the U.S. presence in South Korea and Japan at $4.5 billion and $5.7 billion, respectively.
And if sanctions and blacklists function as another strategy in protecting foreign countries, so be it. As China continues to advance militarily and technologically, these sanctions will only be broader based. This will only put sales of DUV lithography systems further in jeopardy and negatively impact ASML.
Erm, I can only imagine that you are being wilfully obtuse.
Yes. Huawei works directly with the Chinese government. It is an infrastructure supplier!
Huawei works directly with all its customers. Does that surprise you?
'The US is protecting so and so'. You mean like it protected Afghanistan and Iraq?
Nope! The US has strategic interests. That's it. When those strategic interests change, so so does the 'protection' mantra.
Let me say it straight. ASML is a business that wants to sell equipment to China. It is not happy that an external sovereign state is meddling in its ability to trade and it's CEO has spoken out on the subject many times.
He knows that this external limitation will lead to China creating homegrown competitors to his business interests.
You stepped around the facts with yet more opinion pieces and simply roll on with your anti China rhetoric.
The US doesn't want DJI to prosper, just like it didn't want Huawei to prosper.
Going about it the way they have, will not change anything. On the contrary, it will speed up the demise of US technological interests.
His line of thoughts are based on the right wing anti-China ideology. Their premise is China is US adversary. US doing similar things it is ok because it is us. China doing similar thins is not ok because China is an adversary thus a threat. Trump administration used four years to portray China as an adversary. US-China relation is in a downward trend because of this premise. Biden is unwilling or unable to change this sentiment. His hands are tied by this premise. Worse of all, China under Xi has decided to respond directly toward the attacks originated by this premise.
You are correct about his right wing/Trumpian approach: Anybody who stands in the way of their agenda is considered a "bad guy" to be destroyed by whatever means necessary and available.
As George Bush famously (or infamously?) said: "You're either for me Or you're agin' me".
There is no nuance or shades of grey in that world. Pure black & white, good vs bad.
I shouldn't have to reiterate this, but China's human rights violations are concerning to Liberals, Progressives, Conservatives and Trumpists, hence why polls throughout the Western world are so negative on the PRC.
You can attempt to distract from that fact, but the trend is even more negative for the PRC due to militarization that China is engaged in.
And turn a blind eye to the atrocities in Palestine. Hypocrisy at its finest.
BeIt's not about justice or attrocities (as if the US, who has sponsored, done, and still sponsors and does all kinds of attrocities, even downrigh i8t invations and occupations) cared.
It's about the trade war.
Simply put, DJI does too well, and can get even bigger in the future. They'd rather have an American company get that market...
That is pretty much it.
The US has gone on record numerous times (sometimes unwittingly) as fearing being displaced by China as it sees it as a threat to US technological hegemony and influence.
That China is making huge technological strides and is likely to become a technological powerhouse is a widely accepted scenario.
However, the 'threat' isn't only Chinese. The EU also has a stated goal of becoming technologically independent (or in other words, not reliant on US influence, control, and restrictions).
As with China, those plans were in place long before Trump became president.
All Trump has achieved is to push governments to accelerate those independence plans, worsening the situation for US companies.
The US is now seen as unreliable and, logically, companies around the world (and governments) resent being 'told' what to do via executive orders issued under the guise of 'national security' simply because their companies (or their products) use a percentage of US technology.
These actions are mainly 'protectionist' in intent but are only serving to harm US technology interests in the long term.
Perhaps it is China's intellectual property theft that is the basis of its military expansionism that is the issue, and why the West is less willing to cede technological leadership to China. Perhaps it is China's "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy". There are numerous reasons that China is now seen as a threat.
You and you ilk believe that China has peaceful intentions; I do not. There is quite a bit of evidence to the effect that China's militarization is a threat to the West, and the current Rules of Order established at the end of WWII. These rules, for the most part, are the reason that the Global Economy works as well as it does.
Heck, even the EU's position on China is changing to recognize the threat that China poses, and at the same time, is more friendly to Taiwan.
However, the change in public opinion toward China is filtering through to Europe's leadership. Fallon believes that in countries which have historically been in favor of economic partnerships with China like France and Hungary -- which both have elections soon -- political opposition will be able to leverage public hostility.
The danger isn't that there won't be a coherent China strategy, but that a plan gets watered down so much it isn't worth the paper it's written on.
In the case of the Global Gateway, that could be private sector companies not keen to fund huge infrastructure projects that don't make money. On security, it might be that countries in southern Europe enjoy Chinese money and don't geographically see it as a threat. ***that sounds like your country of Spain...
For now, China hawks are happy that Brussels is attempting to stop trampling over its lofty ambitions of promoting democracy, human rights, and free trade, blinded by the Chinese yuan signs in their eyes.
What remains to be seen is whether the EU's own red tape and processes suffocate that ambition, and if once the pandemic begins to recede, Europe returns to its former bad habit of turning a blind eye, even when doing so hurts its own long-term interests.
The tide is turning against China's expansionism, and it isn't soon enough.
What did any of that have to do with what I said?
I'm talking about official statements, not opinion pieces.
William Barr said the US had to do something to stop Huawei and it's dominance in 5G for fear of "surrendering supremecy" to China.
He noted that 5G would form the backbone of countless new technologies and China was already making great strides in developing them.
As the US has nothing of its own to counter that situation, he even suggested the US should consider taking a controlling stake in Ericcson. Another wacky statement seeing as studies suggest that, even under 'sanctions', Huawei in 2021 had business in 5G that is equivalent to that of Ericcson and Nokia combined. Not to mention that the US has continually criticised alleged subsidies to Huawei from government. Huawei itself debunked those claims and it hasn't been brought up since.
The US has also used the terms destroy, kill and choke to refer to its stance on Huawei.
And if you bother to pay attention, even the latest, ehem, 'in depth' investigation on Huawei by Bloomberg, manages to spend much of the latter part of the article blowing holes in its own claims!
There's a lot of clutching at straws going on and desperate moves, but the CEO of ASML made things clear. The US approach will fail.
I have stated many times, that telecom is critical infrastructure, a National Security issue, and had been a concern of the U.S since the Obama Administration. That Huawei is notably working directly with the PRC to provide surveillance of minorities was found much later.
Evidently, people don't believe Huawei nor the PRC, and have made demands on their governments to mitigate that my restricting or outright banning Huawei infrastructure. Now that Merkel is out, I expect Germany to be much tougher on China as well.
As for ASML, the U.S. continues to deny a license to sell leading edge devices to China;
I’ve written several Seeking Alpha articles about China’s equipment industry which, after a decade of attempts, have less than a 5% share of the overall equipment market, according to The Information Network's report entitled "Global Semiconductor Equipment: Markets, Market Share, Market Forecasts." So this means that Taiwan will need to buy equipment from Japan, equipment from Mainland China, or build their own. But recall that in mid-2019, Japan embargoed semiconductor materials to Taiwan, particularly e-beam photoresist. I discussed this in a July 15, 2019 Seeking Alpha article entitled “Sorry, But Japan's Material Embargo Won't Help Micron Technology.”
The overreach of the sanctions by the U.S. government, started by President Trump, have been expanded under President Biden. But like it or not, the U.S. spends a lot of money protecting countries like Korea and Japan. Currently, there are approximately 55,000 U.S. troops in Japan and 26,500 U.S. troops in South Korea.
In 2019, the U.S. and South Korea negotiated an agreement calling for South Korea to contribute approximately $893 million. Japan’s current support amounts to approximately $1.7 billion. By comparison, the Department of Defense currently estimates the total cost of maintaining the U.S. presence in South Korea and Japan at $4.5 billion and $5.7 billion, respectively.
And if sanctions and blacklists function as another strategy in protecting foreign countries, so be it. As China continues to advance militarily and technologically, these sanctions will only be broader based. This will only put sales of DUV lithography systems further in jeopardy and negatively impact ASML.
Erm, I can only imagine that you are being wilfully obtuse.
Yes. Huawei works directly with the Chinese government. It is an infrastructure supplier!
Huawei works directly with all its customers. Does that surprise you?
'The US is protecting so and so'. You mean like it protected Afghanistan and Iraq?
Nope! The US has strategic interests. That's it. When those strategic interests change, so so does the 'protection' mantra.
Let me say it straight. ASML is a business that wants to sell equipment to China. It is not happy that an external sovereign state is meddling in its ability to trade and it's CEO has spoken out on the subject many times.
He knows that this external limitation will lead to China creating homegrown competitors to his business interests.
You stepped around the facts with yet more opinion pieces and simply roll on with your anti China rhetoric.
The US doesn't want DJI to prosper, just like it didn't want Huawei to prosper.
Going about it the way they have, will not change anything. On the contrary, it will speed up the demise of US technological interests.
The U.S. doesn't want China hoovering up data, especially sensitive military data, which is what drones are known for.
Still, if I'm was a harbinger of how the world responds to the PRC military expansionism, I'm still late to the party.
Again you are confusing Huawei with China.
Huawei provides the infrastructure. That infrastructure is managed by the carriers. The heads of security at the carriers know their stuff. I have not heard of a single carrier that wouldn't consider Huawei technologies as an option.
Ironically, they trust Huawei for good reason. 30 years of operations around the world without a single major security breach.
But let's clear some things up.
Telecommunications is standardised. It is standards based. That's how interoperability works. It doesn't matter if a country bans Huawei or not. The probability that data will end up passing through Huawei gear is VERY high. In fact a lot of that data flows through literally thousands of kilometres of undersea cables laid by Huawei.
China and the US can probably find ways into any ICT infrastructure for a heap of reasons. That has nothing to do with Huawei though.
Just look at the recent cases of massive data loss through hacked software in the US.
Where your argument literally falls apart, though. Well, disintegrates really, is that Huawei offered the US the opportunity of licencing its entire 5G stack so that the US could catch up and start competing.
It would have had access to literally every single line of code involved, and if it wanted to, could have developed its own hardware well away from China.
The problem is that the US doesn't have the slightest interest in having access to the code because the code (and the imaginary national security threat) was never the issue.
And turn a blind eye to the atrocities in Palestine. Hypocrisy at its finest.
BeIt's not about justice or attrocities (as if the US, who has sponsored, done, and still sponsors and does all kinds of attrocities, even downrigh i8t invations and occupations) cared.
It's about the trade war.
Simply put, DJI does too well, and can get even bigger in the future. They'd rather have an American company get that market...
That is pretty much it.
The US has gone on record numerous times (sometimes unwittingly) as fearing being displaced by China as it sees it as a threat to US technological hegemony and influence.
That China is making huge technological strides and is likely to become a technological powerhouse is a widely accepted scenario.
However, the 'threat' isn't only Chinese. The EU also has a stated goal of becoming technologically independent (or in other words, not reliant on US influence, control, and restrictions).
As with China, those plans were in place long before Trump became president.
All Trump has achieved is to push governments to accelerate those independence plans, worsening the situation for US companies.
The US is now seen as unreliable and, logically, companies around the world (and governments) resent being 'told' what to do via executive orders issued under the guise of 'national security' simply because their companies (or their products) use a percentage of US technology.
These actions are mainly 'protectionist' in intent but are only serving to harm US technology interests in the long term.
Perhaps it is China's intellectual property theft that is the basis of its military expansionism that is the issue, and why the West is less willing to cede technological leadership to China. Perhaps it is China's "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy". There are numerous reasons that China is now seen as a threat.
You and you ilk believe that China has peaceful intentions; I do not. There is quite a bit of evidence to the effect that China's militarization is a threat to the West, and the current Rules of Order established at the end of WWII. These rules, for the most part, are the reason that the Global Economy works as well as it does.
Heck, even the EU's position on China is changing to recognize the threat that China poses, and at the same time, is more friendly to Taiwan.
However, the change in public opinion toward China is filtering through to Europe's leadership. Fallon believes that in countries which have historically been in favor of economic partnerships with China like France and Hungary -- which both have elections soon -- political opposition will be able to leverage public hostility.
The danger isn't that there won't be a coherent China strategy, but that a plan gets watered down so much it isn't worth the paper it's written on.
In the case of the Global Gateway, that could be private sector companies not keen to fund huge infrastructure projects that don't make money. On security, it might be that countries in southern Europe enjoy Chinese money and don't geographically see it as a threat. ***that sounds like your country of Spain...
For now, China hawks are happy that Brussels is attempting to stop trampling over its lofty ambitions of promoting democracy, human rights, and free trade, blinded by the Chinese yuan signs in their eyes.
What remains to be seen is whether the EU's own red tape and processes suffocate that ambition, and if once the pandemic begins to recede, Europe returns to its former bad habit of turning a blind eye, even when doing so hurts its own long-term interests.
The tide is turning against China's expansionism, and it isn't soon enough.
What did any of that have to do with what I said?
I'm talking about official statements, not opinion pieces.
William Barr said the US had to do something to stop Huawei and it's dominance in 5G for fear of "surrendering supremecy" to China.
He noted that 5G would form the backbone of countless new technologies and China was already making great strides in developing them.
As the US has nothing of its own to counter that situation, he even suggested the US should consider taking a controlling stake in Ericcson. Another wacky statement seeing as studies suggest that, even under 'sanctions', Huawei in 2021 had business in 5G that is equivalent to that of Ericcson and Nokia combined. Not to mention that the US has continually criticised alleged subsidies to Huawei from government. Huawei itself debunked those claims and it hasn't been brought up since.
The US has also used the terms destroy, kill and choke to refer to its stance on Huawei.
And if you bother to pay attention, even the latest, ehem, 'in depth' investigation on Huawei by Bloomberg, manages to spend much of the latter part of the article blowing holes in its own claims!
There's a lot of clutching at straws going on and desperate moves, but the CEO of ASML made things clear. The US approach will fail.
I have stated many times, that telecom is critical infrastructure, a National Security issue, and had been a concern of the U.S since the Obama Administration. That Huawei is notably working directly with the PRC to provide surveillance of minorities was found much later.
Evidently, people don't believe Huawei nor the PRC, and have made demands on their governments to mitigate that my restricting or outright banning Huawei infrastructure. Now that Merkel is out, I expect Germany to be much tougher on China as well.
As for ASML, the U.S. continues to deny a license to sell leading edge devices to China;
I’ve written several Seeking Alpha articles about China’s equipment industry which, after a decade of attempts, have less than a 5% share of the overall equipment market, according to The Information Network's report entitled "Global Semiconductor Equipment: Markets, Market Share, Market Forecasts." So this means that Taiwan will need to buy equipment from Japan, equipment from Mainland China, or build their own. But recall that in mid-2019, Japan embargoed semiconductor materials to Taiwan, particularly e-beam photoresist. I discussed this in a July 15, 2019 Seeking Alpha article entitled “Sorry, But Japan's Material Embargo Won't Help Micron Technology.”
The overreach of the sanctions by the U.S. government, started by President Trump, have been expanded under President Biden. But like it or not, the U.S. spends a lot of money protecting countries like Korea and Japan. Currently, there are approximately 55,000 U.S. troops in Japan and 26,500 U.S. troops in South Korea.
In 2019, the U.S. and South Korea negotiated an agreement calling for South Korea to contribute approximately $893 million. Japan’s current support amounts to approximately $1.7 billion. By comparison, the Department of Defense currently estimates the total cost of maintaining the U.S. presence in South Korea and Japan at $4.5 billion and $5.7 billion, respectively.
And if sanctions and blacklists function as another strategy in protecting foreign countries, so be it. As China continues to advance militarily and technologically, these sanctions will only be broader based. This will only put sales of DUV lithography systems further in jeopardy and negatively impact ASML.
Erm, I can only imagine that you are being wilfully obtuse.
Yes. Huawei works directly with the Chinese government. It is an infrastructure supplier!
Huawei works directly with all its customers. Does that surprise you?
'The US is protecting so and so'. You mean like it protected Afghanistan and Iraq?
Nope! The US has strategic interests. That's it. When those strategic interests change, so so does the 'protection' mantra.
Let me say it straight. ASML is a business that wants to sell equipment to China. It is not happy that an external sovereign state is meddling in its ability to trade and it's CEO has spoken out on the subject many times.
He knows that this external limitation will lead to China creating homegrown competitors to his business interests.
You stepped around the facts with yet more opinion pieces and simply roll on with your anti China rhetoric.
The US doesn't want DJI to prosper, just like it didn't want Huawei to prosper.
Going about it the way they have, will not change anything. On the contrary, it will speed up the demise of US technological interests.
His line of thoughts are based on the right wing anti-China ideology. Their premise is China is US adversary. US doing similar things it is ok because it is us. China doing similar thins is not ok because China is an adversary thus a threat. Trump administration used four years to portray China as an adversary. US-China relation is in a downward trend because of this premise. Biden is unwilling or unable to change this sentiment. His hands are tied by this premise. Worse of all, China under Xi has decided to respond directly toward the attacks originated by this premise.
You are correct about his right wing/Trumpian approach: Anybody who stands in the way of their agenda is considered a "bad guy" to be destroyed by whatever means necessary and available.
As George Bush famously (or infamously?) said: "You're either for me Or you're agin' me".
There is no nuance or shades of grey in that world. Pure black & white, good vs bad.
I shouldn't have to reiterate this, but China's human rights violations are concerning to Liberals, Progressives, Conservatives and Trumpists, hence why polls throughout the Western world are so negative on the PRC.
You can attempt to distract from that fact, but the trend is even more negative for the PRC due to militarization that China is engaged in.
Trump started the whole thing in order to attack China -- because that's what he does with any and all who compete against him. Because some fools jumped on that band wagon and continue riding it down the hill doesn't change that it was and is nothing more than a standard Trumpian smear campaign.
Liberals and progressives tend to be better educated than the typical Trump Deplorable. One would think they would be more concerned about real atrocities and human rights violations being committed in and by this country rather than perpetuating a smear campaign based on half truths against a country half way around the world.
What is really keeping this farce going is same thing that killed 600,000 Iraqis: The "Freedom and Democracy" mantra -- otherwise known as "Cold War #2". Ideology running out of control kills. Aside from the moral depravity of it, we simply can't afford it: our infrastructure is badly out of date and crumbling and we are running massive deficits since our invasion of Iraq -- none of which is anybody's fault but ours. We simply cannot afford to start anymore wars.
And turn a blind eye to the atrocities in Palestine. Hypocrisy at its finest.
BeIt's not about justice or attrocities (as if the US, who has sponsored, done, and still sponsors and does all kinds of attrocities, even downrigh i8t invations and occupations) cared.
It's about the trade war.
Simply put, DJI does too well, and can get even bigger in the future. They'd rather have an American company get that market...
That is pretty much it.
The US has gone on record numerous times (sometimes unwittingly) as fearing being displaced by China as it sees it as a threat to US technological hegemony and influence.
That China is making huge technological strides and is likely to become a technological powerhouse is a widely accepted scenario.
However, the 'threat' isn't only Chinese. The EU also has a stated goal of becoming technologically independent (or in other words, not reliant on US influence, control, and restrictions).
As with China, those plans were in place long before Trump became president.
All Trump has achieved is to push governments to accelerate those independence plans, worsening the situation for US companies.
The US is now seen as unreliable and, logically, companies around the world (and governments) resent being 'told' what to do via executive orders issued under the guise of 'national security' simply because their companies (or their products) use a percentage of US technology.
These actions are mainly 'protectionist' in intent but are only serving to harm US technology interests in the long term.
Perhaps it is China's intellectual property theft that is the basis of its military expansionism that is the issue, and why the West is less willing to cede technological leadership to China. Perhaps it is China's "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy". There are numerous reasons that China is now seen as a threat.
You and you ilk believe that China has peaceful intentions; I do not. There is quite a bit of evidence to the effect that China's militarization is a threat to the West, and the current Rules of Order established at the end of WWII. These rules, for the most part, are the reason that the Global Economy works as well as it does.
Heck, even the EU's position on China is changing to recognize the threat that China poses, and at the same time, is more friendly to Taiwan.
However, the change in public opinion toward China is filtering through to Europe's leadership. Fallon believes that in countries which have historically been in favor of economic partnerships with China like France and Hungary -- which both have elections soon -- political opposition will be able to leverage public hostility.
The danger isn't that there won't be a coherent China strategy, but that a plan gets watered down so much it isn't worth the paper it's written on.
In the case of the Global Gateway, that could be private sector companies not keen to fund huge infrastructure projects that don't make money. On security, it might be that countries in southern Europe enjoy Chinese money and don't geographically see it as a threat. ***that sounds like your country of Spain...
For now, China hawks are happy that Brussels is attempting to stop trampling over its lofty ambitions of promoting democracy, human rights, and free trade, blinded by the Chinese yuan signs in their eyes.
What remains to be seen is whether the EU's own red tape and processes suffocate that ambition, and if once the pandemic begins to recede, Europe returns to its former bad habit of turning a blind eye, even when doing so hurts its own long-term interests.
The tide is turning against China's expansionism, and it isn't soon enough.
What did any of that have to do with what I said?
I'm talking about official statements, not opinion pieces.
William Barr said the US had to do something to stop Huawei and it's dominance in 5G for fear of "surrendering supremecy" to China.
He noted that 5G would form the backbone of countless new technologies and China was already making great strides in developing them.
As the US has nothing of its own to counter that situation, he even suggested the US should consider taking a controlling stake in Ericcson. Another wacky statement seeing as studies suggest that, even under 'sanctions', Huawei in 2021 had business in 5G that is equivalent to that of Ericcson and Nokia combined. Not to mention that the US has continually criticised alleged subsidies to Huawei from government. Huawei itself debunked those claims and it hasn't been brought up since.
The US has also used the terms destroy, kill and choke to refer to its stance on Huawei.
And if you bother to pay attention, even the latest, ehem, 'in depth' investigation on Huawei by Bloomberg, manages to spend much of the latter part of the article blowing holes in its own claims!
There's a lot of clutching at straws going on and desperate moves, but the CEO of ASML made things clear. The US approach will fail.
I have stated many times, that telecom is critical infrastructure, a National Security issue, and had been a concern of the U.S since the Obama Administration. That Huawei is notably working directly with the PRC to provide surveillance of minorities was found much later.
Evidently, people don't believe Huawei nor the PRC, and have made demands on their governments to mitigate that my restricting or outright banning Huawei infrastructure. Now that Merkel is out, I expect Germany to be much tougher on China as well.
As for ASML, the U.S. continues to deny a license to sell leading edge devices to China;
I’ve written several Seeking Alpha articles about China’s equipment industry which, after a decade of attempts, have less than a 5% share of the overall equipment market, according to The Information Network's report entitled "Global Semiconductor Equipment: Markets, Market Share, Market Forecasts." So this means that Taiwan will need to buy equipment from Japan, equipment from Mainland China, or build their own. But recall that in mid-2019, Japan embargoed semiconductor materials to Taiwan, particularly e-beam photoresist. I discussed this in a July 15, 2019 Seeking Alpha article entitled “Sorry, But Japan's Material Embargo Won't Help Micron Technology.”
The overreach of the sanctions by the U.S. government, started by President Trump, have been expanded under President Biden. But like it or not, the U.S. spends a lot of money protecting countries like Korea and Japan. Currently, there are approximately 55,000 U.S. troops in Japan and 26,500 U.S. troops in South Korea.
In 2019, the U.S. and South Korea negotiated an agreement calling for South Korea to contribute approximately $893 million. Japan’s current support amounts to approximately $1.7 billion. By comparison, the Department of Defense currently estimates the total cost of maintaining the U.S. presence in South Korea and Japan at $4.5 billion and $5.7 billion, respectively.
And if sanctions and blacklists function as another strategy in protecting foreign countries, so be it. As China continues to advance militarily and technologically, these sanctions will only be broader based. This will only put sales of DUV lithography systems further in jeopardy and negatively impact ASML.
Erm, I can only imagine that you are being wilfully obtuse.
Yes. Huawei works directly with the Chinese government. It is an infrastructure supplier!
Huawei works directly with all its customers. Does that surprise you?
'The US is protecting so and so'. You mean like it protected Afghanistan and Iraq?
Nope! The US has strategic interests. That's it. When those strategic interests change, so so does the 'protection' mantra.
Let me say it straight. ASML is a business that wants to sell equipment to China. It is not happy that an external sovereign state is meddling in its ability to trade and it's CEO has spoken out on the subject many times.
He knows that this external limitation will lead to China creating homegrown competitors to his business interests.
You stepped around the facts with yet more opinion pieces and simply roll on with your anti China rhetoric.
The US doesn't want DJI to prosper, just like it didn't want Huawei to prosper.
Going about it the way they have, will not change anything. On the contrary, it will speed up the demise of US technological interests.
His line of thoughts are based on the right wing anti-China ideology. Their premise is China is US adversary. US doing similar things it is ok because it is us. China doing similar thins is not ok because China is an adversary thus a threat. Trump administration used four years to portray China as an adversary. US-China relation is in a downward trend because of this premise. Biden is unwilling or unable to change this sentiment. His hands are tied by this premise. Worse of all, China under Xi has decided to respond directly toward the attacks originated by this premise.
You are correct about his right wing/Trumpian approach: Anybody who stands in the way of their agenda is considered a "bad guy" to be destroyed by whatever means necessary and available.
As George Bush famously (or infamously?) said: "You're either for me Or you're agin' me".
There is no nuance or shades of grey in that world. Pure black & white, good vs bad.
I shouldn't have to reiterate this, but China's human rights violations are concerning to Liberals, Progressives, Conservatives and Trumpists, hence why polls throughout the Western world are so negative on the PRC.
You can attempt to distract from that fact, but the trend is even more negative for the PRC due to militarization that China is engaged in.
Trump started the whole thing in order to attack China -- because that's what he does with any and all who compete against him. Because some fools jumped on that band wagon and continue riding it down the hill doesn't change that it was and is nothing more than a standard Trumpian smear campaign.
Liberals and progressives tend to be better educated than the typical Trump Deplorable. One would think they would be more concerned about real atrocities and human rights violations being committed in and by this country rather than perpetuating a smear campaign based on half truths against a country half way around the world.
What is really keeping this farce going is same thing that killed 600,000 Iraqis: The "Freedom and Democracy" mantra -- otherwise known as "Cold War #2". Ideology running out of control kills. Aside from the moral depravity of it, we simply can't afford it: our infrastructure is badly out of date and crumbling and we are running massive deficits since our invasion of Iraq -- none of which is anybody's fault but ours. We simply cannot afford to start anymore wars.
Feb, 2020, covid-19 virus is spreading to Europe. Trump launched tariff war with China in Jan, 2018. He appointed Pompeo as US Secretary of State in April, 2018 replacing Tillerson. Pompeo started numerous China attacks including force closing China Houston office, proclaiming Taiwan is not part of China, touring Europe asking allies to stay away from China. Trump was anxious of his re-election. He chose to downplay the threat of virus. As a result the virus came to US through Europe and spread rapidly in mid March, 2020. When he left the office in Jam, 2021, over 600,000 Americans have died.
And turn a blind eye to the atrocities in Palestine. Hypocrisy at its finest.
BeIt's not about justice or attrocities (as if the US, who has sponsored, done, and still sponsors and does all kinds of attrocities, even downrigh i8t invations and occupations) cared.
It's about the trade war.
Simply put, DJI does too well, and can get even bigger in the future. They'd rather have an American company get that market...
That is pretty much it.
The US has gone on record numerous times (sometimes unwittingly) as fearing being displaced by China as it sees it as a threat to US technological hegemony and influence.
That China is making huge technological strides and is likely to become a technological powerhouse is a widely accepted scenario.
However, the 'threat' isn't only Chinese. The EU also has a stated goal of becoming technologically independent (or in other words, not reliant on US influence, control, and restrictions).
As with China, those plans were in place long before Trump became president.
All Trump has achieved is to push governments to accelerate those independence plans, worsening the situation for US companies.
The US is now seen as unreliable and, logically, companies around the world (and governments) resent being 'told' what to do via executive orders issued under the guise of 'national security' simply because their companies (or their products) use a percentage of US technology.
These actions are mainly 'protectionist' in intent but are only serving to harm US technology interests in the long term.
Perhaps it is China's intellectual property theft that is the basis of its military expansionism that is the issue, and why the West is less willing to cede technological leadership to China. Perhaps it is China's "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy". There are numerous reasons that China is now seen as a threat.
You and you ilk believe that China has peaceful intentions; I do not. There is quite a bit of evidence to the effect that China's militarization is a threat to the West, and the current Rules of Order established at the end of WWII. These rules, for the most part, are the reason that the Global Economy works as well as it does.
Heck, even the EU's position on China is changing to recognize the threat that China poses, and at the same time, is more friendly to Taiwan.
However, the change in public opinion toward China is filtering through to Europe's leadership. Fallon believes that in countries which have historically been in favor of economic partnerships with China like France and Hungary -- which both have elections soon -- political opposition will be able to leverage public hostility.
The danger isn't that there won't be a coherent China strategy, but that a plan gets watered down so much it isn't worth the paper it's written on.
In the case of the Global Gateway, that could be private sector companies not keen to fund huge infrastructure projects that don't make money. On security, it might be that countries in southern Europe enjoy Chinese money and don't geographically see it as a threat. ***that sounds like your country of Spain...
For now, China hawks are happy that Brussels is attempting to stop trampling over its lofty ambitions of promoting democracy, human rights, and free trade, blinded by the Chinese yuan signs in their eyes.
What remains to be seen is whether the EU's own red tape and processes suffocate that ambition, and if once the pandemic begins to recede, Europe returns to its former bad habit of turning a blind eye, even when doing so hurts its own long-term interests.
The tide is turning against China's expansionism, and it isn't soon enough.
What did any of that have to do with what I said?
I'm talking about official statements, not opinion pieces.
William Barr said the US had to do something to stop Huawei and it's dominance in 5G for fear of "surrendering supremecy" to China.
He noted that 5G would form the backbone of countless new technologies and China was already making great strides in developing them.
As the US has nothing of its own to counter that situation, he even suggested the US should consider taking a controlling stake in Ericcson. Another wacky statement seeing as studies suggest that, even under 'sanctions', Huawei in 2021 had business in 5G that is equivalent to that of Ericcson and Nokia combined. Not to mention that the US has continually criticised alleged subsidies to Huawei from government. Huawei itself debunked those claims and it hasn't been brought up since.
The US has also used the terms destroy, kill and choke to refer to its stance on Huawei.
And if you bother to pay attention, even the latest, ehem, 'in depth' investigation on Huawei by Bloomberg, manages to spend much of the latter part of the article blowing holes in its own claims!
There's a lot of clutching at straws going on and desperate moves, but the CEO of ASML made things clear. The US approach will fail.
I have stated many times, that telecom is critical infrastructure, a National Security issue, and had been a concern of the U.S since the Obama Administration. That Huawei is notably working directly with the PRC to provide surveillance of minorities was found much later.
Evidently, people don't believe Huawei nor the PRC, and have made demands on their governments to mitigate that my restricting or outright banning Huawei infrastructure. Now that Merkel is out, I expect Germany to be much tougher on China as well.
As for ASML, the U.S. continues to deny a license to sell leading edge devices to China;
I’ve written several Seeking Alpha articles about China’s equipment industry which, after a decade of attempts, have less than a 5% share of the overall equipment market, according to The Information Network's report entitled "Global Semiconductor Equipment: Markets, Market Share, Market Forecasts." So this means that Taiwan will need to buy equipment from Japan, equipment from Mainland China, or build their own. But recall that in mid-2019, Japan embargoed semiconductor materials to Taiwan, particularly e-beam photoresist. I discussed this in a July 15, 2019 Seeking Alpha article entitled “Sorry, But Japan's Material Embargo Won't Help Micron Technology.”
The overreach of the sanctions by the U.S. government, started by President Trump, have been expanded under President Biden. But like it or not, the U.S. spends a lot of money protecting countries like Korea and Japan. Currently, there are approximately 55,000 U.S. troops in Japan and 26,500 U.S. troops in South Korea.
In 2019, the U.S. and South Korea negotiated an agreement calling for South Korea to contribute approximately $893 million. Japan’s current support amounts to approximately $1.7 billion. By comparison, the Department of Defense currently estimates the total cost of maintaining the U.S. presence in South Korea and Japan at $4.5 billion and $5.7 billion, respectively.
And if sanctions and blacklists function as another strategy in protecting foreign countries, so be it. As China continues to advance militarily and technologically, these sanctions will only be broader based. This will only put sales of DUV lithography systems further in jeopardy and negatively impact ASML.
Erm, I can only imagine that you are being wilfully obtuse.
Yes. Huawei works directly with the Chinese government. It is an infrastructure supplier!
Huawei works directly with all its customers. Does that surprise you?
'The US is protecting so and so'. You mean like it protected Afghanistan and Iraq?
Nope! The US has strategic interests. That's it. When those strategic interests change, so so does the 'protection' mantra.
Let me say it straight. ASML is a business that wants to sell equipment to China. It is not happy that an external sovereign state is meddling in its ability to trade and it's CEO has spoken out on the subject many times.
He knows that this external limitation will lead to China creating homegrown competitors to his business interests.
You stepped around the facts with yet more opinion pieces and simply roll on with your anti China rhetoric.
The US doesn't want DJI to prosper, just like it didn't want Huawei to prosper.
Going about it the way they have, will not change anything. On the contrary, it will speed up the demise of US technological interests.
His line of thoughts are based on the right wing anti-China ideology. Their premise is China is US adversary. US doing similar things it is ok because it is us. China doing similar thins is not ok because China is an adversary thus a threat. Trump administration used four years to portray China as an adversary. US-China relation is in a downward trend because of this premise. Biden is unwilling or unable to change this sentiment. His hands are tied by this premise. Worse of all, China under Xi has decided to respond directly toward the attacks originated by this premise.
You are correct about his right wing/Trumpian approach: Anybody who stands in the way of their agenda is considered a "bad guy" to be destroyed by whatever means necessary and available.
As George Bush famously (or infamously?) said: "You're either for me Or you're agin' me".
There is no nuance or shades of grey in that world. Pure black & white, good vs bad.
Just dropping in for a moment on this interesting thread. I will point out here that you have been quite vigorously labeling anyone who offers any sort of criticism of the PRC as "China Haters," and using that label to dismiss any and all criticisms of Chinese policies or actions.
I will also point out that on this thread and elsewhere on this site, you have been offering fairly vigorous criticisms of the United States, which, thus far, you are still completely free to do here in the United States. Some of your criticisms of the US are even valid. Here in this country, it is possible to criticize the US government without being an "America Hater," but rather as someone who loves the country and wants it to live up to its ideals. Indeed, self-improvement is very hard to achieve if one claims to be perfect and above criticism. So these observations can be offered in this country to only with impunity, but as an act of patriotism.
Finally, I will note that in your vigorous dismissal of all those you label in black & white as "China Haters," you appear to be joining in a chorus of agreement with another person who posts here, seemingly writing from the perspective of the PRC itself. That person has written rather nonchalantly that China surveils all of its people 'for security,' not just minorities, and has written elsewhere on this site that the role of government includes 'dealing with' people who dissent and do not conform.
I would encourage you to reflect on these things. It would seem, were you instead to be an inhabitant of the PRC and writing similarly vigorous criticisms of that government from within, according to your online friend here, that you would be under surveillance 'for security,' and that it would be appropriate for your vigorous criticisms and dissent to lead to a point where you would be 'dealt with' by your government.
Recognizing these contrasts and being concerned about them does not make you, me or anyone else a "China Hater." China has an incredibly long history, a fascinating culture and literally billions of wonderful, beautiful people. Criticizing certain aspects of its governance is not hating China at all.
And turn a blind eye to the atrocities in Palestine. Hypocrisy at its finest.
BeIt's not about justice or attrocities (as if the US, who has sponsored, done, and still sponsors and does all kinds of attrocities, even downrigh i8t invations and occupations) cared.
It's about the trade war.
Simply put, DJI does too well, and can get even bigger in the future. They'd rather have an American company get that market...
That is pretty much it.
The US has gone on record numerous times (sometimes unwittingly) as fearing being displaced by China as it sees it as a threat to US technological hegemony and influence.
That China is making huge technological strides and is likely to become a technological powerhouse is a widely accepted scenario.
However, the 'threat' isn't only Chinese. The EU also has a stated goal of becoming technologically independent (or in other words, not reliant on US influence, control, and restrictions).
As with China, those plans were in place long before Trump became president.
All Trump has achieved is to push governments to accelerate those independence plans, worsening the situation for US companies.
The US is now seen as unreliable and, logically, companies around the world (and governments) resent being 'told' what to do via executive orders issued under the guise of 'national security' simply because their companies (or their products) use a percentage of US technology.
These actions are mainly 'protectionist' in intent but are only serving to harm US technology interests in the long term.
Perhaps it is China's intellectual property theft that is the basis of its military expansionism that is the issue, and why the West is less willing to cede technological leadership to China. Perhaps it is China's "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy". There are numerous reasons that China is now seen as a threat.
You and you ilk believe that China has peaceful intentions; I do not. There is quite a bit of evidence to the effect that China's militarization is a threat to the West, and the current Rules of Order established at the end of WWII. These rules, for the most part, are the reason that the Global Economy works as well as it does.
Heck, even the EU's position on China is changing to recognize the threat that China poses, and at the same time, is more friendly to Taiwan.
However, the change in public opinion toward China is filtering through to Europe's leadership. Fallon believes that in countries which have historically been in favor of economic partnerships with China like France and Hungary -- which both have elections soon -- political opposition will be able to leverage public hostility.
The danger isn't that there won't be a coherent China strategy, but that a plan gets watered down so much it isn't worth the paper it's written on.
In the case of the Global Gateway, that could be private sector companies not keen to fund huge infrastructure projects that don't make money. On security, it might be that countries in southern Europe enjoy Chinese money and don't geographically see it as a threat. ***that sounds like your country of Spain...
For now, China hawks are happy that Brussels is attempting to stop trampling over its lofty ambitions of promoting democracy, human rights, and free trade, blinded by the Chinese yuan signs in their eyes.
What remains to be seen is whether the EU's own red tape and processes suffocate that ambition, and if once the pandemic begins to recede, Europe returns to its former bad habit of turning a blind eye, even when doing so hurts its own long-term interests.
The tide is turning against China's expansionism, and it isn't soon enough.
What did any of that have to do with what I said?
I'm talking about official statements, not opinion pieces.
William Barr said the US had to do something to stop Huawei and it's dominance in 5G for fear of "surrendering supremecy" to China.
He noted that 5G would form the backbone of countless new technologies and China was already making great strides in developing them.
As the US has nothing of its own to counter that situation, he even suggested the US should consider taking a controlling stake in Ericcson. Another wacky statement seeing as studies suggest that, even under 'sanctions', Huawei in 2021 had business in 5G that is equivalent to that of Ericcson and Nokia combined. Not to mention that the US has continually criticised alleged subsidies to Huawei from government. Huawei itself debunked those claims and it hasn't been brought up since.
The US has also used the terms destroy, kill and choke to refer to its stance on Huawei.
And if you bother to pay attention, even the latest, ehem, 'in depth' investigation on Huawei by Bloomberg, manages to spend much of the latter part of the article blowing holes in its own claims!
There's a lot of clutching at straws going on and desperate moves, but the CEO of ASML made things clear. The US approach will fail.
I have stated many times, that telecom is critical infrastructure, a National Security issue, and had been a concern of the U.S since the Obama Administration. That Huawei is notably working directly with the PRC to provide surveillance of minorities was found much later.
Evidently, people don't believe Huawei nor the PRC, and have made demands on their governments to mitigate that my restricting or outright banning Huawei infrastructure. Now that Merkel is out, I expect Germany to be much tougher on China as well.
As for ASML, the U.S. continues to deny a license to sell leading edge devices to China;
I’ve written several Seeking Alpha articles about China’s equipment industry which, after a decade of attempts, have less than a 5% share of the overall equipment market, according to The Information Network's report entitled "Global Semiconductor Equipment: Markets, Market Share, Market Forecasts." So this means that Taiwan will need to buy equipment from Japan, equipment from Mainland China, or build their own. But recall that in mid-2019, Japan embargoed semiconductor materials to Taiwan, particularly e-beam photoresist. I discussed this in a July 15, 2019 Seeking Alpha article entitled “Sorry, But Japan's Material Embargo Won't Help Micron Technology.”
The overreach of the sanctions by the U.S. government, started by President Trump, have been expanded under President Biden. But like it or not, the U.S. spends a lot of money protecting countries like Korea and Japan. Currently, there are approximately 55,000 U.S. troops in Japan and 26,500 U.S. troops in South Korea.
In 2019, the U.S. and South Korea negotiated an agreement calling for South Korea to contribute approximately $893 million. Japan’s current support amounts to approximately $1.7 billion. By comparison, the Department of Defense currently estimates the total cost of maintaining the U.S. presence in South Korea and Japan at $4.5 billion and $5.7 billion, respectively.
And if sanctions and blacklists function as another strategy in protecting foreign countries, so be it. As China continues to advance militarily and technologically, these sanctions will only be broader based. This will only put sales of DUV lithography systems further in jeopardy and negatively impact ASML.
Erm, I can only imagine that you are being wilfully obtuse.
Yes. Huawei works directly with the Chinese government. It is an infrastructure supplier!
Huawei works directly with all its customers. Does that surprise you?
'The US is protecting so and so'. You mean like it protected Afghanistan and Iraq?
Nope! The US has strategic interests. That's it. When those strategic interests change, so so does the 'protection' mantra.
Let me say it straight. ASML is a business that wants to sell equipment to China. It is not happy that an external sovereign state is meddling in its ability to trade and it's CEO has spoken out on the subject many times.
He knows that this external limitation will lead to China creating homegrown competitors to his business interests.
You stepped around the facts with yet more opinion pieces and simply roll on with your anti China rhetoric.
The US doesn't want DJI to prosper, just like it didn't want Huawei to prosper.
Going about it the way they have, will not change anything. On the contrary, it will speed up the demise of US technological interests.
His line of thoughts are based on the right wing anti-China ideology. Their premise is China is US adversary. US doing similar things it is ok because it is us. China doing similar thins is not ok because China is an adversary thus a threat. Trump administration used four years to portray China as an adversary. US-China relation is in a downward trend because of this premise. Biden is unwilling or unable to change this sentiment. His hands are tied by this premise. Worse of all, China under Xi has decided to respond directly toward the attacks originated by this premise.
You are correct about his right wing/Trumpian approach: Anybody who stands in the way of their agenda is considered a "bad guy" to be destroyed by whatever means necessary and available.
As George Bush famously (or infamously?) said: "You're either for me Or you're agin' me".
There is no nuance or shades of grey in that world. Pure black & white, good vs bad.
Just dropping in for a moment on this interesting thread. I will point out here that you have been quite vigorously labeling anyone who offers any sort of criticism of the PRC as "China Haters," and using that label to dismiss any and all criticisms of Chinese policies or actions.
I will also point out that on this thread and elsewhere on this site, you have been offering fairly vigorous criticisms of the United States, which, thus far, you are still completely free to do here in the United States. Some of your criticisms of the US are even valid. Here in this country, it is possible to criticize the US government without being an "America Hater," but rather as someone who loves the country and wants it to live up to its ideals. Indeed, self-improvement is very hard to achieve if one claims to be perfect and above criticism. So these observations can be offered in this country to only with impunity, but as an act of patriotism.
Finally, I will note that in your vigorous dismissal of all those you label in black & white as "China Haters," you appear to be joining in a chorus of agreement with another person who posts here, seemingly writing from the perspective of the PRC itself. That person has written rather nonchalantly that China surveils all of its people 'for security,' not just minorities, and has written elsewhere on this site that the role of government includes 'dealing with' people who dissent and do not conform.
I would encourage you to reflect on these things. It would seem, were you instead to be an inhabitant of the PRC and writing similarly vigorous criticisms of that government from within, according to your online friend here, that you would be under surveillance 'for security,' and that it would be appropriate for your vigorous criticisms and dissent to lead to a point where you would be 'dealt with' by your government.
Recognizing these contrasts and being concerned about them does not make you, me or anyone else a "China Hater." China has an incredibly long history, a fascinating culture and literally billions of wonderful, beautiful people. Criticizing certain aspects of its governance is not hating China at all.
Wrong! Your logic is wrong. China hater refers to non-Chinese. Chinese that bash China is not called China hater. Thus your logic that George is not called America hater is wrong. You think he is an American. On the other, you hate me because in your heart you don't consider I am a American citizen.
And turn a blind eye to the atrocities in Palestine. Hypocrisy at its finest.
BeIt's not about justice or attrocities (as if the US, who has sponsored, done, and still sponsors and does all kinds of attrocities, even downrigh i8t invations and occupations) cared.
It's about the trade war.
Simply put, DJI does too well, and can get even bigger in the future. They'd rather have an American company get that market...
That is pretty much it.
The US has gone on record numerous times (sometimes unwittingly) as fearing being displaced by China as it sees it as a threat to US technological hegemony and influence.
That China is making huge technological strides and is likely to become a technological powerhouse is a widely accepted scenario.
However, the 'threat' isn't only Chinese. The EU also has a stated goal of becoming technologically independent (or in other words, not reliant on US influence, control, and restrictions).
As with China, those plans were in place long before Trump became president.
All Trump has achieved is to push governments to accelerate those independence plans, worsening the situation for US companies.
The US is now seen as unreliable and, logically, companies around the world (and governments) resent being 'told' what to do via executive orders issued under the guise of 'national security' simply because their companies (or their products) use a percentage of US technology.
These actions are mainly 'protectionist' in intent but are only serving to harm US technology interests in the long term.
Perhaps it is China's intellectual property theft that is the basis of its military expansionism that is the issue, and why the West is less willing to cede technological leadership to China. Perhaps it is China's "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy". There are numerous reasons that China is now seen as a threat.
You and you ilk believe that China has peaceful intentions; I do not. There is quite a bit of evidence to the effect that China's militarization is a threat to the West, and the current Rules of Order established at the end of WWII. These rules, for the most part, are the reason that the Global Economy works as well as it does.
Heck, even the EU's position on China is changing to recognize the threat that China poses, and at the same time, is more friendly to Taiwan.
However, the change in public opinion toward China is filtering through to Europe's leadership. Fallon believes that in countries which have historically been in favor of economic partnerships with China like France and Hungary -- which both have elections soon -- political opposition will be able to leverage public hostility.
The danger isn't that there won't be a coherent China strategy, but that a plan gets watered down so much it isn't worth the paper it's written on.
In the case of the Global Gateway, that could be private sector companies not keen to fund huge infrastructure projects that don't make money. On security, it might be that countries in southern Europe enjoy Chinese money and don't geographically see it as a threat. ***that sounds like your country of Spain...
For now, China hawks are happy that Brussels is attempting to stop trampling over its lofty ambitions of promoting democracy, human rights, and free trade, blinded by the Chinese yuan signs in their eyes.
What remains to be seen is whether the EU's own red tape and processes suffocate that ambition, and if once the pandemic begins to recede, Europe returns to its former bad habit of turning a blind eye, even when doing so hurts its own long-term interests.
The tide is turning against China's expansionism, and it isn't soon enough.
What did any of that have to do with what I said?
I'm talking about official statements, not opinion pieces.
William Barr said the US had to do something to stop Huawei and it's dominance in 5G for fear of "surrendering supremecy" to China.
He noted that 5G would form the backbone of countless new technologies and China was already making great strides in developing them.
As the US has nothing of its own to counter that situation, he even suggested the US should consider taking a controlling stake in Ericcson. Another wacky statement seeing as studies suggest that, even under 'sanctions', Huawei in 2021 had business in 5G that is equivalent to that of Ericcson and Nokia combined. Not to mention that the US has continually criticised alleged subsidies to Huawei from government. Huawei itself debunked those claims and it hasn't been brought up since.
The US has also used the terms destroy, kill and choke to refer to its stance on Huawei.
And if you bother to pay attention, even the latest, ehem, 'in depth' investigation on Huawei by Bloomberg, manages to spend much of the latter part of the article blowing holes in its own claims!
There's a lot of clutching at straws going on and desperate moves, but the CEO of ASML made things clear. The US approach will fail.
I have stated many times, that telecom is critical infrastructure, a National Security issue, and had been a concern of the U.S since the Obama Administration. That Huawei is notably working directly with the PRC to provide surveillance of minorities was found much later.
Evidently, people don't believe Huawei nor the PRC, and have made demands on their governments to mitigate that my restricting or outright banning Huawei infrastructure. Now that Merkel is out, I expect Germany to be much tougher on China as well.
As for ASML, the U.S. continues to deny a license to sell leading edge devices to China;
I’ve written several Seeking Alpha articles about China’s equipment industry which, after a decade of attempts, have less than a 5% share of the overall equipment market, according to The Information Network's report entitled "Global Semiconductor Equipment: Markets, Market Share, Market Forecasts." So this means that Taiwan will need to buy equipment from Japan, equipment from Mainland China, or build their own. But recall that in mid-2019, Japan embargoed semiconductor materials to Taiwan, particularly e-beam photoresist. I discussed this in a July 15, 2019 Seeking Alpha article entitled “Sorry, But Japan's Material Embargo Won't Help Micron Technology.”
The overreach of the sanctions by the U.S. government, started by President Trump, have been expanded under President Biden. But like it or not, the U.S. spends a lot of money protecting countries like Korea and Japan. Currently, there are approximately 55,000 U.S. troops in Japan and 26,500 U.S. troops in South Korea.
In 2019, the U.S. and South Korea negotiated an agreement calling for South Korea to contribute approximately $893 million. Japan’s current support amounts to approximately $1.7 billion. By comparison, the Department of Defense currently estimates the total cost of maintaining the U.S. presence in South Korea and Japan at $4.5 billion and $5.7 billion, respectively.
And if sanctions and blacklists function as another strategy in protecting foreign countries, so be it. As China continues to advance militarily and technologically, these sanctions will only be broader based. This will only put sales of DUV lithography systems further in jeopardy and negatively impact ASML.
Erm, I can only imagine that you are being wilfully obtuse.
Yes. Huawei works directly with the Chinese government. It is an infrastructure supplier!
Huawei works directly with all its customers. Does that surprise you?
'The US is protecting so and so'. You mean like it protected Afghanistan and Iraq?
Nope! The US has strategic interests. That's it. When those strategic interests change, so so does the 'protection' mantra.
Let me say it straight. ASML is a business that wants to sell equipment to China. It is not happy that an external sovereign state is meddling in its ability to trade and it's CEO has spoken out on the subject many times.
He knows that this external limitation will lead to China creating homegrown competitors to his business interests.
You stepped around the facts with yet more opinion pieces and simply roll on with your anti China rhetoric.
The US doesn't want DJI to prosper, just like it didn't want Huawei to prosper.
Going about it the way they have, will not change anything. On the contrary, it will speed up the demise of US technological interests.
His line of thoughts are based on the right wing anti-China ideology. Their premise is China is US adversary. US doing similar things it is ok because it is us. China doing similar thins is not ok because China is an adversary thus a threat. Trump administration used four years to portray China as an adversary. US-China relation is in a downward trend because of this premise. Biden is unwilling or unable to change this sentiment. His hands are tied by this premise. Worse of all, China under Xi has decided to respond directly toward the attacks originated by this premise.
You are correct about his right wing/Trumpian approach: Anybody who stands in the way of their agenda is considered a "bad guy" to be destroyed by whatever means necessary and available.
As George Bush famously (or infamously?) said: "You're either for me Or you're agin' me".
There is no nuance or shades of grey in that world. Pure black & white, good vs bad.
Just dropping in for a moment on this interesting thread. I will point out here that you have been quite vigorously labeling anyone who offers any sort of criticism of the PRC as "China Haters," and using that label to dismiss any and all criticisms of Chinese policies or actions.
I will also point out that on this thread and elsewhere on this site, you have been offering fairly vigorous criticisms of the United States, which, thus far, you are still completely free to do here in the United States. Some of your criticisms of the US are even valid. Here in this country, it is possible to criticize the US government without being an "America Hater," but rather as someone who loves the country and wants it to live up to its ideals. Indeed, self-improvement is very hard to achieve if one claims to be perfect and above criticism. So these observations can be offered in this country to only with impunity, but as an act of patriotism.
Finally, I will note that in your vigorous dismissal of all those you label in black & white as "China Haters," you appear to be joining in a chorus of agreement with another person who posts here, seemingly writing from the perspective of the PRC itself. That person has written rather nonchalantly that China surveils all of its people 'for security,' not just minorities, and has written elsewhere on this site that the role of government includes 'dealing with' people who dissent and do not conform.
I would encourage you to reflect on these things. It would seem, were you instead to be an inhabitant of the PRC and writing similarly vigorous criticisms of that government from within, according to your online friend here, that you would be under surveillance 'for security,' and that it would be appropriate for your vigorous criticisms and dissent to lead to a point where you would be 'dealt with' by your government.
Recognizing these contrasts and being concerned about them does not make you, me or anyone else a "China Hater." China has an incredibly long history, a fascinating culture and literally billions of wonderful, beautiful people. Criticizing certain aspects of its governance is not hating China at all.
Wrong! Your logic is wrong. China hater refers to non-Chinese. Chinese that bash China is not called China hater. Thus your logic that George is not called America hater is wrong. You think he is an American. On the other, you hate me because in your heart you don't consider I am a American citizen.
I'm not wrong. George has indicated in the past that he is an American. I suppose he could be lying, but I'll take him for his word on that. You could be an American citizen, but the context of things that you've written here suggests otherwise. I could be wrong about that, and you are free to indicate that you are, you aren't or not to say at all. Either way, I don't hate you. Why would I hate you? There's no need for that. Disagreement neither requires nor indicates hate. Should I assume because you have offered criticisms of the US that you hate the United States? I didn't assume that, but you're free to make it clear that you do or you don't hate the US, or to say nothing at all about that.
The point is, George's comment about some other people seeing things in only black and white was ironic, given that he himself has been very busy labeling people in broad strokes with black and white accusations. None of that is necessary. If we want fewer wars and less fighting (and I certainly do), it would help to avoid such rhetoric. The world, figuratively speaking, is not black and white. It's not even shades of gray. It's the full spectrum of colors, all in light to dark. Rhetoric labeling people in all-or-nothing terms serves no useful purpose other than dehumanizing others in preparation of doing unspeakable things to them. I'm not interested in doing any of that. I may not agree with you, but I don't hate you. In fact, I hope you, your family and friends, wherever you are, have a beautiful day today, and that you can forget about all this other stuff and just be with the people you care about for a while.
And turn a blind eye to the atrocities in Palestine. Hypocrisy at its finest.
BeIt's not about justice or attrocities (as if the US, who has sponsored, done, and still sponsors and does all kinds of attrocities, even downrigh i8t invations and occupations) cared.
It's about the trade war.
Simply put, DJI does too well, and can get even bigger in the future. They'd rather have an American company get that market...
That is pretty much it.
The US has gone on record numerous times (sometimes unwittingly) as fearing being displaced by China as it sees it as a threat to US technological hegemony and influence.
That China is making huge technological strides and is likely to become a technological powerhouse is a widely accepted scenario.
However, the 'threat' isn't only Chinese. The EU also has a stated goal of becoming technologically independent (or in other words, not reliant on US influence, control, and restrictions).
As with China, those plans were in place long before Trump became president.
All Trump has achieved is to push governments to accelerate those independence plans, worsening the situation for US companies.
The US is now seen as unreliable and, logically, companies around the world (and governments) resent being 'told' what to do via executive orders issued under the guise of 'national security' simply because their companies (or their products) use a percentage of US technology.
These actions are mainly 'protectionist' in intent but are only serving to harm US technology interests in the long term.
Perhaps it is China's intellectual property theft that is the basis of its military expansionism that is the issue, and why the West is less willing to cede technological leadership to China. Perhaps it is China's "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy". There are numerous reasons that China is now seen as a threat.
You and you ilk believe that China has peaceful intentions; I do not. There is quite a bit of evidence to the effect that China's militarization is a threat to the West, and the current Rules of Order established at the end of WWII. These rules, for the most part, are the reason that the Global Economy works as well as it does.
Heck, even the EU's position on China is changing to recognize the threat that China poses, and at the same time, is more friendly to Taiwan.
However, the change in public opinion toward China is filtering through to Europe's leadership. Fallon believes that in countries which have historically been in favor of economic partnerships with China like France and Hungary -- which both have elections soon -- political opposition will be able to leverage public hostility.
The danger isn't that there won't be a coherent China strategy, but that a plan gets watered down so much it isn't worth the paper it's written on.
In the case of the Global Gateway, that could be private sector companies not keen to fund huge infrastructure projects that don't make money. On security, it might be that countries in southern Europe enjoy Chinese money and don't geographically see it as a threat. ***that sounds like your country of Spain...
For now, China hawks are happy that Brussels is attempting to stop trampling over its lofty ambitions of promoting democracy, human rights, and free trade, blinded by the Chinese yuan signs in their eyes.
What remains to be seen is whether the EU's own red tape and processes suffocate that ambition, and if once the pandemic begins to recede, Europe returns to its former bad habit of turning a blind eye, even when doing so hurts its own long-term interests.
The tide is turning against China's expansionism, and it isn't soon enough.
What did any of that have to do with what I said?
I'm talking about official statements, not opinion pieces.
William Barr said the US had to do something to stop Huawei and it's dominance in 5G for fear of "surrendering supremecy" to China.
He noted that 5G would form the backbone of countless new technologies and China was already making great strides in developing them.
As the US has nothing of its own to counter that situation, he even suggested the US should consider taking a controlling stake in Ericcson. Another wacky statement seeing as studies suggest that, even under 'sanctions', Huawei in 2021 had business in 5G that is equivalent to that of Ericcson and Nokia combined. Not to mention that the US has continually criticised alleged subsidies to Huawei from government. Huawei itself debunked those claims and it hasn't been brought up since.
The US has also used the terms destroy, kill and choke to refer to its stance on Huawei.
And if you bother to pay attention, even the latest, ehem, 'in depth' investigation on Huawei by Bloomberg, manages to spend much of the latter part of the article blowing holes in its own claims!
There's a lot of clutching at straws going on and desperate moves, but the CEO of ASML made things clear. The US approach will fail.
I have stated many times, that telecom is critical infrastructure, a National Security issue, and had been a concern of the U.S since the Obama Administration. That Huawei is notably working directly with the PRC to provide surveillance of minorities was found much later.
Evidently, people don't believe Huawei nor the PRC, and have made demands on their governments to mitigate that my restricting or outright banning Huawei infrastructure. Now that Merkel is out, I expect Germany to be much tougher on China as well.
As for ASML, the U.S. continues to deny a license to sell leading edge devices to China;
I’ve written several Seeking Alpha articles about China’s equipment industry which, after a decade of attempts, have less than a 5% share of the overall equipment market, according to The Information Network's report entitled "Global Semiconductor Equipment: Markets, Market Share, Market Forecasts." So this means that Taiwan will need to buy equipment from Japan, equipment from Mainland China, or build their own. But recall that in mid-2019, Japan embargoed semiconductor materials to Taiwan, particularly e-beam photoresist. I discussed this in a July 15, 2019 Seeking Alpha article entitled “Sorry, But Japan's Material Embargo Won't Help Micron Technology.”
The overreach of the sanctions by the U.S. government, started by President Trump, have been expanded under President Biden. But like it or not, the U.S. spends a lot of money protecting countries like Korea and Japan. Currently, there are approximately 55,000 U.S. troops in Japan and 26,500 U.S. troops in South Korea.
In 2019, the U.S. and South Korea negotiated an agreement calling for South Korea to contribute approximately $893 million. Japan’s current support amounts to approximately $1.7 billion. By comparison, the Department of Defense currently estimates the total cost of maintaining the U.S. presence in South Korea and Japan at $4.5 billion and $5.7 billion, respectively.
And if sanctions and blacklists function as another strategy in protecting foreign countries, so be it. As China continues to advance militarily and technologically, these sanctions will only be broader based. This will only put sales of DUV lithography systems further in jeopardy and negatively impact ASML.
Erm, I can only imagine that you are being wilfully obtuse.
Yes. Huawei works directly with the Chinese government. It is an infrastructure supplier!
Huawei works directly with all its customers. Does that surprise you?
'The US is protecting so and so'. You mean like it protected Afghanistan and Iraq?
Nope! The US has strategic interests. That's it. When those strategic interests change, so so does the 'protection' mantra.
Let me say it straight. ASML is a business that wants to sell equipment to China. It is not happy that an external sovereign state is meddling in its ability to trade and it's CEO has spoken out on the subject many times.
He knows that this external limitation will lead to China creating homegrown competitors to his business interests.
You stepped around the facts with yet more opinion pieces and simply roll on with your anti China rhetoric.
The US doesn't want DJI to prosper, just like it didn't want Huawei to prosper.
Going about it the way they have, will not change anything. On the contrary, it will speed up the demise of US technological interests.
His line of thoughts are based on the right wing anti-China ideology. Their premise is China is US adversary. US doing similar things it is ok because it is us. China doing similar thins is not ok because China is an adversary thus a threat. Trump administration used four years to portray China as an adversary. US-China relation is in a downward trend because of this premise. Biden is unwilling or unable to change this sentiment. His hands are tied by this premise. Worse of all, China under Xi has decided to respond directly toward the attacks originated by this premise.
You are correct about his right wing/Trumpian approach: Anybody who stands in the way of their agenda is considered a "bad guy" to be destroyed by whatever means necessary and available.
As George Bush famously (or infamously?) said: "You're either for me Or you're agin' me".
There is no nuance or shades of grey in that world. Pure black & white, good vs bad.
Just dropping in for a moment on this interesting thread. I will point out here that you have been quite vigorously labeling anyone who offers any sort of criticism of the PRC as "China Haters," and using that label to dismiss any and all criticisms of Chinese policies or actions.
I will also point out that on this thread and elsewhere on this site, you have been offering fairly vigorous criticisms of the United States, which, thus far, you are still completely free to do here in the United States. Some of your criticisms of the US are even valid. Here in this country, it is possible to criticize the US government without being an "America Hater," but rather as someone who loves the country and wants it to live up to its ideals. Indeed, self-improvement is very hard to achieve if one claims to be perfect and above criticism. So these observations can be offered in this country to only with impunity, but as an act of patriotism.
Finally, I will note that in your vigorous dismissal of all those you label in black & white as "China Haters," you appear to be joining in a chorus of agreement with another person who posts here, seemingly writing from the perspective of the PRC itself. That person has written rather nonchalantly that China surveils all of its people 'for security,' not just minorities, and has written elsewhere on this site that the role of government includes 'dealing with' people who dissent and do not conform.
I would encourage you to reflect on these things. It would seem, were you instead to be an inhabitant of the PRC and writing similarly vigorous criticisms of that government from within, according to your online friend here, that you would be under surveillance 'for security,' and that it would be appropriate for your vigorous criticisms and dissent to lead to a point where you would be 'dealt with' by your government.
Recognizing these contrasts and being concerned about them does not make you, me or anyone else a "China Hater." China has an incredibly long history, a fascinating culture and literally billions of wonderful, beautiful people. Criticizing certain aspects of its governance is not hating China at all.
Wrong! Your logic is wrong. China hater refers to non-Chinese. Chinese that bash China is not called China hater. Thus your logic that George is not called America hater is wrong. You think he is an American. On the other, you hate me because in your heart you don't consider I am a American citizen.
I'm not wrong. George has indicated in the past that he is an American. I suppose he could be lying, but I'll take him for his word on that. You could be an American citizen, but the context of things that you've written here suggests otherwise. I could be wrong about that, and you are free to indicate that you are, you aren't or not to say at all. Either way, I don't hate you. Why would I hate you? There's no need for that. Disagreement neither requires nor indicates hate. Should I assume because you have offered criticisms of the US that you hate the United States? I didn't assume that, but you're free to make it clear that you do or you don't hate the US, or to say nothing at all about that.
The point is, George's comment about some other people seeing things in only black and white was ironic, given that he himself has been very busy labeling people in broad strokes with black and white accusations. None of that is necessary. If we want fewer wars and less fighting (and I certainly do), it would help to avoid such rhetoric. The world, figuratively speaking, is not black and white. It's not even shades of gray. It's the full spectrum of colors, all in light to dark. Rhetoric labeling people in all-or-nothing terms serves no useful purpose other than dehumanizing others in preparation of doing unspeakable things to them. I'm not interested in doing any of that. I may not agree with you, but I don't hate you. In fact, I hope you, your family and friends, wherever you are, have a beautiful day today, and that you can forget about all this other stuff and just be with the people you care about for a while.
You are wrong because you think he can be called America hater. I have explained it to you in simple words. You failed to understand it.
Your anther failed logic is saying I cannot defend China. This can be valid only if China is American adversary. This is true in the minds of China haters. But it is never officially declared. Thus I think I can say whatever I know is fact about China against China haters evil intention.
And turn a blind eye to the atrocities in Palestine. Hypocrisy at its finest.
BeIt's not about justice or attrocities (as if the US, who has sponsored, done, and still sponsors and does all kinds of attrocities, even downrigh i8t invations and occupations) cared.
It's about the trade war.
Simply put, DJI does too well, and can get even bigger in the future. They'd rather have an American company get that market...
That is pretty much it.
The US has gone on record numerous times (sometimes unwittingly) as fearing being displaced by China as it sees it as a threat to US technological hegemony and influence.
That China is making huge technological strides and is likely to become a technological powerhouse is a widely accepted scenario.
However, the 'threat' isn't only Chinese. The EU also has a stated goal of becoming technologically independent (or in other words, not reliant on US influence, control, and restrictions).
As with China, those plans were in place long before Trump became president.
All Trump has achieved is to push governments to accelerate those independence plans, worsening the situation for US companies.
The US is now seen as unreliable and, logically, companies around the world (and governments) resent being 'told' what to do via executive orders issued under the guise of 'national security' simply because their companies (or their products) use a percentage of US technology.
These actions are mainly 'protectionist' in intent but are only serving to harm US technology interests in the long term.
Perhaps it is China's intellectual property theft that is the basis of its military expansionism that is the issue, and why the West is less willing to cede technological leadership to China. Perhaps it is China's "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy". There are numerous reasons that China is now seen as a threat.
You and you ilk believe that China has peaceful intentions; I do not. There is quite a bit of evidence to the effect that China's militarization is a threat to the West, and the current Rules of Order established at the end of WWII. These rules, for the most part, are the reason that the Global Economy works as well as it does.
Heck, even the EU's position on China is changing to recognize the threat that China poses, and at the same time, is more friendly to Taiwan.
However, the change in public opinion toward China is filtering through to Europe's leadership. Fallon believes that in countries which have historically been in favor of economic partnerships with China like France and Hungary -- which both have elections soon -- political opposition will be able to leverage public hostility.
The danger isn't that there won't be a coherent China strategy, but that a plan gets watered down so much it isn't worth the paper it's written on.
In the case of the Global Gateway, that could be private sector companies not keen to fund huge infrastructure projects that don't make money. On security, it might be that countries in southern Europe enjoy Chinese money and don't geographically see it as a threat. ***that sounds like your country of Spain...
For now, China hawks are happy that Brussels is attempting to stop trampling over its lofty ambitions of promoting democracy, human rights, and free trade, blinded by the Chinese yuan signs in their eyes.
What remains to be seen is whether the EU's own red tape and processes suffocate that ambition, and if once the pandemic begins to recede, Europe returns to its former bad habit of turning a blind eye, even when doing so hurts its own long-term interests.
The tide is turning against China's expansionism, and it isn't soon enough.
What did any of that have to do with what I said?
I'm talking about official statements, not opinion pieces.
William Barr said the US had to do something to stop Huawei and it's dominance in 5G for fear of "surrendering supremecy" to China.
He noted that 5G would form the backbone of countless new technologies and China was already making great strides in developing them.
As the US has nothing of its own to counter that situation, he even suggested the US should consider taking a controlling stake in Ericcson. Another wacky statement seeing as studies suggest that, even under 'sanctions', Huawei in 2021 had business in 5G that is equivalent to that of Ericcson and Nokia combined. Not to mention that the US has continually criticised alleged subsidies to Huawei from government. Huawei itself debunked those claims and it hasn't been brought up since.
The US has also used the terms destroy, kill and choke to refer to its stance on Huawei.
And if you bother to pay attention, even the latest, ehem, 'in depth' investigation on Huawei by Bloomberg, manages to spend much of the latter part of the article blowing holes in its own claims!
There's a lot of clutching at straws going on and desperate moves, but the CEO of ASML made things clear. The US approach will fail.
I have stated many times, that telecom is critical infrastructure, a National Security issue, and had been a concern of the U.S since the Obama Administration. That Huawei is notably working directly with the PRC to provide surveillance of minorities was found much later.
Evidently, people don't believe Huawei nor the PRC, and have made demands on their governments to mitigate that my restricting or outright banning Huawei infrastructure. Now that Merkel is out, I expect Germany to be much tougher on China as well.
As for ASML, the U.S. continues to deny a license to sell leading edge devices to China;
I’ve written several Seeking Alpha articles about China’s equipment industry which, after a decade of attempts, have less than a 5% share of the overall equipment market, according to The Information Network's report entitled "Global Semiconductor Equipment: Markets, Market Share, Market Forecasts." So this means that Taiwan will need to buy equipment from Japan, equipment from Mainland China, or build their own. But recall that in mid-2019, Japan embargoed semiconductor materials to Taiwan, particularly e-beam photoresist. I discussed this in a July 15, 2019 Seeking Alpha article entitled “Sorry, But Japan's Material Embargo Won't Help Micron Technology.”
The overreach of the sanctions by the U.S. government, started by President Trump, have been expanded under President Biden. But like it or not, the U.S. spends a lot of money protecting countries like Korea and Japan. Currently, there are approximately 55,000 U.S. troops in Japan and 26,500 U.S. troops in South Korea.
In 2019, the U.S. and South Korea negotiated an agreement calling for South Korea to contribute approximately $893 million. Japan’s current support amounts to approximately $1.7 billion. By comparison, the Department of Defense currently estimates the total cost of maintaining the U.S. presence in South Korea and Japan at $4.5 billion and $5.7 billion, respectively.
And if sanctions and blacklists function as another strategy in protecting foreign countries, so be it. As China continues to advance militarily and technologically, these sanctions will only be broader based. This will only put sales of DUV lithography systems further in jeopardy and negatively impact ASML.
Erm, I can only imagine that you are being wilfully obtuse.
Yes. Huawei works directly with the Chinese government. It is an infrastructure supplier!
Huawei works directly with all its customers. Does that surprise you?
'The US is protecting so and so'. You mean like it protected Afghanistan and Iraq?
Nope! The US has strategic interests. That's it. When those strategic interests change, so so does the 'protection' mantra.
Let me say it straight. ASML is a business that wants to sell equipment to China. It is not happy that an external sovereign state is meddling in its ability to trade and it's CEO has spoken out on the subject many times.
He knows that this external limitation will lead to China creating homegrown competitors to his business interests.
You stepped around the facts with yet more opinion pieces and simply roll on with your anti China rhetoric.
The US doesn't want DJI to prosper, just like it didn't want Huawei to prosper.
Going about it the way they have, will not change anything. On the contrary, it will speed up the demise of US technological interests.
His line of thoughts are based on the right wing anti-China ideology. Their premise is China is US adversary. US doing similar things it is ok because it is us. China doing similar thins is not ok because China is an adversary thus a threat. Trump administration used four years to portray China as an adversary. US-China relation is in a downward trend because of this premise. Biden is unwilling or unable to change this sentiment. His hands are tied by this premise. Worse of all, China under Xi has decided to respond directly toward the attacks originated by this premise.
You are correct about his right wing/Trumpian approach: Anybody who stands in the way of their agenda is considered a "bad guy" to be destroyed by whatever means necessary and available.
As George Bush famously (or infamously?) said: "You're either for me Or you're agin' me".
There is no nuance or shades of grey in that world. Pure black & white, good vs bad.
I shouldn't have to reiterate this, but China's human rights violations are concerning to Liberals, Progressives, Conservatives and Trumpists, hence why polls throughout the Western world are so negative on the PRC.
You can attempt to distract from that fact, but the trend is even more negative for the PRC due to militarization that China is engaged in.
Trump started the whole thing in order to attack China -- because that's what he does with any and all who compete against him. Because some fools jumped on that band wagon and continue riding it down the hill doesn't change that it was and is nothing more than a standard Trumpian smear campaign.
Liberals and progressives tend to be better educated than the typical Trump Deplorable. One would think they would be more concerned about real atrocities and human rights violations being committed in and by this country rather than perpetuating a smear campaign based on half truths against a country half way around the world.
What is really keeping this farce going is same thing that killed 600,000 Iraqis: The "Freedom and Democracy" mantra -- otherwise known as "Cold War #2". Ideology running out of control kills. Aside from the moral depravity of it, we simply can't afford it: our infrastructure is badly out of date and crumbling and we are running massive deficits since our invasion of Iraq -- none of which is anybody's fault but ours. We simply cannot afford to start anymore wars.
Feb, 2020, covid-19 virus is spreading to Europe. Trump launched tariff war with China in Jan, 2018. He appointed Pompeo as US Secretary of State in April, 2018 replacing Tillerson. Pompeo started numerous China attacks including force closing China Houston office, proclaiming Taiwan is not part of China, touring Europe asking allies to stay away from China. Trump was anxious of his re-election. He chose to downplay the threat of virus. As a result the virus came to US through Europe and spread rapidly in mid March, 2020. When he left the office in Jam, 2021, over 600,000 Americans have died.
As a result the virus came to US through Europe and spread rapidly in mid March, 2020. When he left the office in Jam, 2021, over 600,000 Americans have died.
Your statement is inaccurate at best, and a complete lie at worst. COVID 19 arrived first on the West Coast. That is not in dispute.
And turn a blind eye to the atrocities in Palestine. Hypocrisy at its finest.
BeIt's not about justice or attrocities (as if the US, who has sponsored, done, and still sponsors and does all kinds of attrocities, even downrigh i8t invations and occupations) cared.
It's about the trade war.
Simply put, DJI does too well, and can get even bigger in the future. They'd rather have an American company get that market...
That is pretty much it.
The US has gone on record numerous times (sometimes unwittingly) as fearing being displaced by China as it sees it as a threat to US technological hegemony and influence.
That China is making huge technological strides and is likely to become a technological powerhouse is a widely accepted scenario.
However, the 'threat' isn't only Chinese. The EU also has a stated goal of becoming technologically independent (or in other words, not reliant on US influence, control, and restrictions).
As with China, those plans were in place long before Trump became president.
All Trump has achieved is to push governments to accelerate those independence plans, worsening the situation for US companies.
The US is now seen as unreliable and, logically, companies around the world (and governments) resent being 'told' what to do via executive orders issued under the guise of 'national security' simply because their companies (or their products) use a percentage of US technology.
These actions are mainly 'protectionist' in intent but are only serving to harm US technology interests in the long term.
Perhaps it is China's intellectual property theft that is the basis of its military expansionism that is the issue, and why the West is less willing to cede technological leadership to China. Perhaps it is China's "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy". There are numerous reasons that China is now seen as a threat.
You and you ilk believe that China has peaceful intentions; I do not. There is quite a bit of evidence to the effect that China's militarization is a threat to the West, and the current Rules of Order established at the end of WWII. These rules, for the most part, are the reason that the Global Economy works as well as it does.
Heck, even the EU's position on China is changing to recognize the threat that China poses, and at the same time, is more friendly to Taiwan.
However, the change in public opinion toward China is filtering through to Europe's leadership. Fallon believes that in countries which have historically been in favor of economic partnerships with China like France and Hungary -- which both have elections soon -- political opposition will be able to leverage public hostility.
The danger isn't that there won't be a coherent China strategy, but that a plan gets watered down so much it isn't worth the paper it's written on.
In the case of the Global Gateway, that could be private sector companies not keen to fund huge infrastructure projects that don't make money. On security, it might be that countries in southern Europe enjoy Chinese money and don't geographically see it as a threat. ***that sounds like your country of Spain...
For now, China hawks are happy that Brussels is attempting to stop trampling over its lofty ambitions of promoting democracy, human rights, and free trade, blinded by the Chinese yuan signs in their eyes.
What remains to be seen is whether the EU's own red tape and processes suffocate that ambition, and if once the pandemic begins to recede, Europe returns to its former bad habit of turning a blind eye, even when doing so hurts its own long-term interests.
The tide is turning against China's expansionism, and it isn't soon enough.
What did any of that have to do with what I said?
I'm talking about official statements, not opinion pieces.
William Barr said the US had to do something to stop Huawei and it's dominance in 5G for fear of "surrendering supremecy" to China.
He noted that 5G would form the backbone of countless new technologies and China was already making great strides in developing them.
As the US has nothing of its own to counter that situation, he even suggested the US should consider taking a controlling stake in Ericcson. Another wacky statement seeing as studies suggest that, even under 'sanctions', Huawei in 2021 had business in 5G that is equivalent to that of Ericcson and Nokia combined. Not to mention that the US has continually criticised alleged subsidies to Huawei from government. Huawei itself debunked those claims and it hasn't been brought up since.
The US has also used the terms destroy, kill and choke to refer to its stance on Huawei.
And if you bother to pay attention, even the latest, ehem, 'in depth' investigation on Huawei by Bloomberg, manages to spend much of the latter part of the article blowing holes in its own claims!
There's a lot of clutching at straws going on and desperate moves, but the CEO of ASML made things clear. The US approach will fail.
I have stated many times, that telecom is critical infrastructure, a National Security issue, and had been a concern of the U.S since the Obama Administration. That Huawei is notably working directly with the PRC to provide surveillance of minorities was found much later.
Evidently, people don't believe Huawei nor the PRC, and have made demands on their governments to mitigate that my restricting or outright banning Huawei infrastructure. Now that Merkel is out, I expect Germany to be much tougher on China as well.
As for ASML, the U.S. continues to deny a license to sell leading edge devices to China;
I’ve written several Seeking Alpha articles about China’s equipment industry which, after a decade of attempts, have less than a 5% share of the overall equipment market, according to The Information Network's report entitled "Global Semiconductor Equipment: Markets, Market Share, Market Forecasts." So this means that Taiwan will need to buy equipment from Japan, equipment from Mainland China, or build their own. But recall that in mid-2019, Japan embargoed semiconductor materials to Taiwan, particularly e-beam photoresist. I discussed this in a July 15, 2019 Seeking Alpha article entitled “Sorry, But Japan's Material Embargo Won't Help Micron Technology.”
The overreach of the sanctions by the U.S. government, started by President Trump, have been expanded under President Biden. But like it or not, the U.S. spends a lot of money protecting countries like Korea and Japan. Currently, there are approximately 55,000 U.S. troops in Japan and 26,500 U.S. troops in South Korea.
In 2019, the U.S. and South Korea negotiated an agreement calling for South Korea to contribute approximately $893 million. Japan’s current support amounts to approximately $1.7 billion. By comparison, the Department of Defense currently estimates the total cost of maintaining the U.S. presence in South Korea and Japan at $4.5 billion and $5.7 billion, respectively.
And if sanctions and blacklists function as another strategy in protecting foreign countries, so be it. As China continues to advance militarily and technologically, these sanctions will only be broader based. This will only put sales of DUV lithography systems further in jeopardy and negatively impact ASML.
Erm, I can only imagine that you are being wilfully obtuse.
Yes. Huawei works directly with the Chinese government. It is an infrastructure supplier!
Huawei works directly with all its customers. Does that surprise you?
'The US is protecting so and so'. You mean like it protected Afghanistan and Iraq?
Nope! The US has strategic interests. That's it. When those strategic interests change, so so does the 'protection' mantra.
Let me say it straight. ASML is a business that wants to sell equipment to China. It is not happy that an external sovereign state is meddling in its ability to trade and it's CEO has spoken out on the subject many times.
He knows that this external limitation will lead to China creating homegrown competitors to his business interests.
You stepped around the facts with yet more opinion pieces and simply roll on with your anti China rhetoric.
The US doesn't want DJI to prosper, just like it didn't want Huawei to prosper.
Going about it the way they have, will not change anything. On the contrary, it will speed up the demise of US technological interests.
His line of thoughts are based on the right wing anti-China ideology. Their premise is China is US adversary. US doing similar things it is ok because it is us. China doing similar thins is not ok because China is an adversary thus a threat. Trump administration used four years to portray China as an adversary. US-China relation is in a downward trend because of this premise. Biden is unwilling or unable to change this sentiment. His hands are tied by this premise. Worse of all, China under Xi has decided to respond directly toward the attacks originated by this premise.
You are correct about his right wing/Trumpian approach: Anybody who stands in the way of their agenda is considered a "bad guy" to be destroyed by whatever means necessary and available.
As George Bush famously (or infamously?) said: "You're either for me Or you're agin' me".
There is no nuance or shades of grey in that world. Pure black & white, good vs bad.
I shouldn't have to reiterate this, but China's human rights violations are concerning to Liberals, Progressives, Conservatives and Trumpists, hence why polls throughout the Western world are so negative on the PRC.
You can attempt to distract from that fact, but the trend is even more negative for the PRC due to militarization that China is engaged in.
Trump started the whole thing in order to attack China -- because that's what he does with any and all who compete against him. Because some fools jumped on that band wagon and continue riding it down the hill doesn't change that it was and is nothing more than a standard Trumpian smear campaign.
Liberals and progressives tend to be better educated than the typical Trump Deplorable. One would think they would be more concerned about real atrocities and human rights violations being committed in and by this country rather than perpetuating a smear campaign based on half truths against a country half way around the world.
What is really keeping this farce going is same thing that killed 600,000 Iraqis: The "Freedom and Democracy" mantra -- otherwise known as "Cold War #2". Ideology running out of control kills. Aside from the moral depravity of it, we simply can't afford it: our infrastructure is badly out of date and crumbling and we are running massive deficits since our invasion of Iraq -- none of which is anybody's fault but ours. We simply cannot afford to start anymore wars.
Feb, 2020, covid-19 virus is spreading to Europe. Trump launched tariff war with China in Jan, 2018. He appointed Pompeo as US Secretary of State in April, 2018 replacing Tillerson. Pompeo started numerous China attacks including force closing China Houston office, proclaiming Taiwan is not part of China, touring Europe asking allies to stay away from China. Trump was anxious of his re-election. He chose to downplay the threat of virus. As a result the virus came to US through Europe and spread rapidly in mid March, 2020. When he left the office in Jam, 2021, over 600,000 Americans have died.
As a result the virus came to US through Europe and spread rapidly in mid March, 2020. When he left the office in Jam, 2021, over 600,000 Americans have died.
Your statement is inaccurate at best, and a complete lie at worst. COVID 19 arrived first on the West Coast. That is not in dispute.
And turn a blind eye to the atrocities in Palestine. Hypocrisy at its finest.
BeIt's not about justice or attrocities (as if the US, who has sponsored, done, and still sponsors and does all kinds of attrocities, even downrigh i8t invations and occupations) cared.
It's about the trade war.
Simply put, DJI does too well, and can get even bigger in the future. They'd rather have an American company get that market...
That is pretty much it.
The US has gone on record numerous times (sometimes unwittingly) as fearing being displaced by China as it sees it as a threat to US technological hegemony and influence.
That China is making huge technological strides and is likely to become a technological powerhouse is a widely accepted scenario.
However, the 'threat' isn't only Chinese. The EU also has a stated goal of becoming technologically independent (or in other words, not reliant on US influence, control, and restrictions).
As with China, those plans were in place long before Trump became president.
All Trump has achieved is to push governments to accelerate those independence plans, worsening the situation for US companies.
The US is now seen as unreliable and, logically, companies around the world (and governments) resent being 'told' what to do via executive orders issued under the guise of 'national security' simply because their companies (or their products) use a percentage of US technology.
These actions are mainly 'protectionist' in intent but are only serving to harm US technology interests in the long term.
Perhaps it is China's intellectual property theft that is the basis of its military expansionism that is the issue, and why the West is less willing to cede technological leadership to China. Perhaps it is China's "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy". There are numerous reasons that China is now seen as a threat.
You and you ilk believe that China has peaceful intentions; I do not. There is quite a bit of evidence to the effect that China's militarization is a threat to the West, and the current Rules of Order established at the end of WWII. These rules, for the most part, are the reason that the Global Economy works as well as it does.
Heck, even the EU's position on China is changing to recognize the threat that China poses, and at the same time, is more friendly to Taiwan.
However, the change in public opinion toward China is filtering through to Europe's leadership. Fallon believes that in countries which have historically been in favor of economic partnerships with China like France and Hungary -- which both have elections soon -- political opposition will be able to leverage public hostility.
The danger isn't that there won't be a coherent China strategy, but that a plan gets watered down so much it isn't worth the paper it's written on.
In the case of the Global Gateway, that could be private sector companies not keen to fund huge infrastructure projects that don't make money. On security, it might be that countries in southern Europe enjoy Chinese money and don't geographically see it as a threat. ***that sounds like your country of Spain...
For now, China hawks are happy that Brussels is attempting to stop trampling over its lofty ambitions of promoting democracy, human rights, and free trade, blinded by the Chinese yuan signs in their eyes.
What remains to be seen is whether the EU's own red tape and processes suffocate that ambition, and if once the pandemic begins to recede, Europe returns to its former bad habit of turning a blind eye, even when doing so hurts its own long-term interests.
The tide is turning against China's expansionism, and it isn't soon enough.
What did any of that have to do with what I said?
I'm talking about official statements, not opinion pieces.
William Barr said the US had to do something to stop Huawei and it's dominance in 5G for fear of "surrendering supremecy" to China.
He noted that 5G would form the backbone of countless new technologies and China was already making great strides in developing them.
As the US has nothing of its own to counter that situation, he even suggested the US should consider taking a controlling stake in Ericcson. Another wacky statement seeing as studies suggest that, even under 'sanctions', Huawei in 2021 had business in 5G that is equivalent to that of Ericcson and Nokia combined. Not to mention that the US has continually criticised alleged subsidies to Huawei from government. Huawei itself debunked those claims and it hasn't been brought up since.
The US has also used the terms destroy, kill and choke to refer to its stance on Huawei.
And if you bother to pay attention, even the latest, ehem, 'in depth' investigation on Huawei by Bloomberg, manages to spend much of the latter part of the article blowing holes in its own claims!
There's a lot of clutching at straws going on and desperate moves, but the CEO of ASML made things clear. The US approach will fail.
I have stated many times, that telecom is critical infrastructure, a National Security issue, and had been a concern of the U.S since the Obama Administration. That Huawei is notably working directly with the PRC to provide surveillance of minorities was found much later.
Evidently, people don't believe Huawei nor the PRC, and have made demands on their governments to mitigate that my restricting or outright banning Huawei infrastructure. Now that Merkel is out, I expect Germany to be much tougher on China as well.
As for ASML, the U.S. continues to deny a license to sell leading edge devices to China;
I’ve written several Seeking Alpha articles about China’s equipment industry which, after a decade of attempts, have less than a 5% share of the overall equipment market, according to The Information Network's report entitled "Global Semiconductor Equipment: Markets, Market Share, Market Forecasts." So this means that Taiwan will need to buy equipment from Japan, equipment from Mainland China, or build their own. But recall that in mid-2019, Japan embargoed semiconductor materials to Taiwan, particularly e-beam photoresist. I discussed this in a July 15, 2019 Seeking Alpha article entitled “Sorry, But Japan's Material Embargo Won't Help Micron Technology.”
The overreach of the sanctions by the U.S. government, started by President Trump, have been expanded under President Biden. But like it or not, the U.S. spends a lot of money protecting countries like Korea and Japan. Currently, there are approximately 55,000 U.S. troops in Japan and 26,500 U.S. troops in South Korea.
In 2019, the U.S. and South Korea negotiated an agreement calling for South Korea to contribute approximately $893 million. Japan’s current support amounts to approximately $1.7 billion. By comparison, the Department of Defense currently estimates the total cost of maintaining the U.S. presence in South Korea and Japan at $4.5 billion and $5.7 billion, respectively.
And if sanctions and blacklists function as another strategy in protecting foreign countries, so be it. As China continues to advance militarily and technologically, these sanctions will only be broader based. This will only put sales of DUV lithography systems further in jeopardy and negatively impact ASML.
Erm, I can only imagine that you are being wilfully obtuse.
Yes. Huawei works directly with the Chinese government. It is an infrastructure supplier!
Huawei works directly with all its customers. Does that surprise you?
'The US is protecting so and so'. You mean like it protected Afghanistan and Iraq?
Nope! The US has strategic interests. That's it. When those strategic interests change, so so does the 'protection' mantra.
Let me say it straight. ASML is a business that wants to sell equipment to China. It is not happy that an external sovereign state is meddling in its ability to trade and it's CEO has spoken out on the subject many times.
He knows that this external limitation will lead to China creating homegrown competitors to his business interests.
You stepped around the facts with yet more opinion pieces and simply roll on with your anti China rhetoric.
The US doesn't want DJI to prosper, just like it didn't want Huawei to prosper.
Going about it the way they have, will not change anything. On the contrary, it will speed up the demise of US technological interests.
His line of thoughts are based on the right wing anti-China ideology. Their premise is China is US adversary. US doing similar things it is ok because it is us. China doing similar thins is not ok because China is an adversary thus a threat. Trump administration used four years to portray China as an adversary. US-China relation is in a downward trend because of this premise. Biden is unwilling or unable to change this sentiment. His hands are tied by this premise. Worse of all, China under Xi has decided to respond directly toward the attacks originated by this premise.
You are correct about his right wing/Trumpian approach: Anybody who stands in the way of their agenda is considered a "bad guy" to be destroyed by whatever means necessary and available.
As George Bush famously (or infamously?) said: "You're either for me Or you're agin' me".
There is no nuance or shades of grey in that world. Pure black & white, good vs bad.
Just dropping in for a moment on this interesting thread. I will point out here that you have been quite vigorously labeling anyone who offers any sort of criticism of the PRC as "China Haters," and using that label to dismiss any and all criticisms of Chinese policies or actions.
I will also point out that on this thread and elsewhere on this site, you have been offering fairly vigorous criticisms of the United States, which, thus far, you are still completely free to do here in the United States. Some of your criticisms of the US are even valid. Here in this country, it is possible to criticize the US government without being an "America Hater," but rather as someone who loves the country and wants it to live up to its ideals. Indeed, self-improvement is very hard to achieve if one claims to be perfect and above criticism. So these observations can be offered in this country to only with impunity, but as an act of patriotism.
Finally, I will note that in your vigorous dismissal of all those you label in black & white as "China Haters," you appear to be joining in a chorus of agreement with another person who posts here, seemingly writing from the perspective of the PRC itself. That person has written rather nonchalantly that China surveils all of its people 'for security,' not just minorities, and has written elsewhere on this site that the role of government includes 'dealing with' people who dissent and do not conform.
I would encourage you to reflect on these things. It would seem, were you instead to be an inhabitant of the PRC and writing similarly vigorous criticisms of that government from within, according to your online friend here, that you would be under surveillance 'for security,' and that it would be appropriate for your vigorous criticisms and dissent to lead to a point where you would be 'dealt with' by your government.
Recognizing these contrasts and being concerned about them does not make you, me or anyone else a "China Hater." China has an incredibly long history, a fascinating culture and literally billions of wonderful, beautiful people. Criticizing certain aspects of its governance is not hating China at all.
Wrong! Your logic is wrong. China hater refers to non-Chinese. Chinese that bash China is not called China hater. Thus your logic that George is not called America hater is wrong. You think he is an American. On the other, you hate me because in your heart you don't consider I am a American citizen.
I'm not wrong. George has indicated in the past that he is an American. I suppose he could be lying, but I'll take him for his word on that. You could be an American citizen, but the context of things that you've written here suggests otherwise. I could be wrong about that, and you are free to indicate that you are, you aren't or not to say at all. Either way, I don't hate you. Why would I hate you? There's no need for that. Disagreement neither requires nor indicates hate. Should I assume because you have offered criticisms of the US that you hate the United States? I didn't assume that, but you're free to make it clear that you do or you don't hate the US, or to say nothing at all about that.
The point is, George's comment about some other people seeing things in only black and white was ironic, given that he himself has been very busy labeling people in broad strokes with black and white accusations. None of that is necessary. If we want fewer wars and less fighting (and I certainly do), it would help to avoid such rhetoric. The world, figuratively speaking, is not black and white. It's not even shades of gray. It's the full spectrum of colors, all in light to dark. Rhetoric labeling people in all-or-nothing terms serves no useful purpose other than dehumanizing others in preparation of doing unspeakable things to them. I'm not interested in doing any of that. I may not agree with you, but I don't hate you. In fact, I hope you, your family and friends, wherever you are, have a beautiful day today, and that you can forget about all this other stuff and just be with the people you care about for a while.
You are wrong because you think he can be called America hater. I have explained it to you in simple words. You failed to understand it.
Your anther failed logic is saying I cannot defend China. This can be valid only if China is American adversary. This is true in the minds of China haters. But it is never officially declared. Thus I think I can say whatever I know is fact about China against China haters evil intention.
I understood it. I don't agree with your defining of the use of terminology.
I never said anything about whether or not you can "defend China," so my logic about that cannot have failed. Because I never said any such thing, there is no logic to have failed. You can say whatever you want about China. Your continued use of language like "China haters" and "evil intention" is exactly the rhetoric I referred to above that is only useful in dehumanizing others so you can fight with them. I hope that's not what you mean to do. There's no need for any of that.
And turn a blind eye to the atrocities in Palestine. Hypocrisy at its finest.
BeIt's not about justice or attrocities (as if the US, who has sponsored, done, and still sponsors and does all kinds of attrocities, even downrigh i8t invations and occupations) cared.
It's about the trade war.
Simply put, DJI does too well, and can get even bigger in the future. They'd rather have an American company get that market...
That is pretty much it.
The US has gone on record numerous times (sometimes unwittingly) as fearing being displaced by China as it sees it as a threat to US technological hegemony and influence.
That China is making huge technological strides and is likely to become a technological powerhouse is a widely accepted scenario.
However, the 'threat' isn't only Chinese. The EU also has a stated goal of becoming technologically independent (or in other words, not reliant on US influence, control, and restrictions).
As with China, those plans were in place long before Trump became president.
All Trump has achieved is to push governments to accelerate those independence plans, worsening the situation for US companies.
The US is now seen as unreliable and, logically, companies around the world (and governments) resent being 'told' what to do via executive orders issued under the guise of 'national security' simply because their companies (or their products) use a percentage of US technology.
These actions are mainly 'protectionist' in intent but are only serving to harm US technology interests in the long term.
Perhaps it is China's intellectual property theft that is the basis of its military expansionism that is the issue, and why the West is less willing to cede technological leadership to China. Perhaps it is China's "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy". There are numerous reasons that China is now seen as a threat.
You and you ilk believe that China has peaceful intentions; I do not. There is quite a bit of evidence to the effect that China's militarization is a threat to the West, and the current Rules of Order established at the end of WWII. These rules, for the most part, are the reason that the Global Economy works as well as it does.
Heck, even the EU's position on China is changing to recognize the threat that China poses, and at the same time, is more friendly to Taiwan.
However, the change in public opinion toward China is filtering through to Europe's leadership. Fallon believes that in countries which have historically been in favor of economic partnerships with China like France and Hungary -- which both have elections soon -- political opposition will be able to leverage public hostility.
The danger isn't that there won't be a coherent China strategy, but that a plan gets watered down so much it isn't worth the paper it's written on.
In the case of the Global Gateway, that could be private sector companies not keen to fund huge infrastructure projects that don't make money. On security, it might be that countries in southern Europe enjoy Chinese money and don't geographically see it as a threat. ***that sounds like your country of Spain...
For now, China hawks are happy that Brussels is attempting to stop trampling over its lofty ambitions of promoting democracy, human rights, and free trade, blinded by the Chinese yuan signs in their eyes.
What remains to be seen is whether the EU's own red tape and processes suffocate that ambition, and if once the pandemic begins to recede, Europe returns to its former bad habit of turning a blind eye, even when doing so hurts its own long-term interests.
The tide is turning against China's expansionism, and it isn't soon enough.
What did any of that have to do with what I said?
I'm talking about official statements, not opinion pieces.
William Barr said the US had to do something to stop Huawei and it's dominance in 5G for fear of "surrendering supremecy" to China.
He noted that 5G would form the backbone of countless new technologies and China was already making great strides in developing them.
As the US has nothing of its own to counter that situation, he even suggested the US should consider taking a controlling stake in Ericcson. Another wacky statement seeing as studies suggest that, even under 'sanctions', Huawei in 2021 had business in 5G that is equivalent to that of Ericcson and Nokia combined. Not to mention that the US has continually criticised alleged subsidies to Huawei from government. Huawei itself debunked those claims and it hasn't been brought up since.
The US has also used the terms destroy, kill and choke to refer to its stance on Huawei.
And if you bother to pay attention, even the latest, ehem, 'in depth' investigation on Huawei by Bloomberg, manages to spend much of the latter part of the article blowing holes in its own claims!
There's a lot of clutching at straws going on and desperate moves, but the CEO of ASML made things clear. The US approach will fail.
I have stated many times, that telecom is critical infrastructure, a National Security issue, and had been a concern of the U.S since the Obama Administration. That Huawei is notably working directly with the PRC to provide surveillance of minorities was found much later.
Evidently, people don't believe Huawei nor the PRC, and have made demands on their governments to mitigate that my restricting or outright banning Huawei infrastructure. Now that Merkel is out, I expect Germany to be much tougher on China as well.
As for ASML, the U.S. continues to deny a license to sell leading edge devices to China;
I’ve written several Seeking Alpha articles about China’s equipment industry which, after a decade of attempts, have less than a 5% share of the overall equipment market, according to The Information Network's report entitled "Global Semiconductor Equipment: Markets, Market Share, Market Forecasts." So this means that Taiwan will need to buy equipment from Japan, equipment from Mainland China, or build their own. But recall that in mid-2019, Japan embargoed semiconductor materials to Taiwan, particularly e-beam photoresist. I discussed this in a July 15, 2019 Seeking Alpha article entitled “Sorry, But Japan's Material Embargo Won't Help Micron Technology.”
The overreach of the sanctions by the U.S. government, started by President Trump, have been expanded under President Biden. But like it or not, the U.S. spends a lot of money protecting countries like Korea and Japan. Currently, there are approximately 55,000 U.S. troops in Japan and 26,500 U.S. troops in South Korea.
In 2019, the U.S. and South Korea negotiated an agreement calling for South Korea to contribute approximately $893 million. Japan’s current support amounts to approximately $1.7 billion. By comparison, the Department of Defense currently estimates the total cost of maintaining the U.S. presence in South Korea and Japan at $4.5 billion and $5.7 billion, respectively.
And if sanctions and blacklists function as another strategy in protecting foreign countries, so be it. As China continues to advance militarily and technologically, these sanctions will only be broader based. This will only put sales of DUV lithography systems further in jeopardy and negatively impact ASML.
Erm, I can only imagine that you are being wilfully obtuse.
Yes. Huawei works directly with the Chinese government. It is an infrastructure supplier!
Huawei works directly with all its customers. Does that surprise you?
'The US is protecting so and so'. You mean like it protected Afghanistan and Iraq?
Nope! The US has strategic interests. That's it. When those strategic interests change, so so does the 'protection' mantra.
Let me say it straight. ASML is a business that wants to sell equipment to China. It is not happy that an external sovereign state is meddling in its ability to trade and it's CEO has spoken out on the subject many times.
He knows that this external limitation will lead to China creating homegrown competitors to his business interests.
You stepped around the facts with yet more opinion pieces and simply roll on with your anti China rhetoric.
The US doesn't want DJI to prosper, just like it didn't want Huawei to prosper.
Going about it the way they have, will not change anything. On the contrary, it will speed up the demise of US technological interests.
His line of thoughts are based on the right wing anti-China ideology. Their premise is China is US adversary. US doing similar things it is ok because it is us. China doing similar thins is not ok because China is an adversary thus a threat. Trump administration used four years to portray China as an adversary. US-China relation is in a downward trend because of this premise. Biden is unwilling or unable to change this sentiment. His hands are tied by this premise. Worse of all, China under Xi has decided to respond directly toward the attacks originated by this premise.
You are correct about his right wing/Trumpian approach: Anybody who stands in the way of their agenda is considered a "bad guy" to be destroyed by whatever means necessary and available.
As George Bush famously (or infamously?) said: "You're either for me Or you're agin' me".
There is no nuance or shades of grey in that world. Pure black & white, good vs bad.
Just dropping in for a moment on this interesting thread. I will point out here that you have been quite vigorously labeling anyone who offers any sort of criticism of the PRC as "China Haters," and using that label to dismiss any and all criticisms of Chinese policies or actions.
I will also point out that on this thread and elsewhere on this site, you have been offering fairly vigorous criticisms of the United States, which, thus far, you are still completely free to do here in the United States. Some of your criticisms of the US are even valid. Here in this country, it is possible to criticize the US government without being an "America Hater," but rather as someone who loves the country and wants it to live up to its ideals. Indeed, self-improvement is very hard to achieve if one claims to be perfect and above criticism. So these observations can be offered in this country to only with impunity, but as an act of patriotism.
Finally, I will note that in your vigorous dismissal of all those you label in black & white as "China Haters," you appear to be joining in a chorus of agreement with another person who posts here, seemingly writing from the perspective of the PRC itself. That person has written rather nonchalantly that China surveils all of its people 'for security,' not just minorities, and has written elsewhere on this site that the role of government includes 'dealing with' people who dissent and do not conform.
I would encourage you to reflect on these things. It would seem, were you instead to be an inhabitant of the PRC and writing similarly vigorous criticisms of that government from within, according to your online friend here, that you would be under surveillance 'for security,' and that it would be appropriate for your vigorous criticisms and dissent to lead to a point where you would be 'dealt with' by your government.
Recognizing these contrasts and being concerned about them does not make you, me or anyone else a "China Hater." China has an incredibly long history, a fascinating culture and literally billions of wonderful, beautiful people. Criticizing certain aspects of its governance is not hating China at all.
Wrong! Your logic is wrong. China hater refers to non-Chinese. Chinese that bash China is not called China hater. Thus your logic that George is not called America hater is wrong. You think he is an American. On the other, you hate me because in your heart you don't consider I am a American citizen.
I'm not wrong. George has indicated in the past that he is an American. I suppose he could be lying, but I'll take him for his word on that. You could be an American citizen, but the context of things that you've written here suggests otherwise. I could be wrong about that, and you are free to indicate that you are, you aren't or not to say at all. Either way, I don't hate you. Why would I hate you? There's no need for that. Disagreement neither requires nor indicates hate. Should I assume because you have offered criticisms of the US that you hate the United States? I didn't assume that, but you're free to make it clear that you do or you don't hate the US, or to say nothing at all about that.
The point is, George's comment about some other people seeing things in only black and white was ironic, given that he himself has been very busy labeling people in broad strokes with black and white accusations. None of that is necessary. If we want fewer wars and less fighting (and I certainly do), it would help to avoid such rhetoric. The world, figuratively speaking, is not black and white. It's not even shades of gray. It's the full spectrum of colors, all in light to dark. Rhetoric labeling people in all-or-nothing terms serves no useful purpose other than dehumanizing others in preparation of doing unspeakable things to them. I'm not interested in doing any of that. I may not agree with you, but I don't hate you. In fact, I hope you, your family and friends, wherever you are, have a beautiful day today, and that you can forget about all this other stuff and just be with the people you care about for a while.
You are wrong because you think he can be called America hater. I have explained it to you in simple words. You failed to understand it.
Your anther failed logic is saying I cannot defend China. This can be valid only if China is American adversary. This is true in the minds of China haters. But it is never officially declared. Thus I think I can say whatever I know is fact about China against China haters evil intention.
I understood it. I don't agree with your defining of the use of terminology.
I never said anything about whether or not you can "defend China," so my logic about that cannot have failed. Because I never said any such thing, there is no logic to have failed. You can say whatever you want about China. Your continued use of language like "China haters" and "evil intention" is exactly the rhetoric I referred to above that is only useful in dehumanizing others so you can fight with them. I hope that's not what you mean to do. There's no need for any of that.
I will give me a more precise definition what is a China hater. Hate is emotional with no rational. China hater is a non-Chinese who bash China out of emotion without proven fact.
And turn a blind eye to the atrocities in Palestine. Hypocrisy at its finest.
BeIt's not about justice or attrocities (as if the US, who has sponsored, done, and still sponsors and does all kinds of attrocities, even downrigh i8t invations and occupations) cared.
It's about the trade war.
Simply put, DJI does too well, and can get even bigger in the future. They'd rather have an American company get that market...
That is pretty much it.
The US has gone on record numerous times (sometimes unwittingly) as fearing being displaced by China as it sees it as a threat to US technological hegemony and influence.
That China is making huge technological strides and is likely to become a technological powerhouse is a widely accepted scenario.
However, the 'threat' isn't only Chinese. The EU also has a stated goal of becoming technologically independent (or in other words, not reliant on US influence, control, and restrictions).
As with China, those plans were in place long before Trump became president.
All Trump has achieved is to push governments to accelerate those independence plans, worsening the situation for US companies.
The US is now seen as unreliable and, logically, companies around the world (and governments) resent being 'told' what to do via executive orders issued under the guise of 'national security' simply because their companies (or their products) use a percentage of US technology.
These actions are mainly 'protectionist' in intent but are only serving to harm US technology interests in the long term.
Perhaps it is China's intellectual property theft that is the basis of its military expansionism that is the issue, and why the West is less willing to cede technological leadership to China. Perhaps it is China's "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy". There are numerous reasons that China is now seen as a threat.
You and you ilk believe that China has peaceful intentions; I do not. There is quite a bit of evidence to the effect that China's militarization is a threat to the West, and the current Rules of Order established at the end of WWII. These rules, for the most part, are the reason that the Global Economy works as well as it does.
Heck, even the EU's position on China is changing to recognize the threat that China poses, and at the same time, is more friendly to Taiwan.
However, the change in public opinion toward China is filtering through to Europe's leadership. Fallon believes that in countries which have historically been in favor of economic partnerships with China like France and Hungary -- which both have elections soon -- political opposition will be able to leverage public hostility.
The danger isn't that there won't be a coherent China strategy, but that a plan gets watered down so much it isn't worth the paper it's written on.
In the case of the Global Gateway, that could be private sector companies not keen to fund huge infrastructure projects that don't make money. On security, it might be that countries in southern Europe enjoy Chinese money and don't geographically see it as a threat. ***that sounds like your country of Spain...
For now, China hawks are happy that Brussels is attempting to stop trampling over its lofty ambitions of promoting democracy, human rights, and free trade, blinded by the Chinese yuan signs in their eyes.
What remains to be seen is whether the EU's own red tape and processes suffocate that ambition, and if once the pandemic begins to recede, Europe returns to its former bad habit of turning a blind eye, even when doing so hurts its own long-term interests.
The tide is turning against China's expansionism, and it isn't soon enough.
What did any of that have to do with what I said?
I'm talking about official statements, not opinion pieces.
William Barr said the US had to do something to stop Huawei and it's dominance in 5G for fear of "surrendering supremecy" to China.
He noted that 5G would form the backbone of countless new technologies and China was already making great strides in developing them.
As the US has nothing of its own to counter that situation, he even suggested the US should consider taking a controlling stake in Ericcson. Another wacky statement seeing as studies suggest that, even under 'sanctions', Huawei in 2021 had business in 5G that is equivalent to that of Ericcson and Nokia combined. Not to mention that the US has continually criticised alleged subsidies to Huawei from government. Huawei itself debunked those claims and it hasn't been brought up since.
The US has also used the terms destroy, kill and choke to refer to its stance on Huawei.
And if you bother to pay attention, even the latest, ehem, 'in depth' investigation on Huawei by Bloomberg, manages to spend much of the latter part of the article blowing holes in its own claims!
There's a lot of clutching at straws going on and desperate moves, but the CEO of ASML made things clear. The US approach will fail.
I have stated many times, that telecom is critical infrastructure, a National Security issue, and had been a concern of the U.S since the Obama Administration. That Huawei is notably working directly with the PRC to provide surveillance of minorities was found much later.
Evidently, people don't believe Huawei nor the PRC, and have made demands on their governments to mitigate that my restricting or outright banning Huawei infrastructure. Now that Merkel is out, I expect Germany to be much tougher on China as well.
As for ASML, the U.S. continues to deny a license to sell leading edge devices to China;
I’ve written several Seeking Alpha articles about China’s equipment industry which, after a decade of attempts, have less than a 5% share of the overall equipment market, according to The Information Network's report entitled "Global Semiconductor Equipment: Markets, Market Share, Market Forecasts." So this means that Taiwan will need to buy equipment from Japan, equipment from Mainland China, or build their own. But recall that in mid-2019, Japan embargoed semiconductor materials to Taiwan, particularly e-beam photoresist. I discussed this in a July 15, 2019 Seeking Alpha article entitled “Sorry, But Japan's Material Embargo Won't Help Micron Technology.”
The overreach of the sanctions by the U.S. government, started by President Trump, have been expanded under President Biden. But like it or not, the U.S. spends a lot of money protecting countries like Korea and Japan. Currently, there are approximately 55,000 U.S. troops in Japan and 26,500 U.S. troops in South Korea.
In 2019, the U.S. and South Korea negotiated an agreement calling for South Korea to contribute approximately $893 million. Japan’s current support amounts to approximately $1.7 billion. By comparison, the Department of Defense currently estimates the total cost of maintaining the U.S. presence in South Korea and Japan at $4.5 billion and $5.7 billion, respectively.
And if sanctions and blacklists function as another strategy in protecting foreign countries, so be it. As China continues to advance militarily and technologically, these sanctions will only be broader based. This will only put sales of DUV lithography systems further in jeopardy and negatively impact ASML.
Erm, I can only imagine that you are being wilfully obtuse.
Yes. Huawei works directly with the Chinese government. It is an infrastructure supplier!
Huawei works directly with all its customers. Does that surprise you?
'The US is protecting so and so'. You mean like it protected Afghanistan and Iraq?
Nope! The US has strategic interests. That's it. When those strategic interests change, so so does the 'protection' mantra.
Let me say it straight. ASML is a business that wants to sell equipment to China. It is not happy that an external sovereign state is meddling in its ability to trade and it's CEO has spoken out on the subject many times.
He knows that this external limitation will lead to China creating homegrown competitors to his business interests.
You stepped around the facts with yet more opinion pieces and simply roll on with your anti China rhetoric.
The US doesn't want DJI to prosper, just like it didn't want Huawei to prosper.
Going about it the way they have, will not change anything. On the contrary, it will speed up the demise of US technological interests.
His line of thoughts are based on the right wing anti-China ideology. Their premise is China is US adversary. US doing similar things it is ok because it is us. China doing similar thins is not ok because China is an adversary thus a threat. Trump administration used four years to portray China as an adversary. US-China relation is in a downward trend because of this premise. Biden is unwilling or unable to change this sentiment. His hands are tied by this premise. Worse of all, China under Xi has decided to respond directly toward the attacks originated by this premise.
You are correct about his right wing/Trumpian approach: Anybody who stands in the way of their agenda is considered a "bad guy" to be destroyed by whatever means necessary and available.
As George Bush famously (or infamously?) said: "You're either for me Or you're agin' me".
There is no nuance or shades of grey in that world. Pure black & white, good vs bad.
Just dropping in for a moment on this interesting thread. I will point out here that you have been quite vigorously labeling anyone who offers any sort of criticism of the PRC as "China Haters," and using that label to dismiss any and all criticisms of Chinese policies or actions.
I will also point out that on this thread and elsewhere on this site, you have been offering fairly vigorous criticisms of the United States, which, thus far, you are still completely free to do here in the United States. Some of your criticisms of the US are even valid. Here in this country, it is possible to criticize the US government without being an "America Hater," but rather as someone who loves the country and wants it to live up to its ideals. Indeed, self-improvement is very hard to achieve if one claims to be perfect and above criticism. So these observations can be offered in this country to only with impunity, but as an act of patriotism.
Finally, I will note that in your vigorous dismissal of all those you label in black & white as "China Haters," you appear to be joining in a chorus of agreement with another person who posts here, seemingly writing from the perspective of the PRC itself. That person has written rather nonchalantly that China surveils all of its people 'for security,' not just minorities, and has written elsewhere on this site that the role of government includes 'dealing with' people who dissent and do not conform.
I would encourage you to reflect on these things. It would seem, were you instead to be an inhabitant of the PRC and writing similarly vigorous criticisms of that government from within, according to your online friend here, that you would be under surveillance 'for security,' and that it would be appropriate for your vigorous criticisms and dissent to lead to a point where you would be 'dealt with' by your government.
Recognizing these contrasts and being concerned about them does not make you, me or anyone else a "China Hater." China has an incredibly long history, a fascinating culture and literally billions of wonderful, beautiful people. Criticizing certain aspects of its governance is not hating China at all.
Wrong! Your logic is wrong. China hater refers to non-Chinese. Chinese that bash China is not called China hater. Thus your logic that George is not called America hater is wrong. You think he is an American. On the other, you hate me because in your heart you don't consider I am a American citizen.
I'm not wrong. George has indicated in the past that he is an American. I suppose he could be lying, but I'll take him for his word on that. You could be an American citizen, but the context of things that you've written here suggests otherwise. I could be wrong about that, and you are free to indicate that you are, you aren't or not to say at all. Either way, I don't hate you. Why would I hate you? There's no need for that. Disagreement neither requires nor indicates hate. Should I assume because you have offered criticisms of the US that you hate the United States? I didn't assume that, but you're free to make it clear that you do or you don't hate the US, or to say nothing at all about that.
The point is, George's comment about some other people seeing things in only black and white was ironic, given that he himself has been very busy labeling people in broad strokes with black and white accusations. None of that is necessary. If we want fewer wars and less fighting (and I certainly do), it would help to avoid such rhetoric. The world, figuratively speaking, is not black and white. It's not even shades of gray. It's the full spectrum of colors, all in light to dark. Rhetoric labeling people in all-or-nothing terms serves no useful purpose other than dehumanizing others in preparation of doing unspeakable things to them. I'm not interested in doing any of that. I may not agree with you, but I don't hate you. In fact, I hope you, your family and friends, wherever you are, have a beautiful day today, and that you can forget about all this other stuff and just be with the people you care about for a while.
You are wrong because you think he can be called America hater. I have explained it to you in simple words. You failed to understand it.
Your anther failed logic is saying I cannot defend China. This can be valid only if China is American adversary. This is true in the minds of China haters. But it is never officially declared. Thus I think I can say whatever I know is fact about China against China haters evil intention.
I understood it. I don't agree with your defining of the use of terminology.
I never said anything about whether or not you can "defend China," so my logic about that cannot have failed. Because I never said any such thing, there is no logic to have failed. You can say whatever you want about China. Your continued use of language like "China haters" and "evil intention" is exactly the rhetoric I referred to above that is only useful in dehumanizing others so you can fight with them. I hope that's not what you mean to do. There's no need for any of that.
I will give me a more precise definition what is a China hater. Hate is emotional with no rational. China hater is a non-Chinese who bash China out of emotion without proven fact.
That's fine, so long as you don't apply that label to someone just because they disagree with you or have some point of criticism about the Chinese government. That "emotional with no rational" thing goes both ways, and isn't particularly useful to understanding one another. It is possible to assert that the other person is wrong and to disagree with them without assuming they are a "hater" or have "evil intent."
And turn a blind eye to the atrocities in Palestine. Hypocrisy at its finest.
BeIt's not about justice or attrocities (as if the US, who has sponsored, done, and still sponsors and does all kinds of attrocities, even downrigh i8t invations and occupations) cared.
It's about the trade war.
Simply put, DJI does too well, and can get even bigger in the future. They'd rather have an American company get that market...
That is pretty much it.
The US has gone on record numerous times (sometimes unwittingly) as fearing being displaced by China as it sees it as a threat to US technological hegemony and influence.
That China is making huge technological strides and is likely to become a technological powerhouse is a widely accepted scenario.
However, the 'threat' isn't only Chinese. The EU also has a stated goal of becoming technologically independent (or in other words, not reliant on US influence, control, and restrictions).
As with China, those plans were in place long before Trump became president.
All Trump has achieved is to push governments to accelerate those independence plans, worsening the situation for US companies.
The US is now seen as unreliable and, logically, companies around the world (and governments) resent being 'told' what to do via executive orders issued under the guise of 'national security' simply because their companies (or their products) use a percentage of US technology.
These actions are mainly 'protectionist' in intent but are only serving to harm US technology interests in the long term.
Perhaps it is China's intellectual property theft that is the basis of its military expansionism that is the issue, and why the West is less willing to cede technological leadership to China. Perhaps it is China's "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy". There are numerous reasons that China is now seen as a threat.
You and you ilk believe that China has peaceful intentions; I do not. There is quite a bit of evidence to the effect that China's militarization is a threat to the West, and the current Rules of Order established at the end of WWII. These rules, for the most part, are the reason that the Global Economy works as well as it does.
Heck, even the EU's position on China is changing to recognize the threat that China poses, and at the same time, is more friendly to Taiwan.
However, the change in public opinion toward China is filtering through to Europe's leadership. Fallon believes that in countries which have historically been in favor of economic partnerships with China like France and Hungary -- which both have elections soon -- political opposition will be able to leverage public hostility.
The danger isn't that there won't be a coherent China strategy, but that a plan gets watered down so much it isn't worth the paper it's written on.
In the case of the Global Gateway, that could be private sector companies not keen to fund huge infrastructure projects that don't make money. On security, it might be that countries in southern Europe enjoy Chinese money and don't geographically see it as a threat. ***that sounds like your country of Spain...
For now, China hawks are happy that Brussels is attempting to stop trampling over its lofty ambitions of promoting democracy, human rights, and free trade, blinded by the Chinese yuan signs in their eyes.
What remains to be seen is whether the EU's own red tape and processes suffocate that ambition, and if once the pandemic begins to recede, Europe returns to its former bad habit of turning a blind eye, even when doing so hurts its own long-term interests.
The tide is turning against China's expansionism, and it isn't soon enough.
What did any of that have to do with what I said?
I'm talking about official statements, not opinion pieces.
William Barr said the US had to do something to stop Huawei and it's dominance in 5G for fear of "surrendering supremecy" to China.
He noted that 5G would form the backbone of countless new technologies and China was already making great strides in developing them.
As the US has nothing of its own to counter that situation, he even suggested the US should consider taking a controlling stake in Ericcson. Another wacky statement seeing as studies suggest that, even under 'sanctions', Huawei in 2021 had business in 5G that is equivalent to that of Ericcson and Nokia combined. Not to mention that the US has continually criticised alleged subsidies to Huawei from government. Huawei itself debunked those claims and it hasn't been brought up since.
The US has also used the terms destroy, kill and choke to refer to its stance on Huawei.
And if you bother to pay attention, even the latest, ehem, 'in depth' investigation on Huawei by Bloomberg, manages to spend much of the latter part of the article blowing holes in its own claims!
There's a lot of clutching at straws going on and desperate moves, but the CEO of ASML made things clear. The US approach will fail.
I have stated many times, that telecom is critical infrastructure, a National Security issue, and had been a concern of the U.S since the Obama Administration. That Huawei is notably working directly with the PRC to provide surveillance of minorities was found much later.
Evidently, people don't believe Huawei nor the PRC, and have made demands on their governments to mitigate that my restricting or outright banning Huawei infrastructure. Now that Merkel is out, I expect Germany to be much tougher on China as well.
As for ASML, the U.S. continues to deny a license to sell leading edge devices to China;
I’ve written several Seeking Alpha articles about China’s equipment industry which, after a decade of attempts, have less than a 5% share of the overall equipment market, according to The Information Network's report entitled "Global Semiconductor Equipment: Markets, Market Share, Market Forecasts." So this means that Taiwan will need to buy equipment from Japan, equipment from Mainland China, or build their own. But recall that in mid-2019, Japan embargoed semiconductor materials to Taiwan, particularly e-beam photoresist. I discussed this in a July 15, 2019 Seeking Alpha article entitled “Sorry, But Japan's Material Embargo Won't Help Micron Technology.”
The overreach of the sanctions by the U.S. government, started by President Trump, have been expanded under President Biden. But like it or not, the U.S. spends a lot of money protecting countries like Korea and Japan. Currently, there are approximately 55,000 U.S. troops in Japan and 26,500 U.S. troops in South Korea.
In 2019, the U.S. and South Korea negotiated an agreement calling for South Korea to contribute approximately $893 million. Japan’s current support amounts to approximately $1.7 billion. By comparison, the Department of Defense currently estimates the total cost of maintaining the U.S. presence in South Korea and Japan at $4.5 billion and $5.7 billion, respectively.
And if sanctions and blacklists function as another strategy in protecting foreign countries, so be it. As China continues to advance militarily and technologically, these sanctions will only be broader based. This will only put sales of DUV lithography systems further in jeopardy and negatively impact ASML.
Erm, I can only imagine that you are being wilfully obtuse.
Yes. Huawei works directly with the Chinese government. It is an infrastructure supplier!
Huawei works directly with all its customers. Does that surprise you?
'The US is protecting so and so'. You mean like it protected Afghanistan and Iraq?
Nope! The US has strategic interests. That's it. When those strategic interests change, so so does the 'protection' mantra.
Let me say it straight. ASML is a business that wants to sell equipment to China. It is not happy that an external sovereign state is meddling in its ability to trade and it's CEO has spoken out on the subject many times.
He knows that this external limitation will lead to China creating homegrown competitors to his business interests.
You stepped around the facts with yet more opinion pieces and simply roll on with your anti China rhetoric.
The US doesn't want DJI to prosper, just like it didn't want Huawei to prosper.
Going about it the way they have, will not change anything. On the contrary, it will speed up the demise of US technological interests.
His line of thoughts are based on the right wing anti-China ideology. Their premise is China is US adversary. US doing similar things it is ok because it is us. China doing similar thins is not ok because China is an adversary thus a threat. Trump administration used four years to portray China as an adversary. US-China relation is in a downward trend because of this premise. Biden is unwilling or unable to change this sentiment. His hands are tied by this premise. Worse of all, China under Xi has decided to respond directly toward the attacks originated by this premise.
You are correct about his right wing/Trumpian approach: Anybody who stands in the way of their agenda is considered a "bad guy" to be destroyed by whatever means necessary and available.
As George Bush famously (or infamously?) said: "You're either for me Or you're agin' me".
There is no nuance or shades of grey in that world. Pure black & white, good vs bad.
Just dropping in for a moment on this interesting thread. I will point out here that you have been quite vigorously labeling anyone who offers any sort of criticism of the PRC as "China Haters," and using that label to dismiss any and all criticisms of Chinese policies or actions.
I will also point out that on this thread and elsewhere on this site, you have been offering fairly vigorous criticisms of the United States, which, thus far, you are still completely free to do here in the United States. Some of your criticisms of the US are even valid. Here in this country, it is possible to criticize the US government without being an "America Hater," but rather as someone who loves the country and wants it to live up to its ideals. Indeed, self-improvement is very hard to achieve if one claims to be perfect and above criticism. So these observations can be offered in this country to only with impunity, but as an act of patriotism.
Finally, I will note that in your vigorous dismissal of all those you label in black & white as "China Haters," you appear to be joining in a chorus of agreement with another person who posts here, seemingly writing from the perspective of the PRC itself. That person has written rather nonchalantly that China surveils all of its people 'for security,' not just minorities, and has written elsewhere on this site that the role of government includes 'dealing with' people who dissent and do not conform.
I would encourage you to reflect on these things. It would seem, were you instead to be an inhabitant of the PRC and writing similarly vigorous criticisms of that government from within, according to your online friend here, that you would be under surveillance 'for security,' and that it would be appropriate for your vigorous criticisms and dissent to lead to a point where you would be 'dealt with' by your government.
Recognizing these contrasts and being concerned about them does not make you, me or anyone else a "China Hater." China has an incredibly long history, a fascinating culture and literally billions of wonderful, beautiful people. Criticizing certain aspects of its governance is not hating China at all.
Oh, I don't need to reflect on them -- I plead guilty to all charges.
When a person starts with hate (in this case for China) and then backs into whatever facts or allegations or conspiracy theories they can find to support that hate, then I think it's accurate to label them a Hater. Specifically, in this case, a China Hater.
My "criticisms" (as you call them) of the U.S. are all verified facts. My point is NOT to criticize the U.S. but to point out that much of what China is being accused of we have done or are doing -- and often did far worse. And, I point those things out not criticize the U.S. (which would be pointless) but to suggest that we need to reconcile with our own past and clean up our current act before condemning others.
Further, I see these attacks on China for exactly what Trump intended them to be:
1) Tear down a competitor
2) Distract from our own failings
I don't want to do either because they are harmful rather than helpful.
Instead, I want to see the U.S. restore itself to the values it proclaims (and strives for) and that it once again become competitive in the world of industry and manufacturing.
Comments
Administration. That Huawei is notably working directly with the PRC to provide surveillance of minorities was found much later.
Evidently, people don't believe Huawei nor the PRC, and have made demands on their governments to mitigate that my restricting or outright banning Huawei infrastructure. Now that Merkel is out, I expect Germany to be much tougher on China as well.
As for ASML, the U.S. continues to deny a license to sell leading edge devices to China;
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4475198-what-additional-us-sanctions-on-china-mean-for-asml
Yes. Huawei works directly with the Chinese government. It is an infrastructure supplier!
Huawei works directly with all its customers. Does that surprise you?
'The US is protecting so and so'. You mean like it protected Afghanistan and Iraq?
Nope! The US has strategic interests. That's it. When those strategic interests change, so so does the 'protection' mantra.
Let me say it straight. ASML is a business that wants to sell equipment to China. It is not happy that an external sovereign state is meddling in its ability to trade and it's CEO has spoken out on the subject many times.
He knows that this external limitation will lead to China creating homegrown competitors to his business interests.
You stepped around the facts with yet more opinion pieces and simply roll on with your anti China rhetoric.
The US doesn't want DJI to prosper, just like it didn't want Huawei to prosper.
Going about it the way they have, will not change anything. On the contrary, it will speed up the demise of US technological interests.
Still, if I'm was a harbinger of how the world responds to the PRC military expansionism, I'm still late to the party.
You can attempt to distract from that fact, but the trend is even more negative for the PRC due to militarization that China is engaged in.
Huawei provides the infrastructure. That infrastructure is managed by the carriers. The heads of security at the carriers know their stuff. I have not heard of a single carrier that wouldn't consider Huawei technologies as an option.
Ironically, they trust Huawei for good reason. 30 years of operations around the world without a single major security breach.
But let's clear some things up.
Telecommunications is standardised. It is standards based. That's how interoperability works. It doesn't matter if a country bans Huawei or not. The probability that data will end up passing through Huawei gear is VERY high. In fact a lot of that data flows through literally thousands of kilometres of undersea cables laid by Huawei.
China and the US can probably find ways into any ICT infrastructure for a heap of reasons. That has nothing to do with Huawei though.
Just look at the recent cases of massive data loss through hacked software in the US.
Where your argument literally falls apart, though. Well, disintegrates really, is that Huawei offered the US the opportunity of licencing its entire 5G stack so that the US could catch up and start competing.
It would have had access to literally every single line of code involved, and if it wanted to, could have developed its own hardware well away from China.
The problem is that the US doesn't have the slightest interest in having access to the code because the code (and the imaginary national security threat) was never the issue.
Protectionism was (and still is) the issue.
I would encourage you to reflect on these things. It would seem, were you instead to be an inhabitant of the PRC and writing similarly vigorous criticisms of that government from within, according to your online friend here, that you would be under surveillance 'for security,' and that it would be appropriate for your vigorous criticisms and dissent to lead to a point where you would be 'dealt with' by your government.
Recognizing these contrasts and being concerned about them does not make you, me or anyone else a "China Hater." China has an incredibly long history, a fascinating culture and literally billions of wonderful, beautiful people. Criticizing certain aspects of its governance is not hating China at all.
The point is, George's comment about some other people seeing things in only black and white was ironic, given that he himself has been very busy labeling people in broad strokes with black and white accusations. None of that is necessary. If we want fewer wars and less fighting (and I certainly do), it would help to avoid such rhetoric. The world, figuratively speaking, is not black and white. It's not even shades of gray. It's the full spectrum of colors, all in light to dark. Rhetoric labeling people in all-or-nothing terms serves no useful purpose other than dehumanizing others in preparation of doing unspeakable things to them. I'm not interested in doing any of that. I may not agree with you, but I don't hate you. In fact, I hope you, your family and friends, wherever you are, have a beautiful day today, and that you can forget about all this other stuff and just be with the people you care about for a while.
Your anther failed logic is saying I cannot defend China. This can be valid only if China is American adversary. This is true in the minds of China haters. But it is never officially declared. Thus I think I can say whatever I know is fact about China against China haters evil intention.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/26/us-coronavirus-patient-zero-100000-deaths
Your statement is inaccurate at best, and a complete lie at worst. COVID 19 arrived first on the West Coast. That is not in dispute.
I never said anything about whether or not you can "defend China," so my logic about that cannot have failed. Because I never said any such thing, there is no logic to have failed. You can say whatever you want about China. Your continued use of language like "China haters" and "evil intention" is exactly the rhetoric I referred to above that is only useful in dehumanizing others so you can fight with them. I hope that's not what you mean to do. There's no need for any of that.