The extraterritorial sanctions did not 'kill' Huawei. Far from it. They have done untold damage to US semiconductor interests.
At most they threw a spanner into the works of Huawei's 5G and Kirin roadmap in the short term.
So short that Huawei has already gone on record to say they will be back in smartphone business next year and I'd wager without US technology in its processor supply chain.
They have also confirmed new silicon for this year but no one knows what it will be. Possibly 5G related.
Whatever advances Chinese companies make are sure to find their way to purchasers in Russia.
Huawei has veered full force into the automotive market with latest rumours pointing to a multi billion dollar investment from a major German car company for it to use Huawei's self driving technology.
The extraterritorial sanctions did not 'kill' Huawei. Far from it. They have done untold damage to US semiconductor interests.
At most they threw a spanner into the works of Huawei's 5G and Kirin roadmap in the short term.
So short that Huawei has already gone on record to say they will be back in smartphone business next year and I'd wager without US technology in its processor supply chain.
They have also confirmed new silicon for this year but no one knows what it will be. Possibly 5G related.
Whatever advances Chinese companies make are sure to find their way to purchasers in Russia.
Huawei has veered full force into the automotive market with latest rumours pointing to a multi billion dollar investment from a major German car company for it to use Huawei's self driving technology.
Restricting Android use would simply put even more wind under the wings of HarmonyOS.
U.S. Semiconductor interests are not "damaged" by the sanctions of Huawei, nor have they done "untold damage" to U.S. Semiconductor Interests. You are free to link to show how that is true or not.
As for the link to VW considering Huawei self driving, the article was pretty vague about that actually happening, but sure, maybe VW does want to do that. Still, there are already better self driving systems available that VW could license, and given the fact that Tesla's FSD is decidedly L2 capable, there isn't much needed to surpass Tesla.
HiSilicon has no leading edge fab access, and the article that you linked to acknowledged that fact. You need to do better if you are going to convince anyone of a Huawei phone comeback with HiSilicon.
Also, HarmonyOS 2.0 is still primarily AndroidOS, but sure, maybe that will change in HarmonyOS 3.0.
I do hope that China does attempt to ship technology to Russia, so that the West can take even more stringent action to reduce or prevent that transfer.
The extraterritorial sanctions did not 'kill' Huawei. Far from it. They have done untold damage to US semiconductor interests.
At most they threw a spanner into the works of Huawei's 5G and Kirin roadmap in the i8 short term.
So short that Huawei has already gone on record to say they will be back in smartphone business next year and I'd wager without US technology in its processor supply chain.
They have also confirmed new silicon for this year but no one knows what it will be. Possibly 5G related.
Whatever advances Chinese companies make are sure to find their way to purchasers in Russia.
Huawei has veered full force into the automotive market with latest rumours pointing to a multi billion dollar investment from a major German car company for it to use Huawei's self driving technology.
Restricting Android use would simply put even more wind under the wings of HarmonyOS.
U.S. Semiconductor interests are not "damaged" by the sanctions of Huawei, nor have they done "untold damage" to U.S. Semiconductor Interests. You are free to link to show how that is true or not.
As for the link to VW considering Huawei self driving, the article was pretty vague about that actually happening, but sure, maybe VW does want to do that. Still, there are already better self driving systems available that VW could license, and given the fact that Tesla's FSD is decidedly L2 capable, there isn't much needed to surpass Tesla.
HiSilicon has no leading edge fab access, and the article that you linked to acknowledged that fact. You need to do better if you are going to convince anyone of a Huawei phone comeback with HiSilicon.
Also, HarmonyOS 2.0 is still primarily AndroidOS, but sure, maybe that will change in HarmonyOS 3.0.
I do hope that China does attempt to ship technology to Russia, so that the West can take even more stringent action to reduce or prevent that transfer.
That's billions of dollars annually just from Huawei. Would you really like to see all of Russia moving purchases into China?
What would that do to US interests?
The US is limping along with some revenues from Huawei through licencing. Once Huawei has re-jigged it's supply chain, it will simply erradicate those US companies from the chain and send those billions into the pockets of US competitors.
Those references to HiSilicon are not mine. They came directly from Huawei.
What action could the West take against China transferring its own technology to Russia for strategic and financial gain?
The post above is chock full of misinformation. Given the many times that I have countered George since he has been here, I'll spare you the details. Do your own searches on the details.
It's actually entertaining whenever GBM speaks. I always wonder how he's going to defend brutal dictatorships, and he always manages. I would like to have seen him defend the dictatorships back around 1940.
I wish websites like this would have a way we could block certain users from being seen by us. I know a few people would block me, but I think GBM would take top spot.
I don;t defend "brutal dictatorships".
But I do object to instigating totally unnecessary wars.
All we have to do is guarantee that NATO will not threaten Russia by moving into (another of) its neighbor(s).
But, we instead favor war. Economic war (at least for us). But still, war.
Who is going to pay for this war of ours? As usual, it will be us.
But, I am sorry if the truth does not support your war mongering imperialism. Perhaps it is YOU that should be blocked?
Firstly, I never said your posts should be blocked from anyone else but myself. I said I wanted to be able to block your posts so that I don't have to see them. Your constant stream of defending dictators is very tiring to me.
And yes, I would fully support your desires to block me from your own view. In fact, I'd be happy to do it myself if this website allowed me to do that.
Click on the poster’s name at the top of any of his comments, click to open the drop down arrow at the top right and select Ignore. You will no longer see that poster’s comments, unless quoted by other posters.
The extraterritorial sanctions did not 'kill' Huawei. Far from it. They have done untold damage to US semiconductor interests.
At most they threw a spanner into the works of Huawei's 5G and Kirin roadmap in the i8 short term.
So short that Huawei has already gone on record to say they will be back in smartphone business next year and I'd wager without US technology in its processor supply chain.
They have also confirmed new silicon for this year but no one knows what it will be. Possibly 5G related.
Whatever advances Chinese companies make are sure to find their way to purchasers in Russia.
Huawei has veered full force into the automotive market with latest rumours pointing to a multi billion dollar investment from a major German car company for it to use Huawei's self driving technology.
Restricting Android use would simply put even more wind under the wings of HarmonyOS.
U.S. Semiconductor interests are not "damaged" by the sanctions of Huawei, nor have they done "untold damage" to U.S. Semiconductor Interests. You are free to link to show how that is true or not.
As for the link to VW considering Huawei self driving, the article was pretty vague about that actually happening, but sure, maybe VW does want to do that. Still, there are already better self driving systems available that VW could license, and given the fact that Tesla's FSD is decidedly L2 capable, there isn't much needed to surpass Tesla.
HiSilicon has no leading edge fab access, and the article that you linked to acknowledged that fact. You need to do better if you are going to convince anyone of a Huawei phone comeback with HiSilicon.
Also, HarmonyOS 2.0 is still primarily AndroidOS, but sure, maybe that will change in HarmonyOS 3.0.
I do hope that China does attempt to ship technology to Russia, so that the West can take even more stringent action to reduce or prevent that transfer.
That's billions of dollars annually just from Huawei. Would you really like to see all of Russia moving purchases into China?
What would that do to US interests?
The US is limping along with some revenues from Huawei through licencing. Once Huawei has re-jigged it's supply chain, it will simply erradicate those US companies from the chain and send those billions into the pockets of US competitors.
Those references to HiSilicon are not mine. They came directly from Huawei.
What action could the West take against China transferring its own technology to Russia for strategic and financial gain?
Thanks for posting a link from 18 months ago.
China has almost no production of computing devices, SOC's, CPU's, and GPU's at 10 nm, and none under that, so no, China isn't going to be able to provide those devices to Russia.
More to the point, I'm guessing that the EU is also going to tighten its policies on Semiconductor sales to Russia.
The extraterritorial sanctions did not 'kill' Huawei. Far from it. ForThey have done untold damage to US semiconductor interests.
At most they threw a spanner into the works of Huawei's 5G and Kirin roadmap in the i8 short term.
So short that Huawei has already gone on record to say they will be back in smartphone business next year and I'd wager without US technology in its processor supply chain.
They have also confirmed new silicon for this year but no one knows what it will be. Possibly 5G related.
Whatever advances Chinese companies make are sure to find their way to purchasers in Russia.
Huawei has veered full force into the automotive market with latest rumours pointing to a multi billion dollar investment from a major German car company for it to use Huawei's self driving technology.
Restricting Android use would simply put even more wind under the wings of HarmonyOS.
U.S. Semiconductor interests are not "damaged" by the sanctions of Huawei, nor have they done "untold damage" to U.S. Semiconductor Interests. You are free to link to show how that is true or not.
As for the link to VW considering Huawei self driving, the article was pretty vague about that actually happening, but sure, maybe VW does want to do that. Still, there are already better self driving systems available that VW could license, and given the fact that Tesla's FSD is decidedly L2 capable, there isn't much needed to surpass Tesla.
HiSilicon has no leading edge fab access, and the article that you linked to acknowledged that fact. You need to do better if you are going to convince anyone of a Huawei phone comeback with HiSilicon.
Also, HarmonyOS 2.0 is still primarily AndroidOS, but sure, maybe that will change in HarmonyOS 3.0.
I do hope that China does attempt to ship technology to Russia, so that the West can take even more stringent action to reduce or prevent that transfer.
That's billions of dollars annually just from Huawei. Would you really like to see all of Russia moving purchases into China?
What would that do to US interests?
The US is limping along with some revenues from Huawei through licencing. Once Huawei has re-jigged it's supply chain, it will simply erradicate those US companies from the chain and send those billions into the pockets of US competitors.
Those references to HiSilicon are not mine. They came directly from Huawei.
What action could the West take against China transferring its own technology to Russia for strategic and financial gain?
Thanks for posting a link from 18 months ago.
China has almost no production of computing devices, SOC's, CPU's, and GPU's at 10 nm, and none under that, so no, China isn't going to be able to provide those devices to Russia.
More to the point, I'm guessing that the EU is also going to tighten its policies on Semiconductor sales to Russia.
12,18,24... It doesn't matter how many months. The damage is done.
How long do you think it takes to build out US technology from a design?
How long do you think it takes to re-jig a supply chain?
You claimed there was no damage. Associations directly representing US semi conductor interests (and thousands of companies, disagree with you).
10nm? What are you talking about? Over 90% of chip production is at 14nm or higher. China is very much in the game and ramping capacity just like everyone else.
Ah! And the EU set out its technology independence roadmap before the Huawei issue. Yes, to cut back it's reliance on the US.
Can you see a pattern emerging here?
And by the way, Huawei has already locked down contracts with EU companies to offset some lost supplies from the US.
The post above is chock full of misinformation. Given the many times that I have countered George since he has been here, I'll spare you the details. Do your own searches on the details.
It's actually entertaining whenever GBM speaks. I always wonder how he's going to defend brutal dictatorships, and he always manages. I would like to have seen him defend the dictatorships back around 1940.
I wish websites like this would have a way we could block certain users from being seen by us. I know a few people would block me, but I think GBM would take top spot.
I don;t defend "brutal dictatorships".
But I do object to instigating totally unnecessary wars.
All we have to do is guarantee that NATO will not threaten Russia by moving into (another of) its neighbor(s).
But, we instead favor war. Economic war (at least for us). But still, war.
Who is going to pay for this war of ours? As usual, it will be us.
But, I am sorry if the truth does not support your war mongering imperialism. Perhaps it is YOU that should be blocked?
I thought Neville Chamberlain died in 1940.
So, we guarantee that Ukraine won't join NATO. Russia then invades or usurps Ukraine's democracy, like they did Belarus.
Then Russia's interests border Poland, Slovakia, Romania and further isolate the Baltic states.
Then they say NATO membership for Poland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania must be revoked. Or else.
At best, we are at the same borders before the demise of the Warsaw Pact, at worst, he makes a play for all of Europe.
Does any of this sound at all familiar???
Unlikely...
It's only likely if you buy into the line that "Russia is run by a mad dictator intent on conquering the world" -- which is a record being played often these days to justify the U.S. position. We resurrected that line from 2001-2 when we used it to sell our Iraq war.
The truth is: the U.S. backed itself into a corner: it will look even more foolish if it backs down after it promised Ukraine it would be granted a NATO membership if it sided with the U.S.
The post above is chock full of misinformation. Given the many times that I have countered George since he has been here, I'll spare you the details. Do your own searches on the details.
It's actually entertaining whenever GBM speaks. I always wonder how he's going to defend brutal dictatorships, and he always manages. I would like to have seen him defend the dictatorships back around 1940.
I wish websites like this would have a way we could block certain users from being seen by us. I know a few people would block me, but I think GBM would take top spot.
I don;t defend "brutal dictatorships".
But I do object to instigating totally unnecessary wars.
All we have to do is guarantee that NATO will not threaten Russia by moving into (another of) its neighbor(s).
But, we instead favor war. Economic war (at least for us). But still, war.
Who is going to pay for this war of ours? As usual, it will be us.
But, I am sorry if the truth does not support your war mongering imperialism. Perhaps it is YOU that should be blocked?
The Ukraine crisis is primarily a standoff between Russia and the West, but off to the side, another player stands awkwardly: China. Beijing has tried to walk a fine line on Ukraine. On one hand, it has taken Russia’s side, blaming NATO expansion for causing the crisis and alleging that U.S. predictions of an imminent invasion are aggravating it. On the other hand, especially as the risk of military conflict has grown, it has called for diplomacy over war.
If Beijing had its way, it would maintain strong ties with Moscow, safeguard its trade relationship with Ukraine, keep the EU in its economic orbit, and avoid the spillover from U.S. and EU sanctions on Moscow—all while preventing relations with the United States from significantly deteriorating. Securing any one of these objectives may well be possible. Achieving all of them is not.
If Russia invades Ukraine, Beijing could throw Moscow a lifeline: economic relief to alleviate the effect of U.S. sanctions. But doing so would damage Chinese relations with Europe, invite severe repercussions from Washington, and drive traditionally nonaligned countries such as India further into the arms of the West. If Beijing snubs Moscow, by contrast, it may weaken its closest strategic partnership at a time when, given deteriorating security in Asia, it is most in need of outside help.
China should throw Russia under the bus, because Russia is already a failed state, and it wouldn't take much for it to collapse yet again. Might as well give it a push.
The post above is chock full of misinformation. Given the many times that I have countered George since he has been here, I'll spare you the details. Do your own searches on the details.
It's actually entertaining whenever GBM speaks. I always wonder how he's going to defend brutal dictatorships, and he always manages. I would like to have seen him defend the dictatorships back around 1940.
I wish websites like this would have a way we could block certain users from being seen by us. I know a few people would block me, but I think GBM would take top spot.
I don;t defend "brutal dictatorships".
But I do object to instigating totally unnecessary wars.
All we have to do is guarantee that NATO will not threaten Russia by moving into (another of) its neighbor(s).
But, we instead favor war. Economic war (at least for us). But still, war.
Who is going to pay for this war of ours? As usual, it will be us.
But, I am sorry if the truth does not support your war mongering imperialism. Perhaps it is YOU that should be blocked?
Firstly, I never said your posts should be blocked from anyone else but myself. I said I wanted to be able to block your posts so that I don't have to see them. Your constant stream of defending dictators is very tiring to me.
And yes, I would fully support your desires to block me from your own view. In fact, I'd be happy to do it myself if this website allowed me to do that.
The part where you are confused is that: I do not "defend dictators". I defend the truth and what is right and just. If that happens to come from a dictator, I could care less. I don't do "my side vs your side".
The extraterritorial sanctions did not 'kill' Huawei. Far from it. ForThey have done untold damage to US semiconductor interests.
At most they threw a spanner into the works of Huawei's 5G and Kirin roadmap in the i8 short term.
So short that Huawei has already gone on record to say they will be back in smartphone business next year and I'd wager without US technology in its processor supply chain.
They have also confirmed new silicon for this year but no one knows what it will be. Possibly 5G related.
Whatever advances Chinese companies make are sure to find their way to purchasers in Russia.
Huawei has veered full force into the automotive market with latest rumours pointing to a multi billion dollar investment from a major German car company for it to use Huawei's self driving technology.
Restricting Android use would simply put even more wind under the wings of HarmonyOS.
U.S. Semiconductor interests are not "damaged" by the sanctions of Huawei, nor have they done "untold damage" to U.S. Semiconductor Interests. You are free to link to show how that is true or not.
As for the link to VW considering Huawei self driving, the article was pretty vague about that actually happening, but sure, maybe VW does want to do that. Still, there are already better self driving systems available that VW could license, and given the fact that Tesla's FSD is decidedly L2 capable, there isn't much needed to surpass Tesla.
HiSilicon has no leading edge fab access, and the article that you linked to acknowledged that fact. You need to do better if you are going to convince anyone of a Huawei phone comeback with HiSilicon.
Also, HarmonyOS 2.0 is still primarily AndroidOS, but sure, maybe that will change in HarmonyOS 3.0.
I do hope that China does attempt to ship technology to Russia, so that the West can take even more stringent action to reduce or prevent that transfer.
That's billions of dollars annually just from Huawei. Would you really like to see all of Russia moving purchases into China?
What would that do to US interests?
The US is limping along with some revenues from Huawei through licencing. Once Huawei has re-jigged it's supply chain, it will simply erradicate those US companies from the chain and send those billions into the pockets of US competitors.
Those references to HiSilicon are not mine. They came directly from Huawei.
What action could the West take against China transferring its own technology to Russia for strategic and financial gain?
Thanks for posting a link from 18 months ago.
China has almost no production of computing devices, SOC's, CPU's, and GPU's at 10 nm, and none under that, so no, China isn't going to be able to provide those devices to Russia.
More to the point, I'm guessing that the EU is also going to tighten its policies on Semiconductor sales to Russia.
12,18,24... It doesn't matter how many months. The damage is done.
How long do you think it takes to build out US technology from a design?
How long do you think it takes to re-jig a supply chain?
You claimed there was no damage. Associations directly representing US semi conductor interests (and thousands of companies, disagree with you).
10nm? What are you talking about? Over 90% of chip production is at 14nm or higher. China is very much in the game and ramping capacity just like everyone else.
Ah! And the EU set out its technology independence roadmap before the Huawei issue. Yes, to cut back it's reliance on the US.
Can you see a pattern emerging here?
And by the way, Huawei has already locked down contracts with EU companies to offset some lost supplies from the US.
Funny, but you seem to be reiterating a fact that everyone in the industry is stating; that there needs to be more resilience in the industry by building fabs in strategic locations to prevent supply chain disasters. Of course China wants to make more devices at lager nodes, but those aren't the preferred devices for leading edge phones, missiles, and aircraft, hence why the U.S. lured TSMC to Arizona to build a 5nm fab, to assure the U.S. Military that they would have a supply just in case China invades Taiwan in the future.
The post above is chock full of misinformation. Given the many times that I have countered George since he has been here, I'll spare you the details. Do your own searches on the details.
It's actually entertaining whenever GBM speaks. I always wonder how he's going to defend brutal dictatorships, and he always manages. I would like to have seen him defend the dictatorships back around 1940.
I wish websites like this would have a way we could block certain users from being seen by us. I know a few people would block me, but I think GBM would take top spot.
I don;t defend "brutal dictatorships".
But I do object to instigating totally unnecessary wars.
All we have to do is guarantee that NATO will not threaten Russia by moving into (another of) its neighbor(s).
But, we instead favor war. Economic war (at least for us). But still, war.
Who is going to pay for this war of ours? As usual, it will be us.
But, I am sorry if the truth does not support your war mongering imperialism. Perhaps it is YOU that should be blocked?
The Ukraine crisis is primarily a standoff between Russia and the West, but off to the side, another player stands awkwardly: China. Beijing has tried to walk a fine line on Ukraine. On one hand, it has taken Russia’s side, blaming NATO expansion for causing the crisis and alleging that U.S. predictions of an imminent invasion are aggravating it. On the other hand, especially as the risk of military conflict has grown, it has called for diplomacy over war.
If Beijing had its way, it would maintain strong ties with Moscow, safeguard its trade relationship with Ukraine, keep the EU in its economic orbit, and avoid the spillover from U.S. and EU sanctions on Moscow—all while preventing relations with the United States from significantly deteriorating. Securing any one of these objectives may well be possible. Achieving all of them is not.
If Russia invades Ukraine, Beijing could throw Moscow a lifeline: economic relief to alleviate the effect of U.S. sanctions. But doing so would damage Chinese relations with Europe, invite severe repercussions from Washington, and drive traditionally nonaligned countries such as India further into the arms of the West. If Beijing snubs Moscow, by contrast, it may weaken its closest strategic partnership at a time when, given deteriorating security in Asia, it is most in need of outside help.
China should throw Russia under the bus, because Russia is already a failed state, and it wouldn't take much for it to collapse yet again. Might as well give it a push.
We are pushing Russia and China (and a few others) together.
We are falling back on our last bullet: financial sanctions -- and we not using it wisely. Soon they will have a work-around (actually, they probably already do).
... it does not seem like anybody understands russians or Putin.
... Or wants to.
Pretty easy to see that Putin is a dictator, with designs on his neighbors, something that NATO was set up to prevent. Too late for Ukraine, possibly, but Finland and Sweden joining NATO, a likelihood now, is going to impinge on Kalingrad's security.
I probably didn't mention that Finland bought 60 some F-35's, and Switzerland bought some as well. Not seeing any SU-57 in any operating squadrons in Russia, and maybe about 15 produced in total. Sad.
The post above is chock full of misinformation. Given the many times that I have countered George since he has been here, I'll spare you the details. Do your own searches on the details.
It's actually entertaining whenever GBM speaks. I always wonder how he's going to defend brutal dictatorships, and he always manages. I would like to have seen him defend the dictatorships back around 1940.
I wish websites like this would have a way we could block certain users from being seen by us. I know a few people would block me, but I think GBM would take top spot.
I don;t defend "brutal dictatorships".
But I do object to instigating totally unnecessary wars.
All we have to do is guarantee that NATO will not threaten Russia by moving into (another of) its neighbor(s).
But, we instead favor war. Economic war (at least for us). But still, war.
Who is going to pay for this war of ours? As usual, it will be us.
But, I am sorry if the truth does not support your war mongering imperialism. Perhaps it is YOU that should be blocked?
The Ukraine crisis is primarily a standoff between Russia and the West, but off to the side, another player stands awkwardly: China. Beijing has tried to walk a fine line on Ukraine. On one hand, it has taken Russia’s side, blaming NATO expansion for causing the crisis and alleging that U.S. predictions of an imminent invasion are aggravating it. On the other hand, especially as the risk of military conflict has grown, it has called for diplomacy over war.
If Beijing had its way, it would maintain strong ties with Moscow, safeguard its trade relationship with Ukraine, keep the EU in its economic orbit, and avoid the spillover from U.S. and EU sanctions on Moscow—all while preventing relations with the United States from significantly deteriorating. Securing any one of these objectives may well be possible. Achieving all of them is not.
If Russia invades Ukraine, Beijing could throw Moscow a lifeline: economic relief to alleviate the effect of U.S. sanctions. But doing so would damage Chinese relations with Europe, invite severe repercussions from Washington, and drive traditionally nonaligned countries such as India further into the arms of the West. If Beijing snubs Moscow, by contrast, it may weaken its closest strategic partnership at a time when, given deteriorating security in Asia, it is most in need of outside help.
China should throw Russia under the bus, because Russia is already a failed state, and it wouldn't take much for it to collapse yet again. Might as well give it a push.
We are pushing Russia and China (and a few others) together.
We are falling back on our last bullet: financial sanctions -- and we not using it wisely. Soon they will have a work-around (actually, they probably already do).
We should have settled this while we could.
Well, evidently it is being settled, as we speak, and I would love Russia and China being forced together, with the end result that the U.S., EU, NATO, and our Indo-Pacific Allies are all on the same page in containing both countries.
... it does not seem like anybody understands russians or Putin.
... Or wants to.
Pretty easy to see that Putin is a dictator, with designs on his neighbors, something that NATO was set up to prevent. Too late for Ukraine, possibly, but Finland and Sweden joining NATO, a likelihood now, is going to impinge on Kalingrad's security.
I probably didn't mention that Finland bought 60 some F-35's, and Switzerland bought some as well. Not seeing any SU-57 in any operating squadrons in Russia, and maybe about 15 produced in total. Sad.
The post above is chock full of misinformation. Given the many times that I have countered George since he has been here, I'll spare you the details. Do your own searches on the details.
It's actually entertaining whenever GBM speaks. I always wonder how he's going to defend brutal dictatorships, and he always manages. I would like to have seen him defend the dictatorships back around 1940.
I wish websites like this would have a way we could block certain users from being seen by us. I know a few people would block me, but I think GBM would take top spot.
I don;t defend "brutal dictatorships".
But I do object to instigating totally unnecessary wars.
All we have to do is guarantee that NATO will not threaten Russia by moving into (another of) its neighbor(s).
But, we instead favor war. Economic war (at least for us). But still, war.
Who is going to pay for this war of ours? As usual, it will be us.
But, I am sorry if the truth does not support your war mongering imperialism. Perhaps it is YOU that should be blocked?
The Ukraine crisis is primarily a standoff between Russia and the West, but off to the side, another player stands awkwardly: China. Beijing has tried to walk a fine line on Ukraine. On one hand, it has taken Russia’s side, blaming NATO expansion for causing the crisis and alleging that U.S. predictions of an imminent invasion are aggravating it. On the other hand, especially as the risk of military conflict has grown, it has called for diplomacy over war.
If Beijing had its way, it would maintain strong ties with Moscow, safeguard its trade relationship with Ukraine, keep the EU in its economic orbit, and avoid the spillover from U.S. and EU sanctions on Moscow—all while preventing relations with the United States from significantly deteriorating. Securing any one of these objectives may well be possible. Achieving all of them is not.
If Russia invades Ukraine, Beijing could throw Moscow a lifeline: economic relief to alleviate the effect of U.S. sanctions. But doing so would damage Chinese relations with Europe, invite severe repercussions from Washington, and drive traditionally nonaligned countries such as India further into the arms of the West. If Beijing snubs Moscow, by contrast, it may weaken its closest strategic partnership at a time when, given deteriorating security in Asia, it is most in need of outside help.
China should throw Russia under the bus, because Russia is already a failed state, and it wouldn't take much for it to collapse yet again. Might as well give it a push.
We are pushing Russia and China (and a few others) together.
We are falling back on our last bullet: financial sanctions -- and we not using it wisely. Soon they will have a work-around (actually, they probably already do).
We should have settled this while we could.
Well, evidently it is being settled, as we speak, and I would love Russia and China being forced together, with the end result that the U.S., EU, NATO, and our Indo-Pacific Allies are all on the same page in containing both countries.
The post above is chock full of misinformation. Given the many times that I have countered George since he has been here, I'll spare you the details. Do your own searches on the details.
It's actually entertaining whenever GBM speaks. I always wonder how he's going to defend brutal dictatorships, and he always manages. I would like to have seen him defend the dictatorships back around 1940.
I wish websites like this would have a way we could block certain users from being seen by us. I know a few people would block me, but I think GBM would take top spot.
I don;t defend "brutal dictatorships".
But I do object to instigating totally unnecessary wars.
All we have to do is guarantee that NATO will not threaten Russia by moving into (another of) its neighbor(s).
But, we instead favor war. Economic war (at least for us). But still, war.
Who is going to pay for this war of ours? As usual, it will be us.
But, I am sorry if the truth does not support your war mongering imperialism. Perhaps it is YOU that should be blocked?
The Ukraine crisis is primarily a standoff between Russia and the West, but off to the side, another player stands awkwardly: China. Beijing has tried to walk a fine line on Ukraine. On one hand, it has taken Russia’s side, blaming NATO expansion for causing the crisis and alleging that U.S. predictions of an imminent invasion are aggravating it. On the other hand, especially as the risk of military conflict has grown, it has called for diplomacy over war.
If Beijing had its way, it would maintain strong ties with Moscow, safeguard its trade relationship with Ukraine, keep the EU in its economic orbit, and avoid the spillover from U.S. and EU sanctions on Moscow—all while preventing relations with the United States from significantly deteriorating. Securing any one of these objectives may well be possible. Achieving all of them is not.
If Russia invades Ukraine, Beijing could throw Moscow a lifeline: economic relief to alleviate the effect of U.S. sanctions. But doing so would damage Chinese relations with Europe, invite severe repercussions from Washington, and drive traditionally nonaligned countries such as India further into the arms of the West. If Beijing snubs Moscow, by contrast, it may weaken its closest strategic partnership at a time when, given deteriorating security in Asia, it is most in need of outside help.
China should throw Russia under the bus, because Russia is already a failed state, and it wouldn't take much for it to collapse yet again. Might as well give it a push.
We are pushing Russia and China (and a few others) together.
We are falling back on our last bullet: financial sanctions -- and we not using it wisely. Soon they will have a work-around (actually, they probably already do).
We should have settled this while we could.
Well, evidently it is being settled, as we speak, and I would love Russia and China being forced together, with the end result that the U.S., EU, NATO, and our Indo-Pacific Allies are all on the same page in containing both countries.
It won't be "both countries". It will be a world wide cold war. Again.
Anybody who wants that is a fool.
The first one was created and fed by Russia trying to propagate communism around the world.
They openly admitted that.
This one will be created and fed by the U.S. trying to propagate democracy around the world.
We openly admit that.
It doesn't matter who does it: Either way the world suffers.
Putin started this latest conflict, and the West will have to finish it.
China can step out of the way, throw Russia under the bus, or double down on its authoritarian alliance. Either way, Putin is dealing with a hell of a large body of countries that are economically much more powerful than Russia, and are now working together against Putin.
Comments
Peacekeepers in our southern border??
At most they threw a spanner into the works of Huawei's 5G and Kirin roadmap in the short term.
So short that Huawei has already gone on record to say they will be back in smartphone business next year and I'd wager without US technology in its processor supply chain.
They have also confirmed new silicon for this year but no one knows what it will be. Possibly 5G related.
https://www.androidheadlines.com/2022/01/huawei-hisilicon-chips-comeback-2022.html
Huawei is investing in every single link of the semiconductor supply chain too and China as a whole has accelerated its national semiconductor plans.
It is rumoured that they already have two exascale computers.
https://www.nextplatform.com/2021/10/26/china-has-already-reached-exascale-on-two-separate-systems/
Whatever advances Chinese companies make are sure to find their way to purchasers in Russia.
Huawei has veered full force into the automotive market with latest rumours pointing to a multi billion dollar investment from a major German car company for it to use Huawei's self driving technology.
https://interestingengineering.com/volkswagen-huawei-self-driving
Restricting Android use would simply put even more wind under the wings of HarmonyOS.
As for the link to VW considering Huawei self driving, the article was pretty vague about that actually happening, but sure, maybe VW does want to do that. Still, there are already better self driving systems available that VW could license, and given the fact that Tesla's FSD is decidedly L2 capable, there isn't much needed to surpass Tesla.
HiSilicon has no leading edge fab access, and the article that you linked to acknowledged that fact. You need to do better if you are going to convince anyone of a Huawei phone comeback with HiSilicon.
Also, HarmonyOS 2.0 is still primarily AndroidOS, but sure, maybe that will change in HarmonyOS 3.0.
I do hope that China does attempt to ship technology to Russia, so that the West can take even more stringent action to reduce or prevent that transfer.
https://www.fierceelectronics.com/electronics/major-semi-trade-groups-blast-trump-crackdown-huawei
That's billions of dollars annually just from Huawei. Would you really like to see all of Russia moving purchases into China?
What would that do to US interests?
The US is limping along with some revenues from Huawei through licencing. Once Huawei has re-jigged it's supply chain, it will simply erradicate those US companies from the chain and send those billions into the pockets of US competitors.
Those references to HiSilicon are not mine. They came directly from Huawei.
What action could the West take against China transferring its own technology to Russia for strategic and financial gain?
China has almost no production of computing devices, SOC's, CPU's, and GPU's at 10 nm, and none under that, so no, China isn't going to be able to provide those devices to Russia.
More to the point, I'm guessing that the EU is also going to tighten its policies on Semiconductor sales to Russia.
How long do you think it takes to build out US technology from a design?
How long do you think it takes to re-jig a supply chain?
You claimed there was no damage. Associations directly representing US semi conductor interests (and thousands of companies, disagree with you).
10nm? What are you talking about? Over 90% of chip production is at 14nm or higher. China is very much in the game and ramping capacity just like everyone else.
Ah! And the EU set out its technology independence roadmap before the Huawei issue. Yes, to cut back it's reliance on the US.
Can you see a pattern emerging here?
And by the way, Huawei has already locked down contracts with EU companies to offset some lost supplies from the US.
China should throw Russia under the bus, because Russia is already a failed state, and it wouldn't take much for it to collapse yet again. Might as well give it a push.
The part where you are confused is that: I do not "defend dictators". I defend the truth and what is right and just. If that happens to come from a dictator, I could care less. I don't do "my side vs your side".
I probably didn't mention that Finland bought 60 some F-35's, and Switzerland bought some as well. Not seeing any SU-57 in any operating squadrons in Russia, and maybe about 15 produced in total. Sad.
Number of F-35's, of all types, built to date;
https://www.airforcemag.com/f-35-production-set-156-per-year-until-completion/
700 built through September of 2021, with production for 2022 to be 156 per year.
How cool would that be!
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/2/22/2081709/-Russia-s-economy-can-t-handle-a-war-but-Putin-can-t-handle-the-Russian-economy
China can step out of the way, throw Russia under the bus, or double down on its authoritarian alliance. Either way, Putin is dealing with a hell of a large body of countries that are economically much more powerful than Russia, and are now working together against Putin.