The Chinese authoritarian dictatorship defenders never fail to disappoint, here to defend the People’s Regime to the end.
It has nothing to do with what kind of government is in place. It could be South Korea and the result would be exactly the same.
First couple of quoted paragraphs contain the words 'compete', 'competition' and 'competitive' yet the US has actually done literally nothing along those lines.
It was losing so it singled out the threat (Huawei) and literally tried to destroy it, bullying and bludgeoning allies in the process. Authoritarian, you say? Who is dictating here? The irony!
This is about technological supremacy within the context of a nascent multi-polar world made up of all kinds of governments.
The US should be competing but it isn't.
I have quoted exactly what was presented. 5G was such an advancement in technological and economic terms yet the US literally had nothing to offer in response.
That, by top level US admission, and presented in Washington.
In black and white and with crystal clear clarity.
The Chinese authoritarian dictatorship defenders never fail to disappoint, here to defend the People’s Regime to the end.
It has nothing to do with what kind of government is in place. It could be South Korea and the result would be exactly the same.
First couple of quoted paragraphs contain the words 'compete', 'competition' and 'competitive' yet the US has actually done literally nothing along those lines.
It was losing so it singled out the threat (Huawei) and literally tried to destroy it, bullying and bludgeoning allies in the process. Authoritarian, you say? Who is dictating here? The irony!
This is about technological supremacy within the context of a nascent multi-polar world made up of all kinds of governments.
The US should be competing but it isn't.
I have quoted exactly what was presented. 5G was such an advancement in technological and economic terms yet the US literally had nothing to offer in response.
That, by top level US admission, and presented in Washington.
In black and white and with crystal clear clarity.
Type of government is irrelevant.
LOL!
What you fail to mention is that the U.S., as it often did, relied on global trade to provide some of our technology, so yeah, China saw an opportunity in telecom.
I remember the comment by a Swedish government official to the effect that Huawei was quoting Telecom Infrastructure for less than they could manufacture it for. That sure looks like massive subsidies by the Chinese Government and would inevitably lead to Huawei gaining a dominant share and killing ultimately killing off competition. That is in fact a national security concern. More to the point, you seem unable to comprehend that the EU has also recognized security issues with Huawei Telecom, and as I posted elsewhere, is looking to completely ban Huawei in the EU.
Oh, and the type of government is absolutely relevant in global trade, and China has indicated that it wants to have its own rules. You seem to agree with that, but ironically, you otherwise always support the EU.
The Chinese authoritarian dictatorship defenders never fail to disappoint, here to defend the People’s Regime to the end.
It has nothing to do with what kind of government is in place. It could be South Korea and the result would be exactly the same.
First couple of quoted paragraphs contain the words 'compete', 'competition' and 'competitive' yet the US has actually done literally nothing along those lines.
It was losing so it singled out the threat (Huawei) and literally tried to destroy it, bullying and bludgeoning allies in the process. Authoritarian, you say? Who is dictating here? The irony!
This is about technological supremacy within the context of a nascent multi-polar world made up of all kinds of governments.
The US should be competing but it isn't.
I have quoted exactly what was presented. 5G was such an advancement in technological and economic terms yet the US literally had nothing to offer in response.
That, by top level US admission, and presented in Washington.
In black and white and with crystal clear clarity.
Type of government is irrelevant.
LOL!
What you fail to mention is that the U.S., as it often did, relied on global trade to provide some of our technology, so yeah, China saw an opportunity in telecom.
I remember the comment by a Swedish government official to the effect that Huawei was quoting Telecom Infrastructure for less than they could manufacture it for. That sure looks like massive subsidies by the Chinese Government and would inevitably lead to Huawei gaining a dominant share and killing ultimately killing off competition. That is in fact a national security concern. More to the point, you seem unable to comprehend that the EU has also recognized security issues with Huawei Telecom, and as I posted elsewhere, is looking to completely ban Huawei in the EU.
Oh, and the type of government is absolutely relevant in global trade, and China has indicated that it wants to have its own rules. You seem to agree with that, but ironically, you otherwise always support the EU.
My bet is that you now disagree with the EU.
You will hear lots of things about Huawei. Lots of that twisted beyond belief.
Huawei was very competitive. It's famous for its wolf pack culture and driving workers into the ground and bending over backwards to adapt to customers' needs.
As with most things the truth sits somewhere between the extremes that you hear.
On telecom in general, the US simply screwed up strategically. Look no further than that for explanations.
The Chinese authoritarian dictatorship defenders never fail to disappoint, here to defend the People’s Regime to the end.
It has nothing to do with what kind of government is in place. It could be South Korea and the result would be exactly the same.
First couple of quoted paragraphs contain the words 'compete', 'competition' and 'competitive' yet the US has actually done literally nothing along those lines.
It was losing so it singled out the threat (Huawei) and literally tried to destroy it, bullying and bludgeoning allies in the process. Authoritarian, you say? Who is dictating here? The irony!
This is about technological supremacy within the context of a nascent multi-polar world made up of all kinds of governments.
The US should be competing but it isn't.
I have quoted exactly what was presented. 5G was such an advancement in technological and economic terms yet the US literally had nothing to offer in response.
That, by top level US admission, and presented in Washington.
In black and white and with crystal clear clarity.
Type of government is irrelevant.
LOL!
What you fail to mention is that the U.S., as it often did, relied on global trade to provide some of our technology, so yeah, China saw an opportunity in telecom.
I remember the comment by a Swedish government official to the effect that Huawei was quoting Telecom Infrastructure for less than they could manufacture it for. That sure looks like massive subsidies by the Chinese Government and would inevitably lead to Huawei gaining a dominant share and killing ultimately killing off competition. That is in fact a national security concern. More to the point, you seem unable to comprehend that the EU has also recognized security issues with Huawei Telecom, and as I posted elsewhere, is looking to completely ban Huawei in the EU.
Oh, and the type of government is absolutely relevant in global trade, and China has indicated that it wants to have its own rules. You seem to agree with that, but ironically, you otherwise always support the EU.
My bet is that you now disagree with the EU.
You will hear lots of things about Huawei. Lots of that twisted beyond belief.
Huawei was very competitive. It's famous for its wolf pack culture and driving workers into the ground and bending over backwards to adapt to customers' needs.
As with most things the truth sits somewhere between the extremes that you hear.
On telecom in general, the US simply screwed up strategically. Look no further than that for explanations.
I agree that the U.S. was asleep at the wheel on telecom infrastructure, but even more than a decade ago, the U.S. started to turn that around, and today, we have 5G, and Huawei is playing a decreasing role in 5G infrastructure in the West, and at some point, Huawei may be extinquished entirely as a provider. In the meantime Open RAN appears to be growing rapidly.
"This is textbook Chinese Communist Party (CCP) behavior - promote PRC (People's Republic of China) national champions in telecommunications, and slowly squeeze western companies' market access"
And what was the whole Huawei thing in the US about then?
Slightly more of a squeeze!
No way Apple would be complicit in allowing the NSA to install spyware on their iPhones for sale in China, the way the Chinese did on Huawei phones for sale here.
There was no mention of any of that in the quoted text. It amounted to protectionism, not spying.
Apple or Huawei wouldn't have to be complicit in anything when it comes to the NSA or Chinese equivalents.
We know a fair bit about the NSA's activities though thanks to Snowden.
As far a protectionism goes, the US had no cutting edge ICT infrastructure to protect but strong-arming Huawei out of the US (see the 2017 AT&T/Huawei situation) absolutely did protect Apple from Huawei on US soil.
That's why the quote is laughable.
It was spying. And what you don't know can definitely hurt you. An FBI investigation in 2017 determined Chinese-made Huawei equipment could disrupt US nuclear arsenal communications. The FBI uncovered Chinese-made Huawei equipment atop cell towers near US military bases in the rural Midwest. According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the FBI determined the equipment was capable of capturing and disrupting highly restricted Defense Department communications, including those used by US Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear weapons.
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
"This is textbook Chinese Communist Party (CCP) behavior - promote PRC (People's Republic of China) national champions in telecommunications, and slowly squeeze western companies' market access"
And what was the whole Huawei thing in the US about then?
Slightly more of a squeeze!
No way Apple would be complicit in allowing the NSA to install spyware on their iPhones for sale in China, the way the Chinese did on Huawei phones for sale here.
There was no mention of any of that in the quoted text. It amounted to protectionism, not spying.
Apple or Huawei wouldn't have to be complicit in anything when it comes to the NSA or Chinese equivalents.
We know a fair bit about the NSA's activities though thanks to Snowden.
As far a protectionism goes, the US had no cutting edge ICT infrastructure to protect but strong-arming Huawei out of the US (see the 2017 AT&T/Huawei situation) absolutely did protect Apple from Huawei on US soil.
That's why the quote is laughable.
It was spying. And what you don't know can definitely hurt you. An FBI investigation in 2017 determined Chinese-made Huawei equipment could disrupt US nuclear arsenal communications. The FBI uncovered Chinese-made Huawei equipment atop cell towers near US military bases in the rural Midwest. According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the FBI determined the equipment was capable of capturing and disrupting highly restricted Defense Department communications, including those used by US Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear weapons.
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
That sounds like pure paranoia.
It's simple. Huawei would not install anything close to miltary infrastructure to spy on anyone.
Let's be clear, and this has been true for the last 30 years. Just ONE single piece of evidence of 'spying' would kill the company in an instant. Just one. Instant death for the company worldwide.
Why take that risk?
Why put scanning equipment up on a pole within sight of military operations in plain sight where it can be confiscated, taken apart and used as evidence on national security grounds?
It would be literally suicide for the company.
Does that make sense to you?
If such a thing had existed, do you honestly think the US would have kept that evidence under the table and not paraded it around the world?
Is that so difficult to understand?
So, what's the story here?
The story is there is no story. It's as simple as that. The equipment was probably just what it was. Rural ICT infrastructure. End of story. It just happened to be near an installation because that installation was in a rural setting.
As for strategic command, in Afghanistan all of the US Command communication that travelled over local ICT infrastructure, travelled over Huawei equipment. There were no complaints.
"This is textbook Chinese Communist Party (CCP) behavior - promote PRC (People's Republic of China) national champions in telecommunications, and slowly squeeze western companies' market access"
And what was the whole Huawei thing in the US about then?
Slightly more of a squeeze!
No way Apple would be complicit in allowing the NSA to install spyware on their iPhones for sale in China, the way the Chinese did on Huawei phones for sale here.
There was no mention of any of that in the quoted text. It amounted to protectionism, not spying.
Apple or Huawei wouldn't have to be complicit in anything when it comes to the NSA or Chinese equivalents.
We know a fair bit about the NSA's activities though thanks to Snowden.
As far a protectionism goes, the US had no cutting edge ICT infrastructure to protect but strong-arming Huawei out of the US (see the 2017 AT&T/Huawei situation) absolutely did protect Apple from Huawei on US soil.
That's why the quote is laughable.
It was spying. And what you don't know can definitely hurt you. An FBI investigation in 2017 determined Chinese-made Huawei equipment could disrupt US nuclear arsenal communications. The FBI uncovered Chinese-made Huawei equipment atop cell towers near US military bases in the rural Midwest. According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the FBI determined the equipment was capable of capturing and disrupting highly restricted Defense Department communications, including those used by US Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear weapons.
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
That sounds like pure paranoia.
It's simple. Huawei would not install anything close to miltary infrastructure to spy on anyone.
Let's be clear, and this has been true for the last 30 years. Just ONE single piece of evidence of 'spying' would kill the company in an instant. Just one. Instant death for the company worldwide.
Why take that risk?
Why put scanning equipment up on a pole within site of military operations in plain sight where it can be confiscated, taken apart and used as evidence on national security grounds?
It would be literally suicide for the company.
Does that make sense to you?
If such a thing had existed, do you honestly think the US would have kept that evidence under the table and not paraded it around the world?
Is that so difficult to understand?
So, what's the story here?
The story is there is no story. It's as simple as that. The equipment was probably just what it was. Rural ICT infrastructure. End of story. It just happened to be near an installation because that installation was in a rural setting.
As for strategic command, in Afghanistan all of the US Command communication that travelled over local ICT infrastructure, travelled over Huawei equipment. There were no complaints.
Exactly! It is so sad American democracy has fallen so badly people cannot think without fallacy. My only explanation is St. Peter is deeply against the teachings of great Aristotle, Plato, and Socrates. How many Americans learned Aristotle Sophistical Refutations? They don't like to seek facts, talk facts! Wait! Maybe many of these China haters are not American? This is my only hope to America.
"This is textbook Chinese Communist Party (CCP) behavior - promote PRC (People's Republic of China) national champions in telecommunications, and slowly squeeze western companies' market access"
And what was the whole Huawei thing in the US about then?
Slightly more of a squeeze!
No way Apple would be complicit in allowing the NSA to install spyware on their iPhones for sale in China, the way the Chinese did on Huawei phones for sale here.
There was no mention of any of that in the quoted text. It amounted to protectionism, not spying.
Apple or Huawei wouldn't have to be complicit in anything when it comes to the NSA or Chinese equivalents.
We know a fair bit about the NSA's activities though thanks to Snowden.
As far a protectionism goes, the US had no cutting edge ICT infrastructure to protect but strong-arming Huawei out of the US (see the 2017 AT&T/Huawei situation) absolutely did protect Apple from Huawei on US soil.
That's why the quote is laughable.
It was spying. And what you don't know can definitely hurt you. An FBI investigation in 2017 determined Chinese-made Huawei equipment could disrupt US nuclear arsenal communications. The FBI uncovered Chinese-made Huawei equipment atop cell towers near US military bases in the rural Midwest. According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the FBI determined the equipment was capable of capturing and disrupting highly restricted Defense Department communications, including those used by US Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear weapons.
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
That sounds like pure paranoia.
It's simple. Huawei would not install anything close to miltary infrastructure to spy on anyone.
Let's be clear, and this has been true for the last 30 years. Just ONE single piece of evidence of 'spying' would kill the company in an instant. Just one. Instant death for the company worldwide.
Why take that risk?
Why put scanning equipment up on a pole within site of military operations in plain sight where it can be confiscated, taken apart and used as evidence on national security grounds?
It would be literally suicide for the company.
Does that make sense to you?
If such a thing had existed, do you honestly think the US would have kept that evidence under the table and not paraded it around the world?
Is that so difficult to understand?
So, what's the story here?
The story is there is no story. It's as simple as that. The equipment was probably just what it was. Rural ICT infrastructure. End of story. It just happened to be near an installation because that installation was in a rural setting.
As for strategic command, in Afghanistan all of the US Command communication that travelled over local ICT infrastructure, travelled over Huawei equipment. There were no complaints.
"This is textbook Chinese Communist Party (CCP) behavior - promote PRC (People's Republic of China) national champions in telecommunications, and slowly squeeze western companies' market access"
And what was the whole Huawei thing in the US about then?
Slightly more of a squeeze!
No way Apple would be complicit in allowing the NSA to install spyware on their iPhones for sale in China, the way the Chinese did on Huawei phones for sale here.
There was no mention of any of that in the quoted text. It amounted to protectionism, not spying.
Apple or Huawei wouldn't have to be complicit in anything when it comes to the NSA or Chinese equivalents.
We know a fair bit about the NSA's activities though thanks to Snowden.
As far a protectionism goes, the US had no cutting edge ICT infrastructure to protect but strong-arming Huawei out of the US (see the 2017 AT&T/Huawei situation) absolutely did protect Apple from Huawei on US soil.
That's why the quote is laughable.
It was spying. And what you don't know can definitely hurt you. An FBI investigation in 2017 determined Chinese-made Huawei equipment could disrupt US nuclear arsenal communications. The FBI uncovered Chinese-made Huawei equipment atop cell towers near US military bases in the rural Midwest. According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the FBI determined the equipment was capable of capturing and disrupting highly restricted Defense Department communications, including those used by US Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear weapons.
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
That sounds like pure paranoia.
It's simple. Huawei would not install anything close to miltary infrastructure to spy on anyone.
Let's be clear, and this has been true for the last 30 years. Just ONE single piece of evidence of 'spying' would kill the company in an instant. Just one. Instant death for the company worldwide.
Why take that risk?
Why put scanning equipment up on a pole within site of military operations in plain sight where it can be confiscated, taken apart and used as evidence on national security grounds?
It would be literally suicide for the company.
Does that make sense to you?
If such a thing had existed, do you honestly think the US would have kept that evidence under the table and not paraded it around the world?
Is that so difficult to understand?
So, what's the story here?
The story is there is no story. It's as simple as that. The equipment was probably just what it was. Rural ICT infrastructure. End of story. It just happened to be near an installation because that installation was in a rural setting.
As for strategic command, in Afghanistan all of the US Command communication that travelled over local ICT infrastructure, travelled over Huawei equipment. There were no complaints.
Let me just note that Chinese land investments in the U.S. have a location preference near U.S. military bases. Funny that.
Easy counter. I'm going to take a Spanish example and extend it to the US.
There is a publicly available online map of every single tower setup in Spain with a wealth of technical information.
I know a LOT about the tower that covers my area.
That tower required government approval for its installation. It didn't pop up like a mushroom overnight.
Are you telling me a Huawei technician strolled up to a pole near a military installation and stuck the equipment on it? And repeated the move in different areas.
No. Right?
Please get real.
If, and this is a big if, that equipment could have caused problems, I can guarantee you that ANY equipment performing the same task would have caused the same problems.
How can I know this? Because the radio frequency regulations are subject to, erm, strict regulation.
The problem here is simply that the name on the equipment was 'Huawei'.
"This is textbook Chinese Communist Party (CCP) behavior - promote PRC (People's Republic of China) national champions in telecommunications, and slowly squeeze western companies' market access"
And what was the whole Huawei thing in the US about then?
Slightly more of a squeeze!
No way Apple would be complicit in allowing the NSA to install spyware on their iPhones for sale in China, the way the Chinese did on Huawei phones for sale here.
There was no mention of any of that in the quoted text. It amounted to protectionism, not spying.
Apple or Huawei wouldn't have to be complicit in anything when it comes to the NSA or Chinese equivalents.
We know a fair bit about the NSA's activities though thanks to Snowden.
As far a protectionism goes, the US had no cutting edge ICT infrastructure to protect but strong-arming Huawei out of the US (see the 2017 AT&T/Huawei situation) absolutely did protect Apple from Huawei on US soil.
That's why the quote is laughable.
It was spying. And what you don't know can definitely hurt you. An FBI investigation in 2017 determined Chinese-made Huawei equipment could disrupt US nuclear arsenal communications. The FBI uncovered Chinese-made Huawei equipment atop cell towers near US military bases in the rural Midwest. According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the FBI determined the equipment was capable of capturing and disrupting highly restricted Defense Department communications, including those used by US Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear weapons.
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
That sounds like pure paranoia.
It's simple. Huawei would not install anything close to miltary infrastructure to spy on anyone.
Let's be clear, and this has been true for the last 30 years. Just ONE single piece of evidence of 'spying' would kill the company in an instant. Just one. Instant death for the company worldwide.
Why take that risk?
Why put scanning equipment up on a pole within site of military operations in plain sight where it can be confiscated, taken apart and used as evidence on national security grounds?
It would be literally suicide for the company.
Does that make sense to you?
If such a thing had existed, do you honestly think the US would have kept that evidence under the table and not paraded it around the world?
Is that so difficult to understand?
So, what's the story here?
The story is there is no story. It's as simple as that. The equipment was probably just what it was. Rural ICT infrastructure. End of story. It just happened to be near an installation because that installation was in a rural setting.
As for strategic command, in Afghanistan all of the US Command communication that travelled over local ICT infrastructure, travelled over Huawei equipment. There were no complaints.
Exactly! It is so sad American democracy has fallen so badly people cannot think without fallacy. My only explanation is St. Peter is deeply against the teachings of great Aristotle, Plato, and Socrates. How many Americans learned Aristotle Sophistical Refutations? They don't like to seek facts, talk facts! Wait! Maybe many of these China haters are not American? This is my only hope to America.
Now you both sound like Chinese trolls. And yes, I've read Aristotle's viewpoint on sophistrym in addition to Plato (Socrates put nothing in writing, so we only have Plato's word for his teaching), and The Republic is certainly part treatise on sophistry, and very well defended! On the face of it, so is Aristotle's. But Aristotle not only hammers his ideas with tedious repetition and outright contradicts himself almost as much in his Nicomachean Ethics and Eudemian Ethics. I'd characterize his idea of sophistical refutation to be more solipsism than sophistry. Can't beat the Jesuit fathers for that early education in ancient western philosophy!
"This is textbook Chinese Communist Party (CCP) behavior - promote PRC (People's Republic of China) national champions in telecommunications, and slowly squeeze western companies' market access"
And what was the whole Huawei thing in the US about then?
Slightly more of a squeeze!
No way Apple would be complicit in allowing the NSA to install spyware on their iPhones for sale in China, the way the Chinese did on Huawei phones for sale here.
There was no mention of any of that in the quoted text. It amounted to protectionism, not spying.
Apple or Huawei wouldn't have to be complicit in anything when it comes to the NSA or Chinese equivalents.
We know a fair bit about the NSA's activities though thanks to Snowden.
As far a protectionism goes, the US had no cutting edge ICT infrastructure to protect but strong-arming Huawei out of the US (see the 2017 AT&T/Huawei situation) absolutely did protect Apple from Huawei on US soil.
That's why the quote is laughable.
It was spying. And what you don't know can definitely hurt you. An FBI investigation in 2017 determined Chinese-made Huawei equipment could disrupt US nuclear arsenal communications. The FBI uncovered Chinese-made Huawei equipment atop cell towers near US military bases in the rural Midwest. According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the FBI determined the equipment was capable of capturing and disrupting highly restricted Defense Department communications, including those used by US Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear weapons.
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
That sounds like pure paranoia.
It's simple. Huawei would not install anything close to miltary infrastructure to spy on anyone.
Let's be clear, and this has been true for the last 30 years. Just ONE single piece of evidence of 'spying' would kill the company in an instant. Just one. Instant death for the company worldwide.
Why take that risk?
Why put scanning equipment up on a pole within site of military operations in plain sight where it can be confiscated, taken apart and used as evidence on national security grounds?
It would be literally suicide for the company.
Does that make sense to you?
If such a thing had existed, do you honestly think the US would have kept that evidence under the table and not paraded it around the world?
Is that so difficult to understand?
So, what's the story here?
The story is there is no story. It's as simple as that. The equipment was probably just what it was. Rural ICT infrastructure. End of story. It just happened to be near an installation because that installation was in a rural setting.
As for strategic command, in Afghanistan all of the US Command communication that travelled over local ICT infrastructure, travelled over Huawei equipment. There were no complaints.
Let me just note that Chinese land investments in the U.S. have a location preference near U.S. military bases. Funny that.
Easy counter. I'm going to take a Spanish example and extend it to the US.
There is a publicly available online map of every single tower setup in Spain with a wealth of technical information.
I know a LOT about the tower that covers my area.
That tower required government approval for its installation. It didn't pop up like a mushroom overnight.
Are you telling me a Huawei technician strolled up to a pole near a military installation and stuck the equipment on it? And repeated the move in different areas.
No. Right?
Please get real.
If, and this is a big if, that equipment could have caused problems, I can guarantee you that ANY equipment performing the same task would have caused the same problems.
How can I know this? Because the radio frequency regulations are subject to, erm, strict regulation.
The problem here is simply that the name on the equipment was 'Huawei'.
"investigation revealed that Huawei had a pattern of installing equipment on cell towers near military bases in rural America – even if it wasn’t profitable to do so."
Yeah, nothing unusual about that...
The problem, is of course, that Huawei has very close links to the Chinese Government and the PLA. That should be enough of a security concern in itself to ban Huawei telecom in Western telecom infrastructure, and in fact, that is what is happening. But of course, there are always holdouts in the EU that will have to be dealt with, and the EU will.
Do you actually think that China would allow Western telecom installations anywhere near the PLA's military bases?
So, how long before the EU forces Spain, et al, to remove existing Huawei telecom equipment?
"This is textbook Chinese Communist Party (CCP) behavior - promote PRC (People's Republic of China) national champions in telecommunications, and slowly squeeze western companies' market access"
And what was the whole Huawei thing in the US about then?
Slightly more of a squeeze!
No way Apple would be complicit in allowing the NSA to install spyware on their iPhones for sale in China, the way the Chinese did on Huawei phones for sale here.
There was no mention of any of that in the quoted text. It amounted to protectionism, not spying.
Apple or Huawei wouldn't have to be complicit in anything when it comes to the NSA or Chinese equivalents.
We know a fair bit about the NSA's activities though thanks to Snowden.
As far a protectionism goes, the US had no cutting edge ICT infrastructure to protect but strong-arming Huawei out of the US (see the 2017 AT&T/Huawei situation) absolutely did protect Apple from Huawei on US soil.
That's why the quote is laughable.
It was spying. And what you don't know can definitely hurt you. An FBI investigation in 2017 determined Chinese-made Huawei equipment could disrupt US nuclear arsenal communications. The FBI uncovered Chinese-made Huawei equipment atop cell towers near US military bases in the rural Midwest. According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the FBI determined the equipment was capable of capturing and disrupting highly restricted Defense Department communications, including those used by US Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear weapons.
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
That sounds like pure paranoia.
It's simple. Huawei would not install anything close to miltary infrastructure to spy on anyone.
Let's be clear, and this has been true for the last 30 years. Just ONE single piece of evidence of 'spying' would kill the company in an instant. Just one. Instant death for the company worldwide.
Why take that risk?
Why put scanning equipment up on a pole within site of military operations in plain sight where it can be confiscated, taken apart and used as evidence on national security grounds?
It would be literally suicide for the company.
Does that make sense to you?
If such a thing had existed, do you honestly think the US would have kept that evidence under the table and not paraded it around the world?
Is that so difficult to understand?
So, what's the story here?
The story is there is no story. It's as simple as that. The equipment was probably just what it was. Rural ICT infrastructure. End of story. It just happened to be near an installation because that installation was in a rural setting.
As for strategic command, in Afghanistan all of the US Command communication that travelled over local ICT infrastructure, travelled over Huawei equipment. There were no complaints.
Let me just note that Chinese land investments in the U.S. have a location preference near U.S. military bases. Funny that.
Easy counter. I'm going to take a Spanish example and extend it to the US.
There is a publicly available online map of every single tower setup in Spain with a wealth of technical information.
I know a LOT about the tower that covers my area.
That tower required government approval for its installation. It didn't pop up like a mushroom overnight.
Are you telling me a Huawei technician strolled up to a pole near a military installation and stuck the equipment on it? And repeated the move in different areas.
No. Right?
Please get real.
If, and this is a big if, that equipment could have caused problems, I can guarantee you that ANY equipment performing the same task would have caused the same problems.
How can I know this? Because the radio frequency regulations are subject to, erm, strict regulation.
The problem here is simply that the name on the equipment was 'Huawei'.
"investigation revealed that Huawei had a pattern of installing equipment on cell towers near military bases in rural America – even if it wasn’t profitable to do so."
Yeah, nothing unusual about that...
The problem, is of course, that Huawei has very close links to the Chinese Government and the PLA. That should be enough of a security concern in itself to ban Huawei telecom in Western telecom infrastructure, and in fact, that is what is happening. But of course, there are always holdouts in the EU that will have to be dealt with, and the EU will.
Do you actually think that China would allow Western telecom installations anywhere near the PLA's military bases?
So, how long before the EU forces Spain, et al, to remove existing Huawei telecom equipment?
Ah! Let's follow the breadcrumbs...
... CNN EXCLUSIVE!
Oh well!
But let's put some of what you omitted into this...
From the CNN piece:
"Despite its tough talk, the US government’s refusal to provide evidence to back up its claims that Huawei tech poses a risk to US national security has led some critics to accuse it of xenophobic overreach. The lack of a smoking gun also raises questions of whether US officials can separate legitimate Chinese investment from espionage. "
“All of our products imported to the US have been tested and certified by the FCC before being deployed there,” Huawei said in its statement to CNN. “Our equipment only operates on the spectrum allocated by the FCC for commercial use. This means it cannot access any spectrum allocated to the DOD.”
“For more than 30 years, Huawei has maintained a proven track record in cyber security and we have never been involved in any malicious cyber security incidents,” the statement said. "
Conclusión?...
" The federal government’s reticence across multiple administrations to detail what it knows has led some critics to accuse the government of chasing ghosts".
Investigated since at least 2017. Still no charges.
"This is textbook Chinese Communist Party (CCP) behavior - promote PRC (People's Republic of China) national champions in telecommunications, and slowly squeeze western companies' market access"
And what was the whole Huawei thing in the US about then?
Slightly more of a squeeze!
No way Apple would be complicit in allowing the NSA to install spyware on their iPhones for sale in China, the way the Chinese did on Huawei phones for sale here.
There was no mention of any of that in the quoted text. It amounted to protectionism, not spying.
Apple or Huawei wouldn't have to be complicit in anything when it comes to the NSA or Chinese equivalents.
We know a fair bit about the NSA's activities though thanks to Snowden.
As far a protectionism goes, the US had no cutting edge ICT infrastructure to protect but strong-arming Huawei out of the US (see the 2017 AT&T/Huawei situation) absolutely did protect Apple from Huawei on US soil.
That's why the quote is laughable.
It was spying. And what you don't know can definitely hurt you. An FBI investigation in 2017 determined Chinese-made Huawei equipment could disrupt US nuclear arsenal communications. The FBI uncovered Chinese-made Huawei equipment atop cell towers near US military bases in the rural Midwest. According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the FBI determined the equipment was capable of capturing and disrupting highly restricted Defense Department communications, including those used by US Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear weapons.
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
That sounds like pure paranoia.
It's simple. Huawei would not install anything close to miltary infrastructure to spy on anyone.
Let's be clear, and this has been true for the last 30 years. Just ONE single piece of evidence of 'spying' would kill the company in an instant. Just one. Instant death for the company worldwide.
Why take that risk?
Why put scanning equipment up on a pole within site of military operations in plain sight where it can be confiscated, taken apart and used as evidence on national security grounds?
It would be literally suicide for the company.
Does that make sense to you?
If such a thing had existed, do you honestly think the US would have kept that evidence under the table and not paraded it around the world?
Is that so difficult to understand?
So, what's the story here?
The story is there is no story. It's as simple as that. The equipment was probably just what it was. Rural ICT infrastructure. End of story. It just happened to be near an installation because that installation was in a rural setting.
As for strategic command, in Afghanistan all of the US Command communication that travelled over local ICT infrastructure, travelled over Huawei equipment. There were no complaints.
Exactly! It is so sad American democracy has fallen so badly people cannot think without fallacy. My only explanation is St. Peter is deeply against the teachings of great Aristotle, Plato, and Socrates. How many Americans learned Aristotle Sophistical Refutations? They don't like to seek facts, talk facts! Wait! Maybe many of these China haters are not American? This is my only hope to America.
Now you both sound like Chinese trolls. And yes, I've read Aristotle's viewpoint on sophistrym in addition to Plato (Socrates put nothing in writing, so we only have Plato's word for his teaching), and The Republic is certainly part treatise on sophistry, and very well defended! On the face of it, so is Aristotle's. But Aristotle not only hammers his ideas with tedious repetition and outright contradicts himself almost as much in his Nicomachean Ethics and Eudemian Ethics. I'd characterize his idea of sophistical refutation to be more solipsism than sophistry. Can't beat the Jesuit fathers for that early education in ancient western philosophy!
LOL Did you really read Aristotle Sophistical Refutations? Do you know what it is? Aristotle listed 13 fallacies in it. Did any philosopher proved any fallacy of the 13 fallacies? No! What is amazing is after twenty five hundred years many Americans still commit the fallacies. For example, the question cause in which a cause is incorrectly identified which @Tmay loves to use. For example: "Every time I go to sleep, the sun goes down. Therefore, my going to sleep causes the sun to set." The two events may coincide, but have no causal connection. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Questionable_cause
"This is textbook Chinese Communist Party (CCP) behavior - promote PRC (People's Republic of China) national champions in telecommunications, and slowly squeeze western companies' market access"
And what was the whole Huawei thing in the US about then?
Slightly more of a squeeze!
No way Apple would be complicit in allowing the NSA to install spyware on their iPhones for sale in China, the way the Chinese did on Huawei phones for sale here.
There was no mention of any of that in the quoted text. It amounted to protectionism, not spying.
Apple or Huawei wouldn't have to be complicit in anything when it comes to the NSA or Chinese equivalents.
We know a fair bit about the NSA's activities though thanks to Snowden.
As far a protectionism goes, the US had no cutting edge ICT infrastructure to protect but strong-arming Huawei out of the US (see the 2017 AT&T/Huawei situation) absolutely did protect Apple from Huawei on US soil.
That's why the quote is laughable.
It was spying. And what you don't know can definitely hurt you. An FBI investigation in 2017 determined Chinese-made Huawei equipment could disrupt US nuclear arsenal communications. The FBI uncovered Chinese-made Huawei equipment atop cell towers near US military bases in the rural Midwest. According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the FBI determined the equipment was capable of capturing and disrupting highly restricted Defense Department communications, including those used by US Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear weapons.
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
That sounds like pure paranoia.
It's simple. Huawei would not install anything close to miltary infrastructure to spy on anyone.
Let's be clear, and this has been true for the last 30 years. Just ONE single piece of evidence of 'spying' would kill the company in an instant. Just one. Instant death for the company worldwide.
Why take that risk?
Why put scanning equipment up on a pole within site of military operations in plain sight where it can be confiscated, taken apart and used as evidence on national security grounds?
It would be literally suicide for the company.
Does that make sense to you?
If such a thing had existed, do you honestly think the US would have kept that evidence under the table and not paraded it around the world?
Is that so difficult to understand?
So, what's the story here?
The story is there is no story. It's as simple as that. The equipment was probably just what it was. Rural ICT infrastructure. End of story. It just happened to be near an installation because that installation was in a rural setting.
As for strategic command, in Afghanistan all of the US Command communication that travelled over local ICT infrastructure, travelled over Huawei equipment. There were no complaints.
Exactly! It is so sad American democracy has fallen so badly people cannot think without fallacy. My only explanation is St. Peter is deeply against the teachings of great Aristotle, Plato, and Socrates. How many Americans learned Aristotle Sophistical Refutations? They don't like to seek facts, talk facts! Wait! Maybe many of these China haters are not American? This is my only hope to America.
Now you both sound like Chinese trolls. And yes, I've read Aristotle's viewpoint on sophistrym in addition to Plato (Socrates put nothing in writing, so we only have Plato's word for his teaching), and The Republic is certainly part treatise on sophistry, and very well defended! On the face of it, so is Aristotle's. But Aristotle not only hammers his ideas with tedious repetition and outright contradicts himself almost as much in his Nicomachean Ethics and Eudemian Ethics. I'd characterize his idea of sophistical refutation to be more solipsism than sophistry. Can't beat the Jesuit fathers for that early education in ancient western philosophy!
LOL Did you really read Aristotle Sophistical Refutations? Do you know what it is? Aristotle listed 13 fallacies in it. Did any philosopher proved any fallacy of the 13 fallacies? No! What is amazing is after twenty five hundred years many Americans still commit the fallacies. For example, the question cause in which a cause is incorrectly identified which @Tmay loves to use. For example: "Every time I go to sleep, the sun goes down. Therefore, my going to sleep causes the sun to set." The two events may coincide, but have no causal connection. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Questionable_cause
Yes, I know the difference between causation and correlation. I also know the difference between "found not guilty," and "did it." Recent impeachment efforts (going back to say, 1974) by both political parties are a perfect example. None were found guilty. They all did it.
BTW, "Did any philosopher proved any fallacy of the 13 fallacies?" is some tortured and barely intelligible syntax.
"This is textbook Chinese Communist Party (CCP) behavior - promote PRC (People's Republic of China) national champions in telecommunications, and slowly squeeze western companies' market access"
And what was the whole Huawei thing in the US about then?
Slightly more of a squeeze!
No way Apple would be complicit in allowing the NSA to install spyware on their iPhones for sale in China, the way the Chinese did on Huawei phones for sale here.
There was no mention of any of that in the quoted text. It amounted to protectionism, not spying.
Apple or Huawei wouldn't have to be complicit in anything when it comes to the NSA or Chinese equivalents.
We know a fair bit about the NSA's activities though thanks to Snowden.
As far a protectionism goes, the US had no cutting edge ICT infrastructure to protect but strong-arming Huawei out of the US (see the 2017 AT&T/Huawei situation) absolutely did protect Apple from Huawei on US soil.
That's why the quote is laughable.
It was spying. And what you don't know can definitely hurt you. An FBI investigation in 2017 determined Chinese-made Huawei equipment could disrupt US nuclear arsenal communications. The FBI uncovered Chinese-made Huawei equipment atop cell towers near US military bases in the rural Midwest. According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the FBI determined the equipment was capable of capturing and disrupting highly restricted Defense Department communications, including those used by US Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear weapons.
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
That sounds like pure paranoia.
It's simple. Huawei would not install anything close to miltary infrastructure to spy on anyone.
Let's be clear, and this has been true for the last 30 years. Just ONE single piece of evidence of 'spying' would kill the company in an instant. Just one. Instant death for the company worldwide.
Why take that risk?
Why put scanning equipment up on a pole within site of military operations in plain sight where it can be confiscated, taken apart and used as evidence on national security grounds?
It would be literally suicide for the company.
Does that make sense to you?
If such a thing had existed, do you honestly think the US would have kept that evidence under the table and not paraded it around the world?
Is that so difficult to understand?
So, what's the story here?
The story is there is no story. It's as simple as that. The equipment was probably just what it was. Rural ICT infrastructure. End of story. It just happened to be near an installation because that installation was in a rural setting.
As for strategic command, in Afghanistan all of the US Command communication that travelled over local ICT infrastructure, travelled over Huawei equipment. There were no complaints.
Exactly! It is so sad American democracy has fallen so badly people cannot think without fallacy. My only explanation is St. Peter is deeply against the teachings of great Aristotle, Plato, and Socrates. How many Americans learned Aristotle Sophistical Refutations? They don't like to seek facts, talk facts! Wait! Maybe many of these China haters are not American? This is my only hope to America.
Now you both sound like Chinese trolls. And yes, I've read Aristotle's viewpoint on sophistrym in addition to Plato (Socrates put nothing in writing, so we only have Plato's word for his teaching), and The Republic is certainly part treatise on sophistry, and very well defended! On the face of it, so is Aristotle's. But Aristotle not only hammers his ideas with tedious repetition and outright contradicts himself almost as much in his Nicomachean Ethics and Eudemian Ethics. I'd characterize his idea of sophistical refutation to be more solipsism than sophistry. Can't beat the Jesuit fathers for that early education in ancient western philosophy!
LOL Did you really read Aristotle Sophistical Refutations? Do you know what it is? Aristotle listed 13 fallacies in it. Did any philosopher proved any fallacy of the 13 fallacies? No! What is amazing is after twenty five hundred years many Americans still commit the fallacies. For example, the question cause in which a cause is incorrectly identified which @Tmay loves to use. For example: "Every time I go to sleep, the sun goes down. Therefore, my going to sleep causes the sun to set." The two events may coincide, but have no causal connection. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Questionable_cause
Yes, I know the difference between causation and correlation. I also know the difference between "found not guilty," and "did it." Recent impeachment efforts (going back to say, 1974) by both political parties are a perfect example. None were found guilty. They all did it.
BTW, "Did any philosopher proved any fallacy of the 13 fallacies?" is some tortured and barely intelligible syntax.
LOL You forgot your own words. "I'd characterize his idea of sophistical refutation to be more solipsism than sophistry. Can't beat the Jesuit fathers for that early education in ancient western philosophy!" You failed the question cause in which a cause is incorrectly identified.
"This is textbook Chinese Communist Party (CCP) behavior - promote PRC (People's Republic of China) national champions in telecommunications, and slowly squeeze western companies' market access"
And what was the whole Huawei thing in the US about then?
Slightly more of a squeeze!
No way Apple would be complicit in allowing the NSA to install spyware on their iPhones for sale in China, the way the Chinese did on Huawei phones for sale here.
There was no mention of any of that in the quoted text. It amounted to protectionism, not spying.
Apple or Huawei wouldn't have to be complicit in anything when it comes to the NSA or Chinese equivalents.
We know a fair bit about the NSA's activities though thanks to Snowden.
As far a protectionism goes, the US had no cutting edge ICT infrastructure to protect but strong-arming Huawei out of the US (see the 2017 AT&T/Huawei situation) absolutely did protect Apple from Huawei on US soil.
That's why the quote is laughable.
It was spying. And what you don't know can definitely hurt you. An FBI investigation in 2017 determined Chinese-made Huawei equipment could disrupt US nuclear arsenal communications. The FBI uncovered Chinese-made Huawei equipment atop cell towers near US military bases in the rural Midwest. According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the FBI determined the equipment was capable of capturing and disrupting highly restricted Defense Department communications, including those used by US Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear weapons.
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
That sounds like pure paranoia.
It's simple. Huawei would not install anything close to miltary infrastructure to spy on anyone.
Let's be clear, and this has been true for the last 30 years. Just ONE single piece of evidence of 'spying' would kill the company in an instant. Just one. Instant death for the company worldwide.
Why take that risk?
Why put scanning equipment up on a pole within site of military operations in plain sight where it can be confiscated, taken apart and used as evidence on national security grounds?
It would be literally suicide for the company.
Does that make sense to you?
If such a thing had existed, do you honestly think the US would have kept that evidence under the table and not paraded it around the world?
Is that so difficult to understand?
So, what's the story here?
The story is there is no story. It's as simple as that. The equipment was probably just what it was. Rural ICT infrastructure. End of story. It just happened to be near an installation because that installation was in a rural setting.
As for strategic command, in Afghanistan all of the US Command communication that travelled over local ICT infrastructure, travelled over Huawei equipment. There were no complaints.
Let me just note that Chinese land investments in the U.S. have a location preference near U.S. military bases. Funny that.
Easy counter. I'm going to take a Spanish example and extend it to the US.
There is a publicly available online map of every single tower setup in Spain with a wealth of technical information.
I know a LOT about the tower that covers my area.
That tower required government approval for its installation. It didn't pop up like a mushroom overnight.
Are you telling me a Huawei technician strolled up to a pole near a military installation and stuck the equipment on it? And repeated the move in different areas.
No. Right?
Please get real.
If, and this is a big if, that equipment could have caused problems, I can guarantee you that ANY equipment performing the same task would have caused the same problems.
How can I know this? Because the radio frequency regulations are subject to, erm, strict regulation.
The problem here is simply that the name on the equipment was 'Huawei'.
"investigation revealed that Huawei had a pattern of installing equipment on cell towers near military bases in rural America – even if it wasn’t profitable to do so."
Yeah, nothing unusual about that...
The problem, is of course, that Huawei has very close links to the Chinese Government and the PLA. That should be enough of a security concern in itself to ban Huawei telecom in Western telecom infrastructure, and in fact, that is what is happening. But of course, there are always holdouts in the EU that will have to be dealt with, and the EU will.
Do you actually think that China would allow Western telecom installations anywhere near the PLA's military bases?
So, how long before the EU forces Spain, et al, to remove existing Huawei telecom equipment?
Ah! Let's follow the breadcrumbs...
... CNN EXCLUSIVE!
Oh well!
But let's put some of what you omitted into this...
From the CNN piece:
"Despite its tough talk, the US government’s refusal to provide evidence to back up its claims that Huawei tech poses a risk to US national security has led some critics to accuse it of xenophobic overreach. The lack of a smoking gun also raises questions of whether US officials can separate legitimate Chinese investment from espionage. "
“All of our products imported to the US have been tested and certified by the FCC before being deployed there,” Huawei said in its statement to CNN. “Our equipment only operates on the spectrum allocated by the FCC for commercial use. This means it cannot access any spectrum allocated to the DOD.”
“For more than 30 years, Huawei has maintained a proven track record in cyber security and we have never been involved in any malicious cyber security incidents,” the statement said. "
Conclusión?...
" The federal government’s reticence across multiple administrations to detail what it knows has led some critics to accuse the government of chasing ghosts".
Investigated since at least 2017. Still no charges.
LOL!.
Please lay out for me why allowing critical infrastructure from an adversary, or even a neutral party, is good National Security policy, because there are so many counter examples of that just in today's news.
This would be a different situation if China was even a marginally democratic country; it isn't, and given that there is plentiful technology in the West to provide telecom infrastructure, why would we want to use Huawei?
"This is textbook Chinese Communist Party (CCP) behavior - promote PRC (People's Republic of China) national champions in telecommunications, and slowly squeeze western companies' market access"
And what was the whole Huawei thing in the US about then?
Slightly more of a squeeze!
No way Apple would be complicit in allowing the NSA to install spyware on their iPhones for sale in China, the way the Chinese did on Huawei phones for sale here.
There was no mention of any of that in the quoted text. It amounted to protectionism, not spying.
Apple or Huawei wouldn't have to be complicit in anything when it comes to the NSA or Chinese equivalents.
We know a fair bit about the NSA's activities though thanks to Snowden.
As far a protectionism goes, the US had no cutting edge ICT infrastructure to protect but strong-arming Huawei out of the US (see the 2017 AT&T/Huawei situation) absolutely did protect Apple from Huawei on US soil.
That's why the quote is laughable.
It was spying. And what you don't know can definitely hurt you. An FBI investigation in 2017 determined Chinese-made Huawei equipment could disrupt US nuclear arsenal communications. The FBI uncovered Chinese-made Huawei equipment atop cell towers near US military bases in the rural Midwest. According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the FBI determined the equipment was capable of capturing and disrupting highly restricted Defense Department communications, including those used by US Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear weapons.
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
That sounds like pure paranoia.
It's simple. Huawei would not install anything close to miltary infrastructure to spy on anyone.
Let's be clear, and this has been true for the last 30 years. Just ONE single piece of evidence of 'spying' would kill the company in an instant. Just one. Instant death for the company worldwide.
Why take that risk?
Why put scanning equipment up on a pole within site of military operations in plain sight where it can be confiscated, taken apart and used as evidence on national security grounds?
It would be literally suicide for the company.
Does that make sense to you?
If such a thing had existed, do you honestly think the US would have kept that evidence under the table and not paraded it around the world?
Is that so difficult to understand?
So, what's the story here?
The story is there is no story. It's as simple as that. The equipment was probably just what it was. Rural ICT infrastructure. End of story. It just happened to be near an installation because that installation was in a rural setting.
As for strategic command, in Afghanistan all of the US Command communication that travelled over local ICT infrastructure, travelled over Huawei equipment. There were no complaints.
Let me just note that Chinese land investments in the U.S. have a location preference near U.S. military bases. Funny that.
Easy counter. I'm going to take a Spanish example and extend it to the US.
There is a publicly available online map of every single tower setup in Spain with a wealth of technical information.
I know a LOT about the tower that covers my area.
That tower required government approval for its installation. It didn't pop up like a mushroom overnight.
Are you telling me a Huawei technician strolled up to a pole near a military installation and stuck the equipment on it? And repeated the move in different areas.
No. Right?
Please get real.
If, and this is a big if, that equipment could have caused problems, I can guarantee you that ANY equipment performing the same task would have caused the same problems.
How can I know this? Because the radio frequency regulations are subject to, erm, strict regulation.
The problem here is simply that the name on the equipment was 'Huawei'.
"investigation revealed that Huawei had a pattern of installing equipment on cell towers near military bases in rural America – even if it wasn’t profitable to do so."
Yeah, nothing unusual about that...
The problem, is of course, that Huawei has very close links to the Chinese Government and the PLA. That should be enough of a security concern in itself to ban Huawei telecom in Western telecom infrastructure, and in fact, that is what is happening. But of course, there are always holdouts in the EU that will have to be dealt with, and the EU will.
Do you actually think that China would allow Western telecom installations anywhere near the PLA's military bases?
So, how long before the EU forces Spain, et al, to remove existing Huawei telecom equipment?
Ah! Let's follow the breadcrumbs...
... CNN EXCLUSIVE!
Oh well!
But let's put some of what you omitted into this...
From the CNN piece:
"Despite its tough talk, the US government’s refusal to provide evidence to back up its claims that Huawei tech poses a risk to US national security has led some critics to accuse it of xenophobic overreach. The lack of a smoking gun also raises questions of whether US officials can separate legitimate Chinese investment from espionage. "
“All of our products imported to the US have been tested and certified by the FCC before being deployed there,” Huawei said in its statement to CNN. “Our equipment only operates on the spectrum allocated by the FCC for commercial use. This means it cannot access any spectrum allocated to the DOD.”
“For more than 30 years, Huawei has maintained a proven track record in cyber security and we have never been involved in any malicious cyber security incidents,” the statement said. "
Conclusión?...
" The federal government’s reticence across multiple administrations to detail what it knows has led some critics to accuse the government of chasing ghosts".
Investigated since at least 2017. Still no charges.
LOL!.
Please lay out for me why allowing critical infrastructure from an adversary, or even a neutral party, is good National Security policy, because there are so many counter examples of that just in today's news.
This would be a different situation if China was even a marginally democratic country; it isn't, and given that there is plentiful technology in the West to provide telecom infrastructure, why would we want to use Huawei?
The fallacy of your proposition is assuming China is a US adversary.
"This is textbook Chinese Communist Party (CCP) behavior - promote PRC (People's Republic of China) national champions in telecommunications, and slowly squeeze western companies' market access"
And what was the whole Huawei thing in the US about then?
Slightly more of a squeeze!
No way Apple would be complicit in allowing the NSA to install spyware on their iPhones for sale in China, the way the Chinese did on Huawei phones for sale here.
There was no mention of any of that in the quoted text. It amounted to protectionism, not spying.
Apple or Huawei wouldn't have to be complicit in anything when it comes to the NSA or Chinese equivalents.
We know a fair bit about the NSA's activities though thanks to Snowden.
As far a protectionism goes, the US had no cutting edge ICT infrastructure to protect but strong-arming Huawei out of the US (see the 2017 AT&T/Huawei situation) absolutely did protect Apple from Huawei on US soil.
That's why the quote is laughable.
It was spying. And what you don't know can definitely hurt you. An FBI investigation in 2017 determined Chinese-made Huawei equipment could disrupt US nuclear arsenal communications. The FBI uncovered Chinese-made Huawei equipment atop cell towers near US military bases in the rural Midwest. According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the FBI determined the equipment was capable of capturing and disrupting highly restricted Defense Department communications, including those used by US Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear weapons.
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
That sounds like pure paranoia.
It's simple. Huawei would not install anything close to miltary infrastructure to spy on anyone.
Let's be clear, and this has been true for the last 30 years. Just ONE single piece of evidence of 'spying' would kill the company in an instant. Just one. Instant death for the company worldwide.
Why take that risk?
Why put scanning equipment up on a pole within site of military operations in plain sight where it can be confiscated, taken apart and used as evidence on national security grounds?
It would be literally suicide for the company.
Does that make sense to you?
If such a thing had existed, do you honestly think the US would have kept that evidence under the table and not paraded it around the world?
Is that so difficult to understand?
So, what's the story here?
The story is there is no story. It's as simple as that. The equipment was probably just what it was. Rural ICT infrastructure. End of story. It just happened to be near an installation because that installation was in a rural setting.
As for strategic command, in Afghanistan all of the US Command communication that travelled over local ICT infrastructure, travelled over Huawei equipment. There were no complaints.
Let me just note that Chinese land investments in the U.S. have a location preference near U.S. military bases. Funny that.
Easy counter. I'm going to take a Spanish example and extend it to the US.
There is a publicly available online map of every single tower setup in Spain with a wealth of technical information.
I know a LOT about the tower that covers my area.
That tower required government approval for its installation. It didn't pop up like a mushroom overnight.
Are you telling me a Huawei technician strolled up to a pole near a military installation and stuck the equipment on it? And repeated the move in different areas.
No. Right?
Please get real.
If, and this is a big if, that equipment could have caused problems, I can guarantee you that ANY equipment performing the same task would have caused the same problems.
How can I know this? Because the radio frequency regulations are subject to, erm, strict regulation.
The problem here is simply that the name on the equipment was 'Huawei'.
"investigation revealed that Huawei had a pattern of installing equipment on cell towers near military bases in rural America – even if it wasn’t profitable to do so."
Yeah, nothing unusual about that...
The problem, is of course, that Huawei has very close links to the Chinese Government and the PLA. That should be enough of a security concern in itself to ban Huawei telecom in Western telecom infrastructure, and in fact, that is what is happening. But of course, there are always holdouts in the EU that will have to be dealt with, and the EU will.
Do you actually think that China would allow Western telecom installations anywhere near the PLA's military bases?
So, how long before the EU forces Spain, et al, to remove existing Huawei telecom equipment?
Ah! Let's follow the breadcrumbs...
... CNN EXCLUSIVE!
Oh well!
But let's put some of what you omitted into this...
From the CNN piece:
"Despite its tough talk, the US government’s refusal to provide evidence to back up its claims that Huawei tech poses a risk to US national security has led some critics to accuse it of xenophobic overreach. The lack of a smoking gun also raises questions of whether US officials can separate legitimate Chinese investment from espionage. "
“All of our products imported to the US have been tested and certified by the FCC before being deployed there,” Huawei said in its statement to CNN. “Our equipment only operates on the spectrum allocated by the FCC for commercial use. This means it cannot access any spectrum allocated to the DOD.”
“For more than 30 years, Huawei has maintained a proven track record in cyber security and we have never been involved in any malicious cyber security incidents,” the statement said. "
Conclusión?...
" The federal government’s reticence across multiple administrations to detail what it knows has led some critics to accuse the government of chasing ghosts".
Investigated since at least 2017. Still no charges.
LOL!.
Please lay out for me why allowing critical infrastructure from an adversary, or even a neutral party, is good National Security policy, because there are so many counter examples of that just in today's news.
This would be a different situation if China was even a marginally democratic country; it isn't, and given that there is plentiful technology in the West to provide telecom infrastructure, why would we want to use Huawei?
The fallacy of your proposition is assuming China is a US adversary.
Prove China isn't a threat, otherwise The West should assume that "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy" isn't just cosplay, nor is a massive military buildup in China, a sign of friendship.
Comments
First couple of quoted paragraphs contain the words 'compete', 'competition' and 'competitive' yet the US has actually done literally nothing along those lines.
It was losing so it singled out the threat (Huawei) and literally tried to destroy it, bullying and bludgeoning allies in the process. Authoritarian, you say? Who is dictating here? The irony!
This is about technological supremacy within the context of a nascent multi-polar world made up of all kinds of governments.
The US should be competing but it isn't.
I have quoted exactly what was presented. 5G was such an advancement in technological and economic terms yet the US literally had nothing to offer in response.
That, by top level US admission, and presented in Washington.
In black and white and with crystal clear clarity.
Type of government is irrelevant.
What you fail to mention is that the U.S., as it often did, relied on global trade to provide some of our technology, so yeah, China saw an opportunity in telecom.
I remember the comment by a Swedish government official to the effect that Huawei was quoting Telecom Infrastructure for less than they could manufacture it for. That sure looks like massive subsidies by the Chinese Government and would inevitably lead to Huawei gaining a dominant share and killing ultimately killing off competition. That is in fact a national security concern. More to the point, you seem unable to comprehend that the EU has also recognized security issues with Huawei Telecom, and as I posted elsewhere, is looking to completely ban Huawei in the EU.
Oh, and the type of government is absolutely relevant in global trade, and China has indicated that it wants to have its own rules. You seem to agree with that, but ironically, you otherwise always support the EU.
My bet is that you now disagree with the EU.
Huawei was very competitive. It's famous for its wolf pack culture and driving workers into the ground and bending over backwards to adapt to customers' needs.
As with most things the truth sits somewhere between the extremes that you hear.
On telecom in general, the US simply screwed up strategically. Look no further than that for explanations.
Sounds like strategic success to me!
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
It's simple. Huawei would not install anything close to miltary infrastructure to spy on anyone.
Let's be clear, and this has been true for the last 30 years. Just ONE single piece of evidence of 'spying' would kill the company in an instant. Just one. Instant death for the company worldwide.
Why take that risk?
Why put scanning equipment up on a pole within sight of military operations in plain sight where it can be confiscated, taken apart and used as evidence on national security grounds?
It would be literally suicide for the company.
Does that make sense to you?
If such a thing had existed, do you honestly think the US would have kept that evidence under the table and not paraded it around the world?
Is that so difficult to understand?
So, what's the story here?
The story is there is no story. It's as simple as that. The equipment was probably just what it was. Rural ICT infrastructure. End of story. It just happened to be near an installation because that installation was in a rural setting.
As for strategic command, in Afghanistan all of the US Command communication that travelled over local ICT infrastructure, travelled over Huawei equipment. There were no complaints.
Let me just note that Chinese land investments in the U.S. have a location preference near U.S. military bases. Funny that.
There is a publicly available online map of every single tower setup in Spain with a wealth of technical information.
I know a LOT about the tower that covers my area.
That tower required government approval for its installation. It didn't pop up like a mushroom overnight.
Are you telling me a Huawei technician strolled up to a pole near a military installation and stuck the equipment on it? And repeated the move in different areas.
No. Right?
Please get real.
If, and this is a big if, that equipment could have caused problems, I can guarantee you that ANY equipment performing the same task would have caused the same problems.
How can I know this? Because the radio frequency regulations are subject to, erm, strict regulation.
The problem here is simply that the name on the equipment was 'Huawei'.
Yeah, nothing unusual about that...
The problem, is of course, that Huawei has very close links to the Chinese Government and the PLA. That should be enough of a security concern in itself to ban Huawei telecom in Western telecom infrastructure, and in fact, that is what is happening. But of course, there are always holdouts in the EU that will have to be dealt with, and the EU will.
Do you actually think that China would allow Western telecom installations anywhere near the PLA's military bases?
So, how long before the EU forces Spain, et al, to remove existing Huawei telecom equipment?
... CNN EXCLUSIVE!
Oh well!
But let's put some of what you omitted into this...
From the CNN piece:
"Despite its tough talk, the US government’s refusal to provide evidence to back up its claims that Huawei tech poses a risk to US national security has led some critics to accuse it of xenophobic overreach. The lack of a smoking gun also raises questions of whether US officials can separate legitimate Chinese investment from espionage. "
Conclusión?...
" The federal government’s reticence across multiple administrations to detail what it knows has led some critics to accuse the government of chasing ghosts".
Investigated since at least 2017. Still no charges.
Please lay out for me why allowing critical infrastructure from an adversary, or even a neutral party, is good National Security policy, because there are so many counter examples of that just in today's news.
This would be a different situation if China was even a marginally democratic country; it isn't, and given that there is plentiful technology in the West to provide telecom infrastructure, why would we want to use Huawei?