Miscellaneous News

S

supersnoop

Major
Registered Member
Bellum_Romanum said:
Chinese Asylum seekers? Like from China? Why asylum? Are all of them declaring to being prosecuted by the Chinese government?
Click to expand...

Bellum_Romanum said:
What's your interpretation on this report. Why are the Chinese nationals getting the most approval for the asylum process. Is this based purely on merit, based on the fact that there are far more Chinese asylum seekers per capita which the approvals simply reflect the number of applicants? Or does politics meaning geopolitics play into the equation a little bit. Essentially this tidbit can and will be used by America as part of the overall attack on the supposed political, religious (nutjobs of FLG) regressions allegedly to be happening in China.
Click to expand...

Not being familiar with the process of asylum seeking myself, I actually put it out there for others that maybe know a bit better.

I know that there was a bit of an outcry when the Trump administration said crime and domestic violence were no longer grounds to claim asylum. This supposedly affected the Latin/Central American countries asylum seekers greatly, but statistically speaking, they still form a big number of the approved claims as shown here.

Generally speaking asylum claims are most likely due to religious/racial/political persecution. However, I am not sure how it is proven. I heard that being charged with violating the One-Child policy can be grounds for asylum. I imagine it is very easy to forge documents with respect to that as @winword suggested. Anyone could also call themselves FLG if they want a green card as well.

In Canada, there is a general concern of whether these are people are being pursued as a result of political score settling or legitimately corrupt officials.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Because of the geopolitics involved, there is this assumption that the CPC is always out to "get" people. Yet, from the western news itself we know that the anti corruption drive was quite successful in rooting out the corrupt officials who were being paid by the CIA, so clearly those particular people were not innocent.

On the surface level, I find it hard to believe that so many people can be pursued by the authorities. The CPC does not have "God Mode", it cannot zero in on every person who says "Xi Jinping F** Off", nor would it care to. The other thing that is kind of ridiculous from a common sense standpoint is that probably the asylum approval percentage for seekers from China must be ridiculously high relative to the Latin American countries.

At the same time, we do have to respect the differences between western "rule of law" vs. PRC "rule of law", which leads to certain incompatibilities. I don't think one is "right" and the other is "wrong", just different and therefore not always in agreement. As such, probably some of these people have legitimate claims from a western perspective. For example some cases are probably civil in nature in the West, but become criminal cases in China, as such this would be "unfair prosecution" under western law.
 
Bellum_Romanum

Bellum_Romanum

Brigadier
Registered Member
Holy cow!! Didn't know this unfortunate natural disaster is unfolding in some parts of India. While I hope and wish that no people there are severely hurt, injured, and killed regardless of their social standing. I can't help but observe that if this unfortunate calamity happened in China the comments on the video would be to either bash the government, bash China's infrastructure as less than stellar for being "Chinese made" the idiots and fake religious nutcases expressing that such event is a punishment handed by their gods. The other group composed of the Gordon Chang type variety would then declare for the bazillion times that China is on the verge of collapse.

 
AssassinsMace

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
I remember reading after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Eastern European countries resented China because the West outsourced to China and not them when China was communist. Am I surprised when an Eastern European country has a problem with China? No. Am I surprised there are a lot of white supremacist skinhead groups in Eastern Europe? No, and the two probably have a lot to do with one another.
 
O

Overbom

Brigadier
Registered Member
AssassinsMace said:
I remember reading after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Eastern European countries resented China because the West outsourced to China and not them when China was communist.
Click to expand...
Lol. Capitalists are not stupid

Imagine splitting your supply chain in a dozen different countries with different languages, different tax regimes, different gov policies, different infrastructure levels, not good enough work culture (zzz) etc

Compared to China, EE was an extremely bad choice for businesses to outsource
 
AssassinsMace

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
Overbom said:
Lol. Capitalists are not stupid

Imagine splitting your supply chain in a dozen different countries with different languages, different tax regimes, different gov policies, different infrastructure levels, not good enough work culture (zzz) etc

Compared to China, EE was an extremely bad choice for businesses to outsource
Click to expand...
Lithuania obviously thought the West was going to protect the country from China or they wouldn't be reflecting. Did Lithuania think the West was going to act against China or did they think sympathy money was going to be pouring in. It's no different when Google thought it was bigger than China and thought other companies were going to follow suit when they decided to take on China. The only company that followed was GoDaddy and thus a history changing moment where the corporate world knew not to screw with China. Maybe Lithuania was jealous of all the moral support that Australia was getting for taking on China and thought they can get something from it also.
 
A

Appix

Senior Member
Registered Member

Taiwan should destroy chip infrastructure if China invades: paper​


NEW YORK -- In the most-downloaded paper published by the U.S. Army War College in 2021, two American scholars propose a Taiwan deterrence strategy to render the island so "unwantable" that it would make no logical sense for China to seize it by force.

One key recommendation is for the U.S. and Taiwan to threaten to destroy facilities of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. -- the world's most important chipmaker and China's most important supplier -- if Beijing invades.
Samsung, based in U.S. ally South Korea, would be the only alternative for cutting-edge designs. If TSMC went offline, "China's high-tech industries would be immobilized at precisely the same time the nation was embroiled in a massive war effort," the authors note. "Even when the formal war ended, the economic costs would persist for years,"
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
suggests, adding that such a scenario could hurt the legitimacy of the Chinese Communist Party.

The challenge, the authors argue, is to make such a threat credible. "An automatic mechanism might be designed, which would be triggered once an invasion was confirmed," they write.

"Despite a huge Chinese effort for a 'Made in China' chip industry, only 6% of semiconductors used in China were produced domestically in 2020," the paper notes.

"Broken Nest: Deterring China from Invading Taiwan" was written by Jared McKinney, chair of the Department of Strategy and Security Studies at the eSchool of Graduate Professional Military Education, Air University, and Peter Harris, associate professor of political science at Colorado State University. The views do not necessarily represent those of Air University or the U.S. Air Force, McKinney said.

China has responded strongly to the report. On Dec. 23, the website of the Chinese State Council's Taiwan Affairs Office posted an article noting that "the mainland's pursuit of cross-strait reunification is definitely not for TSMC."
The controversial approach stems from an acknowledgement that traditional deterrence strategies -- such as forward-deploying American warships in Taiwan's vicinity -- may not be enough to discourage Beijing from taking action in the Taiwan Strait.

The People's Liberation Army's goal for a successful invasion was 14 hours, a Chinese analyst with connections in the PLA Navy told the authors. The U.S. and Japan, meanwhile, would need 24 hours to respond, according to a PLA projection cited in the paper.

"If this scenario is close to being accurate, China's government might well be inclined to attempt a fait accompli as soon as it is confident in its relative capabilities," McKinney and Harris write.
While ensuring that key chip-producing facilities do not fall into Beijing's hands, the U.S. and allies could also form contingency plans to quickly evacuate highly skilled Taiwanese working in this sector and give them refuge, the paper proposes.

The authors acknowledge that this "scorched-earth" strategy will be unappealing to the Taiwanese. But the costs "will be far less devastating to the people of Taiwan than the U.S. threat of great power war, which would see massive and prolonged fighting in, above, and beside Taiwan," they continue.

McKinney told Nikkei Asia that the plan brings the economic instruments of power into the deterrence argument and that it offers "an alternative to fighting a great power war at a location 5,000 miles west of Hawaii, a prohibitively difficult proposition."

Harris said: "If the U.S. and Taiwan wish to deter China from invading, then they should look for means of doing so that do not rely on the threat of U.S. military reprisals. Relying exclusively on military threats is becoming less credible and thus more dangerous."

Meanwhile, the paper proposes making efforts to convince Beijing of the "considerable advantages" to maintaining the status quo.

"Washington must restate in unambiguous terms the status of Taiwan is undetermined, that the United States has no plans to support independent statehood for Taiwan, and it will not seek to shift the status quo using gray-zone tactics that violate the spirit of Sino-American rapprochement," the authors write.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Non paywall

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
BoraTas

BoraTas

Captain
Registered Member
Appix said:

Taiwan should destroy chip infrastructure if China invades: paper​


NEW YORK -- In the most-downloaded paper published by the U.S. Army War College in 2021, two American scholars propose a Taiwan deterrence strategy to render the island so "unwantable" that it would make no logical sense for China to seize it by force.

One key recommendation is for the U.S. and Taiwan to threaten to destroy facilities of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. -- the world's most important chipmaker and China's most important supplier -- if Beijing invades.
Samsung, based in U.S. ally South Korea, would be the only alternative for cutting-edge designs. If TSMC went offline, "China's high-tech industries would be immobilized at precisely the same time the nation was embroiled in a massive war effort," the authors note. "Even when the formal war ended, the economic costs would persist for years,"
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
suggests, adding that such a scenario could hurt the legitimacy of the Chinese Communist Party.

The challenge, the authors argue, is to make such a threat credible. "An automatic mechanism might be designed, which would be triggered once an invasion was confirmed," they write.

"Despite a huge Chinese effort for a 'Made in China' chip industry, only 6% of semiconductors used in China were produced domestically in 2020," the paper notes.

"Broken Nest: Deterring China from Invading Taiwan" was written by Jared McKinney, chair of the Department of Strategy and Security Studies at the eSchool of Graduate Professional Military Education, Air University, and Peter Harris, associate professor of political science at Colorado State University. The views do not necessarily represent those of Air University or the U.S. Air Force, McKinney said.

China has responded strongly to the report. On Dec. 23, the website of the Chinese State Council's Taiwan Affairs Office posted an article noting that "the mainland's pursuit of cross-strait reunification is definitely not for TSMC."
The controversial approach stems from an acknowledgement that traditional deterrence strategies -- such as forward-deploying American warships in Taiwan's vicinity -- may not be enough to discourage Beijing from taking action in the Taiwan Strait.

The People's Liberation Army's goal for a successful invasion was 14 hours, a Chinese analyst with connections in the PLA Navy told the authors. The U.S. and Japan, meanwhile, would need 24 hours to respond, according to a PLA projection cited in the paper.

"If this scenario is close to being accurate, China's government might well be inclined to attempt a fait accompli as soon as it is confident in its relative capabilities," McKinney and Harris write.
While ensuring that key chip-producing facilities do not fall into Beijing's hands, the U.S. and allies could also form contingency plans to quickly evacuate highly skilled Taiwanese working in this sector and give them refuge, the paper proposes.

The authors acknowledge that this "scorched-earth" strategy will be unappealing to the Taiwanese. But the costs "will be far less devastating to the people of Taiwan than the U.S. threat of great power war, which would see massive and prolonged fighting in, above, and beside Taiwan," they continue.

McKinney told Nikkei Asia that the plan brings the economic instruments of power into the deterrence argument and that it offers "an alternative to fighting a great power war at a location 5,000 miles west of Hawaii, a prohibitively difficult proposition."

Harris said: "If the U.S. and Taiwan wish to deter China from invading, then they should look for means of doing so that do not rely on the threat of U.S. military reprisals. Relying exclusively on military threats is becoming less credible and thus more dangerous."

Meanwhile, the paper proposes making efforts to convince Beijing of the "considerable advantages" to maintaining the status quo.

"Washington must restate in unambiguous terms the status of Taiwan is undetermined, that the United States has no plans to support independent statehood for Taiwan, and it will not seek to shift the status quo using gray-zone tactics that violate the spirit of Sino-American rapprochement," the authors write.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Non paywall

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...
Next article: Taiwan should nuke itself if China invades.
Besides the weirdness of the idea, all these talks about the TSMC are ridiculous. I bet TSMC is not even a factor in China's Taiwan policy.
 
solarz

solarz

Brigadier
Appix said:

Taiwan should destroy chip infrastructure if China invades: paper​


NEW YORK -- In the most-downloaded paper published by the U.S. Army War College in 2021, two American scholars propose a Taiwan deterrence strategy to render the island so "unwantable" that it would make no logical sense for China to seize it by force.

One key recommendation is for the U.S. and Taiwan to threaten to destroy facilities of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. -- the world's most important chipmaker and China's most important supplier -- if Beijing invades.
Samsung, based in U.S. ally South Korea, would be the only alternative for cutting-edge designs. If TSMC went offline, "China's high-tech industries would be immobilized at precisely the same time the nation was embroiled in a massive war effort," the authors note. "Even when the formal war ended, the economic costs would persist for years,"
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
suggests, adding that such a scenario could hurt the legitimacy of the Chinese Communist Party.

The challenge, the authors argue, is to make such a threat credible. "An automatic mechanism might be designed, which would be triggered once an invasion was confirmed," they write.

"Despite a huge Chinese effort for a 'Made in China' chip industry, only 6% of semiconductors used in China were produced domestically in 2020," the paper notes.

"Broken Nest: Deterring China from Invading Taiwan" was written by Jared McKinney, chair of the Department of Strategy and Security Studies at the eSchool of Graduate Professional Military Education, Air University, and Peter Harris, associate professor of political science at Colorado State University. The views do not necessarily represent those of Air University or the U.S. Air Force, McKinney said.

China has responded strongly to the report. On Dec. 23, the website of the Chinese State Council's Taiwan Affairs Office posted an article noting that "the mainland's pursuit of cross-strait reunification is definitely not for TSMC."
The controversial approach stems from an acknowledgement that traditional deterrence strategies -- such as forward-deploying American warships in Taiwan's vicinity -- may not be enough to discourage Beijing from taking action in the Taiwan Strait.

The People's Liberation Army's goal for a successful invasion was 14 hours, a Chinese analyst with connections in the PLA Navy told the authors. The U.S. and Japan, meanwhile, would need 24 hours to respond, according to a PLA projection cited in the paper.

"If this scenario is close to being accurate, China's government might well be inclined to attempt a fait accompli as soon as it is confident in its relative capabilities," McKinney and Harris write.
While ensuring that key chip-producing facilities do not fall into Beijing's hands, the U.S. and allies could also form contingency plans to quickly evacuate highly skilled Taiwanese working in this sector and give them refuge, the paper proposes.

The authors acknowledge that this "scorched-earth" strategy will be unappealing to the Taiwanese. But the costs "will be far less devastating to the people of Taiwan than the U.S. threat of great power war, which would see massive and prolonged fighting in, above, and beside Taiwan," they continue.

McKinney told Nikkei Asia that the plan brings the economic instruments of power into the deterrence argument and that it offers "an alternative to fighting a great power war at a location 5,000 miles west of Hawaii, a prohibitively difficult proposition."

Harris said: "If the U.S. and Taiwan wish to deter China from invading, then they should look for means of doing so that do not rely on the threat of U.S. military reprisals. Relying exclusively on military threats is becoming less credible and thus more dangerous."

Meanwhile, the paper proposes making efforts to convince Beijing of the "considerable advantages" to maintaining the status quo.

"Washington must restate in unambiguous terms the status of Taiwan is undetermined, that the United States has no plans to support independent statehood for Taiwan, and it will not seek to shift the status quo using gray-zone tactics that violate the spirit of Sino-American rapprochement," the authors write.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Non paywall

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...

What this paper tells me is that the US has no stomach for defending Taiwan. Give it a couple more years, and there will be papers saying the US should just make a deal with China over Taiwan in order to save face.
 
G

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Lol. No. China has enough chip production capacity for its own needs. Plus if China wanted to grab high end production capacity so bad, why not invade Taiwan and South Korea? Problem solved.

Most of the high end chip production China does use is for producing consumer products for export like computers and smartphones. If for whatever reason after a Taiwan invasion the US sanctioned the sale or export of such devices it would produce the same result. There would be no final client for the factories. Plus given most of the high end chips Taiwan produces are for US customers then China couldn't manufacture those either since they don't own the IP for them. Given the rapid pace of the chip industry any chip designs they still had at the fab would be obsolete in a year or two.
 
S

SanWenYu

Captain
Registered Member
BoraTas said:
Next article: Taiwan should nuke itself if China invades.
Besides the weirdness of the idea, all these talks about the TSMC are ridiculous. I bet TSMC is not even a factor in China's Taiwan policy.
Click to expand...
This kind of pretentious douchebags are what the Empire's ruling elites can find and rely on? I would be worrying if I was a citizen of the Empire. Looks like the rot has reached the core.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top