who cares?
Literally all other countries in the region.
- Posts
- 3
- Comments
- 148
- Joined
- 1 yr. ago
- Posts
- 3
- Comments
- 148
- Joined
- 1 yr. ago
- JumpLocked
Wo Militär-Debatte?
- JumpLocked
Wo Militär-Debatte?
The US playbook usually means having the support of allies. They lost the trust of all of them.
- JumpLocked
Wo Militär-Debatte?
- JumpLocked
Wo Militär-Debatte?
There are many ways to take a stand besides advocating for assassinations.
a private company innovated aerospace technology despite the US government’s reluctance to invest in aerospace technology.
Huh? The US government paying SpaceX made it possible to succeed in the first place. That's literally the US investing in aerospace tech.
US dod officials have been very clearly saying for Over a decade that the US might already be behind China in key areas of defense
China is catching up, but still behind in defense and aerospace technology. The one area they are ahead is industrial capacity to build, especially ships. China builds a huge number of civilian and military ships.
despite spending 4 to 10 times as much on their defense budget
Wages, manufacturing, etc. are all far more expensive in the US. It's also much easier and cheaper to copy someone else's design than to discover and build for the first time.
they cannot even compete with a free operating system
Microsoft has good support for Linux nowadays with Windows services for Linux and Azure Linux for example. On the desktop Microsoft Windows is still leading in market share and Microsoft Office is dominating as well.
Where are the biggest Linux companies located?
Apple? they haven’t been innovative in 15 years, depend on slave labor
Apple's AR/VR is innovative, if not particularly successful in the market. Their M-series chips are among the best chip available. Very fast with low power use.
Apple makes their products in same factories (Foxconn etc) as other companies. So the labor conditions aren't unique to Apple at all.
it’s not leading in manufacturing, it’s not leading in most sciences, and it has one of the most awful education systems in the world, not to mention the living affordability crisis going on.
I mostly agree. The quality of the US education system is similar to the health care system. The US has some of the best education and health care in the world. However, it's neither cheap nor affordable for the majority of the population.
you can’t do science without funding and support, and dumps has taken that funding away, and importantly does not believe in science or the benefits of research and development.
I agree mostly. Regarding funding under Trump, we will see. Elon Musk certainly know about R&D costs and benefits and is influential.
meanwhile, other countries are investing record amounts and setting technological records in innovative technologies like solar that the US has no hope of catching up to in the near future.
Yes, other countries are catching up steadily overall and are ahead in some areas, especially China.
- JumpLocked
Wo Militär-Debatte?
The US is still leading in aerospace and defense. Boeing is in a slump, but military planes are top notch. SpaceX is a decade ahead of the global competition at least.
computer science
All the biggest and leading companies in that area are still based in the US. American companies dominate the market for software and internet services. The possibly most disruptive technology AI is also firmly in the hands of the USA.
You're also missing biotechnology as another key sector, where the US is doing very well.
the US does not have the technological edge it once did;
That much is clear. It's still doing very good though.
The amount of money spent on R&D is still huge in the USA and it attracts top minds from across the globe.
Why would any other country rely on us for military equipment instead of working on their own? Yeah it costs money to setup
It costs a ton of money, especially research and development into high tech weapons. Very few countries for example even have the technology to build blades for jet turbines. There's half a dozen companies world wide that have the capability to make jet engines. Or even seemingly much simpler: making good ball bearings is surprisingly difficult and are required for lots of things. High quality optics? Extremely hard.
A weapons system pretty much all countries can assembly is the technical: a pickup truck with a heavy machine gun bolted to it. Making a car or a machine gun is already difficult and few countries have the metallurgy, precision engineering, trained workforce, etc. to make all the parts for them. The microelectronics and chips in the radio? Also not easy to make.
The supply chain is long, even for relatively simple systems. The more advanced the system, the fewer parts the local industry will be capable of producing.
R&D costs will be spread out over all production units. So if research costs 100 million, but you only build 20, it will be a hundred times more expensive than if you build 2000. That's how the F-35 is more capable and cheaper than previous generation fighter jets.
So to build your own stuff, you need to a fairly advanced and diversified industrial base in the first place. On top of that you need money and a big enough number of units for it to be financially viable.
Sweden makes its own fighter jet JAS 39 Gripen. However it imports the engines, electronics, radar, and some other essential parts from the USA. That somewhat better for Sweden because it keeps some of the money spent in the local economy and keeps a trained workforce around. It doesn't create strategic independence from the US though.
Play Solitaire
Upvoted for the optimism. Let's hope you're right.
technology (…) being suppressed
What technology or technology development is being suppressed?
The USA are still leading in most technological fields and have a dominant position.
Zelensky is a media and communication master.
Term limits have a huge downside. The politician will need a job afterwards and is thus more motivated to give political favors for job security afterwards. Your goal would also be achieved via an age limit like 70.
It also takes a while for a newly elected representative to understand how the political apparatus works, who is who and so on. Lobbyists and bureaucrats don't have term limits though and have a much easier influencing the newcomer. Experience matters in every profession including politics.
I wouldn't be so sure. Copy Russia's playbook.
Let's say, it's just a short special military operation to clear Vancouver of fentanyl imports from China. You don't need the whole military on board for that. A few battalions is enough. A preceding crisis could be created that then provides a reason. The city doesn't even need to be taken in a battle. Occupying Canada's highway 1, railway, and blockading the port could lead to a peaceful handover of the city.
The next step is then the US needs a strategic land bridge to protect Alaska against Russia, so BC and Yukon will be temporarily under US administration.
With Mexico it's even easier. Say cartel and drugs, special military operation, and that's that.
Countries in East and Southeast Asia are Westerners now? The Koreans, Taiwanese, Japanese, Pinoy, Vietnamese, Malays will be surprised to hear that. All of these countries are afraid of Chinese ambitions.
Maybe ask the Tibetans if they think the Chinese annexation of their homeland is just Western hypocrisy.
You are aware that China invaded Vietnam after the USA left?
You are ignorant of the regional policies. Not everything is as Western centric as your limited understanding of geopolitics.