China Has Painted Itself Into a Semiconductor Corner (bloomberg.com) 123
Tim Culpan, writing at Bloomberg: As Washington embarks on a multi-billion dollar, decade-long semiconductor development campaign, Beijing is reckoning with its own 20-year effort that's largely failed to deliver. Both will need to grapple with wasted funds and misguided goals as they play catch-up to Taiwan and South Korea. Architects of China's ambitious efforts may be facing the music for having not produced world-beating technology, Bloomberg News reported this week. Multiple corruption probes announced by authorities stem from anger among the nation's top leaders over an inability to develop semiconductors that could replace American components, it reported. Two of the most scrutinized areas are the $9 billion bailout of Tsinghua Unigroup Co., and the National Integrated Circuit Industry Investment Fund -- known as the Big Fund.
For all intents and purposes, China has failed to achieve its semiconductor goals, and those tasked with realizing them are being brought to account. Beijing won't be smarting at the loss of money -- it's been willing to burn cash -- but at the lack of progress such expenditure was supposed to buy. Those looking at China's achievements are mostly finding what they seek, and ignoring the rest. Semiconductor Manufacturing International, for example, got a lot of attention recently when industry analysts TechInsights wrote: "SMIC has been able to fabricate features that are small enough to be considered 7nm."
For all intents and purposes, China has failed to achieve its semiconductor goals, and those tasked with realizing them are being brought to account. Beijing won't be smarting at the loss of money -- it's been willing to burn cash -- but at the lack of progress such expenditure was supposed to buy. Those looking at China's achievements are mostly finding what they seek, and ignoring the rest. Semiconductor Manufacturing International, for example, got a lot of attention recently when industry analysts TechInsights wrote: "SMIC has been able to fabricate features that are small enough to be considered 7nm."
Blame fat-bellied Western businessmen (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Chip fab is hardly the only industry that's been wooed by the siren song of globalization. Let's not lose sight of just how much manufacturing has been offshored over the past few decades in search of low worker wages.
From the management perspective, offshoring makes a lot of sense. When production prices fall, profit margins increase - it is very simple math, an average 5th grader could do it easily. And, given the profit-seeking forces of the stock market, we should not expect any individual manager of a
Re: (Score:3)
SMIC's "7nm" is a DUV process. That means that it's extremely limited in what can actually be manufactured on it, and it likely has extremely high error rates and manufacturing is very slow.
Everyone else is doing "7nm" on EUV, which requires far less passes and patterning tricks, resulting in being able to manufacture complex logic chips at relatively low error rates and high speed of manufacturing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I will start with caveat that in spite of spending several weeks diving into reading about this topic, my understanding of it remains very cursory and due to intense secrecy surrounding top tier lithographic techniques, there are likely some errors below. It's engineering, but optics is not something I really touched after university before picking up this subject about a year ago, and semiconductor lithography is fundamentally applied optics.
That said, the general concept is well understood at this point a
Re: (Score:2)
As far as I know, why Intel has failed for years at EUV has not been widely publicized. Considering that Samsung and TSMC are using the same EUV machines, it may not be the machines themselves but something about the Intel process. ASML also has a reputation of laser focused on working out any production issues with their machines regardless of the customer so I do not think the Intel problems were due to EUV. There was speculation I read that Intel was using cobalt in one part of the process that had very
Re: (Score:2)
It's been fairly reliably leaked that 2017 intel's problems were in the fact that they used specific fabrication technique/feature that was not functioning well in early iterations of EUV. I can't remember the specific name of the technique or lithographic feature in question off the top of my head unfortunately, so I can't search for it easily. Apologies, but like I mention above, this really is one of the very few engineering fields that I can't fully grasp in spite of diving into it.
I just remember readi
Re: (Score:3)
China is nowhere close to 7nm. Only Taiwan has that, not even the US, and the US is well ahead of China.
Greedy Westerners and Taiwanese (Score:2)
Sunning themselves on the deck of their superyachts and plush Barbadian resorts on the backs of those they made redundant in their own factories so they could outsource to China. The CCP would be getting nowhere close to 7nm if it wasn't for the massive leg up given by the West over the past 30 or so years.
A lot of the Chinese progress comes from Taiwanese that are bought by Chinese government money. There have been and continue to be a non-zero number of important TSMC folks who can be bought, either with enough money or enough criticism of the traditional Asian hierarchy at TSMC that makes promotions very challenging.
There are one million Taiwanese businessmen in China, and that's out of a nation with only 23 million total people. The deal with the devil was for the Taiwanese businessmen to get rich in Ch
Re: (Score:2)
You want us to blame fat-bellied western businessmen for China failing to achieve its semiconductor manufacturing goals? (that is what the article and summary above are talking about)
ok....
CONGRATS FAT-BELLIED WESTERN BUSINESSMEN !!!!
Good Job!
-Your anti-american rant failed, bro.
Re:Blame fat-bellied Western businessmen (Score:5, Insightful)
No. The blame lies with the elites, as it always does. The poor working class just trying to scrape by as the 1% steals more and more of their money and manipulates them with billions dollars of advertising and propaganda are not the ones to blame. It's the ones with power, as it always is.
And, as always, there will be cowardly lickspittle toady motherfuckers defending those rich assholes.
Re: (Score:2)
Who are those "elites"? I keep hearing about them, but nobody managed to tell me who they are.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You know exactly who I mean, people in the top .1% of wealth. Don't play stupid.
Re: (Score:3)
I personally strive to buy products made in the USA. Often, the price difference between USA made products and foreign made products is not that great. The profits made by the corporations is.
If (when) China invades Twain, TSMC should have a scorched earth policy and level their production plants and insure everything is destroyed so China gets nothing of val
Re:Blame fat-bellied Western businessmen (Score:5, Interesting)
I personally strive to buy products made in the USA. Often, the price difference between USA made products and foreign made products is not that great. The profits made by the corporations is.
In a previous job I was involved with physical hardware. It was high margin, and made in the good old US-of-A had a number of benefits especially to do with certification of processes etc for the American market. No language barrier helped too for getting the manufacturing right (even if one of the local subcontractors fucked up).
Some of the lightly customized components (clearly very low margin components) were made in China. I couldn't get them made elsewhere. None of the non Chinese companies would reply to me at all. So, I went to alibaba, found something close to what I wanted and contacted several companies for customization. They all replied the next day with specs, a technical drawing and a link to pay. I later did the same for an accessory and they were all "well we can add your company logo for a $500 one off tooling cost". Sold!
In my admittedly incredibly limited experience, Chinese companies can be much more discoverable and willing to engage.
Re: (Score:2)
If (when) China invades Twain
I imagine Twain would have a great quip for this typo, but sadly he's dead and I'm not as clever by half.
TSMC should have a scorched earth policy and level their production plants and insure everything is destroyed so China gets nothing of value.
There is no doubt in my mind that if TSMC doesn't destroy the fabs, the US Navy or Air Force will.
Re: (Score:2)
There is no doubt in my mind that if TSMC doesn't destroy the fabs, the US Navy or Air Force will.
I'm thinking, a pair of D11s with a nice heavy steel cable between them.
Re: (Score:2)
Only if the D11s are permanently disabled after. They can have the steel cable, as long as it's made of a standard steel.
Re: (Score:2)
That should be a simple matter, just like the John Deere equipment that the russians thieved from Ukraine.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I blame silly and useless environmental regulations on why more people don't buy American. Producing electronics is a highly automated industry. They use robots in China just like we'd use in the USA if produced here. The issue isn't lower labor costs in China, not any more at least.
At some point the USA put in regulations on what is called "NORM", naturally occurring radioactive materials. This is the radon, uranium, thorium, and other elements that get dug up with anything else we dig up. If you mine
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The savings aren't passed down to the consumer, so I don't see why you would blame the American consumer.
In the free American society the consumer has no right to know. Politicians can say whatever they like and are not accountable.
Not to mention that America is a moneyocrasy and not a democracy. They only way you can get elected to a position to make a difference is if you have the money to support it. I won't even get on the topic on how money buys you freedom. Today Americans don't even care about all th
Re: (Score:2)
The continued success of WalMart suggests otherwise. American consumers are much more motivated by price than by nationalism.
Re: (Score:3)
Unions were part of the problem, and in many areas, still are...
Re: (Score:2)
Worker exploitation is historically problematic, and system in place to reduce that is good for people and good for the local economy. Trade with a nation that exploits all their people almost universally is is the opposite of having a union, and that trade reduces the competitiveness of businesses that aren't exploiting people. Essentially letting a authoritarian government sell you cheap things turns everyone into a third world shithole.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not the customers that are at fault there. It's the uneven "free trade" lobby.
Prior to NAFTA, there were high tariffs between Canada and the US. What happened after? Well food got a lot cheaper in Canada because the various food cartels could not longer ask extortionate prices. BUT, it also resulted in a lot of American stuff being outsourced to Canada, many things that shouldn't be (such as customer-facing services, like your customer support calls.) So it was overall a win-win until it came to certai
..which is why they want to invade/occupy Taiwan (Score:5, Insightful)
On the one hand I think it's good that the U.S. is starting to move it's semiconductor manufacturing back into it's own borders, but on the other hand that's going to make China more desperate both for financial reasons as well as technological reasons; they like and want the revenue, but they also like and want the opportunities to steal more technology, and we're going to deny them that.
Re: (Score:3)
According to official US Policy China already "possesses" Taiwan. It's the same country.
Re: (Score:2)
the distinction for the US, China, and Taiwan is if the companies on the island are state owned.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:..which is why they want to invade/occupy Taiwa (Score:4, Informative)
Official US policy does not recognize Chinese sovereignty over Taiwan. I admit it is confusing, but that is on purpose. However, there are two things to note:
1) China follows the "one China principle" and wishes everyone else would.
2) America follows the "one China policy" which is different, and not what China wants.
The details are explained on Wikipedia [wikipedia.org]. Another way of looking at it (if anyone really wants to argue), you can always accurately say Taiwan is de facto a free, independent sovereign country. De jure it might not be independent.
Either way, the CCP has threatened to kill Taiwanese people on multiple occasions, and that is not good under international law.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No different fundamentally than Putin wanting to re-create the Soviet Union,
The Soviet Union is gone, and anyway Putin was KGB, not Soviet (soviet just means council, and was one power structure in the USSR. The other two were the army and NKVD or KGB).
It's the Russian Empire that Putin wants to recreate. He's a Mongol.
Re: (Score:2)
Saying, "we do not support Taiwan independence" is not the same as saying, "China already possesses Taiwan."
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure where your confusion on this point is. It sounds like you are using motivated reasoning instead of trying to understand.
Consider that when the US says, "we do not support Taiwan independence," that is entirely compatible with the statement, "We do not oppose Taiwan independence." China opposes Taiwan independence, the US does not.
Re: (Score:2)
Not supporting independence means it's another country's territory. Pretty simple
No, this is wrong. You have problems with basic logic.
Go look up "motivated reasoning."
Then go look up "false dilemma fallacy."
Don't come back until you understand what both of those things are, because if you reply I'm going to quiz you on those.
Re: (Score:2)
Let's not forget that these policies were set back in the 70's when Taiwan was literally just another banana republic ruled by a hereditary dictatorship. Political prisoners were common with sporadic dissident assassinations sanctioned by the government. Martial law was not lifted till the late 80's, democratic elections was first held in the 90's, and the ruling KMT government from the martial law era was first dislodged from power in the 2000's.
To be honest, I don't don't we can blame the US government
Re: (Score:2)
back in the 70's when Taiwan was literally just another banana republic ruled by a hereditary dictatorship.
More precisely, a pineapple republic.
Re: (Score:2)
Tell that to Nancy...
Re: (Score:2)
That's more motivated reasoning.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:..which is why they want to invade/occupy Taiwa (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's likely that their semiconductor manufacturing capability is the thing stopping China from invading.
Taiwan's military is stopping China from invading. In addition, the US military is preventing China from setting up a blockade and attempting to starve the people into submission.
Re: (Score:3)
Even if China came in a took the plants over without damage, they don't have the skills to run them. Plus, modern fabs require continual support from equipment suppliers. Plus, if China invades, their access to international shipping (importing oil, exporting products) will disappear immediately. China has a huge navy of small boats that can police the China Sea, but not the Indian ocean and definitely not the Pacific.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:..which is why they want to invade/occupy Taiwa (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:..which is why they want to invade/occupy Taiwa (Score:5, Insightful)
The west was willing to trade technology to China for access to their huge consumer market,
That is only half the story. The hope was that by increasing economic ties and their standard of living, China would become democratic. This idea was popular in the Clinton era, and admittedly was better than going to war.
Unfortunately it didn't turn out that way. China has gotten richer and now the CCP oppresses anyone they want.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Whatever the rest of the world intends to do to defend Taiwan, and to what extent they do so, is going to be besides the point in the next decade or so. Diversifying of supply will have the effect of reducing Taiwan's importance as a supplier of semiconductors, and any hope that China, whether by seizing Taiwan or by developing the technologies on the mainland as a means of beating out rivals, will fade. The West tried to buy China into being a nice cooperative capitalist power, but China grabbed for the br
Re: (Score:2)
On a 10-year timescale, I don't think it's a zero-sum game. Demand presently outstrips supply by fair margin. The size of the market will continue to grow, even as new manufacturing capacity comes online. By the time new fabs in the U.S. or China o
Re: (Score:2)
Taiwan is a technological powerhouse China wants to posess. They're willing (on paper, anyway) to start World War 3 over it.
Yes, China would like to get hold of Taiwan and it's technological manufacturing capacity but you have to know that if it looks like China is about to land troops on Taiwan that most, if not all, of the people who have the education and experience of running these companies will flee to America, South Korea, etc. Having possession of a semiconductor fab is one thing but unless you have
Re: ..which is why they want to invade/occupy Taiw (Score:2)
It wouldn't surprise me if lot of the software which prepares EUV steppers for a run, runs from cloud computing. Nevermind ongoing maintenance and parts. Even with their ASML software theft, the EUV steppers would probably be useless bricks.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: ..which is why they want to invade/occupy Taiw (Score:2)
They want to isolate them and bully them into surrender. They don't want their navy to get Moskva'd, which even with a bombing campaign would happen.
Re:..which is why they want to invade/occupy Taiwa (Score:5, Interesting)
I think TSMC may have averted an invasion by warning China that mere possession of their physical plant wouldn't be sufficient to continue operations. TSMC tweeted that they rely on a global supply chain to make chips. Invade Taiwan and away goes that supply chain. Moreover, if TSMC's equipment is damaged beyond repair during an invasion, it would be years before the equipment was replaced, if at all.
The U.S. has repeatedly said it would support reunification with the caveat it was a peaceful process that Taiwan agreed to. China screwed up when they didn't honor their commitment to allow Hong Kong to self rule after Britain left. They promised a One Country - Two Systems approach which they reneged on when Britain left. Reneging on Hong Kong warned the Taiwanese they wouldn't fare any better after reunification.
A path forward would entail restoring self rule to Hong Kong. Leave Hong Kong alone and Taiwan wouldn't be as reluctant to join the mainland. If China was smart, China could end up becoming the United States of Asia by letting other countries maintain their democratically elected governments and joining China like the Territories joined the United States. The word "States" in "United States" means self rule for each region subject to the powers reserved to the Federal government.
For that to happen, China would need a new Deng Xiaopeng to replace Xi Jinping. China's huge strides forward were due to Deng allowing private ownership, a huge break from Mao's legacy. Hopefully the Chinese recognize that before WWIII breaks out.
Re: (Score:2)
That logic defies itself (Score:1)
They've been willing to burn money, you say? They've been at it for 20 years? The Chinese leadership are nothing if not patient and harbouring long-term plans.
Then the question is whether the money was pissed away entirely, or whether the progress that they wanted to buy just goes slower than hoped for. In the latter case, just burn some more money and push a bit harder.
It's only when they cannot buy enough progress for the money allotted and in the time they need it to that suddenly buttfucking Taiwan st
Re: (Score:3)
From what I have read some of the money was pissed away due to corruption inherent in the system. Some of the money has lead to progress but that progress is not near to accomplishing the goals. And more money will not necessarily buy more progress.
For example, SMIC can make 7nm chips but they are using DUV which is an older process and not EUV. EUV is extremely restricted as only one company in the world, ASML, is capable of making the machines and due to trade restrictions, China has only 2 machines in t
Re: (Score:2)
I think that focusing so much on "7nm" is a mistake. Most of the chips that matter are not the high prestige flagships, but everything else that comes out of a chip fab. That includes all the chips whose shortages impede production on non-general-computing-device-apparatuses. IE cars, washing machines, what-have-you.
The issue is not just 7nm itself but where is China at the leading edge. Those chips that are not leading edge can be done in places other than China. The is the main reason China has been investing in the leading edge.
Look what apple did with the M1 and M2. Took a while (when did they buy PASEMI again?), and it's not even that great a chip according to some, but it gets the job done.
But we are not talking about only chip design. Apple has spent a decade working iteratively on design. In this context, manufacturing those chips in China is a problem regardless of who designed them. China has no facility that Apple would use for their A16, A17, etc processors. In a worse ca
Re: (Score:2)
Putin did not invade Ukraine to get their oil fields because Russia did not have enough oil. It was because Ukraine was a COMPETITOR.
Buy not steal (Score:2)
China has a different view on Intellectual Property Rights then the rest of the world. Numerous cases where startups trying to be bold and cost effective teamed up with China to help produce their new product to the market, to find within weeks or months later there is a Chinese knockoff of your idea being sold at half the price.
This isn't a big deal for a lot of products, as the product itself isn't that hard to copy and reproduce anyways and the markup is just based on the Brand Name, however for Chips th
Re: (Score:2)
This is actually normal in most of the world. Western economies are in a small minority with intellectual property right protections both existing and being actually workable for startups.
China bashing (Score:2)
For all intents and purposes, I would have liked more facts in this China bashing article. It appears to be the opinion of the author to discredit China's dominance in the semiconductor industry. This reminds me of a stock analyst who says Apple is suffering because they failed to meet the quaters expectations of the market.
China is a power house in the semiconductor industry and deserves a lot of respect. Do not forget that they have a monopoly in rare earth metals:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news... [bloomberg.com]
Paint out of a corner (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I think it's stupid to assume your opponents will fail. People have been saying Russia is running out of weapons, ammunition and supply trucks since March. It's August now and last I heard Ukraine is complaining they're being out-gunned 8 to 1. That's not "running out" according to any definition I know.
There corruption & there is china' way corrupt (Score:3)
Everyone remember the 2008 chinese Milk scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Now, imagine that on the chip industry.
China will never get out of the middle age corruption style politic if they don't chance their politic system, look at the Russian that have the same corruption level in the army equipments. Same type of politic system, and same type and level of corruption
Re:There corruption & there is china' way corr (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
It wasn't one bad company, and food problems are ongoing [youtube.com]. Food safety is a place with room for improvement.
China Is In Big Trouble (Score:4, Interesting)
China has many, many problems and will literally crumble in the next 5-10 years. The top three of these are their real estate bubble (neutering 30% of their GDP), an incurable aging problem (comparable or worse than Japan's), massive waste due to high speed rail overbuilding, massive banking scandals, loss of world respect over their "wolf warrier" diplomacy style, predatory debt traps associated with the belt and road initiative, bullying neighbors over South China Sea territory and trade policy, and of course Taiwan. They've created an economy that requires massive foreign exports, but are going to see their foreign investment evaporate as they are increasingly viewed as evil and their shipping routes undefended by the US at best. If they try anything truly evil, like invading Taiwan, oil will be cut off and their economy will burn.
In sum, China is fucked.
Re: (Score:2)
Corruption? (Score:2)
Multiple corruption probes announced by authorities stem from anger among the nation's top leaders
Those top leaders, of course, are definitely not corrupt, and definitely not part of the problem. /s
Alt source if you get paywalled (Score:2)
https://auto.economictimes.ind... [indiatimes.com]
An interesting conclusion is that TSMC and Samsung became the top dogs via internationalization, not "go it alone" because cutting edge chips need access to a wide variety of experts. A "walled nation" won't cut it unless you are happy with slow commodity chipsHear that Xi and Don/Joe?
Facing the music ... (Score:2)
Architects of China's ambitious efforts may be facing the music for having not produced world-beating technology, Bloomberg News reported this week. Multiple corruption probes announced by authorities stem from anger among the nation's top leaders over an inability to develop semiconductors that could replace American components, it reported.
I'm going to predict the US chip production boosting effort will end in the same pork barrel festival and corruption as the Chinese one except nobody will face any music over spending he taxpayer's chip production boosting money on stock buybacks and bonuses and multiple congress critters will fatten their wallets off of insider trading deals.
Smart people enjoy Freedom (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I don't buy it (Score:2)
Yes, China has problems and China is politically a problem. But I do not buy this "having painted themselves into a corner" in this area. This seems to be western propaganda that tries to belittle China and paint them as significantly less capable than they are.
That seems to be an entirely stupid stance to me. Underestimating a potential opponent is not a good idea.
China is back to nothing but labor supply (Score:2)
China never had any tech of their own. Entire industries have been leaving for many years already. How many phones does Samsung make in China? Zero, since 2019. Even low tech industries like shoes and apparel have been leaving for over 10yrs. This all started long before COVID as well. The only reason AAPL is still there is because they still enjoy blowing CCP for sales in mainland China.
Western restrictions aren't helping (Score:2)
Companies like Intel that want to build fabs in the US under the new laws will have no problems getting access to things like the latest EUV machines from ASML.
Chinese companies like SMIC are blocked from getting these machines which puts China at a huge disadvantage.
Playing a mediocre hand worse than it is... (Score:2)
There is plenty of demand overall for chips that aren't on the latest manufacturing node, or even close to it. Chips for cars are typically what, a 32 nm process? Mind you, there's very little profit at this end, but this still constitutes what I'd call "a playable hand", and the world would probably be happy to snap up that supply if the CCP would stop playing chicken over the dumbest shit, but they won't, because they've invested too much face and can't afford to back down now.
As the commercial for a cert
Re: (Score:2)
I think lot of the automotive chips are back on 200 nm.
Complicated topic, but a horrible Slashdot summary (Score:2)
Re:Makes sense (Score:4, Informative)
Most of the raw wafers come from India. Most of the silicon comes from Norway. Inert gasses from Ukraine. Any geopolitical problems are disruptive to high tech manufacturing.
Between TSMC and UMC a whole lot of chips are made in Taiwan. With Samsung in Korea likely to benefit from the big chip crunch when prices shoot up and they won't be able to keep up with the demand. Start saving your old cellphones, the refurb market is going to be huge.
Re: (Score:2)
That's not going to help problems in infrastructure. A lot of things got shifted to fairly small chips in last decade or so.
It's going to nice to have a phone while not having a working base station with enough capacity to service it properly because there are no spare parts to be found.
Re: Makes sense (Score:2)
Blockade in two weeks then?
Re: (Score:3)
As soon as Senile Joe got the gig, Russia invaded Ukraine.
Except that Russia is now at the 6 month mark with little to show for what some estimates show as 50-80,000 dead soldiers, a resurgent NATO that is more relevant and united than ever and even adding longtime holdouts Sewden and Finland, the USA is back as a leader on the international stage and setting the example of arm supply to Ukraine and really stringent sanctions (again, led by the US) that are starting to have really bad outcomes: “Business Retreats and Sanctions Are Crippling the Russian Econ [yale.edu]
Re: Invade Taiwan (Score:2)
It's a self inflicted cluster fuck for Russia, but they likely predicted that Biden would defer to Germany&co and not ram through secondary sanctions which would have been a much bigger disaster for both Russia and the EU.
Trump could very well have gone full "respect muh authority", his unpredictability and occasional excess was a deterrent.
Re: (Score:2)
Trump certainly could have but I suppose my question for the OP is which version of Trump are we talking about?
From his supporters point of view he is both a careful and thoughtful diplomat with totally dovish ideal, not starting new wars because he just is ideologically opposed to the idea of state violence or he's a wild card who every leader is scared to antagonize ebcause he just might declare all out war and start dropping bombs at the drop of a hat because the man is uncontrollable and unpredictable.
Re: (Score:2)
If anything it was a huge miscalculation whereas Trump was willing to hold Ukrainian defense funds hostage and my hunch says Trump would not be nearly as willing to provide support for the country.
It's funny when Joe does it.
Joe Biden brags about holding US loan guarantees hostage while demanding Ukrainian prosecutor General Viktor Shokin be fired. - https://youtu.be/UXA--dj2-CY [youtu.be] (75 seconds)
Re: (Score:2)
Did Joe Biden doing that himself, on his own decision and volition or was he representing US State Department interests?
Re: (Score:2)
Well with Joe being the VP at the time, I'm pretty sure it was him representing US State Department interests.
I can't imagine that going over very well if he was just on some weird power trip or something.
Re: Invade Taiwan (Score:2)
Ok so that's a fundamentally different thing than what Trump tried to pull with his withholding of funds.