I think you're conflating different contexts and scenarios. People aren't used to war being brought to the US itself. Look at Pearl Harbor and 9/11, both rallying the country pretty well. Attacking the US mainland is a losing strategy.

If people generally understand that we're intervening in a China/Taiwan conflict for the right reasons, and China attacks us at home it would only accelerate the west. If you look at Vietnam, the logic around that war fell apart and it no longer made sense to continue it. The people were right to push back. Iraq and Afghanistan went on for a long time without much fuss.

Some kind of conflict in South East Asia would likely largely be a naval and resource war, with many casualties being naval rather than mainland. Most losses on both sides will probably be drones, AI or not.

If it came down to attrition, it would maybe be AI machine attrition or drone/missile attrition which is in a way a resource war which the US could win even without TSMC, but from where we're standing today it would take more ramping up which is a process that has already started.

If OpenAI, Google, Microsoft, Amazon, etc were attacked by China in a more critical way, it would have to be for some major short term advantage that is capitalized on immediately, because long-term it would be a losing strategy by itself. China has systems to disrupt as well, so if they let loose on cyber then the US has options too.

Either way, don't conflate general economic preference around an election for whether people would tolerate being unable to access Gmail or order from Amazon like they would all rush to riot in the streets. I think that misreads the situation.

I assume that in the failing of the tech industry brings discomfort like you mentioned will have an impact on society such as strikes, riots, protests. The US will surely hope this gets mirrored to the Chinese society, although i would like the mention that there is a difference between self sabotage and external sabotage, Chinese people are pretty understanding and patient not all are against their government. Most respect and are grateful for what their government has done for the country in the last 30 years,, i would say roughly 80% of them feel this way. This sentiment is beneficial, because it only speeds up recovery from economical disruptions such as this example, housing market is another story.

Another note most of the world understands US's strategy for this type of disruptions used as a weapon, if they can cause civil unrest, the US can use this against the government and it will into the advantage of the US. I would like to note this is not a country of easy convincing, The majority of the seating members of the CCP are deeply interested in their society's interests, then globally second. You have 1.4b people this is not an easy management to handle.

In my eyes best to not compete and work together. There are hard obstacles ahead that are going to need all of our efforts collectively, in Hines-sight this is childish and a waste of time, literally. We made it this far, all of the great achievements and innovations that with out a doubt all have collectively contributed as humans. Climate changes, Populations management, Biological threats, viral threats, pandemic management, genome advancements etc...

Some of the moves that leaders make are simply moving us back in time and when one does something unfavorable to the other it sets the tone for how future engagements and decisions are made, whether silly or not. Indeed no leader is innocent in their decisions, but my point still stands.

>China has a much high pain tolerance than US citizens at least

Can you give some examples of why you think this? I really can't imagine how this would be true.

Best examples would be in last 25 years when they've had mass affluence.

[flagged]