[bigyabai]

> And yes IP theft is comparable to invasions and often worse.

This assertion smells more American than a Big Mac. Do you have any actual citations?

In a free market, lowering the barrier-to-entry in a given market tends to increase competition. Industry-scale IP theft really only damages your economy if the rent-seekers rely on low competition. A country with a strong primary/secondary sector (resources and manufacturing) never needs to rely on protecting precious IP. America has already lost if we depend on playing keep-away with F-35 schematics for basic doctrinal advantage.

[SilverElfin]

All of that is just a wild justification for large-scale economic damage to another country. In other words, warfare.

[bigyabai]

Hybrid warfare. Go bomb China for Salt Typhoon if it makes you feel any better, they still have the upper hand. Obsessing over retaliation instead of defense is precisely what China wants to provoke, it manufactures global consent to destroy America. No nation wants to coexist with a hegemon that goes nuclear whenever they're outdone.

When we forego obvious solutions ("hmm maybe telecoms need to be held to higher standards") and jump to war, America forfeits the competitive advantage and exacerbates the issue. For all of China's authoritarian misgivings, this is how they win.

[SilverElfin]

Hybrid warfare is warfare.

[bigyabai]

Like I said - go bomb them, then. No amount of gunboat diplomacy will reverse the J-35 production line. The logical response to having your "IP battleship" sunk is to protect your future ones better. Ragequitting kills US servicemembers, it's not a real-world option.