From China's perspective, producing more than it needs and exporting at cutthroat prices is a strategic tool, not an economic problem. This form of industrial warfare is designed to weaken other nations' manufacturing bases, prioritizing geopolitical goals over profit.

Instead of a total ban, a more strategic approach is to "slow ball" an adversary like China by providing them with just enough technology. This keeps them dependent on foreign suppliers and disincentivizes the massive state investment required to develop their own superior, independent solutions.

In defense technology, smaller is often better. The ideal platform is the most compact one that can still perform its intended mission. This approach provides significant advantages in stealth, manufacturing cost, logistical footprint, and speed of proliferation.

The US won World War II largely due to its unparalleled manufacturing capacity. Today, that strategic advantage has been ceded to China. In a potential conflict, the US would face an adversary that mirrors its own historical strength, creating a critical national security vulnerability.

The belief that China's manufacturing advantage is cheap labor is dangerously outdated. Its true dominance lies in a 20-year head start on manufacturing autonomy, with production for complex products like the PlayStation 5 being 90% automated. The US outsourced innovation instead of automating domestically.

The US defense industry's error was creating a separate, "exquisite" industrial base. The solution is designing weapons that can be built using existing, scalable commercial manufacturing techniques, mirroring the successful approach used during World War II.

From a Chinese perspective, its vast manufacturing capacity, supported by world-class infrastructure, is a global utility. The concept of "Made in China" is reframed as "Made for the World." This view suggests the U.S. should focus on its own strengths like innovation ("zero to one") instead of viewing China's manufacturing prowess ("one to 100") as a national security threat.

China is compensating for its deficit in cutting-edge semiconductors by pursuing an asymmetric strategy. It focuses on massive 'superclusters' of less advanced domestic chips and creating hyper-efficient, open-source AI models. This approach prioritizes widespread, low-cost adoption over chasing the absolute peak of performance like the US.

Simulations of a conflict with China consistently show the US depleting its high-end munitions in about seven days. The industrial base then requires two to three years to replenish these stockpiles, revealing a massive gap between military strategy and production capacity that undermines deterrence.