Quote (Kuggergug @ Mar 1 2022 03:07am)
Game theory is that when one side controls 90% and the other controls 10%, the one with the 10% wins because they basically have nothing to lose. An example of this is in real estate development. A skyscraper project backed by millions of dollars can be put on hold because some dude owns a shack on a tiny slice of the property and wont sell unless you pay millions. The dude has nothing to lose really so he can hold out. Another example is in politics where the poor might hold all the cards because many are jobless so they can easily spent months protesting, marching, rioting and disrupting while the middle class or upper class have jobs and stuff to do. So the poor wind up getting what they want.
In this war, Russia has 10% or so of the world. The rest of the world united against him with like 90%. Game theory says Putin is in control as he really has nothing to lose, especially with crippling sanctions, etc. on him.
Game theory says Putin should start nuking the US immediately and demanding the world kneel. The world has everything to lose and Putin has nothing to lose. Game theory says Biden will respond to nuclear strikes by kneeling and making Putin emperor of earth. It may sound strange but that would be the expected outcome here.
You might think he definitely has something to lose but not after being made a pariah state. Now he has nothing so hes free to nuke and demand to be made god king of earth
The correct play by the west was to not sanction him until hes cut off. Then putin wouldnt nuke because hes still part of the community and has something to lose
Just played catch up on this topc and got to this. I think this is the most relevant post in this topic. while I dont agree with either "Game theory says Putin should start nuking the US immediately and demanding the world kneel." or "Game theory says Biden will respond to nuclear strikes by kneeling and making Putin emperor of earth" but I do agree with : "The correct play by the west was to not sanction him until hes cut off. Then putin wouldnt nuke because hes still part of the community and has something to lose" and, i hesitate to say this as well, the correct play would be not to aid Ukraine militarily (as well as not imposing sanctions) noting both of those things are 1 step closer to serious business.
full disclosure, I am from Ireland, I see Putin as a baddy but the west failed to appreciate and accept Putin's red lines and as that is set to continue, it is likely at this point that things will escalate in some way, outside of Ukraine. I dont care if america has a bigger army, more advanced weapons and more trained soldiers, that is NOT relevant to the discussion. The discussion as I see it is : when will the west bank down, and if they don't, what will be next thing they (we) do which may the trigger Putin to escalate this conflict outside of Ukraine.
TLDR: no one is blameless here, the west needs to take a long hard look in the mirror as what they are currently doing would appear to be adding fuel to the fire.
This post was edited by ferdia on Mar 2 2022 04:36am