this is nonsense. the whole difficulty of the "real" situation is its vagueness and its unknown consequences and effects, that it cannot be worked out with simple 50% assumptions and kindergarten logic, despite what the administration says.
Madison put a lid on the liberal nonsense ok. Actually this is a perfect example of game theory. Ever heard of the prisoner's dilemma? Two guys are arrested for a crime and kept in separate cells. The detective interviews each of them separately. He tells prisoner A that he has two choices. Confess to the crime and he will only get 2 years in prison. He tells the same to prisoner B. He also tells both of them that if both confess to the crime they both will get 2 years in prison. If both deny the crime, they will be set free. However, if one of them confesses and the other does not, the one that confesses will get 2 years while the other will spend life in prison. Of course to make things even more difficult the detective tells them the other person has already confessed. This leaves the prisoner with quite a dilemma. The answer lies in what is the optimal strategy for the prisoner. The optimal strategy is always to confess. Why? Because if you played out this scenario 1 million times giving each possibility a 3:1 probability then the total number of years served in prison would be over 10 times that the number of years served if you confessed every time. This type of strategy applies to many things in life including war. When dealing with an enemy that wants to kill you, you have to accept that there is a certain probability that he will be successful if given the chance. This begs the question should one act now to avoid a possible conflict later or leave yourself at the mercy of your enemy. Again, just like the prisoner's dilemma there is one optimal strategy if you played out this scenario a million times. If you add up the number of lives lost every time the enemy would attack times the probability of how many times they would choose to do this out of a 100, then you would get a number much much higher then the number of deaths that would occur by taking the first move.
Mavertrick!!! Down to 5 braincells? already? sheeesh Your logic, and this malarkey of kill or be killed, would give me the right to blow your head off. I think you should agree yes.??? You see, there is a 50% chance of you killing me first. So by me acting first, 100% first my threat is eliminated right??? Is this what you are telling us here? Same disgusting twisted logic of yours applied by dumya? enlighten us. Let's nuke everyone out there?....you know according to your screwed up logic they have 50% chance of attacking us first. :eek:
Hey Nolan, where did you go to college? If you have ever taken a college economics course, then certainly you would be familiar with game theory. And if you are familiar with game theory then certainly you would be familiar with the prisoner's dilemma. But you just exposed youself as to having no post graduate education which was obvious to me from the first post I read of yours, but is now obvious to every one else on this board. Thank you for making it so easy to expose you. Game theory is not something I made up here, it's an example that has been used for hundreds of years. It was John Nash that took game theory to a whole new level in the 1950's for which he won a nobel prize for. Please stay away from the heavy intellectual stuff on these boards. It's way over your head.
Hmm...you are actually talking to both of us.....Cathy is a Libertarian and Bob is a conservative Republican. To answer your question. So guess who had which answer. Bob would shoot them both. I would hide....you never want to burn your bridges. Never know if you will need Mr. X later on. He might be a valuable ally.
ahahahaha That confirms it yer completely lost it! Thread about the 3 People in the World, x kills y, Frenchguy on the side (nice pick Anonymoustrader) and you making claims on my education levels talking post graduate degrees blahblahblah ********Well leme tel you somting....... 5 PhD's ore non, I hav nough edecaution to realize that you belong in a nice white well padded room with no visiting rights.