Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Policy Discussion Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (1888)	1/8/2003 6:50:41 AM
From: zonder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 15987

it may not fit perfectly, but I believe my original understanding of the word's definition and applicability stands true. I did not mean to say "You are wrong in saying this", just that English is a second language for me and when I see a term I have never heard before, I try to make sense of it. But that's not how Jong thinks.. Sure he's smart.. And I believe also deluded by his megalomaniac personality where he doesn't believe he has to act in a civilized manner, according to norms and rules that we impose upon ourselves But civilized behaviour or lack thereof has nothing to do with Game Theory, which is concerned with (naturally selfish) strategies for survival. Jong's personality has nothing to do with the very valid Game Theory decision to go forward with a nuclear weapons program given that: (1) N. Korea is already named in "axis of evil" and knows it will be their turn soon after Iraq (2) Iraq example shows not heaving weapons is no guarantee that you will not be invaded (3) Nuclear weapons will deter any country from invasion (4) Result: Restart nuclear weapons program You see, nothing at all to do with Jong's personality. Do you see any problem with the game logic here? Would another world leader arrive at a different result given the same situation?