[FRIAM] What are the scenarios? Game theory?

[Marcus Daniels]

Owen writes:


"The toughest part is that South Korea is being held hostage. NK can devastate SK even if hit with a pre-emptive strike."


How about Trump defines SK as an undesirable economic competitor to the U.S. that steals jobs, and cuts them loose.   He has no doubt been briefed on the multi-lateral proliferation that would no doubt result, but it that assumes the message stays clear in his mind.


Marcus

________________________________
From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> on behalf of Owen Densmore <owen at backspaces.net>
Sent: Wednesday, August 9, 2017 3:40:59 PM
To: Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: [FRIAM] What are the scenarios? Game theory?

>From BBC a reasonable summary:
  http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40879485

My question is simple: what *are* the alternatives? Is there an interesting game theoretic analysis?

The toughest part is that South Korea is being held hostage. NK can devastate SK even if hit with a pre-emptive strike.

As rash as Trump's bluster has been, the real question remains: what is the reasonable response to NK's threat.
- Preemptive Strike? Likely a loser unless it is so massive as to obliterate every human in NK. SK would be seriously damaged in the aftermath.
- Wait 'til NK strikes? Again, hardly reasonable.
- Anti-missile defense? Possibly, but you just gotta miss one for apocalypse. And what do you do if you *do* succeed? SK is still hostage.
- Tit for Tat? Well, only in the bluster game. Our threats will match yours & vice versa.

Has anyone heard of an interesting strategy?

   -- Owen


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20170809/b58dfb81/attachment.html>