3 ms·
No, because you can come up for very good arguments a priori for why two or more rational nuclear powers leads to a very stable world, because every party is ve
by x220 8y ago
No, because you can come up for very good arguments a priori for why two or more rational nuclear powers leads to a very stable world, because every party is very interested in preventing nuclear war if they are materialists.
- perl4ever 8y agoAre they good arguments though? Some would say that we observe through declassified information after the fact, that the "rational nuclear powers" were not themselves in control, and a series of accidents at lower levels could have, but didn't, cause disaster, mainly through luck. Similarly, there was a recent thread that had information about how the only reason the first moon landing succeeded was because of a series of accidents, where a computer bug compensated for another unintended defect in the lander. History could have been vastly different via small pivotal events.