> a better explanation might be, historically, passage of time leads to war. My point exactly. Say that wars break out naturally with some Poisson-like distrib

> a better explanation might be, historically, passage of time leads to war. My point exactly. Say that wars break out naturally with some Poisson-like distribution. When the war breaks out, the scale of it is gonna be in relation to the current arsenal of the warring parties. So given your comment, I can revise my comment to say: Historically—and mathematically—military build up leads more devastating wars. Although that is not entirely true. As if nations didn’t hold militaries, there wouldn’t be wars between nations.