Washington DC (Washington Insider Magazine)- The threat of a nuclear war breaking out is a serious concern among people all over the world. The nuclear war is a lose-lose game, and the winner might not lose absolutely everything. The loser is left with absolutely nothing and could be a loss. Is Nuclear Armageddon A Zero Sum Game? Nuclear planners have taken it to a ridiculous level.
It is a lose-lose situation because neither side typically “wins” such a war. If a full-scale nuclear war breaks out, then the combatants on both sides could see their countries utterly destroyed. The rest of the world could also face the lingering effects of that war including fallout. There could also be possible economic disruption and environmental damage.
Nuclear War Is A Zero Sum Game For The World
There are many scenarios of war in which the world could face a lot of danger and threat. If one country attacks a city, then there is a large military compound that could be hit with a tactical nuke. The country that is under attack cannot unleash all its missiles.
A zero-sum game results in none of the side’s gain and another side’s loss. It could be conceivably possible to make both sides better off and to make both sides worse off. The nuclear game cannot possibly be zero-sum and it is possible to make one side better/worse off without putting any kind of effect on the other side.
Zero Sum Game Could Be Unrealistic and A Restrictive Condition
Any reasonable model of nuclear war could be the following possible outcomes. There is no nuclear war, where one side gets destroyed. If the other side gets destroyed, then both sides get destroyed. This means that it might not be zero-sum. It does not matter what happens in the equilibrium as it is merely allowing certain outcomes to make the game non-constant-sum.
If you remove the possibility of “no war” from the game, then you could assume that the country prefers mutual annihilation and it could be the only country that has been destroyed. The definition of a zero-sum game can apply to the probabilistic distributions over outcomes.
Read More: List Of Nuclear Targets In USA (2022 Updated)
It could not just be the outcomes themselves as both sides would surely prefer. However, there could be a 50% chance that one country could annihilate them and win. Only the later outcome would tell what will happen in reality. It would again remind you that the definition of a zero-sum game could end up including all the outcomes allowed by the game, and it would not just be the outcomes that happen in equilibrium.
Results Could Depend On The Countries Getting Affected By The Nuclear War
The result of the nuclear war would depend on how many countries get involved in the war. The nuclear that are under the warheads are not less and they will have a disaster if the war lasts for many years. The United States is said to be well protected from such an attack.
After we look at the results of 911 the military was notified and they did not have any power to do anything. The Nuclear warheads travel far faster and the jest can also get destroyed in our Capital city. Nuclear warheads can launch a sea in subs which can deliver the payload and have an impact as quickly as 4 to 5 minutes.
After the first few defenses, things would start working out to their best. After sub attack, most countries other than the US, UK, Russia, France, China, India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea would try to make their move as well.
It is bound to affect it, but it will depend on all sorts of other things. This heavily depends on the size & accuracy of the nukes and what is their target. If there are too many nukes, then all sides could be screwed. The nuclear winter theory will come into play by a large number of nukes. The firestorms will put too much soot into the atmosphere and could lead to a big disaster.
There will be one side that had 300 nukes and the other that had only 12. There will be an extreme difference that could indicate a pretty certain winner. When the disparity is not so overwhelming, there is a sort of conflict. The countries might have as many tanks so they’ll win. This idea has already worked when it is compared to the weapons of different countries attacking other countries.
