2 Reasons Why Nukes Are Good For Peace

Admittedly, the title of this article is utterly counter-intuitive. An alternate statement of a proposition should be an antithesis, proving that it’s opposite cant also be true. The proposition, ‘Nukes are inherently bad‘ should be examined against its opposite, ‘Nukes are inherently good.’ Essentially, this is a good way of blocking out the media waffle from over-zealous reporters, a determination based on speed of news writing, rather than accuracy; a writer at the coal face getting paid for how fast they chip away at the wall, not for how much resource they extract.

Every major news article on North Korea or World War III from major news outlets in the past 72 hours, has been designed to create a sense of urgency, and the mother of all paychecks, fear.

Nuclear weapons are good for peace. Here are 2 reasons why:



Believe it or not, humans want to survive. They will do almost anything to preserve their own lives. There is a reason it has been 71 years, 7 months and 14 days since the end of World War II. Nukes keep aggression confined to conflicts between nations who don’t have Nuclear weapons, or where only one side has them. If nation-states didn’t have nuclear weapons, World War III would have started a long time ago. Think about Vietnam, Cuba, Ukraine, India, Czechoslovakia, and Korea. It is simply too risky to be on the verge of nuclear war. 

World War III will happen when technology advances to the point that nuclear weapons are no longer a significant threat.



The Nash Equilibrium is a concept of Game Theory where the optimal outcome of a game is one where no player has an incentive to deviate from his chosen strategy after considering an opponent’s choice. Overall, an individual can receive no incremental benefit from changing actions, assuming other players remain constant in their strategies.

For an example of Sub-game perfect Nash Equilibrium, lets use the scenario:

The U.S demanded North Korea stop its missile testing or they will attack. 

Here is an example of the Nash Equilibrium:

Naheq1In short, the situation where North Korea doesn’t stop its missile testing, and the U.S.A doesn’t attack, is a Sub-game Perfect Nash Equilibrium. North Korea has no incentive to stop its missile testing, and the U.S.A has no incentive to attack, as North Korea has threatened the use of nuclear weapons.

To see this clearer we look at a Game Tree:


From this diagram, you can see that the major decision is for the U.S.A: if North Korea decides not to stop missile testing, they can either attack, which would have huge ramifications for both sides, where North Korea would lose more than the U.S, or not attack. The U.S will not attack because they have more to lose from attacking, than they do from not attacking. They cannot risk all out nuclear war. It is all about fear.

I hope you enjoyed this massively over-analysed Geo-political conflict reduced to a Sub-game Perfect Nash Equilibrium.

Only time will tell what happens next, but logic seems to suggest the decision that is best for humanity.





5 thoughts on “2 Reasons Why Nukes Are Good For Peace

Add yours

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: