Timeline for How can Empire A convince Empire B that it has a planet-destroying weapon without helping Empire B to recreate it?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 7, 2021 at 13:17 | comment | added | J... | @user161005 I'll put it another way - I don't find your proposition to make a very believable world or story. It feels cartoonish and contrived. If that's the feel you're going for with the story, though, then great - go for it. | |
| Jul 7, 2021 at 13:15 | comment | added | J... | @user161005 It's not a paradox - it's a real political problem. Empire A has to draw a line in the sand and Empire B has to decide whether to cross that line or not. In the real world, Empire B is likely to call the bluff and cross the line - so you end up with a moving goalpost problem that Empire A either has to prove they're serious about (destroying everything) or simply concede bit by bit to Empire B in a slow attrition. No fallacy, no paradox - it's a pure game of poker. Of chicken. | |
| Jul 7, 2021 at 13:08 | comment | added | KarmaPeasant | @J... "See how this goes?" Basically your (fallacious) logic can be boilded down to "Is one grain of sand a dune? No. What if I add another grain of sand? Again, no. And yet another one? Still no. See how it goes? You just won't get a dune". It's called the paradox of the heap, by the way. | |
| Jul 7, 2021 at 12:32 | comment | added | J... | @user161005 But not a less-than-fatal blow? Empire A has 20 states. Empire B takes one. What does Empire A do? Blow everything up? Or do they sabre-rattle and make some noise about the weapon and warn them to stop? Empire B calls the bluff and marches their army in and takes another state. Now what does Empire A do? End the game? Or keep playing for time? Empire B takes another state... now what? See how this goes? | |
| Jul 7, 2021 at 3:11 | comment | added | KarmaPeasant | @J... The weapon isn't pointless. It's used not to destroy Empire B, but to avoid destruction of Empire A. The weapon would deter Empire B from dealing fatal blows to Empire A | |
| Jul 6, 2021 at 18:39 | comment | added | J... | @user161005 But if Empire A can defeat Empire B using conventional warfare anyway, then the weapon is pointless and they don't need it, nor do they need Empire B to believe it is a credible threat. | |
| Jul 5, 2021 at 21:16 | history | edited | Tom | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
removed partial frame challenge that flowed from my faulty analysis of OP's goals
|
| Jul 5, 2021 at 21:13 | comment | added | Tom | @user161005 You're right. I'll update my answer accordingly. | |
| Jul 5, 2021 at 6:42 | comment | added | KarmaPeasant | "I really think you're missing the point of doomsday weapons." I'm not. Rememberr that Empire A wants to destroy Empire B. If Empire A has the doomsday weapon and Empire B doesn't, then Empire A has guarantee against complete destruction by Empire B and Empire B can be destroyed without triggering the end of the world | |
| Jul 5, 2021 at 6:16 | history | answered | Tom | CC BY-SA 4.0 |