{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

april25th - khomeni induced his best outcome I see how the...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Nathaniel Elghanayan april 25 th Game theory and the humanities. My question is rather succinct this week but is intrinsic to understanding chapters 9-10. Starting on p 214 and going on you show (x,y) payoffs and [x,y] payoffs the bottom one is in anticipation of AG you show the sequence of event and explain the steps that lead up to the unique (3,2) NME also ( though not forcibly the nash equilibrium ) in game 26 . you list this payoff (3,2) as the REAL GAME in the Iran crisis you list initially a series of 2 NME for the faulti perception of carter and one in the correct sequence (2,4) which was the outcome in which
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: khomeni induced his best outcome. I see how the payoff of 4 occurs regardless of whether or not Iran gets attacked by the US ( either way it serves khomeinis purpose, either he shores up strength quickly at home more by creating an external ally who has attacked iran or he does the same by reframing the debate as a revolution vs non revolutionary struggle and slowly defeats the US). Khomeini has a dominant strategy of obstruct and carter had a dominant strategy of negotiate over intervene. My question is : does this ability to unilaterely control the outcome amount to moving or threat power?...
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online