> 10 to 1 one you're wrong. https://xkcd.com/1132/

What are the two scenarios you're referring to? That Trump does or does not contribute to a nuclear war?

Trump trashes everyone who disagrees with him. He will likely increase tensions on the world stage.

Yes but if you are right and the world ends and he doesn't have to pay up. That's the joke.

Just as a discussion point (and going off topic and being maybe too pedantic) that is not how I understood the XKCD. The difference is that the one interpretation only takes into account the odds of the machine lying, the bayesian approach also takes into account the odds of the sun actually going nova, which is still neglible.

Yes as a second consideration you can also take the view of the world will end, but that is not the point of the XKCD.

And then drawing it to this discussion, yes the odds that Trump would be willing to start a nuclear war might be high, but combined with the odds of an actual nuclear war occurring the odds of it happening is still neglible.

> He will likely increase tensions on the world stage.

While Trumps opponent openly warns Russia of consequences. Lets be objective now.

>> He will likely increase tensions on the world stage.

> While Trumps opponent openly warns Russia of consequences. Lets be objective now.

Yes, let's. Russia is not an ally. There are consequences to its aggression.

Trump, on the other hand, has repeatedly said we should extract more money from our allies in east asia, and that we should threaten to withdraw from Japan and South Korea. These are scenarios China and Russia would love to see play out.

Trump argues NATO is obsolete. He defends Russia's annexation of Crimea, and he thinks we should give up Aleppo to Russian-friendly Assad.

He thinks he knows more than the generals. At the same time, he claims he never thought about this stuff during his time as a businessman.

The alternative to nuclear war is the proxy wars you see playing out in the middle east. Any concessions are gobbled up by whichever side backs down.

> its aggression

I see NATO bases all around the planet.

> The alternative to nuclear war is the proxy wars you see playing out in the middle east.

True. We also know who started that with leaders not bowing to the western interests. While Assad isn't exactly prince charming, his country wasn't in ruins as it is now. Same stands for Gaddafi and Hussein.

By every account, he already has. Numerous world leaders and multinational organizations have denounced him, specifically because of his dangerous rhetoric.