A long list of unsubstantiated assertions without a thread of evidence being thrown in. But maybe that is the privilege of a Nobel Laureate who writes in Ynet for us lesser folks

Wish to offer him a rather unique speaking engagement.

B"H I like the writing and would liek to see the Professor write more often, maybe even a regular opinion column or even web-blog on the subject. What an honor for YNET to have such opinion pieces!

I am not sure if you guys have noted, but this is not an opinion or an op-ed article. this is an excerpt from Professor Aumann's Nobel speech-not a Nobel lecture, and thus there could be not much specifics in it. Hence, this represents very broad strokes of his views that have to be viewed in the context of the details of his research which is extremely mathematically rigorous and is accepted by the majority of academics around the world as top notch. As some who studied aspects of it I can tell that Game theory could provide very unique insights into the social interaction problems, including wars, and this is all Professor Aumann is saying. To see more specifically, one has to read his papers or at very least popular game theory books

If Professor Aumann bases his clearly stated political biases on the basis of mathematical extrapolations, I have no way of disputing his positions. If he has adopted his political positions, like most of us, on subjective considerations, that is perfectly legitimate and can be argued pro and con on that same subjective basis. However, if he is making claims that his political position is scientifically valid, he may be making a very dubious claim that could even be bordering on dishonesty.

Rational---maybe a percentage of the population might think in that manner. Another portion of society might be followers. And another portion pascifists. But what about the ones that are complete psychopaths? The ones who just have to much time on their hands and like to kill people? Do we breed a group of these characters with every generation of humans? Each year, another 18 year old group of students who just love to fu*k everything, and everybody up. No morals or inhibitions? No right and wrong? Hitler? Egomaniacs? Narcistic characters? Now the suicidal religious, take my life for God crowd, is a case unto themselves. A promise of riches in the afterlife? Human behaviour ,and beliefs, mixed in with rascism, fanatism, greed, territory, power, blame the other guy for your misery complex, and unwillingness to compromise, all contribute to every conflict that was ever committed. Can you stamp a mathematical number on everyones forehead? Can you stamp a number on every situation that brought the conflict about? Who Knows. Maybe we should attribute it to Chaos.

Your point is well taken. However, the views expressed in the speech above have validity in the rational mathematical framework of game theory-the reference to the arms race he is making in the end prevented either US of Soviet Union in using nuclear weapons. The mathematical rigor of those theories does not necessarily make them the prime answer to the real life problems-these models are very stylized and are meant to provide insights to the formation of equlibria. One of the fundamental assumptions of the game theory is that every player knows that every other player acts rationally and is fully aware of the other player's choices. In some cases, it is not a difficult assumption to accept. For example, if one assumes that Arabs are out there to destroy Israel, it seems that the best response Israel could give is not give Arabs anything. But if one assumes that Arabs just want a state and live like normal human beings, then the best response is probably give to them the state and get on with our lives. The ultimate strategy will depend on what you believe the underlying true reality to be. In game theoretic sense, such reality is the same for everyone-thus the inferences from game theory are limited. But in certain situations, we could accept that the reality is seen as the same by everyone, and this is where game theoretic arguments are most useful. In the end, Professor Aumann is entitled to his own belief of what the Middle East conflict represents-in particular, whether Arabs truly accepted the right of Israel to exist. He does not believe it, neither do I. The post-disengagement events only further support this view-they are out there to kill more Jews. Their strategy is to use war of attrition (game theoretic term) against Israel to force Israel to wirthdraw as much as possible and to inflict as much damage on the Jews as they can, knowing that Jews value life and they do not. So far they have succeeded in Lebanon and Gaza. The real question is what's going to happen next-will Israelis and Jews realize that all Arabs are trying to do is to bleed us so that we gave up and gave them everything, or will Arabs stop at a reachable compromise and get their own state that will be non-belligerent. I believe that their strategy is the former. The Israeli left believes it is the latter. I do not purport to have perfect foresight and tell what will happen, neither does Professor Aumann. However, given his beliefs about the reality, his arguments are correct,and if he is right, given the current withdrawal strategy of the Israeli government, G-d help us all.

the first kill in the history is when kabil kill his brother habil ,,,,what is the couse it is jelouse suspecion feel of unfair to tell iam the best iam the stronger i have the right i think all these are the couses of war how to prevent war it is difecult but we must reache to the mid line in any way diffecult to put the weapon down even it is only the hand please shake hands first then start the game

The religious, I want to blow my self up for God crowd, may be the suicidal group, that has no compunction to let any one of us live. Being self haters in the first place, they may try to kill as many humans as they can afford to. Their own included. The nuclear weapons fired won't be considered a weapon against the good guy or the bad guy. They will be fired to kill all the people. Because the killer will try to inflict his pain on all human's involved. The Post Office Killers, serial killing psychopaths, that never needed a real reason to kill in the first place. They just wanted to die, because their life was miserable, and take everyone else with them. It wouldn't matter that you were a Muslim or Jew, No Heaven or Hell would really matter. Just the fact that the guy touching off the Nuclear Weapon was taking all the assholes around him to the same place he was going. Does a Psychopath really need a reason to kill, other than the little voice in his head telling him to do the deed in the first place. Just killing everyone involved, himself included, could be reason enough in the right circumstances. What mathematical formula do you apply to that? Humans sometimes can be rational enough to live, at other times they will be happy to take everyone else with them. If I get to die, so do they! Chaos has a place in all human decisions at one point in everyone's lives. There doesn't have to be a rhyme, or reason, for a stupid human decision. Why did your wife commit Adultery? She new it would destroy your marriage. She loves you. But she just couldn't weigh the bad, against good consequences. She couldn't stop herself. Do any of us, really believe, we can look into the mathematical crystal ball, and predict what any human will do in the end?

I would like to pose Prof. Aumann a challenge. Does game theory apply to two protagonists who play by entirely different rules, as does the West and Islamic extremists? I say it does not. New game theory principles must be created for such situations, or the West will lose, as did the French and British when facing such an enemy. You are the most distinguished academic to develop such new game theory principles. See if my plan, "The Light at the End of the Tunnel" www.gsimons.org can be clarified according to such new principles. They could end the genocidal war within days and save countless innocent Israeli lives. Please reply. Gilbert Simons Phi Beta Kappa, U. of Pgh, graduate degree, U.C.L.A. School of Public Affair, Holocaust survivor