Deterrence creates an evidence problem because its claimed success is an action an opponent did not take. Observing a carrier arrive before a crisis recedes does not by itself prove cause, which is the post hoc fallacy of confusing sequence with explanation. The analyst must infer motives without direct access to decision-makers’ minds or records that may never be written. Peace is still cheaper than war, and past attempts to secure peace simply through disarmament have repeatedly failed, so imperfect proof does not make deterrent capacity valueless.
Notable Point · 2:12:23-2:15:52
Why successful deterrence is hard to prove
A crisis that never occurs cannot be measured like a battle, and sequence alone does not establish that military presence caused restraint.