Dear (Director):

Even before television underscored the tragedy of war by bringing pictures of human suffering and enviromental destruction into my home, I thought there MUST be a better way than war for settling disputes. Could it be that modeling and simulation hold hope for finding a better way? I believe so. Certainly the possibility is worth investigating.

Besides the old tried and true "What If ... ?" method -- trying an idea on a model to see if it holds promise before real-world application -- I think there is at least one other way that I believe should be investigated. That is Peace Gaming, as contrasted with War Gaming, which is now used so extensively by the military. In both of these types of gaming, roles are assigned to players to represent important opponents in a real-life confrontion. But the objectives are as different as war and peace: In war games the objective is to win the war; in peace games players are charged with the responsibility of reaching a peaceful resolution of a conflict of ideas or objectives.

Peace gaming is not a new idea; it can be, and is, being done without computers. But the advantage of using computers for simulating the results of player's decisions, whether they be assembled or at a distance, can be recognized all of us.

I am sending messages similar to the above to the Directors of all MISS Centers with the request that they and/or their colleagues reply with thoughts on the above, or on their own ideas.

So please let me have YOUR comments!

John