Perhaps you are confusing the incidence of war and the risk of war. A long period of many wars would be evidence for an increase of war, not an increase of war risk.
Since it was using casualties I’m not sure what you think the difference is.
At about 1:00 in this video NNT explains how a small amount of benefit also exposes you to an increased risk
If we want to assume far-fetched models with no evidence. Note that if you are trying to use this in conjunction with OP, you are guilty of fully general counterarguments: ‘long period of wars? proof of risk! long period of peace? actually, it just makes the risk even worse!’ No matter what happens, Taleb will claim he’s right, like he usually does.
Since it was using casualties I’m not sure what you think the difference is.
If we want to assume far-fetched models with no evidence. Note that if you are trying to use this in conjunction with OP, you are guilty of fully general counterarguments: ‘long period of wars? proof of risk! long period of peace? actually, it just makes the risk even worse!’ No matter what happens, Taleb will claim he’s right, like he usually does.