Confirmed previous forecast
1.247232
Relative Brier Score
16
Forecasts
0
Upvotes
Forecasting Activity
Forecasting Calendar
| Past Week | Past Month | Past Year | This Season | All Time | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Forecasts | 0 | 0 | 16 | 16 | 16 |
| Comments | 0 | 0 | 14 | 14 | 14 |
| Questions Forecasted | 0 | 0 | 9 | 9 | 9 |
| Upvotes on Comments By This User | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Definitions | |||||
New Prediction
New Prediction
Probability
Answer
75%
(0%)
Yes
25%
(0%)
No
Files
New Prediction
Probability
Answer
70%
(-10%)
Yes
30%
(+10%)
No
Why do you think you're right?
Updating to be closer to the crowd. My initial forecast likely overestimates how strongly Trump feels about this policy, and his top DoD staff will likely push back against this force reduction.
Files
Why might you be wrong?
The crowd forecast (and now me) may be wrong about how strongly Trump will push an ally if he feels they are taking advantage of the USA.
Files
New Prediction
Probability
Answer
75%
(0%)
Yes
25%
(0%)
No
Confirmed previous forecast
Files
New Prediction
Probability
Answer
80%
Yes
20%
No
Why do you think you're right?
- Trump has signaled his interest in reducing U.S. military presence in ROK. Unlike in Trump's first term, the DoD now appears to be more reactive to Trump's foreign policy preferences. A 4.5k reduction could be enough to satisfy Trump's desire while still maintaining significant regional presence. So, I think the crowd is underestimating the likelihood of an announcement for such a withdrawal.
- That said, it's still unlikely, given the focus on China. Elbridge Colby and his associates in the DoD would likely push back on policies that reduce USA's ability to apply military pressure on China.
Files
Why might you be wrong?
- My analysis is based on vibes and anchored on the crowd's forecast. I'm unsure how to determine a base rate here. Trump is an anomaly, so I don't think it's right to compare this event with past military force reductions.
Files
New Prediction
Probability
Answer
5%
Yes
95%
No
Why do you think you're right?
- A new deal is hard to negotiate. The JCPOA might provide a baseline, but Iran would want more protection from future sanctions, and Trump would want stricter regulations to show that his new deal is better.
- The timing would be strange politically. The USA conducted significant military strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities, and Iran launched a large missile salvo at Americans in Qatar.
- There's only 2.5 weeks remaining for this question to be resolved.
Files
Why might you be wrong?
Never say never...Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian recently appeared on Tucker Carlson's show to talk about U.S.-Iranian relations and potential ways forward. Also, reports suggest that Trump was upset with Israel (or at least PM Netanyahu) in forcing his hand on the Iran strike.
It's possible that the U.S. and Iran are currently hosting discreet talks and Trump announces that a deal (largely JCPOA with some minor points further in USA favor) has been finalized, which would still satisfy the resolution criteria in the affirmative.
Files
New Prediction
Probability
Answer
10%
(-85%)
Yes
90%
(+85%)
No
Why do you think you're right?
The question is now whether Spain will agree to a defense spending target of 5% GDP within the next 2.5 weeks. Given Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez's public statements against the new spending target, it seems highly unlikely that this resolution will be satisfied in time.
Files
Why might you be wrong?
It's not just Trump pushing the 5% target. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has gone on a media blitz hyping up the importance of the latest NATO declaration. I may be underestimating how much pressure PM Sánchez is facing from his fellow Europeans to play ball.
Files
Why do you think you're right?
Why might you be wrong?