The PRC definitely has related ambitions, and could pull it off with their standard approach (bribing senior officials, offering trade deals, etc.).
No Scores Yet
Relative Brier Score
0
Forecasts
0
Upvotes
Forecasting Activity
Forecasting Calendar
| Past Week | Past Month | Past Year | This Season | All Time | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Forecasts | 0 | 16 | 78 | 78 | 78 |
| Comments | 0 | 9 | 56 | 56 | 56 |
| Questions Forecasted | 0 | 15 | 39 | 39 | 39 |
| Upvotes on Comments By This User | 1 | 1 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
| Definitions | |||||
New Badge
Star Commenter - Nov 2025
Earned for making 5+ comments in a month (rationales not included).
New Prediction
New Prediction
Probability
Answer
60%
Yes
40%
No
Why do you think you're right?
Files
Why might you be wrong?
The timeline for this question is pretty tight.
Files
New Prediction
Probability
Answer
15%
Moldova
2%
Armenia
10%
Georgia
3%
Kazakhstan
Why do you think you're right?
After the disastrous consequences of his invasion of Ukraine, Putin will hopefully be deterred from similar actions for other countries.
Files
Why might you be wrong?
Putin might actually consider the Ukrainian invasion a success (also depending on the terms of any ceasefire or peace agreement), and/or might think it is to his benefit to flex his muscle and/or create a distraction for other purposes.
Files
New Prediction
Probability
Answer
7%
Yes
93%
No
Why do you think you're right?
Very unlikely given the timeline.
Files
Why might you be wrong?
If there's an incident pointing to the need for increased AI regulation, Congressional leaders might make this a priority.
Files
New Prediction
Probability
Answer
10%
Yes
90%
No
Why do you think you're right?
European nations can barely muster this kind of force for their own defense, and thus would be hard-pressed to deploy one to Ukraine. Also, persistent issues such as risk aversion, fear of escalation, slow decisionmaking, lack of logistics capabilities, etc. will make this even less likely.
Files
Why might you be wrong?
There may be symbolic deployments of a few (or a few dozen) soldiers, which I guess would mean a "yes" scoring given how the question is posed. However those would be worthless as an actual deterrent.
Files
New Prediction
Probability
Answer
30%
Yes
70%
No
Why do you think you're right?
I don't think the European nations can overcome their related issues (slow decisionmaking, anti-defense mindset/culture, fear of escalation, Russian-controlled people in key positions, etc.) and come through with this kind of substantial commitment.
Files
Why might you be wrong?
There's always hope!
Files
New Prediction
Probability
Answer
5%
Less than $21.0 billion
5%
More than or equal to $21.0 billion but less than $22.5 billion
10%
More than or equal to $22.5 billion but less than $23.5 billion
25%
More than or equal to $23.5 billion but less than $25.0 billion
55%
More than or equal to $25.0 billion
Why do you think you're right?
The creation of the Space Force is one of President Trump's achievements and thus he and his team are likely to push for generous funding. Beyond that, space is also an area of increasing importance to national security and national prosperity, and the USSF plays an important role for both, so they should receive more funding.
Files
Why might you be wrong?
Congressional decisions don't always make sense, and the USSF budget may fall victim to political games.
Files
New Prediction
Probability
Answer
60%
Yes
40%
No
Why do you think you're right?
ASAT technology is proliferating, and the benefits to those using them are so obvious that some of our adversaries may feel tempted to use them, likely as a real-world test or capability demonstration, or as a "shot across the bow" in support of a terrestrial conflict.
Files
Why might you be wrong?
The U.S. has made it clear that it will not tolerate such attacks, which may have enough of a deterrent effect - especially under the current administration - to restrain our adversaries.
Files
New Prediction
Probability
Answer
20%
Yes
80%
No
Why do you think you're right?
Given the pressure applied by the US administration, both countries will hopefully see it as being in their best interest to cease hostilities. Accidental deaths e.g. from mines during the forecast period are unlikely to reach 20 or more.
Files
Why might you be wrong?
There could be accidents with many victims (e.g. a bus driving over a mine or the like) that could cause 20 or more deaths. There is also the (IMHO slight) chance that one of the countries concludes that a continuation of hostilities is in their best interest.
Files
Why do you think you're right?
This kind of attack matches Putin's "gray zone" approach, and would be just the thing for him to do to demonstrate his power (or even just out of spite) if he is pressured into a ceasefire or peace agreement in Ukraine.
Why might you be wrong?
Cyber defenses are getting better, and Western governments may be able to create conditions to deny or deter such an attack.