Per the NYT I believe this has been resolved, "Five days of resumed fighting this week has killed at least 20 people and displaced more than half a million."
No Scores Yet
Relative Brier Score
0
Forecasts
0
Upvotes
Forecasting Calendar
| Past Week | Past Month | Past Year | This Season | All Time | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Forecasts | 0 | 1 | 126 | 125 | 126 |
| Comments | 0 | 1 | 133 | 132 | 133 |
| Questions Forecasted | 0 | 1 | 49 | 49 | 49 |
| Upvotes on Comments By This User | 0 | 0 | 13 | 13 | 13 |
| Definitions | |||||
Star Commenter - Dec 2025
Why do you think you're right?
Why might you be wrong?
If the NYT is wrong!
Why do you think you're right?
I regret my earlier confidence that neither side wanted escalation; now it feels like a spiral that is going to get worse before it gets better.
Also wondering if this has already been resolved? According to the NYT today, "Five days of resumed fighting this week has killed at least 20 people and displaced more than half a million." ???
Why might you be wrong?
If the NYT report is erroneous and the threshold of 20 hasn't already been reached, it's certainly possible for hostilities to quiet for 6 weeks. Fatalities are not daily but coming in discrete events
Why do you think you're right?
Greatly increasing probability with yesterday's Thai strike on Cambodia, killing 5, in response to a Thai soldier dying in a skirmish (for a total of 6 deaths). This obviously makes it much more likely that more such incidents may occur, and raises questions about troop discipline and desire for peace
Why might you be wrong?
Still considering this less than likely as both leaders still encouraging restraint, and both countries still have incentives (mainly economic) to avoid conflict
Why do you think you're right?
Reducing likelihood with the passage of more time and lack of movement / news
Why might you be wrong?
China still expansion-minded I would imagine, and US continues to shrink from international interests
Why do you think you're right?
When I first forecasted long ago it seemed like it was going to be close to 70; with passage of time numbers are clearly leaning >70 rather than <70
Why might you be wrong?
Still some time and some countries don't have data yet for later months
Why do you think you're right?
Can't say I've read everything but it seems like Egypt's economy has stabilized. I think the international community also has a stake in keeping Egypt stable lest it destabilize the fragile Gaza ceasefire
Why do you think you're right?
In addition to some time having passed since my initial forecast, mainly reducing the probability as previously I didn't fully appreciate that the question meant truly excluding Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Israel. I had misread the question to mean "at least 3 MENA states other than Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Israel," and not that those 4 countries could not be involved. As others have pointed out, those states tend to drive geopolitical developments in the region, so it would be unlikely for any group of 3 countries to put together a security agreement without any of those 4 countries.
Why might you be wrong?
I could see an agreement specifically ABOUT Israel, even if Israel isn't involved, including the bordering countries (Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, or other nearby countries).