Will a NATO country be attacked?
41
194
αΉ2.4KαΉ360
resolved Jan 1
Resolved
NO1D
1W
1M
ALL
Bound it the time frame to end of 2023.
Cyberattacks are not included because not recognized as "war attacks" so far.
Get αΉ200 play money
Related questions
π Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | αΉ94 | |
| 2 | αΉ48 | |
| 3 | αΉ44 | |
| 4 | αΉ28 | |
| 5 | αΉ23 |
Sort by:
@ValentinManes does the recent missile strike in Poland count as an attack? Current reporting suggests that it was an accident and not an intentional attack, but the two Polish people who died might not agree.
Thanks @PatrickDelaney I didn't know about the Belgrade incident. Interesting case.
The market is related to this other market on NATO article 5 trigger:
- https://manifold.markets/ValentinManes/if-a-nato-country-is-attacked-will
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Atlantic_Treaty#Article_5
An attack is an act sufficient to be recognized as an article 5 trigger.
Yes it is very unlikely and the point of this market is to quantify how unlikely that is. It might even be under 1%.
Unfortunately, what is recognizable as an article 5 trigger is bounded to be political. Ideally, we would have a trusted third party we could rely for the resolution of this market. Like a newspaper or a think-tank?
When you say, "accidents are not fully random," this just depends upon your definition. You are choosing to model them as not, "fully random" for the purpose of what you are trying to figure out. Also, perhaps nitpicking, but apart from this what is the difference between, "fully random," and "random?" There is no difference, it is rhetorical, it is either random, can be modeled as a random variable or something else like, "random with fixed effects."
Accidents during a war, like a bombing of an unintended target, are very likely to happen. Accidents like bombing a NATO asset of some time is less likely than just, "any accident," but still more likely than other cases we could consider. Here is a high profile example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_bombing_of_the_Chinese_embassy_in_Belgrade
However, something like straight up invading Poland purposely is very unlikely to happen.
There might also be purposeful accidents, like setting fire to a bunch of tires on the Polish boarder, causing tons of toxic fumes to go into Poland, "whoops, sorry, didn't mean that, just trying to get rid of waste." That could arguably be an attack on a NATO country, and is much more likely than, "invasion."
Could you give an example of what you mean @PatrickDelaney ?
In the absolute, I'd say the accident doesn't make a war itself. It's the reaction to the accident. At the same time, "accident" are usually not fully random. For example, the recent US-China ship near collision is a result of tensions and lack of communication.
Cf. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/02/world/asia/china-us-warships-south-china-sea.html
I'd say the market will be resolved the way to consensus of the time does. Similarly to how @Duncan resolved the russian attack market: https://manifold.markets/Duncan/will-russia-invade-ukraine-before-t
More related questions
Related questions
Who will be the next country to join NATO?
What will be the first NATO country to officially send soldiers to fight in Ukraine?
POLL
Will Russia launch an armed attack against a NATO member by the end of April 2024?
1% chance
If there is Russia-NATO war by 2030, which NATO country gets invaded the first?
If NATO troops fight in the Ukraine war, will Russia use a nuclear weapon?
14% chance
Will Russian missile hit NATO territory in 2024?
19% chance
Will there be an attack on civilians in a NATO country committed primarily with a laser weapon with >19 casualties?
26% chance
Will a NATO aircraft shoot down a missile or drone fired towards a target in Ukraine before 2027?
45% chance
Will Russia launch an armed attack against a NATO member by the end of May 2024?
2% chance
Will a NATO country shoot down a Russian military asset by end of 2024?
29% chance