Resolves YES immediately if before the closing date, there is a credible official statement or mainstream news reports that Ukraine’s military (including aligned paramilitary forces) will receive or has received ATACMS missiles for ongoing war purposes.
Resolves NO otherwise.
OSINT reports may serve as proof, but they need to be self-evident and non-controversial. As a rule of thumb, they should be credible enough to be uncritically cited by Reuters as more than rumors, making this caveat mostly redundant.
Statements and offers conditional on the war ending – that would only come into effect after it ends – don’t count. If the war does actually definitely end during 2023, and only then missiles are promised or given, it also doesn’t count.
Related questions
🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ1,050 | |
| 2 | Ṁ331 | |
| 3 | Ṁ154 | |
| 4 | Ṁ150 | |
| 5 | Ṁ132 |
We have an official statement by Zelensky, and mainstream coverage by BBC, AP, WaPo, NYT, Politico, WSJ, plus OSINT bomblet photos, with the rumors from a month ago not too far from being substantial enough on their own.
At the moment this is a breaking story and some media still hedge a little and lean on anonymous insiders (“said to…”, “according to officials familiar with…”), at least until Zelensky spoke, but this has passed my personal threshold and with a very conservative margin on top. If I’m wrong I will pay the NO positions their expected wins.
@Joshua pretty much no way politico and wsj are both independently wrong about this. ty https://www.politico.com/news/2023/10/17/ukraine-uses-secretly-shipped-u-s-missiles-to-launch-surprise-strike-00121932
I believe this qualifies as a credible mainstream media report: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/russia-ukraine-war-atacms-biden-zelenskyy-long-range-missile-rcna116876
@Jai It has to be official, so far it seems like another rumour (of which there were many since the start of the year).
> Resolves YES immediately if before the closing date, there is a credible official statement or mainstream news reports that Ukraine’s military (including aligned paramilitary forces) will receive or has received ATACMS missiles for ongoing war purposes.
In particular it's unclear whether it was unconditional
> Statements and offers conditional on the war ending – that would only come into effect after it ends – don’t count. If the war does actually definitely end during 2023, and only then missiles are promised or given, it also doesn’t count.
@42irrationalist Doesn't the "or" imply it doesn't haven't to be official? There's no such thing as an official mainstream news report.
Agree that there is still room for ambiguity here.
@Jai Fair enough. What I was trying to say is that the promise has to be a sufficiently well-defined, carry some weight and ideally be "binding". Biden saying Zelensky while having a cup of tea: "Ok, you know what, we'll send you a few ATACMS" wouldn't count in my opinion. There has to be some kind of official action taken either privately or publicly (e.g. Biden saying the same thing to the press).
Moreover, currently we have no idea of what exactly was said. In particular I can easily imagine a scenario where no actual promise exists and this leak is some kind of deliberate media strategy to test the US internal reaction or perhaps force the Russian government to act in a certain way. I am not saying this scenario is especially likely, but it's — in my opinion — plausible.