Minimum to count as military conflict: either a combined 10 people die as part of action by either military OR a confirmed airstrike on Venezuelan soil (doesn't have to be on military targets).
Update 2025-08-28 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - A US Navy action against a narco-boat causing 10+ fatalities counts only if it occurs in Venezuelan waters.
Update 2025-09-03 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - Ambiguous location won't count: If the location of an incident is unclear or disputed, it will not count toward YES. Location must be clearly established (e.g., USN interdictions must be clearly within Venezuelan waters).
Update 2025-09-03 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - Only internationally recognized Venezuelan waters will count; incidents in disputed or solely Venezuelan-claimed areas (e.g., Essequibo maritime claims) will not.
Update 2025-09-03 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - For the narco-boat scenario, incidents only count if clearly within internationally recognized Venezuelan waters (as previously stated).
If the US and Venezuelan navies exchange fire, location is irrelevant; the Venezuelan-waters restriction does not apply to this case.
Update 2025-10-25 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - If Venezuelan military takes action against US targets (e.g., sinking a cruise ship in US waters), this counts as YES regardless of location, consistent with the rule that military-vs-military conflict counts regardless of location.
Update 2025-10-25 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - A gunfight between smugglers and US Coast Guard (law enforcement) does not count as military conflict, even if 10+ people die. This is not considered an act of war.
1,000
1.00U.S. Carrier to the Caribbean: A Step Closer to War: https://www.csis.org/analysis/us-carrier-caribbean-step-closer-war
If I were a Manifold whale, I would bid this up to 80%.
"Well, I don't think we're going to necessarily ask for a declaration of war. I think we're just going to kill people that are bringing drugs into our country. OK? We're going to kill them,"
"Now they (drugs) are coming in by land ... you know, the land is going to be next,"
Some quotes from Trump above
Venezuela claims capture of CIA-linked mercenaries | Miami Herald
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/venezuela/article312660489.html
The USS Gerald R. Ford, the world's largest aircraft carrier with a nuclear reactor - and I believe the US Navy's second most valuable asset - is now parked off the coast of Venezuela and costing ~$7 million a day doing nothing. I struggle to see a story where they just "pack up and go home" makes more sense than they actually use what they spent all the effort putting into place.
They're just waiting for hurricane season to end and then kinetic strikes of some sort will start mid-to-late November or early December. I think the goal will be regime change not unlike Iran strikes.
@CornCasting Signaling is a use and it does not require military action. But that is still a good point.
@Lilemont yeah, I thought it was very clear the US strikes were exclusively about setting back the nuclear weapons program. Otherwise very different targets would have been chosen. That regime change was the goal is a baffling view to me.
There is substantial evidence regime change was Israel's goal.
- Netanyahu called for Iranians to rise up against their "evil and oppressive regime"
- Israel's operations extended beyond nuclear facilities to include decapitation strikes against top commanders, key government officials, and military infrastructure -> destabilize the regime and possibly incite unrest. The focus on command, control, and communications, as well as targeted assassinations, suggests a broader strategy than mere make nukes go bye bye.
- Israel has entertained regime change as a long-term goal before, and the timing of attacks alongside calls for nationwide uprisings supports this interpretation
Ok, what about the US you ask? Well there is substantial evidence the US knew about the plan before it happened and supported it. Israel was the US's proxy:
- Trump publicly acknowledged that he was informed of the Israeli attacks beforehand, and had ongoing communication with Prime Minister Netanyahu in the days leading up to the strikes
- There are international think tanks and policy publications that argue that, while Israel took the operational initiative, the US played a crucial supporting role. Like just think of it as a video game, this is the smart move to play. This is really just traditional proxy dynamics in Middle East conflicts, it is barely surprising to say the US would support it
- Some sources explicitly describe the Israeli attack as a “cover” for broader US strategic objectives, pointing to intelligence sharing, diplomatic messaging, and concurrent military readiness as evidence of proxy involvement
- Trump mused on social media, “wouldn't there be regime change if Iran cannot make itself great again?” so err... yea
Oh yea and then shortly after the Israeli strikes, the US conducted its own bombardments against Iranian nuclear sites. They weren't separate events. i.e. Coordinated military action rather than purely independent military decisions. Timing and sequence of events suggest that Israel and the US were operating with shared goals and, in practice, combined operational momentum.
So yes, I do think it was an actual goal (alongside setting back the nuclear program) and it is a fairly straightforward conclusion to draw from what we know. Of course I'm not 100% sure and could be wrong and am happy to change my mind. But no, they would never publicly say that because they knew there was massive risk of failure and oh boy does nobody like admitting failure in the world of politics.
I think setting back the nuclear weapons program was the explicitly stated goal (easier) and regime change was a the implicit one where they hoped the local population would rally up after their act.
I think the analogy will hold where in Venezuela eliminating the Cartel of the Suns will be the explicitly stated goal and regime change the implicit one. The Trump admin has already said there are links with the highest level of government in Venezuela and Cartel of the Suns (how convenient!). Just like with Iran where we saw many Iranian nuclear scientists murdered and infrastructure completely unrelated to Iran's nuclear program obliterated with decapitation strikes we will see something similar in Venezuela with high ranking officials and other Venezuela infrastructure turned into pulp - with "it is linked with Cartel of the Suns" being the justification.
And the hope will be that their decapitation strike will lead to the local population (which would love a regime change much like Iranians) rallying up and overthrowing their government. But if that fails they wont have to admit failure because they made sure that was never an explicitly stated goal. Smart.
@CornCasting Granted there is one crucial difference:
In this case destroying infrastructure is not as much a goal at all (no nuke facilities to destroy and if anything, preserve the oil producing infra at all costs!) and the goal is much more just killing particular Venezuelan officials that the US government absolutely hates.
See: the US now has a bigger bounty on the president of Venezeula's head than Osama, Saddam, and Abu bakr al-baghdadi. Even inflation-adjusted it is bigger - a fuckton bigger. They really want this guy unalive and in the ground. It is the same with many members of his cabinet - ridiculously huge bounties on their heads. They really want them dead.
@GazDownright keep in mind if it's the actual militaries fighting, it's YES no matter where. But sure, if Venezuela sinks a Princess Cruise ship in Fort Lauderdale it's also YES. While extremely unlikely that should be with the spirit of the market.
@AlexanderTheGreater cheers. it's more of a hypothetical, but if there's a gun fight between an almost successful smuggling run and law enforcement like us coast guard?
Since the year is coming to an end in a little over two months, I created a market that's identical but goes till end of 2026: https://manifold.markets/AlexanderTheGreater/military-conflict-between-the-us-an-ES6shSpnd6?r=QWxleGFuZGVyVGhlR3JlYXRlcg
@Dulaman I had no idea chatgpt was that "intelligent", kinda scary. I wonder how well an entirely AI run manifold account would end up doing, maybe a series of them with different ais. Could bet on which does best.
