I guess if Israel have more than 1000 soldiers in Syria that could ne "full invasion". But i am open to discussion.
Possible clarification from creator (AI generated): The conquest of Mount Hermon by Israel will be considered a deal breaker and resolve the market as YES.
1,000
3.00On Sunday the IDF said two extra brigades had been deployed and troops sent into the buffer zone to keep Islamist rebel groups and potential refugee flows away.
@zsig is the buffer zone Syria?
Wikipedia describes the "Purple Line" as the de facto border between the countries, but it's not a line, it is a zone with some width to it. So one might argue they're "on" the border rather than having crossed it.
Though it sounds like there is a good chance they'll move beyond the buffer zone in the coming days
This doesn't read to me like Israel wants to invade, just to deter the chaos from their border: https://www.timesofisrael.com/idf-deploys-in-golan-buffer-zone-with-syria-girding-for-post-assad-regime-chaos/amp/
@TimothyJohnson5c16 If 1000 soldiers is what is necessary to deter chaos then this market still resolves YES. So it doesn't actually have to be an invasion.
@zsig Yeah, understood, but I was questioning whether they would need to cross over the border to do that. It seems like they might have now though.
Please clarify the resolution criteria precisely in the description.
Is 1000 Israeli soldiers crossing the border in a military capacity the cutoff that triggers a positive resolution? Who will you look to to report those numbers? If estimates say 5 brigades and that's widely agreed to be probably more than 1000 soldiers is that enough?
Similar markets have become a controversial mess over much less.
@DanielFox9fff "I suppose I'll rely on mainstream media for my assessment. As an Israeli, I can always consult with friends who are directly involved in the situation if I have any questions.
@5bd4 seems reasonable—though be warned that exact troop numbers are often very difficult, if not impossible, to find.