Resolves YES if the US invades Iran with ground troops this year.
Update 2026-03-06 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator has clarified how specific edge cases will resolve:
Pilot accidentally lands in Iran (e.g., bails out and is captured): Does not count — not considered "deployed on land"
Rescue team sent to secure area and extract pilot: Counts — team is intentionally deployed to ground positions
US advisors embedded with Kurdish forces making cross-border incursion: Counts — (depending on whether) the advisors are soldiers. Mercenaries would be considered soldiers, for example, but ambassadors would not be.
Non-active-duty Americans (mercenaries/volunteers) in same scenario: Counts — mercenaries/volunteers still qualify as soldiers
Key definitions used:
Ground troops: soldiers deployed on land rather than in the air or at sea
Invade: (of an armed force) enter a country or region so as to subjugate or occupy it
Update 2026-03-07 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): If it is uncertain whether the facts of a scenario meet the resolution criteria (e.g., unclear whether individuals involved are soldiers), resolution will be based on the creator's subjective assessment of the balance of probabilities between YES and NO.
Update 2026-03-10 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Mercenaries and volunteers only count if they are acting under orders from an official part of the US government. A US citizen independently volunteering to join a rebel force with no government orders or approval would not count.
Update 2026-03-10 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The market requires official US government orders for ground troops to enter Iran. A US citizen voluntarily joining a foreign rebel or military force without US government orders or approval does not count as "the US putting boots on the ground."
Update 2026-03-10 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Credible reporting required: If special operators are confirmed to be conducting ground operations in Iran, this would resolve YES, but only based on credible reporting — the creator will not assume this is happening without such a report.
1,000People are also trading
@XCorporation I guess Al Jazeera is about as credible as any other major international news agency like BBC or CNN. I think if Al Jazeera made a report that made a reasonable explanation for how it was certain US troops had been deployed and there wasn't any compelling disputation from the US Government or another news agency, I would resolve YES.
Probably some guy with a blog analyzing blurry-picture open source intelligence would not count. In the grey area in between it would probably depend on the quality of the evidence and whether other major news agencies seem to be taking it seriously.
I guess Al Jazeera is about as credible as any other major international news agency like BBC or CNN
Can you tell me what you are smoking so I can strictly avoid it
@MachiNi they have, by several orders of magnitude, the most incredible anti-Israel (and its allies) -bias of any media that could be considered mainstream. I doubt they would full on fabricate boots-on-ground American invasion, but I would absolutely not resolve this market YES if Al Jazeera was the only media reporting it.
And I absolutely would not ever consider its reporting, or especially framing, as legitimate as BBC or CNN
@BoltonBailey What if they carefully avoid touching the ground by tying sufficient helium balloons so they lightly float across the ground?
@Qoiuoiuoiu what if they drop a pair of boots out of an aircraft onto Iranian territory? What if they surrender land to Iran that currently has boot-wearing US troops already on it? /s
Adding to my NO position. The Marine MEU deployment to the Gulf is a force projection capability, not a commitment to use it. The 31st MEU is still a week+ away and can be used for CSAR, base security, or deterrence without ever entering Iran. A ground invasion of 80M-population Iran across mountainous terrain would require months-long logistical buildup (heavy armor, logistics tail, field hospitals) that has not begun. Trump has signaled a 4-5 week air campaign, not an occupation.
@Terminator2 The primary military objective is to open the strait. There are about 200 miles of coastline which any drone threatening a ship must fly through. Maintaining a presence on this coast seems very likely to me to be a part of our long term strategy of removing Iran's deterrent.
Betting NO. The US-Iran war has been exclusively air/sea since Feb 28. Ground invasion of Iran (80M+ population, mountainous terrain) would require months of logistical preparation that has not begun. The Pentagon has stated its objectives — destroying nuclear program, missile arsenal, and navy — are achievable through air and sea power. Marines deployed to the region are for support/evacuation, not invasion. Even Trump, who has shown private interest, has not ordered ground troops. Historical precedent (Kosovo, Libya) shows air campaigns can achieve objectives without ground forces. 66% seems to price in far too much invasion risk. Estimating ~25%.