From the bbc:

"The IDF's strikes, which came in several waves over a three-hour period, involved scores of aircraft, including jets and drones.

Targets comprised Iran’s air defences, missile and drone production, and launch facilities."

@PatrickMcCann Have you found any other media sources mentioning launch sites/facilities?

@Epistemic_Trespasser yes https://www.rferl.org/a/iran-israel-missile-production-air-defenses/33183370.html

Shahrud as well as s-300 launch sites, which have offensive capability

@PatrickMcCann Thanks. Sharhud i think is a production facility not a missile launch site. But the s-300 systems technically count since they launch missiles. Resolving yes.

@Epistemic_Trespasser shahrud is also a launch site

https://www.nti.org/education-center/facilities/shahroud-missile-test-site/

@Epistemic_Hygiene launch sites targeted

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cgr0yvrx4qpo

Why did civilian infrastructure resolve at 50%?

@Lemming i thought the category potentially would be too ambigious to resolve objectively. couldn't figure out how to cancel the option without closing the whole market so i just resolved at 50 (there were 0 actual traders on that option so no one made or lost mana).

Technically, the embassies around the world are also Iranian territory… and there is not an option that support this type of attack.

@BP17b6 You could add it as an option.

@Epistemic_Hygiene I did so, and also The NY Times published there was an attack on the embassy in Syria 🫣

@BP17b6 Be careful, @Epistemic_Hygiene said below that it only counts if it is part of the planned attack. I don't think this would qualify.

@Sodann Not sure I understand the definition.

It was surly panned, and not probable that there will only be ‘one’ attack.

Also the word planned is not in the description. It’s only sates ‘expected’…

@BP17b6 I'm not sure I understand it either. But it seems to build on the assumption that there will be one single large operation as response to Iran's attack. And strikes will only count if @Epistemic_Hygiene judges them to be part of that attack. But I fear the resolution might get a bit messy.

@Sodann I didn’t read it like you at all, and the attack is every possible attack on Iran by the end of 2024, can be more than one, in several times…

@Sodann @BP17b6 In retrospect, I should have formulated the question and description in a way that better avoided some of these possible sources of ambiguity. I think the singular "expected attack on Iran" implies that the attack is reasonably understood as single operation (which does not necessarily mean it can't take place over several days and involve a range of activities). And "expected attack" I think obviously refers to the expected response to Iran's recent ballistic missile strikes against Israel which has been the subject of discussion across the world in the past week--additionally, the PM of Israel announced that there will be an Israeli response. Will make it more explicit in the description, but I don't think the question can reasonably interpreted as referring to any attack by Israel on Iran that happens before the end of 2024.

@Epistemic_Hygiene My inclination is to resolve the embassy option as N/A because it was added after the event in the Damascus embassy had been reported and I don't think the market should be traded based on an event that happened before the market was introduced.

@Epistemic_Hygiene I generally agree about betting in retrospective, but I asked the question after the event, and your answer was that I can add this option, so I also think you should take responsibility on it.

I also think that there will be several attacks, starting with “small” things, like the attack on the embassy, and the end will be something bigger in Iran. I honestly don’t see how it would be possible to set only ‘one’ ‘expected’ attack.

@BP17b6 a house near the embassy was targeted, not the embassy?

@Epistemic_Hygiene there was no event at the Damascus embassy

There was an attack on a nearby apartment building

I would leave this open until dec 30, as the event in question isn't sufficient to resolve yes

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce3zd11022do

There was an attack on the embassy in April, but that seems irrelevant. That attack targeted embassy housing. This one has not been reported as also doing so.

@BP17b6 There are several other markets on manifold addressing the Israeli response with the assumption that it can meaningfully be distinguished. Remember: attacks directly on Iranian territory by Israel (rather than its proxies or assets on the territory of another country) are quite rare. If Israel decides, let's say, to launch a series of smaller attacks over the course of a few weeks, I think this can justifiably still be considered the "response", especially if it is referred to as such either by Israeli officials and the press. Still, there is a possibility this market might have to be resolved based on my best attempt at a reasonable interpretation at what constitutes the Israeli response. In that case I will make sure to consult major news sources, as well as the speeches and statements of relevant govt. figures, etc. to try my best to resolve as objectively as possible. All in all, I still think it is a useful market to have here given the widespread speculation and debate on the question of the Israeli response to Iran's attack.

@PatrickMcCann thanks. looking at several reports, and none claim that the strike hit the iranian embassy proper (which would be necessary to count as an attack on Iran) but rather a building in the vicinity of the embassy. I will keep the option open.

Can this be in any attack before the end of 2024 or does it have to be the first attack?

@Sodann If it’s not part of the planned response to Iran’s recent ballistic missile attack but a separate attack under some other circumstances, I am not going to count it.

@Epistemic_Hygiene How can you determine, if it happened after the attack that it is not in response?