Time bound to a response in 2024. No response in 2024 or responses against proxies only will resolve “none (no attack on Iran itself) in 2024”. Multiple yes resolutions are possible.
Iranian territory includes Iran and offshore islands. Update: an answer including Iranian diplomatic facilities is now an option, as many would consider this Iranian territory too.
Air defences might be air defences under any branch of the Iranian military or IRGC (including say naval air defences in a naval base), but will not resolve yes if only other platforms that include air defences (eg a warship with air defences) is struck.
1,000
3.00Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says his country's air attack on Iran last month hit “a component” of Tehran's nuclear programme
https://manifold.markets/SemioticRivalry/will-israel-hit-iranian-nuclear-sit
This was resolved as YES
@DanielFox9fff worth noting that this was specifically reported to be a research facility for plastic explosives used in nukes, not an enrichment or storage facility for manufacturing them. So it's borderline for the category definition even if confirmed.
@ICRainbow I think of the response is the first wave of bombing, anothing after that is a new initiation
An American researcher said an Israeli airstrike on Saturday hit a building that was part of Iran's defunct nuclear weapons development program, and he and another researcher said facilities used to mix solid fuel for missiles also were struck.
The assessments based on commercial satellite imagery were reached separately by David Albright, a former U.N. weapons inspector, and Decker Eveleth, an associate research analyst at CNA, a Washington think tank.
...
In posts on X, Albright said commercial satellite imagery showed that Israel hit a building in Parchin called Taleghan 2 that was used for testing activities during the Amad Plan, Iran's defunct nuclear weapons development program.
...
Iran may have removed key materials before the airstrike, he said, but "even if no equipment remained inside" the building would have provided "intrinsic value" for future nuclear weapons-related activities.
@VonGadke Will wait for a bit more info. A building formally used by a defunct program is a bit “grey area” between facilities and not facilities.
@Pjfkh Latest updates still inconclusive. The close proximity and overlapping purpose of missile production vs former nuclear sites at Parchin / Khojir is making this one difficult
Resolution update:
Resolved Air Defences to YES given that Iran so far has acknowledged four military deaths, all of whom worked for military air defence units. Indications are they were S-300 (Soviet / Russian- supplied) air defence systems including some around nuclear sites. No evidence yet that nuclear sites / facilities were hit, but this makes any next round of escalation “easier” if the target list includes these sites.
Resolved “no attack” to NO given both sides acknowledged an attack.
Resolved Military Industrial Complex to YES given emerging evidence in various reputable news sites source claiming both U.S. and Israel officials claiming missile solid fuel production sites were struck.
other answers still awaiting more confirmation…
….there is emerging evidence that military industrial complex related to missiles: solid fuel production (machinery “planetary mixers” that Iran procures exclusively from China) was struck and significantly damaged.
@Pjfkh Israel has apparently hit some air defenses in Syria this week (which would be on the flight path to Iran), which is at least some evidence they'd also hit Iranian defenses in a strike
@ShakedKoplewitz Indeed would expect air defence suppression to be part of a large strike, especially one involving manned platforms (F35, F15, F16 etc). Perhaps not so for a missile / cruise missile strike, but even then maybe a first phase on this could be possible.
Iran has Russian S300s and I think maybe S400s, neither of which has performed well in Ukraine (they have been very vulnerable to both storm shadow / scalp and HIMARS rocket artillery attacks). .
In April Israel launched a limited attack on an S-300 battery protecting the nuclear facilities at Natanz. For this Israel apparently used new air-launched ballistic missiles. In this case, it was a signal to Iran that it’s air defences will not be able to protect assets if Israel chooses to strike further. If Israel strikes Iran again following October 1st, I would not expect to only see an air defence battery attacked, but an actual “other” asset too. (IMO)
@Pjfkh I remain a bit surprised by the market being so confident in an Israeli attack on Iranian airbases. Iran does not have a strong airforce, and although airbases might be attacked as a pre-cursor to a deep strike (to protect against Iranian interceptors), Iranian manned aircraft are not part of any attack on Israel, and other than drones, air bases play a small role in Irans defence posture.
Time will tell about this strike and any future tit for tat exchanges though
@Pjfkh I think "airbases" was assumed to include missile force bases (i.e. places from which Iran launches missiles at Israel), not just places where they store fighter jets.
@ShakedKoplewitz Interesting. I always understood airbases as being primarily defined as having a runway for fixed wing, or at least helipads for rotary aircraft. Drones have slightly confused this, but even then drones themselves I would consider aircraft and not missiles.
@Pjfkh so the option specifies "air force or airbases", which I understand to imply that an air force base doesn't have to be an airbase (in the sense of having runways) to count. An irgc aerospace force base for launching missiles should qualify as this.
@ShakedKoplewitz Understood. I am not sure I’ve ever come across that as a definition of an airbase before though. It would imply that a missile silo is an “airbase”, which doesn’t seem to be accurate.