Israel is widely understood to have 2 goals in its war with Iran: destroying Iran's nuclear program (primary) and regime change (secondary).
The market resolves to YES if either of the following are achieved by December 31, 2025:
Iran's nuclear weapons program is effectively ended, either via the destruction of nuclear sites/scientists or via a nuclear deal.
Iran's regime falls (e.g. in a revolution or military coup).
Some notes:
The first resolution condition is a bit vague, but I will resolve based on the consensus of reputable US and Israeli media whether or not Iran's nuclear weapons program is considered to be effectively nonexistent. One possible resolution would be a consensus that it will take at least a decade to rebuild the nuclear program to a pre-war capacity.
A change in leadership is not enough to resolve the second condition (e.g. death of ayatollah). It must be a change in regime.
Any nuclear deal that Israel views as insufficiently restraining Iran's ability to get a nuclear weapon (like the JCPOA) does not resolve to yes.
This market resolves whether the aims are achieved directly by Israel or not.
Update 2025-06-17 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator has stated that due to the potential ambiguity of the resolution, they will not bet on this market.
Update 2025-06-24 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): If the consensus assessment at the end of the resolution period is that Iran's nuclear program has been set back several years but not destroyed, this market will likely resolve to NO.
1,000
3.00Preliminary evidence is ambiguous: https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/israeli-intel-assesses-that-irans-nuclear-program-set-back-several-years-but-not-destroyed-official/
This market lasts until the end of the year, so there is still plenty of time for things to change (e.g. a nuclear deal, Iran credibly giving up its nuclear weapons program, regime change, resumption of fighting) as well as more detailed analyses to come to light. However, in the interest of transparency, if the above assessment continues to be the consensus by the end of the year, this market would likely resolve NO.
@LarsOsborne It is based on public statements and news reports. See for instance https://theconversation.com/netanyahu-has-two-war-aims-destroying-irans-nuclear-program-and-regime-change-are-either-achievable-259014
I disagree with the two goals.
For the first "primary" goal, it never had the ability to actual end Iran's nuclear program. That's widely reported. I consider this a multi step goal, the initial step being to get the usa dragged in to end the nuclear program for them.
If there's a new regime instantly in Iran that's stable, I don't think that's what Israel wants. It would rather a civil war with many factions and instability like what happened in Syria. Therefore it's not a regime change, It's an unstable Iran that doesn't pose a threat while Israel continues to weaken it.
I would add another goal, to stop Iran's ability to manufacture new ballistic missiles and try to damage the existing stockpile.
@nathanwei I didn't bet on this. Not sure why you're being hostile for leaving a comment where i try to be informative. I have bet on some of the many iran markets that already exist and have clear and factual resolution criteria
@Samaritan No you’re just leaving anti-Israel propaganda that pretends to be “informative”. Israel would want a friendly stable regime in Iran not a civil war. They liked the pre-1979 regime in Iran.
Are you sure they need to involve America (“drag America in”) to destroy Fordow? That’s been reported but I wouldn’t be surprised if Israel has its own bunker busters.
@nathanwei this clearly exposes how unknowledgeable you are about this topic. Israel has clearly shown they don't like Syria being stable now. It was understood historically that's how they are but in the last 2 years they've been saying the quiet part out loud.
It's well documented that Israel's bunker busters are not the MOP because they don't have a aircraft that can carry an MOP. Some minimal basic research from even israeli sources could teach you that.
@Samaritan that guy seems to have a knee-jerk reaction to anything he perceives as being vaguely anti-israel. Seems really, really emotional about it. Probably not worth engaging because you're unlikely to get good faith discussion.
@Samaritan Huh? First of all. Syria was always hostile to Israel. Iran used to be friendly with Israel, before 1979. Israel would love the pre-1979 regime back. Syria and Iran are different countries. Syria borders Israel, is Arab, and has Palestinians there. The only reason that Iran-Israel relations are so bad is because of the ideology of the current regime. Israel definitely doesn't want a civil war in Iran. They want a regime that does not hate them.
By the way Israel was not happy with the civil war in Syria and it created a lot of chaos. The Syrian Civil War allowed Iran to establish itself in Syria. Netanyahu was not happy about that. Netanyahu negotiated with Assad over the Golan before the Syrian Civil war started, and the negotiations ended because of the war. This is widely reported. I am knowledgable yes, and I know about this. See these links. Now that the war is over they are negotiating peace again.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/report-netanyahu-agreed-to-withdraw-from-golan-heights/
@Samaritan As for the bunker busters, I am saying that it's not so unlikely that Israel has already bought them from the US and has the ability to deploy them but they just have not told us yet. We cannot discount this possibility. Why would Israel announce to the world that it bought the bunker busters? It might not be the case but it might be. It's hard to tell.
@nathanwei Israel is not happy with the syria stabilizing now. They want to keep them unstable to justify continuing to bomb them so that they never build up anything that can remotely be considered a thread.
I agree with @BlackCrusade about the knee-jerk part but with middle east it's unfortunately almost the norm.
That bunker buster, even if purchase can't be dropped from any aircraft israel has. Unless you're implying israel also bought a B2 bomber.
@Samaritan I don't know if Israel has a B2. I think that Israel probably has some kind of capability that they are not telling us about.
As for the Syria thing, do you have evidence? Israel wants Syria in the Abraham Accords. They wanted normalization with Syria before the war and negotiated with them.
https://www.axios.com/2025/06/11/israel-syrian-peace-negotiations-netanyahu-barrack
https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/abraham-accords/article-855243
@Samaritan So, in 2012 Israel thought that a civil war in Syria might not be so bad for the US and Israel because it could check Iran's nuclear ambitions. And this means that Israel wants the anti-Iran Syria of 2025 to remain unstable and divided because... why exactly? Before 2012, in 2010, Israel wanted normalization with Syria in exchange for removing Iranians. That's what Netanyahu negotiated for.
@nathanwei Actions speak louder than words with what they're trying to do witht he druze https://levant24.com/news/international/2025/05/druze-leadership-warns-of-israeli-backed-sectarian-strife-in-syria/
Of course Erdagon was quick to call it out too:
“Those who seek to benefit from the instability of Syria by provoking ethnic and religious affiliations should know that they won’t be able to achieve their goals. We won’t allow the partition of Syria as they imagine drawing maps”
http://nitter.net/ragipsoylu/status/1896616123606675802
@Samaritan Meanwhile, Israeli Druze block roads calling for Israeli intervention. The Druze thing was a warning against sectarian violence. Maybe don't trust Erdogan. What's the Syrian Druze guy gonna say? That he welcomes the strikes?