This market focuses on whether the United States will carry out another military strike before January 9 amid heightened tensions surrounding Venezuela. Recent developments involving regional security, alleged threats to U.S. interests, and Washington’s broader posture toward the Maduro government have raised speculation about further use of force. Traders are weighing signals from U.S. officials, military movements, and unfolding events on the ground to assess whether the situation escalates into another direct strike within this short time frame.

1. Market Outcomes and Resolution Criteria: The market resolves to Yes if the United States launches at least one qualifying military strike, as defined in Rule 2, after the most recent prior U.S. strike in the foreign-country–related episode referenced in the Market Summary and on or before the end of 9 January (inclusive) in the time framework used by the platform. The market resolves to No if no such qualifying “another strike” occurs by the end of 9 January. There is no TIE outcome in this market; it resolves only to Yes or No.
2. Definition of “Strike,” “Another,” and Scope: For this market, a “strike” means the deliberate use of kinetic military force (e.g., airstrikes, missile/drone strikes, naval or artillery fire) by U.S. armed forces or other U.S. military assets against targets in or directly tied to the foreign country or countries referenced in the Market Summary (such as targets on that country’s territory or that country’s government or aligned armed forces/assets in the region). “Another strike” means a new qualifying strike that is subsequent to at least one U.S. strike already conducted in this same foreign-country–related context before it, and is publicly reported as such. Non-kinetic actions (e.g., cyber operations, electronic warfare only, sanctions, blockades, troop movements, overflights, or threats without actual weapons use) do not count as strikes for this market.
3. Official Sources and Evidence: Primary evidence consists of official U.S. government communications (e.g., Department of Defense, U.S. combatant commands, the White House, State Department) and official statements by the government or armed forces of the country (or countries) struck acknowledging or describing a U.S. strike. Secondary evidence includes reports by major international news agencies and reputable global news organizations citing U.S. or foreign officials or clearly describing U.S. responsibility; these may be used to establish details (such as timing and whether the action qualifies as a strike) when primary sources are incomplete, but cannot override clear, later-dated primary statements.
4. Resolution Timing: The outcome will be assessed based on events occurring up to and including the end of 9 January, using the date and time convention applied by the platform for this market. The market should be resolved as soon as reasonably practical once reliable information is available, which may be several days after 9 January if reporting is delayed. If credible evidence emerges later showing that a qualifying strike did occur (or did not occur) by the deadline, the resolution may be updated to match the facts as of that deadline.
5. Handling Ambiguous or Limited-Scale Incidents: Small-scale uses of force (including strikes causing little or no damage) count as strikes if they meet the definition in Rule 2 and are publicly described as U.S. military attacks or strikes connected to the foreign-country–related situation described in the Market Summary, even if characterized as “limited,” “defensive,” or “retaliatory.” Isolated warning shots, accidental discharges, or minor border skirmishes only count if they are widely and credibly reported by the sources in Rule 3 as a U.S. strike or attack, not merely as an incident or exchange of fire. If a series of closely timed attacks is described as one operation (e.g., “a U.S. strike” with multiple munitions), it is treated as a single strike for the purpose of determining whether “another strike” has occurred.
6. Conflicts, Denials, and Disputes: If there is a conflict between sources about whether a U.S. strike occurred, clear and later-dated official U.S. statements take priority, followed by official statements from the government or armed forces of the country allegedly struck, then by the consensus of major international news agencies. If U.S. officials formally deny responsibility for an incident and there is no strong, consistent contrary consensus among the secondary sources listed in Rule 3 attributing it to the U.S., the incident does not count as a qualifying strike. In any residual ambiguous case not explicitly covered above, the resolver will apply these rules to align the outcome with how a well-informed, neutral observer would classify whether the United States launched another qualifying military strike by the stated deadline.