PolymarketAnd no time reference is given by the US official?
And no time reference is given by the US official?
Analista.参与话题 9消息总数 501
该用户的聊天记录定位。
聊天记录
共 501 条，显示第 51-100 条And Bahrain was targeted multiple times on different days?
And Bahrain was targeted multiple times on different days?
When the whole article is talking about 2 days of strike
When the whole article is talking about 2 days of strike
<@940487785029185589> you think that "wedsnday night" automatically translates into July 9 arab time lmao?
<@940487785029185589> you think that "wedsnday night" automatically translates into July 9 arab time lmao?
We have 20 different piece of evidence for strike on the 12, nothing for the 9th
We have 20 different piece of evidence for strike on the 12, nothing for the 9th
Otherwise you are just forcing a resolution
Otherwise you are just forcing a resolution
How is it a cuck? Just provide evidence that the strike happened clearly on july 9
How is it a cuck? Just provide evidence that the strike happened clearly on july 9
Why is a cuck bro?
Why is a cuck bro?
The U.S. and Iran **__exchanged fire on Wednesday night __**after President Trump said he considered the ceasefire over, a second night of tit-for-tat attacks that marked the largest escalation in fighting since the two sides agreed to a 60-day peace deal last month. [....] Explosions were reported in Bandar Abbas and Sirik, located along the coast framing the waterway, according to Iranian media. **__The U.S. attacks were broader in scope than Tuesday’s__** and included air-defense systems, coastal surveillance assets, naval capabilities and logistics infrastructure, according to Centcom. In a post on social media, **__Trump described Wednesday’s strikes__** as retribution for Iranian attacks on commercial vessels near the strait earlier this week. “If it happens again, it will get much worse!” he said. Later, on his way back to Washington, D.C., from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization summit in Ankara, Turkey, Trump said on Air Force One that Iran called him seeking a deal. “They want to make a deal so badly,” he said. “I don’t know that they’re going to honor the deal.” Iran has said nothing about new talks. Iran responded to the strikes by attacking Bahrain and Kuwait, which have accommodated the U.S. military throughout the war. Both countries reported that they were being targeted and asked their citizens to seek safety. Kuwait said on social media that its air defenses were confronting missile and drone attacks. Qatar briefly raised its security threat level to high but later said all was normal. There were no indications that Iran was targeting Qatar, the U.S. official said. **Iran said it hit U.S. bases in Kuwait and Bahrain. The U.S. and allies intercepted most of the attacks, according to U.S. officials. Some of the attacks hit their targets, but they caused no casualties and minimal damage, the officials said.** (WHEN??)
The U.S. and Iran **__exchanged fire on Wednesday night __**after President Trump said he considered the ceasefire over, a second night of tit-for-tat attacks that marked the largest escalation in fighting since the two sides agreed to a 60-day peace deal last month. [....] Explosions were reported in Bandar Abbas and Sirik, located along the coast framing the waterway, according to Iranian media. **__The U.S. attacks were broader in scope than Tuesday’s__** and included air-defense systems, coastal surveillance assets, naval capabilities and logistics infrastructure, according to Centcom. In a post on social media, **__Trump described Wednesday’s strikes__** as retribution for Iranian attacks on commercial vessels near the strait earlier this week. “If it happens again, it will get much worse!” he said. Later, on his way back to Washington, D.C., from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization summit in Ankara, Turkey, Trump said on Air Force One that Iran called him seeking a deal. “They want to make a deal so badly,” he said. “I don’t know that they’re going to honor the deal.” Iran has said nothing about new talks. Iran responded to the strikes by attacking Bahrain and Kuwait, which have accommodated the U.S. military throughout the war. Both countries reported that they were being targeted and asked their citizens to seek safety. Kuwait said on social media that its air defenses were confronting missile and drone attacks. Qatar briefly raised its security threat level to high but later said all was normal. There were no indications that Iran was targeting Qatar, the U.S. official said. **Iran said it hit U.S. bases in Kuwait and Bahrain. The U.S. and allies intercepted most of the attacks, according to U.S. officials. Some of the attacks hit their targets, but they caused no casualties and minimal damage, the officials said.** (WHEN??)
WSJ article mentions Wednesday 3 times and Thursday only once when talking about "Jordan said its air defenses had intercepted eight Iranian missiles."
WSJ article mentions Wednesday 3 times and Thursday only once when talking about "Jordan said its air defenses had intercepted eight Iranian missiles."
Articles is about the exchange of fire between iran and us on july 8 and 9
Articles is about the exchange of fire between iran and us on july 8 and 9
Don’t play stupid bro we read the statement 1000 times
Don’t play stupid bro we read the statement 1000 times
The only confirmation of a strike is the US official statement, where no time reference is provided
The only confirmation of a strike is the US official statement, where no time reference is provided
They’ll argue that the context of the article is enough but it’s not
They’ll argue that the context of the article is enough but it’s not
There is no ace
There is no ace
I’m asking you how is there not a time issue? Can you provide evidence of impact on july 9th AST?
I’m asking you how is there not a time issue? Can you provide evidence of impact on july 9th AST?
Whats the piece of evidence that undeniably prove that the impact happened on july 9th?
Whats the piece of evidence that undeniably prove that the impact happened on july 9th?
If there was no timing issue market would not be trading at 55c
If there was no timing issue market would not be trading at 55c
Reality is we don’t know if the us base was struck on the 9th
Reality is we don’t know if the us base was struck on the 9th
July 9 is being pushed without new evidence?
July 9 is being pushed without new evidence?
https://x.com/i/status/2075878170654384518
https://x.com/i/status/2075878170654384518
Most likely a sex tape
Most likely a sex tape
Bosaurum will be back as the greatest trader ever
Bosaurum will be back as the greatest trader ever
Yes
Yes
Are fake orders back??? I keep clicking 400/500 orders from ob and get filled less than 10% of it
Are fake orders back??? I keep clicking 400/500 orders from ob and get filled less than 10% of it
No way fake orders are back?
No way fake orders are back?
But clearly not an upside down logo
But clearly not an upside down logo
No my bad this should
No my bad this should
> (e.g., words spelled out in a letter posted as a .jpg will qualify, however a word posted as part of an animated .gif will not.) Reading this it's clear that only words spelled as text should qualify, and even only in a static format
> (e.g., words spelled out in a letter posted as a .jpg will qualify, however a word posted as part of an animated .gif will not.) Reading this it's clear that only words spelled as text should qualify, and even only in a static format
Imo according to rules it should not, but clearly you have a stronger case here
Imo according to rules it should not, but clearly you have a stronger case here
This is clearly the case that the clause: > "Text posted in images, memes, or other non-animated, non-video media that are not strictly text will qualify towards a "Yes" resolution only if the listed term is spelled out clearly and in full. " Wants to make count toward yes. Not an upside down photo of a logo
This is clearly the case that the clause: > "Text posted in images, memes, or other non-animated, non-video media that are not strictly text will qualify towards a "Yes" resolution only if the listed term is spelled out clearly and in full. " Wants to make count toward yes. Not an upside down photo of a logo
Not as text nor as picture
Not as text nor as picture
He did not posted "UFC" written in a readable way
He did not posted "UFC" written in a readable way
Market is about trump posting listed terms
Market is about trump posting listed terms
Clearly upside down cannot be considered as spelled correctly
Clearly upside down cannot be considered as spelled correctly
Market is about text, this picture clearly do not meet the text requirments specificied by rules.
Market is about text, this picture clearly do not meet the text requirments specificied by rules.
Btw if you aks a 5yo if this is spelled correctly he will tell you it's not
Btw if you aks a 5yo if this is spelled correctly he will tell you it's not
Wtf is this guy posting lmao
Wtf is this guy posting lmao
> e.g., words spelled out in a letter posted as a .jpg will qualify
> e.g., words spelled out in a letter posted as a .jpg will qualify
exactly, or post it in it's correct spelling
exactly, or post it in it's correct spelling
It's pretty easy
It's pretty easy
An upside down photo of a logo is not words spelled out clearly
An upside down photo of a logo is not words spelled out clearly
Mostly this is clearly not the case rules foreseen when saying: Text posted in images, memes, or other non-animated, non-video media that are not strictly text will qualify towards a "Yes" resolution only if the listed term is spelled out clearly and in full. (e.g., words spelled out in a letter posted as a .jpg will qualify
Mostly this is clearly not the case rules foreseen when saying: Text posted in images, memes, or other non-animated, non-video media that are not strictly text will qualify towards a "Yes" resolution only if the listed term is spelled out clearly and in full. (e.g., words spelled out in a letter posted as a .jpg will qualify
100k shares wall now
100k shares wall now
No here you are associating the ufc logo to something you know. If someone never saw the UFC logo in his life, it wouldn't read UFC
No here you are associating the ufc logo to something you know. If someone never saw the UFC logo in his life, it wouldn't read UFC
Exactly. Is not about being readable or not, is about posting a phrase or word clearly. Uspide down words are not spelled clearly. Reading left to right is not UFC
Exactly. Is not about being readable or not, is about posting a phrase or word clearly. Uspide down words are not spelled clearly. Reading left to right is not UFC
Did you hang your feet to the roof?
Did you hang your feet to the roof?
180 is not
180 is not
Well, 1 degree would ofc be readable
Well, 1 degree would ofc be readable
Exactly, the text should be clear, and clear means also to be written how a reader should read it
Exactly, the text should be clear, and clear means also to be written how a reader should read it