[WackyFighter]

No that is not the definition of a military invasion.

> An invasion is a military action consisting of a large armed force of one geopolitical entity entering the territory of another with the goal of militarily occupying part or all of the invaded polity's territory, usually to conquer territory or alter the established government.

What happened on Saturday was not an invasion. It was an extraction/capture operation. It was a large scale one, but they left after they captured Maduro and his Wife.

> I think you can argue that the Bin Laden raid was and invasion into Pakistan. Anytime a military forces enters uninvited, that's an invasion.

No it wasn't. When they killed Bin Laden they didn't "invade" Pakistan. They infiltrated, then assassinated him and left.

[kritiko]

It was an extraction/capture operation “with the goal… to alter the established government”

[WackyFighter]

Still doesn't make it an invasion. If they drone striked and thus killed Majuro it would not be an invasion. It would be an assassination.

Invasion in this context has a specific meaning. The bet on the market would have been done with this specific meaning in mind.

No invasion, means no payout.

It would be like making a bet where someone scores in Football/Soccer from a penalty, but in the game they score from a free kick outside the penalty box. You wouldn't pay out on the bet, because a penalty is not a free kick even though they are similar and had the same result.

[kritiko]

I’m quibbling with invasion per the Wiki definition quoted in this thread, which is different from the Kalshi one.

I think the Kalshi one is bad because “intent” is not something that can be objectively defined.