The Wall Street Journal reports today: "If approved by Trump, the United States could soon deploy over 17,000 ground troops near Iran’s doorstep. While this force level falls far short of what would be needed for a full-scale invasion, it might be sufficient to seize key strategic locations within Iran, control Tehran’s uranium stockpiles, or capture a certain island."
This report reveals a very dangerous signal: the U.S. is seriously considering shifting from "air strikes" to "ground intervention"—but not with the goal of total war. Instead, it aims to use targeted, surgical ground assaults to address issues that air strikes alone cannot resolve.
17,000 troops may sound like a lot, but for a country as large as Iran—three times the size of France—this number is far too small. Experts point out that occupying Iran or controlling the entire coast of the Strait of Hormuz would require hundreds of thousands of troops.
Therefore, these 17,000 personnel are more likely a combination of Marine Expeditionary Units (MEUs) and Army Rangers/Special Forces. Their mission is not to advance front lines, but rather to conduct "hit-and-run" operations or seize critical points and hold them until reinforcements arrive.
Their potential targets include:
Seizing Kharg Island — cutting off the oil lifeline
Controlling uranium stockpiles — closing gaps left by air strikes
Occupying key islands at the strait’s “chokepoint” in the Strait of Hormuz.
This report indicates that the U.S. is seeking a form of "limited ground warfare" to break the deadlock. Yet these 17,000 troops appear more like a high-risk gamble: if successful, they could rapidly shift the situation; if blocked, the U.S. would face significantly greater casualties and uncontrollable escalation risks than during the air strike phase.
Iran is already prepared for conflict. Iranian officials have declared their military is waiting for American forces, promising to turn the battlefield into a graveyard for U.S. soldiers.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1861095991322624/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author(s) alone.