I Was a US Intelligence Analyst. Here's What a Ground Invasion of Iran Could Look Like
The Trump admin has floated three possible ground operation plans it claims would be 'small.' But in reality, Harrison Mann writes, they all risk dragging the US into a forever war in Iran.
Donald Trump bombed Iran expecting an overnight victory. Instead, he got a 14-country war, at least seven dead US servicemembers, the worst US military civilian casualty incident in decades, and skyrocketing oil prices. Desperate for a win, he’s tried bombing Iran, bombing Iran, and even bombing Iran, and now he’s all out of ideas.
So it’s no surprise that Trump officials soft-pitched ground operations inside Iran to Axios over the weekend. If that sounds like an invasion to you, don’t worry, they would be “small special ops raids — not a big force,” per a reassuring unnamed Trump official.
Before evaluating the three “small” plans on the table, we need to understand three important factors for context:
First, for Iran hawks in Israel and the US, the longer the war, the better. Trapping Trump in a quagmire raises the odds of state collapse in Iran – a humanitarian catastrophe and the ideal outcome for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Second, Trump has plenty of troops at his disposal, even if he hasn’t put in the months it would take to assemble an Iraq-scale invasion force. He could deploy over 10,000 rapid-response troops in weeks if he wanted to – potentially enough to buy time for a larger invasion force.
Third, the closer US forces get to Iranian soil, the more US technological and firepower advantages are negated. The US military can bomb Iran at will, but that doesn’t protect a commando from stepping on an IED, or a landing helicopter from a concealed Iranian soldier with an RPG.
The three proposed ground operations reported – or pitched – in the media all have limited aims that sound more palatable than committing the US to a ruinous forever war in Iran. Here’s how they all risk ending up there anyway:
 | A guest post by
|