Posted on 04/10/2026 8:31:51 AM PDT by Retain Mike
The United States is said to be considering conducting limited ground operations in the Iran war. Among the potential operations reportedly under consideration are efforts to seize the islands of Abu Musa and the Greater and Lesser Tunbs, Larak, and Kharg in the Persian Gulf.
There are serious questions surrounding the feasibility of these potential actions. But like with the air war, even if ground operations succeed tactically, it is highly unlikely they will bring about the strategic effects the administration seeks. Limited ground operations are unlikely to compel the Iranian regime to agree to an immediate ceasefire or an initial political settlement to end the war. They are even less likely to force the regime to fully reopen the Strait of Hormuz to international shipping prior to a cessation of hostilities, as Iran’s control over that waterway is its most important source of leverage to end the war on favorable terms.
Limited ground operations risk prolonging the war and widening it. Such operations would substantially increase the resources required to prosecute the war, severely and enduringly degrading U.S. military readiness in other critical areas of national interest, particularly the Indo–Pacific.
Despite the degradation of Iran’s military capabilities and industrial base in the five weeks since the United States initiated Operation Epic Fury, the combined U.S.–Israeli offensive has not brought about decisive strategic results. The Iranian regime has not collapsed. It maintains the capacity to attack targets throughout the Middle East and has de facto control over the flow of shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.
(Excerpt) Read more at usni.org ...
Thank you for the correction.
I guess these people think it would a shame to move 2,500 Marines and not use them.
I am also guessing those people are retarded.
2,500 marines are a drop in the bucket when it comes to Iran. I guess we could take a small island and hold it for a while. But 2,500 marines does not mean 2,500 on the front lines. It means about 1,000 on the front lines and 1500 supporting them.
As you look at how these marines would be used, the numbers get smaller and smaller until it would be highly unlikely to use them in any way other than a “raid.”
Kharg Island can be shut off with a team of Special Operators. Shutting it down does not equate with destroying it, or occupation.
You merely go in and take the key pieces of equipment/computers and leave. You shut down the pipes going into the island.
In short, you stop the flow. And you stop it in a way that is easily reversed when the time comes.
The arm chair tacticians in the media don’t tend to think in terms of the objective. They think in terms of movies.
Destroying the oil storage and loading infrastructure on Kharg Island solves no strategic goal.
Why is the US Naval Institute throwing public water on a possible plan our government might have in the near future? I thought Hegseth was cleaning house for those who hate America and Trump by extension. Get that broom over to Annapolis Mr Secretary.
That is some retard thinking. Who is talking about doing that?
You just need to disable the controls to a few valves.
And you shut down 90% of their oil business.
The USNI says it is independent and often is.
Man, I usually agree with you about most things, but even if you take the island, how are you going to hold it without the contiguous coastline?
This isn’t Iwo Jima. It’s Corregidor.
“ Given a choice, they would not have their current government”
Maybe you are right and maybe you aren’t - but if your sources are some rug merchants in Beverly Hills and Mark Levin, you want to be a little more careful.
We heard the same thing about Afghanistan, and Iraq, and none of it was true.
“Roughly 1/3 of the oil Iran has been selling is loaded on CHINESE tankers.
Are you proposing blockading Chinese Oil Tankers?”
I do (if they are loading Iranian oil products), but would propose talking to China first, so they have an opportunity to pressure Iran to open the Straits, before Chinese supplies are impeded.
We own the air. Resupply is easy.
“ Resupply is easy.”
The Germans had air superiority at Stalingrad.
Wargame an evacuation of Kharg.
Stop. If we can’t take and hold Kharg then it’s over. Just give them what they want.
I don’t believe that for a second.
We couldn’t hold Corregidor.
The challenges are similar.
Consider perhaps that the US Naval Institute loves America and wishes to protect her from harm.
The japs had 100% air superiority. Different situation.
Appears the USNI has gone soft.
“Why is the US Naval Institute throwing public water on a possible plan”
To deceive the enemy, into believing that we won’t do it perhaps?
“ Given a choice, they would not have their current government….”
But don’t you see that is the same naive assumption that was used in the trillion dollar debacles in Afghanistan and Iraq, but turns out that Afghans wanted the security and order that the Taliban provided, and the Iraqis wanted Islamic not western values. The same damn mistakes are being made today with Iran despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. The basis of forever wars is moral hazard: that we never learn anything -and I truly mean zero lessons learned and no accountability- from the last war.
iran has designated a relatively small area as the primary IRGC restricted zone.
https://www.reuters.com/graphics/IRAN-CRISIS/MAPS/klvylmooypg/
if a military solution is not feasible then perhaps an engineering solution could be persued.
There is an isthumus betwwen the persian gulf and the sea of oman. it is about 700 feet wide at a place called maksar, and apparently is occupied by a campground at ~70 feet above sea level at its highest point. if the maps are correct, why not just quickly blast a sea level water passageway through the isthumus at this point to allow ships to pass, at sea level without locks, entirely within the territory of oman?
one possible reason that a hormuz bypass canal has not yet been proposed is that ships transiting it would still be vulnerable to missile attacks from iran. that sounds reasonable, but the proposal would still have the advantage of forcing iran to be the aggressor outside of hormuz, while allowing other ME nations to control iranian prosperity via shutting down hormuz to iranian traffic, and preventing exposure of US forces to overt combat and loss of life.
ideally, also, a relatively peaceful construction project would have an appeal to trump over a protracted ME war.
removing a cubic yard of rock costs between $100 and $200. let’s say $150/yd^3. a back of the envelope calculation to dig an 700’ long canal (allowing passing of very large vessels, 180’ wide) would yield
width 460’ (including 45 degree sloped sides)
length 1000’ (including approaches)
depth 60’
460 * 1000 * 60 / 27
volume = 1.022 yds^3 to be removed
cost = 1.022M*$150 = $153M
maybe add another $50M for removal of extra rock due to the hilly topography. That total cost is still ~$200M.
time involved would apparently be between 5+ and 15+ weeks, applying standard canal construction estimates, and depending on the number of shifts used to complete the work.
the canal related constants came from AI, so YMMV, but still the cost seems low compared to the number of lives that it might save.
the canal would avoid the IRGC restricted zone and not require any mine removal.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.