Posted on 07/19/2026 4:27:23 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
Tehran has spent decades preparing for — and welcoming — a U.S. ground invasion, a senior Iranian official has claimed, as fresh explosions rocked the region on the eighth day of renewed U.S.-Iran strikes.
Seyed Mohammad Marandi, an Iranian American academic identified as a regime "Tehran had just launched a "new missile" while decentralizing and burying its arsenal deep underground to withstand sustained American air campaigns.
"The Americans are planning an invasion. I'm not saying it will necessarily happen. I'm not saying it will necessarily happen in the next few days. But they have plans for an invasion," Marandi, a former advisor to Iran's nuclear negotiation team, said in an interview with political analyst Glenn Diesen.
"Whether they carry them out or not, we'll see. But the Iranians, as you pointed out, the focus of Iranian strikes is on Bahrain and Kuwait, and that's because that's where most American assets have been placed for a ground invasion," Diesen said.
Marandi’s comments came as the conflict expanded across western and southern Iran in the run-up to Saturday.
Jordanian officials confirmed they intercepted 10 missiles early Saturday, while authorities in Kuwait reported casualties and severe damage to a domestic power and desalination plant.
In response, U.S. airstrikes struck bridges, a key road tunnel, surveillance outposts and reinforced underground weapons storage facilities.
Multiple explosions also rocked the city of Khorramabad in Iran's Lorestan province. Iranian state media claimed the blasts were caused by U.S. missiles launched from regional bases in Kuwait, according to reports.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
the US should have been covertly arming Iranian dissidents for the past 25 years.
the US should have been covertly arming Iranian dissidents for the past 25 years. So they could overthrow the mullahs themselves.
Between 70% and 88% of the Iranian population opposes the current regime and wishes to transition away from the Islamic Republic, not to mention the more than 30,000 of them who were already slaughtered for merely protesting agains the regime. LINK
So you're fine with killing them too?
If only we had had you for President. It would have all been so easy.
Compare Iran to Vietnam.
Iran is 5 times bigger. And we lost 57,000 lives in Vietnam.
Can we afford to lose 250,000 to 300,000 lives in Iran?
Nope.
“Iran is 5 times bigger. And we lost 57,000 lives in Vietnam.
Can we afford to lose 250,000 to 300,000 lives in Iran?”
There is no Ho Chi Minh trail for Iran.
“Iran is 5 times bigger. And we lost 57,000 lives in Vietnam.
Can we afford to lose 250,000 to 300,000 lives in Iran?”
Iraq is larger than Vietnam and we lost less than 10% there so if you extrapolate from 1.32 to 5x we should only lose about ten in Iran.
Maybe we just take Kharg!!
That’d shut thei pie holes!!
“There is no Ho Chi Minh trail for Iran.”
And we’ve learned our lesson about nation building, making the hypothetical irrelevant.
It’s a fool’s errand to try to occupy the whole country and prop up a chosen government.
But that’s what everyone uses to scare away reasoned regime change....er...regime destruction.
Sending arms to dissidents would result the same way sending humanitarian aid to Gaza did.
It would end up in the hands of the IRGC.
Yeah, lets use nukes on Iran so we can say we had to use nukes because Iran could get a nuke and they are so crazy that they would use it. Geez, some of you are nuts.
I doubt you can see what is wrong with that.
A smart invasion would look nothing like what they have planned for over the last 40 years. It would not look like Iraq.
It would be closer to Afghanistan.
_________________________________________
Which, of course, was a failure. Under no circumstances should anyone want a land invasion.
I hear that Iran used weaponry allegedly supplied by China that we didn’t know they had in this American base attack in Jordan.
It is time to seriously stop buying stuff made in China.
People have way more than they need anyways, and there’s always buying something second hand. But if China is using the IRGC as a proxy to attack America, something needs to change in our country to break all ties with China.
And deport ALL Chinese nationals and cancel all student visas and send them packing.
sorry , it is not too obvious to some here ..
If the United States takes Kharg Island, how hard would it be to defend?
https://x.com/i/grok/share/b473699175984ce69c4fce496fa61088
Very hard to defend long-term, despite being relatively straightforward to seize initially. Kharg Island (also spelled Kharg or Khark) is a small coral/limestone outcrop in the northern Persian Gulf, roughly 25–30 km (15–19 miles) off Iran's mainland coast near Bushehr. It measures about 8 km long by 4–5 km wide (~20 km² or ~8 sq miles), with low elevation (max ~70–87 meters). It hosts massive oil infrastructure handling ~90% of Iran's crude exports (up to ~7 million barrels/day capacity, ~30 million barrels storage), plus an airport, jetties for supertankers, and military sites.
Seizing It Would Be Feasible for the US
The US military could likely capture it with a brigade-sized or smaller force (estimates around 1,200–4,000 troops, e.g., a reinforced Marine battalion landing team or airborne elements from the 82nd, supported by MEUs with Ospreys, helicopters, and naval gunfire/air support).
Defending It Would Be Extremely Difficult
This is the core challenge. Kharg sits too close to the mainland (~25 km), putting it in easy range of Iranian fires from the coast and interior. Key problems include:
Strategic Context
They are too dumb to be bothered with.
It was a celebrated success.
Fast and innovative.
It was only staying beyond 3 months that was a disaster.
The US, of course, has no need to invade.
However, the Pakistanis are apparently getting annoyed at having their oil imports reduced. (UAE is their #1 supplier, Saudi Arabia is #2.) Pakistan is not much of a force-projection power, but they could certainly complicate matters for Iran.
Maybe not, but the Paks are none too happy about the Iranians hitting their (Pak’s) oil suppliers.
I see your arguments that it took only 71 days to “win” in Afghanistan.
But you fail to mention that after we toppled the Taliban insurgents, then another regime took control.
ISIS.
Perhaps it would have been the best thing in Afghanistan to declare victory and go home. But the whole purpose of fighting those 71 days would have been for naught. A waste of time.
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.