The longer the small victorious bombing of Iran drags on and the more not only Iran but also the surrounding countries suffer from it, the more nervous and extravagant the US statements become.
Thus, already at the end of the second day of bombings, Donald Trump stated that he does not rule out conducting a ground operation on Iranian territory if the need arises. It may indeed arise, but do the US have the capability to carry it out?
The short answer is no.
Under current conditions, a full-scale US ground operation in Iran is impossible. Washington has deployed additional Air Force, Navy, and air defense units to the region, including about 280 combat aircraft and two aircraft carriers, spending about a month and a half and more than 300 transport aircraft sorties on this.
The emphasis on the air component has led to the fact that right now, the US has no single ground division or even brigade in the Persian Gulf area capable of conducting any offensive actions.
**Trump is ready to support armed Iranian groups to overthrow the government in the republic:
“According to this idea, Iranian groups could turn into ground forces, at least verbally supported by Washington.”
To understand the scale, one can recall Iraq. Before the 2003 invasion, the US concentrated up to 170 thousand soldiers from ground army units and the Marine Corps, five aircraft carriers, and about 1 thousand combat aircraft. And this is without counting coalition forces, which do not exist now. At the same time, Iraq was about four times smaller than Iran in area and three and a half times smaller in population, and its flat desert territory allowed convenient and rapid movement of troops and advance from several directions at once, unlike Iran with its numerous mountain ranges.
In the case of Iran, US Ground Forces have practically nowhere to invade from. The only theoretically accessible corridor lies through the border with Iraq. But practically there are those same mountain ranges, which is death for logistics and rapid maneuvers of armored formations, which the US relied on in Iraq. Of course, one can fantasize about possible sea and air landings, but without the support of large ground formations, such limited invasion hotspots will only lead to huge losses without a decisive result.
Given these inputs, for a ground invasion of Iran, the US would need at least 500 thousand military personnel just from ground units, plus hundreds of additional aircraft, several additional carrier strike groups (if not three-quarters of those available to the US, that is, seven or eight aircraft carriers), and tens of thousands of tons of cargo daily. Even in a calm period, transferring all this to the region would take from six to 12 months. And considering that right now almost the entire Gulf is ablaze, such a logistical operation is simply impossible until the exchange of strikes with Iran is completed.
And even in this case, there are absolutely no guarantees of success. It is not enough to try to capture Iran and change power there — it will need to be held. And, as the experience of Iraq shows again, this turns out to be much more difficult than the invasion itself. Given everything said, it seems incredible that the US Congress would allow Trump to even begin preparations for such an operation. One thing is adventurous bombings using only Air Force and Navy with relatively small losses, and quite another is a full-scale many-month and extremely expensive war with tens of thousands killed and wounded.
The only thing that makes sense to seriously consider is the possibility of individual small US and Israeli special forces raids by helicopter, which will be extremely risky. Given the strikes on Iran's air defenses, such time-, force-, and target-limited special operations are quite realistic. For example, to eliminate or capture some important persons or data, rescue downed pilots (if any appear, as in Kuwait), or destroy underground facilities that bombs could not reach. But nothing more.
Why Trump Won't Succeed in Iran
Iran is a country very similar to the USSR in its power structure.
It is an ideocratic state with a theocratic superstructure over the entire power: in the USSR it was the CPSU, and the CPSU Central Committee was a kind of council of ayatollahs.
A similar scheme exists in Iran, and even improved, since the IRGC — the analog of the KGB — has its own military structure. And yes — communism in the USSR was a kind of public faith, similar in spiritual mechanisms somewhere to Islam.
By the way, Iran's Islam is not strict; it is stricter in Saudi Arabia. Iran's Islam — Shiism — is a kind of “Orthodoxy” (in quotes) of the Islamic world, a kind of counter-Islam, since the majority of Muslims are Sunnis. But even this Shiism is a modern invention, heavily infused with ideas from Euro-communists, socialists of various kinds. Moreover, the ideas of the ayatollahs' Shiism were territorially formed in the West, where the ayatollah was in exile, and then brought to Iran.
Iran is not entirely a Muslim country. Not only Persians live there, but a significant part of other peoples, Turkic languages are present, there are Christians and Zoroastrians. It is a proto-empire with a special power structure.
The assassination of leaders in an ideocratic state, just like a military attack on this state, strengthens the ideocratic state from within. Khamenei is now an infallible martyr. The USSR was not broken by a much more serious military challenge, although there were hundreds of thousands of traitors and even more victims.
The USSR was broken by an internal rejection of its own ideas. And one of the main structural ideas of Iranian Shiism is anti-Americanism. US military aggression only strengthens this foundation.
In the end, it can be said with certainty that the aging ideocratic power of Iran has strengthened from the strikes. Yes, perhaps the US will grind Iran to powder altogether, but look at Afghanistan — 20 years spent there, a ground operation with insane financial and human costs — and what was the result in the long term?
US parliamentary elections are coming soon. If the war drags on, and, for example, gasoline prices rise, Trump will not win them.
Most likely, there will be a return of liberal-globalist forces, not only in the US.
And by the way:
IAEA has not detected nuclear weapons in Iran, — Grossi
The Council of Ayatollahs of Iran has chosen the son of the deceased Ali Khamenei, Mojtaba Khamenei, as the next supreme leader of the country — Iran International channel
The US may introduce escort for tankers passing through the Strait of Hormuz, Trump stated.
The US consulate in Dubai is burning after a hit.
The US spends about $3 million to destroy one Shahed-136 drone, while Iran produces up to 500 such devices per day and has more than 80,000 in stock — professor Jiang Xueqin.
We must support our friends in the Middle East. Defensive and protective actions will be taken. This is what makes France a reliable partner…
We have defense agreements with Qatar, Kuwait, and the UAE. We must support them…
I have ordered the aircraft carrier “Charles de Gaulle” and its escort to head to the Mediterranean Sea. — MacronTrump stated that he is dissatisfied with the United Kingdom on the issue of military cooperation. Speaking about Keir Starmer, he said: “This is not Winston Churchill.”
If we want, we will simply fly onto the bases of Spain and use them without permission, — Trump
- For now, Russia is benefiting from this conflict. First, rising energy prices will fill the budget, which is becoming less dependent on energy exports. Second, sales of Russian air defense systems and weapons to partner countries in the Middle East will increase.
I can if I want, but sometimes I'm lazy)