U.S. military ground war "quick victory in a few weeks" plan exposed, aiming to replicate the Gulf War! Media analysis: three major pitfalls! Iran warns: soldiers have been waiting for a long time and will annihilate the invading U.S. forces.

On March 29, the U.S.-Israel-Iran conflict entered its 30th day.

Iranian Navy Commander Shahram Irani stated on March 29 local time that Iran is monitoring the position, movements, and requests made by the U.S. aircraft carrier group “Lincoln” in real-time. Once the “Lincoln” carrier group enters Iran’s range, Iran will launch missiles.

The regional situation has long surpassed the scope of a single conflict, displaying severe characteristics of high complexity, deep interconnectivity, and ongoing external spillover under the involvement of multiple forces and overlapping risks. Firstly, the military actions of the U.S., Israel, and Iran are continuously escalating, with the targets of attacks expanding. Secondly, on the 28th, the Yemeni Houthi forces officially announced their intervention in the war and launched missiles at Israel, further increasing regional tensions. Finally, it is worth closely monitoring reports that the U.S. Department of Defense is preparing for ground operations in Iran that may last for several weeks.

Officials have stated that if President Trump approves the relevant plans, this will mark a new phase in the war, with risks potentially significantly higher than in the previous weeks. It is reported that the U.S. amphibious assault ship “Liberty” and its over 3,500 naval sailors and Marines arrived in the Middle East on the 27th and have now entered their area of responsibility. This area of responsibility includes the Middle East and other regions.

The U.S. military’s “Rapid Resolution” ground combat plan exposed

According to news from Guoshi Zhitongche on March 29, the news of the U.S. military’s preparations for ground operations in Iran has ignited global attention. Unlike the full-scale invasion of the 2003 Iraq War, the Pentagon is adopting a “surgical strike” tactic this time—no occupation, no prolonged warfare, directly targeting Iran’s oil lifeline, Khark Island, attempting to replicate the glory of a “rapid victory” akin to the 1991 Gulf War.

The Washington Post reported on the 28th that the Pentagon is preparing for a limited ground operation lasting several weeks, rather than a full-scale invasion. Thousands of Marines and paratroopers from the 82nd Airborne Division have already been deployed to the Middle East, with approximately 3,500 Marines from the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit aboard the “Liberty” amphibious assault ship, headed directly to the core waters of the Persian Gulf. The Wall Street Journal disclosed on the 26th that the U.S. military is considering deploying up to 10,000 ground combat troops, including infantry and armored forces, with the total force size only one percent of that during the Iraq War, completely abandoning the operational model of a million-strong army at the border.

The Pentagon’s strategic intent is very clear: to abandon the costly and uncontrollable full occupation and instead focus on an “economic strangulation war.” Its core tactical objective directly targets Iran’s southwestern oil-producing regions and the Strait of Hormuz, further honing in on Iran’s core oil export hub—Khark Island, which is responsible for over 90% of Iran’s crude oil exports and is the lifeblood of the Iranian economy.

Foreign media reports on the 25th revealed that controlling Khark Island could cut off 90% of Iran’s crude oil exports, paralyzing its national economy at minimal military cost; other foreign media indicated that the plan clearly prioritizes the invasion or blockade of Khark Island and control of the Strait of Hormuz as core tasks, with the operation cycle set for weeks rather than months. CNN reported concurrently that Iran has noticed the U.S. military’s movements and has increased air defense forces and laid defensive mines on Khark Island to counter potential U.S. amphibious landings, while the U.S. military has previously launched airstrikes on over 90 military targets on the island, deliberately preserving the oil infrastructure. It is evident that this move is preparing for subsequent control of the island.

This “rapid resolution” combat concept is the U.S. military’s attempt to leverage absolute maritime and air superiority, combined with elite ground rapid response forces, to bypass Iran’s deep land defenses and directly strike its economic vulnerabilities, essentially aiming to avoid falling into a long quagmire like the Iraq War. However, this is merely a superficial reflection on the lessons of war, more a compromise forced by the high anti-war sentiment within the U.S. and the reality of shrinking global strategic resources.

It can be seen that this operation is fundamentally about precise strikes and economic strangulation, not seeking full occupation, but achieving political objectives of promoting negotiations and extreme pressure through control of key oil-producing areas and the strait.

Several international media outlets and think tanks have repeatedly warned: believing in the myth of “42 days to destroy Iran” may lead the U.S. into a new strategic quagmire.

U.S. media reported on March 28 that, according to anonymous American officials, the Pentagon is preparing for “ground operations lasting several weeks” in Iran.

The report suggests that any potential ground operation will not be a full invasion and may be initiated by a joint raid involving special operations forces and conventional infantry units. Currently, President Trump has not yet approved the relevant plans.

Recently, the U.S. military has been deploying ground combat forces to the Middle East from multiple locations. Military experts analyze that if U.S. military actions against Iran evolve into ground operations, the intensity of the conflict and casualties will rise to a “completely different level.”

Various signs indicate that the U.S. is on the verge of launching ground operations against Iran. However, regardless of the methods the U.S. ultimately employs or how many troops are mobilized, the situation it faces in Iran is not comparable to that in Afghanistan or Iraq.

Insufficient troop strength, terrain limitations, and the Strait of Hormuz will become the three major pitfalls for U.S. operations.

An article by experts published in the British Independent recently analyzed that from 2007 to 2008, then-President Bush ordered an increase of troops in Iraq, with approximately 185,000 American and allied soldiers deployed to Iraq, along with 450,000 to 550,000 Iraqi government soldiers cooperating in combat. However, these hundreds of thousands of soldiers were still insufficient to completely resolve the issues in Iraq. The article argues that facing a country with a population nearly twice that of Iraq and a land area nearly four times larger, the U.S. military will undoubtedly need more troops.

The Independent quoted several former NATO generals stating that to achieve victory in ground operations in Iran, the U.S. would need to deploy an army of over 1.3 million—almost equivalent to the total number of active-duty U.S. military personnel.

Iran’s military warns the U.S. not to take ground action

According to Iranian media reports today (March 29), Iranian Speaker of Parliament Ghalibaf pointed out that the U.S. talks about negotiations on the surface but secretly plans a ground attack. Ghalibaf stated that the Iranian armed forces are “waiting” for a U.S. ground attack and will “punish” its regional allies.

On March 29 local time, a spokesperson for the Central Command of the Iranian Armed Forces, Khatam al-Anbiya, issued a statement in response to President Trump’s threat of ground action against Iran. The statement said, if the relevant threats are implemented, the Iranian armed forces will respond decisively.

The statement pointed out that U.S. military actions in the region are facing severe challenges and that its relevant military deployments have already been hit. It also emphasized that the Iranian armed forces are prepared to respond to any possible military actions.

The statement said the only language the U.S. can understand is force. In response to recent U.S. threats of ground action against Iran, Iranian soldiers have been “waiting for a long time” for such actions, and the Iranian armed forces will “destroy” the invading U.S. troops.

Iran has also stated that the U.S. leadership is inconsistent in its foreign policy, proposing negotiations on one hand while continuing to issue military threats on the other. The statement declared that Iran will respond to these challenges with a firm stance.

On March 29 local time, the spokesperson for the Central Headquarters of Khatam al-Anbiya warned that President Trump’s threats regarding ground actions in Iran will only lead U.S. troops “into the abyss of captivity and death.”

The statement said that in response to Trump’s repeated threats of ground actions against Iran and the occupation of certain Iranian islands, the Iranian military is prepared for combat. “The sharks of the Persian Gulf are waiting for American soldiers.” Trump’s wrong decisions will lead U.S. troops “into a quagmire of death.”

Recent U.S. media reports indicate that it is still unclear to what extent Trump will approve the Pentagon’s action plans. If he “chooses to escalate actions,” this will mark a “dangerous new phase” in the war.

Military analysts: For the U.S. military,

it is undoubtedly a huge military adventure

Military commentator Wei Dongxu: The U.S. has prepared two plans, “fight and negotiate.”

If the U.S. believes it can successfully conduct island-seizing operations in the relevant region, or thinks it has a chance of winning a large-scale ground war, then the current so-called engagement, negotiation, and dialogue are most likely just methods to buy time. Conversely, if the U.S. is eager to withdraw from the Middle East, the large number of troops gathered now will become leverage in negotiations, using military pressure to force Iran to compromise and concede.

If the U.S. carries out ground operations, there may be three plans.

First is the main attack on Iran’s oil export “valve,” Khark Island. The “Liberty” amphibious readiness group could seize Khark Island through low-altitude flanking raids under the cover of carrier-based aircraft and other air force aircraft. However, even if the U.S. successfully seizes the island, Iran would use long-range rocket launchers, short-range tactical missiles, suicide drones, and covertly stationed fast attack boats to launch assaults on U.S. troops on the island, leading to substantial U.S. casualties.

Second is an all-encompassing “island-seizing operation.” This method of warfare targets not only Khark Island but may also involve comprehensive operations against various islands in the Strait of Hormuz, such as Greater and Lesser Tunb islands. It is even possible to launch attacks on the Iranian coastal areas of the Strait of Hormuz to achieve greater control over the Strait.

Third is to conduct strikes into the depths of Iran’s interior. Even if both amphibious readiness groups arrive, approximately 5,000 U.S. troops would find it unrealistic to engage in comprehensive ground combat with Iran. Therefore, the U.S. may use low-altitude raids to strike targets such as Iran’s nuclear facilities, underground missile silos, and the residences of high-ranking Iranian officials, then quickly retreat.

However, regardless of which plan is adopted, as long as island-seizing operations and ground combat are conducted, the U.S. military will face huge risks of casualties during the actions, and there is even a possibility that its raids could fail completely due to exposure of intent and being met with greater Iranian manpower and firepower, which undoubtedly constitutes a significant military adventure.

(Source: Daily Economic News)