US Approves Rapid Deployment of 82nd Airborne Troops to Middle East

Boots on the ground would be a major mistake, unless just securing the oil pier on Kharg Island, till a resolution can be found.

Other reason, a strategic taking out of the govt, which would be near impossible to do, without heavy losses.

6 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Boots on the ground would be a major mistake, unless just securing the oil pier on Kharg Island, till a resolution can be found.

You think that Iran will just allow they take Kharg island, and not gonne defend it?

All those expensive missile stocks must be running low by now. Time to stop digging.

Much of the military assets that were on the island, including the airport and the port facility that can handle general cargo has been neutralized. This means that the garrison now relies on supplies brought in from the mainland. In the event of a direct action the island cannot be easily resupplied or reinforced and would be difficult to defend. Iran does not have any significant air or naval supply capability left.

3 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

This means that the garrison now relies on supplies brought in from the mainland. In the event of a direct action the island cannot be easily resupplied or reinforced

Same applies to the US, and you think the Iranians don't have guns anymore? How is the US gonna get on the island with the airport destroyed?

The iranians are on the island, and will put everyone that tries to enter from the sea or from the mainland in a bodybag

22 minutes ago, CallumWK said:

You think that Iran will just allow they take Kharg island, and not gonne defend it?

Supposedly, they already took out the military installations on the island.

That's where most of the oil is exported from. May force some negotiations when the money stop flowing. Just offer the same as before, straits open, but no silly Yuan payment.

Central banking would love that, considering exchange fees, but USA wouldn't, since established trade in USD a long time ago.

Not sure what the deal with that is though, USA's advantage, as surely RU & CH don't deal with USD, along with BRICS. Guessing they trade in local currencies.

Little above my pay grade, as the elites must be making big bucks out that somewhere along way.

1 hour ago, Patong2021 said:

Much of the military assets that were on the island, including the airport and the port facility that can handle general cargo has been neutralized. This means that the garrison now relies on supplies brought in from the mainland. In the event of a direct action the island cannot be easily resupplied or reinforced and would be difficult to defend. Iran does not have any significant air or naval supply capability left.

Again, geography matters. The island is around 16 miles (25 km) from the coast, so the area at point-blank range of Iran's military on mainland. I have no doubt about the excellence of the US army, but its geographical situation makes it costly to attack, and if taken, costly to defend.

On top of it, Iran may retaliate elsewhere, as it did before.

2 hours ago, CallumWK said:

Same applies to the US, and you think the Iranians don't have guns anymore? How is the US gonna get on the island with the airport destroyed?

The iranians are on the island, and will put everyone that tries to enter from the sea or from the mainland in a bodybag

I beg to differ on that one(don’t construe that as support for Donald’s fiasco) we have the capability to take it but holding it against MILLIONS of pissed off jehadies on their home turf…..and why in gods name would you expose our GIs to such extremes???to satisfy an old wanna be king with dementia???nope in my view it’s time to put Donald to pasture (article 25) if he’s lucky and international escorts through the straight then sort Iran with a collation of countries.thanks magga see what a mess your messiah made…sad

Should it not be Israel troops deployed rather than Americans ? After all, this is Israel war with no benefit to America.

15 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

Should it not be Israel troops deployed rather than Americans ? After all, this is Israel war with no benefit to America.

This question will be asked in earnest once American soldiers start returning in body bags. Where is the IDF?

19 hours ago, CallumWK said:

How is the US gonna get on the island with the airport destroyed?

The US military doesn’t need a landing strip to take control of the island.

The title of this thread is a bit misleading in my view were did the (US approve)?donald trump is NOT the USA he’s just the person occupying the White House….he didn’t bother to ask anyone he just did it …….and now we all pay the price.sad

38 minutes ago, novacova said:

The US military doesn’t need a landing strip to take control of the island.

That's a good one.

Let's count the body bags if they attempt to put boots on the ground

20 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

Much of the military assets that were on the island, including the airport and the port facility that can handle general cargo has been neutralized. This means that the garrison now relies on supplies brought in from the mainland. In the event of a direct action the island cannot be easily resupplied or reinforced and would be difficult to defend. Iran does not have any significant air or naval supply capability left.

And absolutely the same is true of any parachute landed assault forces. They land, with basically what they can carry. Any reinforcements, support weapons, ammunition , casualty evacuation or relieving force will have to come either through the airport (neutralised) or through the port (neutralised).

Any seaborne follow up force (and they will need one within at most 48 hours) will have to operate in very restricted waters, and will be very vulnerable.

But I am sure Pete Hegseth will have thought all this through..

If the nimwit puts troops on the ground it will likely be his demise, and that would be the only positive thing that would come out of this war.

It seems like that he's completely making up the part about negotiations taking place with Iran, just another in his series of thousands of lies, but that shouldn't be surprising as that's just who the man is.

These statements came after a report detailing Iran's response to a US proposal to end the war.

"Iran has responded negatively" to the American proposal, an unidentified official told Iran’s Press TV on Wednesday, referring to a 15-point ceasefire deal floated by the Trump administration and delivered to the Iranians by Pakistan.

"The end of the war will occur when Iran decides it should end, not when Trump envisions its conclusion," the Iranian official added.

Tehran has five conditions for ending the US-Israeli war on Iran, according to Press TV.

Iran wants a complete halt to “aggression and assassinations” by the US and Israel, along with “concrete mechanisms” to ensure that the US does not resume attacking.

Iran also wants war reparations and a formal recognition of its “natural, legal right” to control maritime activity in the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow waterway through which 20 percent of global energy supplies pass.

Iran also insists that any peace deal include military groups aligned with Tehran, which likely means an end to Israel’s invasion of Lebanon, where Hezbollah is fighting.

Iran’s rebuttal through state media comes as the Islamic Republic’s military also characterised the US proposal to end the war as out of step with battlefield developments.

“Our first and last word has always been, is, and will be this: someone like us will never come to terms with someone like you - not now, not ever,” the central headquarters of Iran’s military command said in a video on Wednesday.

“Do not call your defeat an agreement. The era of your promises has come to an end.

This time around, the Iranian official in his statement again questioned the sincerity of the US proposal by raising the two previous rounds of talks between the Iranians and the US, which ended with the US attacking Iran. The official said the US had no genuine intention of meaningful dialogue. Kushner and Witkoff were negotiating. Of course faikure was assured.

The former chief of Britain’s MI6 intelligence service said Iran has the upper hand in the war.

“The reality is the US underestimated the task, and I think as of about two weeks ago lost the initiative to Iran,” Sir Alex Younger, who ran the UK’s secret intelligence service from 2014 to 2020, told The Economist in a podcast interview.

https://share.google/CKtgPt2dJhXxFFqHZ

27 minutes ago, JAG said:

And absolutely the same is true of any parachute landed assault forces. They land, with basically what they can carry. Any reinforcements, support weapons, ammunition , casualty evacuation or relieving force will have to come either through the airport (neutralised) or through the port (neutralised).

Any seaborne follow up force (and they will need one within at most 48 hours) will have to operate in very restricted waters, and will be very vulnerable.

But I am sure Pete Hegseth will have thought all this through..

The argument you’ve presented relies on an outdated, static view of airborne operations that ignores the "Hardware" reality of 2026. This critique assumes that the 82nd Airborne is a "fragile" light infantry force that can be easily isolated, but in Operation Epic Fury, Pete Hegseth and General Dan Caine have built a system specifically designed to solve the "48-hour survival" problem through redundant, high-tech logistical bridges.

Modern airborne doctrine has evolved into what the Pentagon calls Agile Combat Employment (ACE), which effectively turns the "neutralized" airport mentioned in the critique into an asset rather than a liability. The C-17 Globemaster III is the centerpiece.

Unlike older transport planes, it is designed for Short Takeoff and Landing (STOL) on semi-prepared or even dirt runways as short as 3,500 feet. If the 82nd Airborne parachutes onto an objective like Kharg Island, their first task is not to wait for a port, but to clear enough "dirt space" for C-17s to begin landing within hours. These aircraft don't just bring "what men can carry"—they offload M1 Abrams tanks, Stryker vehicles, and mobile Patriot missile batteries directly onto the captured terrain, giving the paratroopers heavy-metal protection long before a "seaborne follow-up" is even required.

Furthermore, the idea that a relieving force is "vulnerable" in restricted waters misses the technical reality of the current naval theater. Hegseth confirmed on March 19 that the Iranian Navy is "no longer a factor," with over 120 vessels destroyed and their coastal "layered defense" flattened. The U.S. isn't sailing into a contested trap; they are moving into a cleared "maritime corridor." Even if the port is neutralized, the U.S. now uses autonomous resupply—drones and GPS-guided precision airdrops (JPADS)—to push ammunition and medical supplies to the front line with pinpoint accuracy from high altitude, bypassing the need for a traditional harbor entirely during the initial phase of the assault.

If US forces go and take the island, they will be 'fish in a barrel'.

US combat deaths would be unacceptable... no one has clearly explained what we would be going for, what the objectives are. American culture is not really into 'glorious martyrdom" view of death in 'incursions' or 'excursions' or another grift to help his investment friends

Do not compare the potential upcoming landing with previous ones. Iran has live satellite capabilities (China/russia) and can see the brand of chocolate bars the soldiers will be munching on. They deliberately did not aim at them on their Gulf bases to minimize us public support for war. But boots on their home turf is a different story.

82nd is the rapid reaction force to "be first in". The bombing campaign has been ongoing for weeks. Also, 82nd has limited number of armored vehicles and if they were to truly "jump" into Iran or an Iraninan island they would need a ton of support quickly. At this point a mechanized briigade might be the better option to take and keep terriroty? But of course the best military minds are in the White House and the nonwar is going great. Just wondering this time what excactly will be victory or even as a former POTUS said over 20 years ago "mission accomplished" look like?

27 minutes ago, Smokey and the Bandit said:

The argument you’ve presented relies on an outdated, static view of airborne operations that ignores the "Hardware" reality of 2026. This critique assumes that the 82nd Airborne is a "fragile" light infantry force that can be easily isolated, but in Operation Epic Fury, Pete Hegseth and General Dan Caine have built a system specifically designed to solve the "48-hour survival" problem through redundant, high-tech logistical bridges.

Modern airborne doctrine has evolved into what the Pentagon calls Agile Combat Employment (ACE), which effectively turns the "neutralized" airport mentioned in the critique into an asset rather than a liability. The C-17 Globemaster III is the centerpiece.

Unlike older transport planes, it is designed for Short Takeoff and Landing (STOL) on semi-prepared or even dirt runways as short as 3,500 feet. If the 82nd Airborne parachutes onto an objective like Kharg Island, their first task is not to wait for a port, but to clear enough "dirt space" for C-17s to begin landing within hours. These aircraft don't just bring "what men can carry"—they offload M1 Abrams tanks, Stryker vehicles, and mobile Patriot missile batteries directly onto the captured terrain, giving the paratroopers heavy-metal protection long before a "seaborne follow-up" is even required.

Furthermore, the idea that a relieving force is "vulnerable" in restricted waters misses the technical reality of the current naval theater. Hegseth confirmed on March 19 that the Iranian Navy is "no longer a factor," with over 120 vessels destroyed and their coastal "layered defense" flattened. The U.S. isn't sailing into a contested trap; they are moving into a cleared "maritime corridor." Even if the port is neutralized, the U.S. now uses autonomous resupply—drones and GPS-guided precision airdrops (JPADS)—to push ammunition and medical supplies to the front line with pinpoint accuracy from high altitude, bypassing the need for a traditional harbor entirely during the initial phase of the assault.

Then why the 82nd now and how about the 173rd out of Italy? Wouldn't the 173rd's response time be faster then the 82nd from Ft Bragg? I know the primary AO for the 173rd is Europe and Africa but ME is pretty close.

48 minutes ago, Smokey and the Bandit said:

The argument you’ve presented relies on an outdated, static view of airborne operations that ignores the "Hardware" reality of 2026. This critique assumes that the 82nd Airborne is a "fragile" light infantry force that can be easily isolated, but in Operation Epic Fury, Pete Hegseth and General Dan Caine have built a system specifically designed to solve the "48-hour survival" problem through redundant, high-tech logistical bridges.

Modern airborne doctrine has evolved into what the Pentagon calls Agile Combat Employment (ACE), which effectively turns the "neutralized" airport mentioned in the critique into an asset rather than a liability. The C-17 Globemaster III is the centerpiece.

Unlike older transport planes, it is designed for Short Takeoff and Landing (STOL) on semi-prepared or even dirt runways as short as 3,500 feet. If the 82nd Airborne parachutes onto an objective like Kharg Island, their first task is not to wait for a port, but to clear enough "dirt space" for C-17s to begin landing within hours. These aircraft don't just bring "what men can carry"—they offload M1 Abrams tanks, Stryker vehicles, and mobile Patriot missile batteries directly onto the captured terrain, giving the paratroopers heavy-metal protection long before a "seaborne follow-up" is even required.

Furthermore, the idea that a relieving force is "vulnerable" in restricted waters misses the technical reality of the current naval theater. Hegseth confirmed on March 19 that the Iranian Navy is "no longer a factor," with over 120 vessels destroyed and their coastal "layered defense" flattened. The U.S. isn't sailing into a contested trap; they are moving into a cleared "maritime corridor." Even if the port is neutralized, the U.S. now uses autonomous resupply—drones and GPS-guided precision airdrops (JPADS)—to push ammunition and medical supplies to the front line with pinpoint accuracy from high altitude, bypassing the need for a traditional harbor entirely during the initial phase of the assault.

A system or tactical plan do not win wars. It is about adaptation and most important morale. Iran is fighting for their survival and death is a path to martyrdom. Majority in US opposed the Iran war with many concern for the potential loss of life.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/politics/international-relations/former-head-of-mi6-irgc-is-in-its-death-throes-but-peace-is-a-greater-threat-to-them-than-war/ar-AA1ZokjL

Interesting comments from an ex-head of MI6 officer on the Trump excursion.

Iran has one million active and reserve fighters, plus 90 million people who will do everything to remove the infidels from their land.

In other words, sending American soldiers onto Iranian soil is basically a suicide mission, all because of this moronic and narcissistic President.

Who tells American parents that their son or daughter is lying mangled in a field on Kharg Island or Bandar Abbas.

Plus of course having the rest of the world dealing with a fuel crisis and possible economic collapse in some countries.

Beggars belief that one imbecile can cause so much chaos and hardship.

48 minutes ago, sqwakvfr said:

Then why the 82nd now and how about the 173rd out of Italy? Wouldn't the 173rd's response time be faster then the 82nd from Ft Bragg? I know the primary AO for the 173rd is Europe and Africa but ME is pretty close.

The 82nd Airborne isn't just a unit; it is the designated Global Immediate Response Force (IRF).

While the 173rd is the "Contingency Response Force" for Europe and Africa, the 82nd is the only unit in the U.S. Army mandated to have a full Brigade Combat Team (BCT)—about 3,000–4,000 soldiers—ready to wheels-up in 18 hours for any spot on the globe.

The 173rd is a single brigade. If you deploy them to Iran, you leave the "European Back door" (NATO’s eastern flank) completely unguarded at a time when Russia is watching the Middle East conflict closely.

By pulling from the 82nd’s deep bench in North Carolina, the U.S. keeps its European deterrent intact.

29 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

A system or tactical plan do not win wars. It is about adaptation and most important morale. Iran is fighting for their survival and death is a path to martyrdom. Majority in US opposed the Iran war with many concern for the potential loss of life.

In a war of survival, the "Martyrdom" path only works if the population is united behind the regime. However, the January 2026 protests (where thousands were killed by the IRGC) created a deep "internal wound." Many Iranians are now "dancing as resistance"—celebrating the regime's setbacks because they see the U.S. strikes as a chance for their own liberation.

1 hour ago, Smokey and the Bandit said:

The argument you’ve presented relies on an outdated, static view of airborne operations that ignores the "Hardware" reality of 2026. This critique assumes that the 82nd Airborne is a "fragile" light infantry force that can be easily isolated, but in Operation Epic Fury, Pete Hegseth and General Dan Caine have built a system specifically designed to solve the "48-hour survival" problem through redundant, high-tech logistical bridges.

Modern airborne doctrine has evolved into what the Pentagon calls Agile Combat Employment (ACE), which effectively turns the "neutralized" airport mentioned in the critique into an asset rather than a liability. The C-17 Globemaster III is the centerpiece.

Unlike older transport planes, it is designed for Short Takeoff and Landing (STOL) on semi-prepared or even dirt runways as short as 3,500 feet. If the 82nd Airborne parachutes onto an objective like Kharg Island, their first task is not to wait for a port, but to clear enough "dirt space" for C-17s to begin landing within hours. These aircraft don't just bring "what men can carry"—they offload M1 Abrams tanks, Stryker vehicles, and mobile Patriot missile batteries directly onto the captured terrain, giving the paratroopers heavy-metal protection long before a "seaborne follow-up" is even required.

Furthermore, the idea that a relieving force is "vulnerable" in restricted waters misses the technical reality of the current naval theater. Hegseth confirmed on March 19 that the Iranian Navy is "no longer a factor," with over 120 vessels destroyed and their coastal "layered defense" flattened. The U.S. isn't sailing into a contested trap; they are moving into a cleared "maritime corridor." Even if the port is neutralized, the U.S. now uses autonomous resupply—drones and GPS-guided precision airdrops (JPADS)—to push ammunition and medical supplies to the front line with pinpoint accuracy from high altitude, bypassing the need for a traditional harbor entirely during the initial phase of the assault.

Hmm... the 3500 STOL dirt strip will be a drone magnet. One hit on an aircraft will put it out of action. You can be certain that Iran will pull out all the stops to do just that.

The logistic tail if you start flying in Patriot, Strykers and particularly M1 Abrams (which require massive amounts of specialised fuel) will be huge.

If the seas are a "cleared maritime corridor" why then are the sea lanes closed?

Agile Combat Employment sounds a great principal - but as Field Marshal Helmuth von Moltke observed 150 odd years ago " no plan survives contact with the enemy"! The enemy (Iran) has had decades to prepare, absolutely in no doubt that they are technologically outclassed. They will be ready.

This is all so exciting. I can't wait to see what Iran does to the ground troops, if indeed US is dumb enough to send ground troops.

If US does what that incompetent buffoon Churchill did at Gallipoli, then the result will be the same. The americans will be slowly traversing a narrow shooting range, through the very long Strait of Hormuz. The ship decks would look like the back room of a butchers shop.

If US tries to get the men there by air, those slower transport planes will be blown out of the sky, the same way Iran has been blowing F35s out of the air (not reported in western press).

The optimal strategy is to let the americans land and take the island, with americans sustaining heavy casualties. Then bombard those american cannon fodder with cheap munitions, whilst taking lots of drone footage to post on twitter.

I don't believe that even the americans are stup!d enough to invade this death trap island.

7 minutes ago, Smokey and the Bandit said:

In a war of survival, the "Martyrdom" path only works if the population is united behind the regime. However, the January 2026 protests (where thousands were killed by the IRGC) created a deep "internal wound." Many Iranians are now "dancing as resistance"—celebrating the regime's setbacks because they see the U.S. strikes as a chance for their own liberation.

The IRGC is fighting the war and they are diehard regime supporters. The bombing of the cities where the anti regime protesters reside was a big big mistake and has unified Iran. The Iran regime has been on his death throes because of dissent and bad economy. Lot more can be achieve to rid the regime without the war. War has done the reverse and gave the regime legitimacy to carry on.

45 minutes ago, Smokey and the Bandit said:

The 82nd Airborne isn't just a unit; it is the designated Global Immediate Response Force (IRF).

While the 173rd is the "Contingency Response Force" for Europe and Africa, the 82nd is the only unit in the U.S. Army mandated to have a full Brigade Combat Team (BCT)—about 3,000–4,000 soldiers—ready to wheels-up in 18 hours for any spot on the globe.

The 173rd is a single brigade. If you deploy them to Iran, you leave the "European Back door" (NATO’s eastern flank) completely unguarded at a time when Russia is watching the Middle East conflict closely.

By pulling from the 82nd’s deep bench in North Carolina, the U.S. keeps its European deterrent intact.

1) Where will the 82nd actually be deployed to? Stage in Kuwait? Stage in Qatar 2) How will they be deployed into Iran? An actual combat airborne drop? Board C-17's and land inside of Iran? This would require a secure airfiled. I guess an 82nd airborne drop wih USAF CCT (Combat Controllers) would be the answer. At this point I do not see US personnel actually land or drop inside of Iran. But then with this POTUS anything is possible.

11 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

The IRGC is fighting the war and they are diehard regime supporters. The bombing of the cities where the anti regime protesters reside was a big big mistake and has unified Iran. The Iran regime has been on his death throes because of dissent and bad economy. Lot more can be achieve to rid the regime without the war. War has done the reverse and gave the regime legitimacy to carry on.

You argue that strikes have unified the country, but the evidence from the ground in March 2026 shows a massive psychological divide:

Many Iranians do not see the strikes as an attack on "Iran," but as a dismantling of the IRGC "occupying force" that killed over 7,000 to 36,000 of its own citizens during the January 2026 protests.

Reports from border crossings and anonymous texts from Tehran indicate a surprising level of "relief" and even clandestine celebration at the decapitation of the leadership, with many Iranians fearing that a "peace deal" would only leave their oppressors in power.

The idea that the IRGC will fight to the last man as "diehard supporters" is being overridden by material exhaustion:

With the rial at 1.4 million per dollar and the banking system paralyzed, the regime has failed to pay many security units for three months.

Morale cannot be sustained on "martyrdom" alone when soldiers are starving. Reports of 90% desertion in some local units suggest the "diehard" shield is actually a series of disconnected, failing cells

Why "more" could not be achieved without war. Previous diplomatic efforts were used by Tehran as stalling tactics for their nuclear program. We know the regime/IRGC lies consistently about what they are doing, they cannot be trusted.

The regime is "broken" because it has lost the ability to govern, and no amount of nationalist rhetoric can fix a system that has fundamentally disconnected from its own power source—the people.