Skip to main content

← American Soldiers — Articles

Force-Planning Documents: How Washington Sized a Ground War in Iran, 2007–2026

The idea of American soldiers fighting in Iran did not begin with the bombing in 2026. For almost twenty years, the US Army's own staff college, the Army's research contractor, Washington's leading think tanks, and Congress's research service have been writing down how many Americans it would take. Their numbers are remarkably consistent. An invasion: 200,000 to 750,000. An occupation: 1.25 million to 1.4 million, and "a draft to fill the ranks." A first foothold: seize "a lodgment around the strait." Read in order, these documents show that the ground options discussed in 2026 were not improvised. They were thought through long before, including what they would cost American families.

Evidence rating: CONFIRMED that each document below exists and says what is quoted, from the documents themselves or their publishers. STRONG that the 2026 options follow the path these documents laid out (islands and coast around the Strait of Hormuz first, special forces for the uranium, a far larger force to hold ground), based on the Axios, CBS, and Washington Post reporting on the 2026 plans.

What a "force-planning document" is, and what has not been published​

Force planning means working out how many soldiers, ships, and aircraft a mission needs. The Pentagon's actual war plans for Iran are classified; no numbered 2026 plan has been published. One document sometimes passed around, OPLAN 1002, is a late-1980s plan for defending the Arabian Peninsula, not a plan to invade Iran. What the public can read are two kinds of evidence: unclassified studies by military schools, government-funded research centers, and think tanks, which do the same arithmetic in the open; and reporting on the contingency plans themselves.

Those plans exist. Former CENTCOM commander Gen. Michael Kurilla told the House Armed Services Committee in June 2025, asked whether CENTCOM was prepared to respond with overwhelming force to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran: "I have provided the Secretary of Defense and the President a wide range of options." Chairman Mike Rogers: "I take that as a yes?" Kurilla: "Yes" (as quoted by Dan Linnaeus on X, 11 Jun 2025). In June 2026, reporter Ken Klippenstein reported, per a summary of his report, that 82nd Airborne soldiers were sent to Israel on temporary duty, tied to "new joint U.S. and Israeli contingency plans finalized back in February, which reportedly map out ways to seize Kharg Island and establish a foothold on the Iranian coast" (FrameGlobeNews on X, 8 Jun 2026). February 2026 is before the war began.

The record, in order​

YearDocumentGround force for IranPage
2007Army Command and General Staff College thesis (Maj. Bruce Terry)750,000 to invade; 1.25 million to occupy; "would likely require a draft"Army staff college thesis
2007Stanley Foundation (Kagan and O'Hanlon)200,000–300,000 "even in fairly optimistic scenarios"The warnings of 2007
2007CSIS (Cordesman)"a bloody and pointless war of attrition" if Iranians rallyThe warnings of 2007
2009Brookings, Which Path to Persia?200,000–250,000 to invade; 1.4 million to occupy; "partial conscription"Which Path to Persia
2011Brookings (O'Hanlon)occupation "beyond our plausible means"Occupation off the table
2012The Iran Projectoccupation greater than Iraq and Afghanistan combinedOccupation off the table
2017RAND, for the US Armya corps, divisions, and a Marine expeditionary force in Oman to "seize a lodgment around the strait"RAND's Oman lodgment
2019New York Times; Defense Newsup to 120,000 to the region; special forces inside IranThe 120,000-troop plan
2026Foreign Affairs, Brookings, CSIS, CRStens of thousands for the coast; over half a million to secure Iran; 375,000–600,000 for TehranThe 2026 estimates

2007: the Army's own arithmetic​

The most striking document is a thesis accepted by the US Army Command and General Staff College, the Army's graduate school for officers, on 15 June 2007. Maj. Bruce W. Terry compared invasion, a strategic raid on nuclear sites, and a single special-forces raid. For invasion: "In a conventional fight against an equal opponent, the US would need at least an equal number of troops to conduct an invasion, 750,000 troops." For occupation, about 1.25 million. And: "First, a force of 1.25 million Americans would likely require a draft to fill the ranks with soldiers" (a214).

The same year, Frederick Kagan and Michael O'Hanlon, from the conservative American Enterprise Institute and the centrist Brookings Institution, wrote that "force requirements of 200,000-300,000 are highly likely even in fairly optimistic scenarios for a war with Iran" (a217). Anthony Cordesman of CSIS warned that an invasion meeting "a strong nationalist response" would "almost certainly turn into a bloody and pointless war of attrition" (a220).

2009: invasion, occupation, and "Leave it to Bibi"​

The Brookings Saban Center's "Which Path to Persia?" sized an invasion at "four to six divisions amounting to 200,000 to 250,000 troops," naming Marines to seize a beachhead and the 82nd Airborne among the units, and an occupation at "1.4 million troops," possibly requiring "partial conscription" (a215). Its chapter "Leave it to Bibi" discussed letting Israel strike first, with the United States encouraging "and perhaps even assist[ing]." The 2026 war followed Israel's lead: an Israeli strike in June 2025 that the United States joined, then a joint war in February 2026 that a State Department legal opinion said the United States entered "at the request of" Israel.

2011–2012: occupation taken off the table​

Michael O'Hanlon wrote in 2011 that occupying Iran was "beyond our plausible means" and had been "dispensed with ... by American military planners" (a201). The Iran Project estimated in 2012 that occupation "would require a commitment of resources and personnel greater than what the U.S. has expended over the past 10 years in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined," and that strikes alone would not end Iran's program (a216). Commentary's Sohrab Ahmari predicted that a limited strike could topple the government and leave only a thin Western force on the ground (a171).

The Army of 2026, about 452,000 active soldiers, was sized on the assumption that the United States would never occupy Iran.

2017: the lodgment around the strait​

RAND, in a study sponsored by the US Army, wrote a 2025 scenario against a nuclear-armed Iran in which a corps headquarters, several divisions, and a Marine expeditionary force gather in Oman "to give the option to seize a lodgment around the strait and to give leadership the option to undertake a full-scale invasion" (a203). In March 2026, Axios reported the Pentagon's options for a "final blow": invade Kharg Island, invade Larak, seize Abu Musa and the Tunbs, all islands around the strait.

2019: 120,000 to the region​

The New York Times reported on 13 May 2019 that Acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan presented, at John Bolton's request, "an updated military plan that envisions sending as many as 120,000 troops to the Middle East should Iran attack American forces or accelerate work on nuclear weapons" (as quoted by Borzou Daragahi). Defense News imagined a war in which "The few U.S. and allied boots on the ground inside of Iran belong to clandestine special operations forces" (a233).

2026: the same arithmetic, during the war​

Kenneth Pollack in Foreign Affairs: securing Iran would take "well over half a million troops, at least initially" (a197). Michael O'Hanlon on Brookings's podcast: holding the Hormuz coast means "low tens of thousands of U.S. troops in Iran" (a196). Andrew Faulhaber of CSIS: "a force size between 375,000 and 600,000 counterinsurgents would be required to stabilize Tehran" (a195). India's MP-IDSA: boots on the ground would be needed if the objectives expanded to "regime change or seizure of nuclear facilities" (a224). And the Congressional Research Service told Congress on 18 September that the war's course could depend on "whether the United States introduced ground forces or attempted to displace and occupy some portions of Iran's territory" (a205).

Then, on 30 August 2026, an Israeli newspaper printed the largest number of all: "between 750 thousand and 1.5 million American troops," with a plan to recruit them by paying off their debts. Its low end is the Army thesis's invasion figure from 2007. See the Jerusalem Post column.

What these documents teach​

  1. The first step is always small. A foothold around the strait, a raid on a nuclear site. That is what the 2026 plans describe. See Pentagon ground plans and Kharg Island and the uranium raid.
  2. Holding ground is enormous. Every document that sizes an occupation lands between one and one and a half million soldiers.
  3. The volunteer force cannot supply it. The 2007 thesis and the 2009 study both say a draft or "partial conscription" would be needed. See troop math and Reserves, the Guard, and the road to a draft.
  4. The planners knew. None of this is hidden. It has been in the open literature, written by the Army's own officers and contractors, for nearly twenty years. The public is told only "no boots on the ground." See No boots on the ground.

The articles on this page's shelf​

Status: Bruce W. Terry is alive. Frederick Kagan is alive. Michael O'Hanlon is alive. Anthony Cordesman is alive. Kenneth Pollack is alive. Andrew Faulhaber is alive. Michael Kurilla is alive. Patrick Shanahan is alive. John Bolton is alive.

Sources​

Last Updated: 2026-09-26

Last updated on