Skip to main content

← Kharg Island and the Uranium Raid

Trump Administration Considers Deploying Thousands More U.S. Troops to Middle East

On 19 March 2026, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz published a Reuters report, Trump Administration Considers Deploying Thousands More U.S. Troops to Middle East. The deck says the options included the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow sea lane oil tankers use to leave the Persian Gulf, and Kharg Island, and that ground forces would anger parts of President Donald Trump's base. An American family should care because unnamed officials described Americans on Iran's own shoreline, on an Iranian oil island, and at Iran's nuclear material. The same article says no decision had been made.

Background for new readers: On 28 February 2026 the United States and Israel began a joint air war on Iran. The Pentagon calls its part Operation Epic Fury; Israel calls its part Operation Roaring Lion. It came eight months after a shorter war in June 2025, when US bombers hit Iran's nuclear sites at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. The question running through this section is whether the air war turns into American soldiers fighting on Iranian soil. This article is filed under Kharg Island and the Uranium Raid; the full article index lists every article on this shelf.

Evidence rating: MODERATE. The report comes through Reuters as Haaretz printed it, with a US official and several people familiar with the matter speaking anonymously. The White House official's answer, also anonymous, keeps every option open.

What the article says​

Reuters, as Haaretz carried it, says a U.S. official and three people familiar with the matter said the administration was considering thousands more U.S. troops to reinforce the Middle East operation. The Iran war was well into its third week. Reuters granted the sources anonymity to talk about military planning.

The article says safe passage for tankers through the Strait of Hormuz would be done mostly by air and naval forces. Four sources, including two U.S. officials, said securing the strait could also mean U.S. troops on Iran's shoreline.

The same story says the administration had discussed sending ground forces to Kharg Island, which it calls the hub for 90 percent of Iran's oil exports. Three people familiar with the matter and three U.S. officials are cited for that. One official said the operation would be very risky, because Iran can hit the island with missiles and drones. The article says the United States struck military targets on the island on 13 March, and that Trump had threatened its oil infrastructure. Military experts, the article says, thought controlling the island would likely be seen as better than destroying it.

One person familiar with the matter said officials had also discussed sending U.S. forces to secure Iran's stocks of highly enriched uranium, meaning uranium processed far enough that it can be used in a nuclear weapon. The sources did not believe a ground deployment anywhere in Iran was imminent. They would not discuss the details of operational planning. Experts told Reuters that securing the uranium would be highly complex and risky even for special operations forces, the troops trained for small, high-risk raids.

A White House official, speaking anonymously, gave the denial.

There has been no decision to send ground troops at this time, but President Trump wisely keeps all options at his disposal.

A White House official, as Reuters reported and Haaretz published on 19 March 2026. The article then quotes the official on Operation Epic Fury, the name used for the campaign. The official's list was destroying Iran's ballistic missiles, destroying its navy, stopping what the official called terrorist proxies from destabilizing the region, and keeping Iran from a nuclear weapon. The Pentagon declined to comment.

The article says U.S. Central Command, the headquarters for American forces in the region, put out a factsheet that Wednesday: more than 7,800 strikes since the war began on 28 February, and more than 120 Iranian vessels damaged or destroyed. It says that command oversees roughly 50,000 U.S. troops already in the Middle East. The U.S. military, the article says, reported 13 U.S. troops killed and about 200 wounded so far, most of the injuries minor, even without a direct ground fight inside Iran.

The article says Trump had for years promised to keep the United States out of new foreign wars, and more recently had refused to rule out "boots on the ground" in Iran. A senior White House official told Reuters that Trump had ways to acquire Iran's nuclear material and had not decided. The official said, "Certainly there are ways in which it could be acquired," and "He hasn't made a decision yet."

In written testimony that Wednesday, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who leads the U.S. intelligence agencies, said Iran's nuclear enrichment program had been obliterated by strikes in June and that the entrances to those underground sites had been "buried and shuttered with cement." That is an official account that the sites were already sealed, set beside the idea of sending troops to secure the uranium.

The sources said the reinforcement talks went beyond an Amphibious Ready Group due in the Middle East the next week. That is a set of Navy ships carrying a Marine Expeditionary Unit, a Marine force that can go ashore. The article says this one included more than 2,000 Marines. One source said the military was also losing a large ship for a time: the carrier USS Gerald R. Ford was going to Greece for repairs after a fire. On the strait itself, the article says Trump first talked about Navy escorts, then asked other countries to help, then posted on Truth Social about leaving the waterway to the countries that use it.

What other reporting adds​

What Americans thought, the same week. A Reuters/Ipsos poll released the day this story ran found, as Common Dreams reported it, that "just 7% of US voters support the idea of a large-scale ground invasion of Iran," that "65% of Americans believe that Trump will order such an operation anyway," that "34%" would support "a small number of special forces," and that "55% said they would oppose the use of any ground troops" (Common Dreams, 20 March 2026; research capture: twitter/t13__v147.md).

The next day's Reuters follow-up. Three US officials confirmed to Reuters that thousands more Marines and sailors were headed to the Middle East. "But two officials also said at the time that no decision had been made to send those troops into Iran itself," as STL.News later summarized (STL.News, 21 September 2026; research capture: twitter/t49__v580.md).

Trump on camera the same day. Asked about troops, Trump said: "No, I'm not putting troops anywhere. If I were, I certainly wouldn't tell you, but I'm not putting troops." (USA Today video, 19 March 2026, as transcribed in the capture; research capture: twitter/t13__v147.md).

What it shows​

On one day, 19 March 2026, the record holds both halves of the pattern. Reuters, printed in Israel by Haaretz, reported officials discussing US troops on Iran's shoreline, ground forces on Kharg Island, and US forces sent to secure Iran's uranium. The White House answered "no decision to send ground troops at this time," and Trump said on camera, "No, I'm not putting troops anywhere. If I were, I certainly wouldn't tell you."

The next day CBS reported the Pentagon's detailed ground preparations, and thousands more Marines were confirmed on their way. Americans polled that week saw where it led: 65% believed Trump would order a ground operation anyway. See No Boots on the Ground and Pentagon Ground Plans 2026.

Check it yourself​

Last Updated: 2026-09-26

Last updated on