Category: Military Matters Page 1 of 3

Why are US ground troops going to fight for Saudi Arabia?

I’m pretty sure EVERY military advisor/planner/expert/consultant is watching what I’m watching and shaking their collective heads vehemently.

What are we watching?

Well, in addition to the Marines and 82nd Airborne troops allegedly heading to the Middle East already, how about the 70 flights of mainly troop and cargo carrying aircraft that have departed various special operations bases in the US in the last 48 hours?

Some of the bases the aircraft have departed from include:

Hunter Army Airfield, home of the 160th Night Stalkers and 75th Rangers
Naval Air Station Oceana home of DEVGRU or SEAL Team 6 as most people know it
Cannon Air Force Base, home of Air Force Special Operations
Hurlburt Field, AFSOC headquarters
Fort Campbell, 5th Special Forces Group

I’ve held back from commenting on the Marines and 82nd Airborne’s deployments as, in all honesty, part of me believed it was part of a strategic communication to the Iranian regime: We’re not afraid to put boots on the ground to finish the job.

But they should be.

That’s the one military move from the US that Iran would welcome. They know the power of the optics of American soldiers coming home in body bags. They know the rallying call to the Ummah, the greater Muslim family, that an American occupation of a Muslim country will provide. But America’s military command know this. Much better than little old James E Mack, sipping coffee and typing away from his home office on the east coast of Scotland. Which, naturally, begs the question;

Why the hell are Americans going to put their troops on Iranian soil?

The answer is actually quite surprising.

While many in the USA who oppose the war are laying the blame at Israel for dragging their country into another ‘dumb’ war, there is another player in the game who, more than Israel, has been demanding American troops in Iran for some time.

KSA. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Under the Trump administration, very close economic and military ties have been forged between the nations. While previous administrations such as Obama’s restricted the sale of certain weapon types to KSA, in both Trump’s terms, he released these restrictions. In May 2025, during his second term, Trump signed a new $142 billion agreement. This deal is officially promoted as the largest single weapons agreement between the two nations, though, as in Trump’s first term where his claim of $110 billion in sales was actually $42 billion, it remains to be seen how many of these intended sales will be fully realized.

In addition, massive tech deals ‘encouraged’ by the White House have also been a key element in investment agreements between the USA and KSA. Companies such as Nvidia, AMD, Amazon, Google, and Microsoft are all lead elements in this trade. Controversy over the sale of certain strands of technology included as part of this deal were dismissed by the White House as irrelevant.

For his part, Mohammed Bin Salman, MBS, the crown prince and de facto ruler of KSA, has pledged $600 billion in investment in the USA which he claimed could rise to as much as $1 trillion.

My point in highlighting these deals is not to bore you with stats and data but give you some context for where KSA’s leverage comes from. Because, as I said earlier, no senior military commander in the US could possibly believe American troops in Iran can be a good idea. But the troops are going, and if it’s not America’s idea, then whose is it?

It’s at the direct request of MBS. For the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

The American/Israeli war against Iran has not panned out the way it was supposed to have. A blitzkrieg of surgical strikes and the decapitation of the regime’s leadership to encourage the population to rise up, overthrow the remaining hardliners and select a government of their own. Militarily, Iran has been smashed, no question. But strategically?

Definitely not.

And that’s where KSA comes in. MBS played a bit of a double hand by publicly claiming he was not allowing the US to use his airspace when attacking Iran but was then caught red-handed facilitating US support. When Trump paused his intense bombing campaign in the hope that it would encourage dialogue with Iran, MBS told Trump directly that he had to keep bombing Iran until regime change happens. Anything short of that leaves KSA completely exposed to decades of overt and covert retaliation from Iran and its proxies in the region.

As its become clearer that Trump is desperate to walk away from this ill-thought war, KSA has suddenly realised the precarious position he is in. With a fully defeated Iran, KSA is the new king of the hill in the Middle East, a petrochemical powerhouse running the entire show. Anything less than this, and he and his kingdom are looking at decades of conflict and terrorism. His demands have now changed to pleas, best demonstrated by Donald Trump’s statement on Friday at a Saudi Investor’s Conference:

“He didn’t think he would be kissing my ass… and now he has to be nice to me,” Continuing his remarks, Trump said, “He (Mohammed bin Salman) thought I’d be just another American president that was a loser, where the country was going downhill. But now he has to be nice to me. You tell him he’d better be nice to me. He’s got to be.”

Compare this to Trump’s description only days earlier, where he referred to Mohammed bin Salman as a “warrior” aligned with the United States, particularly in the context of the conflict with Iran: “He is a warrior. He is fighting with us, by the way.”

There you have it. The crown prince of Saudi Arabia goes from ‘warrior’ to ‘ass kisser’ in a matter of days. Why? Because the power shifted. Initially as a supporting element to the war, MBS was confident that Trump and Netanyahu would bomb Iran back to the Stone Age and he and his Kingdom would rise to become the most powerful player in the Middle East.

But then Trump got bored.

He’s openly stated as much. His morning briefings on the war in Iran literally just a snuff montage of bombs and explosions as his staff desperately try to hold his attention. He’s already said openly he wants to wrap Iran up and move to Cuba. Israel and KSA do not like this one bit. As neighbours of Iran, their citizens will suffer the lethal consequences of an undefeated Iran hell bent on vengeance. Israel is also quietly acknowledging that the war has not gone to plan for them and that’s why we are starting to see their objectives clashing with Trump’s. The White House is desperately seeking an off ramp. Israel is not. Like KSA, it needs Iran completely defeated.

And now MBS has made it clear to the Trump administration that if the US doesn’t secure complete regime change in Iran, all those shiny trade and security deals of hundreds of billions of dollars are going to go up in black, bombed-refinery smoke. The Strait of Hormuz will remain closed to all but those Iran decides can pay the fee and enjoy safe transit. The bombing campaign has decimated the Iranian military but it has not defeated the defensive drone and missile salvos screaming through the skies toward American aligned or adjacent targets.

Including KSA.

Now, I don’t mean to be too disparaging here but I can tell you from personal experience that, while KSA has a massive defence budget and is probably the best equipped military in the region (other than Israel of course), as combat forces they are very underwhelming. In common with many of the Gulf nations, they have so much disposable funds they spend an absolute fortune on the best kit and equipment. They hire legions of military contractors to train their forces. But, and this really the point, they are not particularly capable, proven by their poor performance in Yemen, a small scale conflict where KSA struggled to achieve even their most modest of objectives. So, going head to head with Iran? A nation accustomed to constant conflict and war?

No contest.

KSA absolutely needs the USA to step up to the plate here and that’s exactly what’s happening. Donald Trump is gleeful at MBS’ relegation to lower tier status but also recognises the truth in what MBS stated. The bombings haven’t achieved their aims and if regime change doesn’t happen, oil prices will actually increase and Iran will have a stranglehold on this economic leverage for the foreseeable future. Trump can lie and obfuscate many things from the ordinary man and woman in the US but he can’t hide gas (petrol) prices. Every time someone fills up their car there is the automatic I can’t believe gas is now $4 . . . $5 . . . $6 . . . $7 . . . While America does have a slightly better hedge against rising oil prices than a lot of other countries, it isn’t anywhere near enough to offset anything as significant as it would need to.

Trump is always looking for the economic gain in any venture and the Iran war is no different. While taking MBS’ points on board, he has weighed up the loss of the potential investments MBS committed to the USA. He will also have looked at what monetary gain could be claimed for securing the region by facilitating full regime change in Iran. And let’s face it, if the USA actually carried out a full regime change in Iran, secured the country and made the neighbouring countries safe, he can pretty much name his price and take it.

But that’s a bloody big if.

And it can’t be achieved without tens of thousands of troops at a minimum and years of occupation. A model we’ve seen fail in every other recent foreign venture. But unless Iran completely capitulates, American troops are coming in numbers. As I’ve said before, there are CIA and special operations elements in country already but the big Green Machine will soon be on its way. Unless Iran agrees to a complete regime change and surrenders completely.

And that’s the best option for all concerned.

The White House has stated that there are now 13 American dead and around 300 injured. And breaking news from Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia that a further 15 were wounded this morning and AWACS and refuelling Stratotankers hit during the same attack. The New York Times also recently exposed the fact that Iran has attacked and rendered ‘nearly uninhabitable’ around 17 US military bases in the Middle East. And that hundreds of military personnel are ‘working remotely from hotels’.

That’s not good.

A report which hit the headlines in recent days broke the news of the USA’s Tier 1 special forces unit CAG/Delta Force plan to enter Iran and grab the 450kg of enriched uranium Iran is said to hold. This involved massive military support elements and assaults on multiple locations and, while not shelved indefinitely, the logistics required and high risk nature of the venture have put it on hold for at least the time being.

With the large mobilisation of the special operations units I highlighted at the start of this article and the thousands of troops already in the region, a ground war looks almost certain. And I believe Trump’s mockery of MBS supports this. Warrior to Ass Kisser in a couple of days says to me that Trump has agreed to put troops into Iran to secure KSA’s future and that Trump now ‘owns’ MBS. And while MBS has committed KSA troops to assist the US ground elements, the heavy lifting and actual fighting will be done by US troops. A lot of them.

By committing to this however, Trump has boxed himself into a corner: He has to win. For the man who campaigned on ‘no more foreign wars’, he is already straining his bedrock support to breaking point. American soldiers coming home in body bags will snap this, particularly where many of the American public believe their country was dragged into this by Israel. As I hope I’ve highlighted in this article, while there is some truth to this, the powerful lobbying/bribing from another nation is responsible for Trump’s commitment to putting American troops in harms way:

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

My fervent hope is that Iran capitulates, regime change is orchestrated by the people of Iran and there’s no need for American troops to enter Iran in numbers. Because, as we’ve seen from the last two foreign military misadventures, one can win the war but be completely defeated by the peace. A peace which is measured in the numbers of dead service men and women in the name of whatever new objective its nation decides is most relevant to the venture.

And in this case, the objective of securing KSA as the key petrochemical power in the region might not be enough to convince an American public that the sacrifice is worth the lives of their bright, young things.

Again.

It’s July 2002. George W Bush is the President of the USA. In the Persian Gulf, a US Navy carrier group comes under surprise attack from a wave of missiles launched from commercial ships and radio-silent aircraft. The carrier group’s defences are overwhelmed by the sheer scale of the incoming missiles. 19 US ships, including the main aircraft carrier, are destroyed and sunk within 10 minutes. 20,000 US troops killed and lying dead at the bottom of a foreign sea. The Pentagon is stunned. Staff officers at Norfolk Command turn to stare at each other, open mouthed and wide-eyed in horror. A middle eastern adversary has just decimated one of the most powerful military expeditionary forces in the world.

In 10 minutes.

This was not foreseen, planned for, or even considered as a remote possibility when, hours before, the US had demanded the unconditional surrender of the adversary and a commitment from them to cease any offensive or even defensive actions. And now the most powerful military in the world has suffered its biggest defeat in history with 20,000 of its finest service personnel dead at the bottom of the ocean.

Fortunately, this was just an exercise.

But a very realistic one. A war game. An officially run stress test to simulate how a planned scenario would play out if it was conducted for real. This exercise was called Millennium Challenge 2002 and was the largest ever joint military exercise conducted by the United States. Designed over 2 years and costing around $250 million with 14,000 participants, every facet of a military deployment to potential hostilities was included.

The background to this exercise was a theocratic, Middle Eastern country with an Army, Navy, and Air Force and where relations with the US had descended into open hostility. Oh, and the country also had significant natural resources critical for global trade and commerce.

Sound a wee bit familiar?

In these war games, everything is done for real. Manpower, logistics, capabilities, are all utilised from current resources. The good guys are referred to as Blue Forces, the bad guys are Red Forces. In this exercise, the Blue Forces were of course, the US Military. For the Red Forces, the Pentagon wanted someone suitably qualified to assume the role of military commander of a hostile middle eastern nation. A military or former military senior officer with relevant experience.

Enter Marine Lt General (Retired) Paul Van Riper.

It should be noted that Van Riper was not a corridor-slinking staff officer. A multi-decorated combat veteran, he was assessed as one of the finest field commanders to grace the United States Marine Corps. Based upon his long career and experience of command, The Pentagon probably assumed that Van Riper would apply conventional US doctrine and tactics in his responses to the Blue Team actions.

They couldn’t have been more wrong.

Assuming his role as Major General in command of his nation’s armed forces, Van Riper immediately looked for his opponent’s key weaknesses and devoted his main effort to exploiting these. His first assessment was that the Blue Forces would rely heavily on technology to identify Red Forces military capabilities and infrastructure. They would also depend upon that same technology to intercept commands and directives, giving them advance notice of Red Force intentions and the ability to strike these. Van Riper knew that satellites, SIGINT platforms and ELINT intercepts would be constantly attacking his military communication platforms.

So he went old school.

Encrypted notes, on paper, delivered by motorcycle couriers. Coded messages broadcast from minarets and mosques to coordinate actions. Lighting signals on airfields to enable take offs and landings without the need for communications between aircraft and ground crews. His Air Force went dark; no radio communications for his enemy to exploit and Find, Fix, and Finish.

When Blue Forces took out his nation’s microwave towers and fibre optics, it didn’t impede Van Riper’s ability to direct his forces. His old school methodology ensured command and control still functioned. But Van Riper was also well aware that, should the might of the Blue Forces arrive near or on his shores, things would change significantly. And this is where his experience as a field commander during combat tours came into its own. He recognised that there would be a geographical point where the carrier group would commit to a point of no return. A threshold which meant they had committed to engaging in war. Van Riper identified this point and prepared, without any digital or radio communications to betray his plan.

Then he struck.

He used missiles launched from commercial boats. Wave after wave of land-based missiles to overwhelm defences and leave openings for his Air Force to strafe with their missiles. Boats laden with explosives driven directly into the hulls of the Blue Force ships. In a 10-minute attack he’d wiped out 19 ships and killed around 20,000 US service personnel.

This was not in the script.

The Pentagon and Norfolk Command went into meltdown mode. Recriminations for who was culpable for such a defeat soon morphed into a blame game but not for the commanders responsible for the defeat. Nope, a far more convenient scapegoat was soon identified and nominated as responsible for the failure of the Blue Forces to win the war game.

Lt Gen Paul Van Riper.

The narrative the Pentagon began to spin was that, in the real world, tactics such as Van Riper’s would never be used. He hadn’t played fair. No Middle Eastern adversary could possibly put together such a strategic defence against a technologically advanced opponent using mere analogue tactics.

Van Riper raised an eyebrow and pointed out that an exact tactic he used was taken from the suicide attack against The USS Cole in Yemen in the year 2000.

As a veteran of multiple combat tours of Vietnam, he reminded The Pentagon that an army of small men and women on bicycles had constructed one of the world’s most incredible feats of military supply logistics: the Ho Chi Minh Trail. A supply line that navigated the jungles of 3 countries and stubbornly resisted the heaviest bombings the world had seen to that point. That the might of the Soviet Union, with all its armour, helicopters, and manpower was defeated by the ‘analogue’ tactics of the mujahideen.

But his examples were falling on deaf ears.

The exercise was put on hold then ‘refreshed’. A start over. The Staff Officers, in probably one of the most brazen examples of in-group bias ever seen, assured each other that the failure of the exercise lay in Van Riper, not them. Therefore, better to replace Van Riper with someone more suitable. Thank Van Riper for his assistance and send him on his way.

Van Riper wasn’t happy.

As an experienced field commander, he knew all too well the inherent dangers in Command ignoring vital lessons from the battlefield. He argued that The Pentagon was essentially prioritising saving face over learning from mistakes. When he saw that the exercise was now scripted to enable the Blue Forces to win, Van Riper walked away. Putting his thoughts to paper, he wrote a detailed, 21-page After Action Report (AAR) where he highlighted how vulnerable the US Military was to low tech warfare.

An important document, one might think, particularly when America went on to invade Iraq only a year later. An opportunity perhaps, for the military command to read a very pertinent AAR that could provide important lessons to bear in mind when attacking a hostile, Middle Eastern nation with natural resources critical to global trade and commerce. Alas, this was not the case.

The AAR was classified and buried for over 20 years.

A detailed report from a decorated Marine General pointing out US Military vulnerabilities against Iran, was, to all intents and purposes, buried.

It’s this act which I believe completely validates Van Riper’s assertion of The Pentagon prioritising saving face over operational lessons. If, as The Pentagon claimed, Van Riper had conducted an unrealistic campaign which added no value to the exercise, why hide the AAR? For 20 years? I think it’s pretty clear that while the public-facing message was such, privately The Pentagon couldn’t allow such a damning indictment of US military vulnerabilities to come to light.

In the past few days, Donald Trump has come under increasing pressure to explain how his administration could possibly not have considered Iran’s responses to the US/Israel attacks. His defence is to claim surprise. That he hadn’t been made aware Iran might close the Strait of Hormuz. That his administration was both shocked and taken aback when Iran attacked US allies’ energy infrastructure in the region. That he was surprised Iran was still fighting.

He shouldn’t be.

A report from a decorated Marine Officer, written 24 years ago after a war gaming scenario playing out a US/Iran conflict, would have told him everything he needed to know.

If it hadn’t been hidden.

The biggest military deployment since 2003 is happening now

War in a week?

That’s not conjecture or hyperbole. As of today, it’s a very real possibility. Since the bombing of Iranian targets last year, the USA has been engaging with Iran on a two-pronged front. Diplomatic negotiations between White House representatives and those from the Iranian regime, and a steady build up of force in the region to display physical consequences if agreements are not reached.

I, like many others, assumed the situation had reached an impasse when Donald Trump stated that because the Iranians didn’t concede to his demands he was imposing tariffs. That’s right, tariffs. A meaningless measure against a country hardened and accustomed to enduring and evading international sanctions. Trump had obviously become bored with the political stalemate and wanted to move on, bigger fish to fry and all that.

But Israel wasn’t happy.

Benjamin Netanyahu flew to Washington at very short notice bringing with him not the diplomats and negotiators one would expect on such a visit but his hawks. The key military figures who are keying up Israel’s next strike against Iran. A strike that needed simultaneous US action to maximise its effectiveness. Trump bored and moving on from the Iran issue was not something Netanyahu wanted to see. After this meeting, the build up of American military troops and hardware to the region intensified in a big way.

But is it all just a bluff? Sabre-rattling to convince Iran that the US will wield the stick if the carrot fails?

No. Unfortunately, it’s not.

These are the movements of in-flight refuelling tankers from 2 days ago. You don’t send these aircraft as part of a bluff. There’s no point to it. They’re the logistics chain. You send them when you know you’re going to have thirsty aircraft needing to refuel after bombing or attack runs. These are among the last types of aircraft that the USA has been quietly stacking around bases in the Middle East.

Here’s some who got there before:

Another pointer that strengthens the conclusion of physical confrontation? The deployment of Combat Search And Rescue (CSAR) personnel and aircraft. Again, you don’t send these assets to a contested region unless you’re anticipating the possibility of downed pilots.

The aircraft above is a HC-130J Combat King II, a specialized beast which supports CSAR missions in hostile environments. It is equipped for long-range operations, night missions, and aerial refueling of rescue helicopters. The aircraft can refuel two HH-60G Pave Hawk helicopters simultaneously, allowing rescue crews to operate deep inside contested airspace. Two of these aircraft and their crews were recently deployed from their home base in Florida to undisclosed bases in the Middle East.

These aircraft are typically deployed in advance of or during air combat operations to ensure the recovery of downed aircrews. They facilitate U.S. commanders maintaining personnel recovery capability during high-risk air operations, including those involving strikes or sustained air activity over hostile territory. Again, not any point in deploying as part of a sabre-rattling exercise but essential for combat operations.

Interestingly, many of the USA’s allies in the region have refused permission for America to transit their airspace for any confrontation with Iran. Citing fear of imminent reprisal from the regime, this has pushed the US into deploying a massive naval contingent including the aircraft carrier the USS Gerald R. Ford, the world’s largest warship ever built. The Ford has been at sea since June 2025 and the Commander of the US Fleet, Admiral Daryl Caudle, pushed back against extending the crew’s deployment even further. To give this some context, if, as the crew has been informed, this extension of their deployment is scheduled until April 2026, it will break post-Vietnam War records for operational duration. But the Admiral’s pushback was ignored and the USS Gerald R. Ford is on track to reach the coast of Israel either today or tomorrow. Once again, unnecessary to keep these poor sailors away from their families for another extended period if all you were doing was sabre-rattling. However, when your Middle Eastern allies close off their airspace for your combat operations, you need to source and use your own launch platforms.

Will the USA definitely strike Iran? Latest statements from the White House claim that the world will know in 10 day’s time. That seems to me to be well beyond the threshold for keeping pre-positioned troops and assets safe. The Iranians have already deployed a Shahed drone against a US ship which shot it down when it got too close. These carrier groups and major military assets forward deployed represent targets for as long as they are in the region. Leaving them in situ for a further 10 days seems irrational and unwise. But then again, another 10 days gives the President of the USA some time to come up with the reason he’s committed the biggest military expedition since 2003 to the region. To date, he hasn’t actually stated the justification for this intervention and in fact, as major news outlets have noted, hasn’t bothered involving Congress or even any public debate or consultation. His critics point out that having to strike Iran again so soon after his last foray only proves that the previous bombings had little to no effect, despite Trump’s claims of garlanded glory.

And the Iranian regime? They’re actually talking a hard game with mentions of Red Lines and unacceptable American demands. Warning that the US could still be dealt a heavy blow despite the size and strength of their military contingent. In private, a law firm in France has seen over a thousand percent increase in visa applications from wealthy Iranians. Russia has confirmed it will take fleeing heads of the Iranian regime and provide them sanctuary in Moscow. Russia has also, in the past week, delivered weapons technology in exchange for gold in a further quid pro quo for Iran’s supply of missiles and drones for Putin’s war against Ukraine. Yesterday Russia also conducted joint naval exercises with Iran near the Straits of Hormuz. While a lot of journalists pointed to this as Russia warning the US not to strike Iran, the Russian element was minimal in number and effect and more just a show of solidarity with Iran.

China is also displeased at what it perceives as unchecked US aggression against one of China’s main suppliers of discounted oil. Importing 1.4 million barrels per day, this is a significant supply chain for Chinese energy. China supplies Iran with missile and air defence technology components that it can’t get anywhere else due to sanctions. I’ve seen reports of a marked increase in Chinese military freight planes landing in Iran since the beginning of February but no further details on what they could have been carrying. Despite this symbiotic relationship, China won’t openly support a direct confrontation with the US but will happily stoke the fires from the background.

The scale and complement of this deployment already shows that this confrontation will be very different to the surgical strikes the USA implemented last year. This is a deployment that is anticipating weeks of operations, not just a day. And you know, maybe, just maybe, it is a bluff but if that’s the case, it’s a very bold call. Very bold. To expose an enormous task force to potential attack in the name of a diplomatic deal? As I said earlier, I’d buy that if it wasn’t for the logistic and rescue support elements deployed alongside the tip of the spear.

So, the biggest military build-up since Iraq in 2003 is happening now and we don’t know whether it’s war or sabre-rattling of the most dangerous kind. We’re told we’ll find out in 10 days.

My gut tells me we will find out, one way or another, a lot sooner than that.