The TOI correspondent from Washington: What began as a “little excursion” into Iran – as described by President Trump –- is now edging toward a full-scale invasion of the country, with U.S officials signaling the start of a broader military campaign, including the potential seizure of Kharg Island—Tehran’s most critical oil export hub.In carefully calibrated leaks over the weekend, U.S. officials revealed preparations for a “final blow” against Iran, including movement of thousands of American troops into the region. While the administration has stopped short of confirming a full-scale invasion, the scale and tempo of troop movements suggest a widening conflict over the next few days – unless the leaks constitute a monumental bluff or psy-ops to spook Iran. According to the U.S Central Command, more than 3,500 additional U.S. troops have already been deployed to the Middle East, including roughly 2,500 Marines aboard the USS Tripoli (LHA-7), a modern amphibious assault ship capable of launching F-35 stealth fighters and Osprey aircraft. The vessel, formerly based in Japan, now serves as the flagship of a Marine Expeditionary Unit positioned within range of the Persian Gulf.The Pentagon has also moved elements of the 82nd Airborne Division and is reportedly considering deploying up to 10,000 additional troops. Amphibious assets, including the USS Boxer (LHD-4), are en route, underscoring the administration’s effort to build “maximum optionality,” as officials repeatedly describe it.Administration officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, are sending mixed signals about the maneuvers, seemingly unsure of the President’s thinking. Rubio said the United States could achieve its objectives “without any ground troops,” but added that President Trump must be prepared for multiple contingencies. “It’s the job of the Pentagon to make preparations in order to give the Commander in Chief maximum optionality,” White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said, emphasizing that no final decision has been made.Yet the focus of planning—Kharg Island—reveals much about Washington’s strategic intent. Located just off Iran’s coast in the Persian Gulf, the island handles the vast majority of Iran’s oil exports, much of it directed towards China. Seizing or neutralizing it would strike directly at the country’s economic lifeline and potentially give the United States leverage over global energy flows.Defense analysts say the objective of seizing Kharg is not territorial conquest in the traditional sense, but about choking off Teheran’s revenues, controlling maritime routes, and denying Iran the ability to threaten shipping through the Strait of Hormuz. Roughly a fifth of the world’s oil passes through the Strait of Hormuz, and any disruption has immediate ripple effects. Already, the conflict has driven up fuel prices, disrupted commercial aviation, and rattled global markets.By targeting Iran’s infrastructure, Washington could reshape global energy markets and indirectly pressure major buyers such as China, which relies heavily on Iranian oil. Some analysts argue the move is tied to a wider strategy aimed at constraining Beijing’s strategic options, including its posture toward Taiwan.Military experts concede that any attempt to seize Kharg Island would be complex and risky. Unlike inland targets, the island is exposed, making it vulnerable to Iranian missile strikes, drone attacks, and naval harassment. Holding it would require sustained air superiority and naval protection, as well as a steady flow of reinforcements and supplies. Experts also warn that even a limited operation could escalate quickly. Iran, despite what U.S. and Israeli officials describe as a degraded military capacity, has continued to strike back. Low-level but persistent attacks on American assets in the region—targeting aircraft, missile defense systems, and naval units—have kept tensions high and demonstrated Tehran’s ability to impose costs. Tehran has also warned of a “punitive response” if its territory is seized. Analysts point to the country’s history, including its protracted war with Iraq in the 1980s, as evidence of its willingness to absorb heavy losses while sustaining a fight.Still, critics argue the administration is courting a wider war without a clear endgame. Over the weekend, nationwide “No Kings” rallies — the third such demonstrations since Trump took office for a second term — revealed growing opposition to the war across the U.S., including in MAGA circles which embraced the President’s promise not to get into needless foreign wars. President Trump, for his part, continues to essay erratic statements, sometimes insisting there will be “no deal” with Iran short of “unconditional surrender” and at other times saying the “War is almost over” amid an expanding military buildup. While officials – many of them unsure of the President’s motivation — maintain that diplomacy remains possible, the steady buildup of forces suggests the Pentagon is preparing for a scenario in which talks fail.