Iran: The Latest

Episode: 'We’ve trained for this': How US Marines could open the Strait of Hormuz and seize Iran’s uranium
Date: April 2, 2026
Host: Roland Oliphant (The Telegraph)
Guest: Andrew Milburn (Former Colonel, US Marine Corps)

Episode Overview

This episode provides an expert deep dive into the operational and strategic options facing US forces in the ongoing war with Iran, centering on the potential for amphibious operations to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and the feasibility of “seizing” Iran’s uranium stockpiles. USMC Colonel (ret.) Andrew Milburn brings both personal and professional insights, dissecting President Trump’s latest declarations, the challenges of eliminating the Iranian threat, and the immense risks involved in potential ground operations. The discussion is rich with military detail, on-the-ground perspectives from the Gulf, and a sober look at the consequences for regional and global security.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. President Trump’s Declaration and US War Aims

[03:07–06:06]

• Trump’s Speech Recap: President Trump declares the US is "on track to soon complete all of its military objectives in Iran," emphasizing the "systematic dismantling" of Iran’s military, with claims the "navy is gone, their air force is gone, their missiles are just about used up or beaten."
• Energy Security: Trump points out the US imports no oil via Hormuz and urges other nations to "grab it and cherish it. They can do it easily. We will be helpful. But they should take the lead" ([05:10]).
• Regime Change Not Stated Goal: "Regime change has occurred because of all of their original leaders' death. They're all dead. The new group is less radical and much more reasonable." – Donald Trump ([05:55])

2. Iranian Response and Hostilities

[06:06–07:56]

• Iranian Retaliation Threats: Iran vows "crushing attacks" in retaliation, asserting, "the war will continue until your humiliation, disgrace and permanent and certain regret."
• Escalation of Tactics: Concern over Iranian-backed militias' use of “hostage diplomacy,” exemplified by the kidnapping of US journalist Shelley Kittleson in Baghdad.

3. Interview: US Marines and the Challenge of Amphibious Operations

[09:31–16:11, 18:51–26:32, 29:55–35:48]

A. Assessing the US Campaign

[10:19–16:11]

• Off-Ramp or Escalation?
  Milburn suggests Washington is "looking for an off ramp" and sees ground invasions more as negotiating leverage than immediate plans.

  • "I hope that the prospect of landing ground troops is a tactic to kind of drive negotiations." – Andrew Milburn ([10:19])

• Risks of Escalation:

  • Economic: Hormuz closure affects global energy markets; air/naval power alone can't guarantee shipping security.
  • Military: Iran retains the ability to "strike at their neighbors" even after losses, as assets are dispersed and hardened.

B. The Strait of Hormuz – Threats and Realities

[15:10–17:09, 18:51–29:55]

• Main Threats:

  • "The threat to shipping, of course, comes from drones, missiles, primarily missiles, but also drones and of course, mines. And it's very difficult to reduce the threat from those three things to zero." – Milburn ([15:10])
  • US air campaign can't eliminate these; physical control is immensely challenging.

• Psychological and Economic Deterrence:

  • "As long as there is a threat…it’s impossible to eliminate that threat. Even if you hold that length of coastline, the ships are at threat." – Milburn ([16:39])

C. What Would an Amphibious US Operation Look Like?

[19:45–29:55]

• Likely Approach – Targeted Raids:

  • Small, swift raids (“landing ground troops to destroy given targets and then withdraw right away”) are the most feasible.
  • Land-based helicopter insertions from Oman—using V22 Ospreys—are more likely/safer than classic beach landings.
    • "With everything that the Marine Corps has now among assets, landing craft are almost an archaic way to get ashore." – Milburn ([21:00])
    • "They’ve practiced to do this…the 31st MEU recently conducted as part of an exercise a 1600 kilometer insertion." ([21:58])

• Occupation Missions:

  • Seizing and holding islands (or Kharg Island), while possible, is perilous: fixed positions become “static targets” for missile/drone attack, resupply is difficult, and the underlying threat to shipping remains.

• Full-Scale Beachhead:

  • Larger operations, securing even a modest stretch of coastline (e.g., near Bandar-e-Jask), would require division-level forces and remain extremely hazardous, potentially incurring heavy casualties.
    • "These missions I’ve just described are high-risk. Even the raids are high-risk." – Milburn ([29:10])
    • "It's really very optimistic to assume…any of these operations would open the straits." ([29:31])

D. The “Kharg Island Option”

[29:55–31:50]

• Red Herring/Misleads:
  • Seizing Kharg Island (Iran’s oil export hub) would give leverage, but Iran has workarounds. The occupation would pose the same risks of attrition, exposure, and limited strategic payoff.
    • "Once you leave Marines on land on these islands, now you’ve got a problem…You only control that oil infrastructure for as long as you have troops on the island." – Milburn ([30:19])

4. Special Operations: Seizing Iran’s Uranium

[32:13–35:48]

• The Mission: Extracting 440kg of enriched uranium near Isfahan is theoretically possible (US SOF “[have] trained for this” per Washington Post), but the operation is “tremendously complex, tremendously high risk.”
  • "It is a viable mission. And as if you read the Washington Post, you'll see…it's a mission that U.S. special operations forces have trained for." – Milburn ([33:14])
• Requirements: Not just SOF, but a large security force and major logistical support for heavy equipment.
• Risks: Intelligence gaps; Iranian anticipation; force exposed to attack; limited element of surprise.
• Reality Check:
  • "I would be very surprised if this was actually going to be carried out." – Milburn ([34:30])
  • Presidents may request feasibility as contingencies, but the operational cost may outweigh the benefit.

5. Regional Concerns from the Gulf States

[35:48–37:12]

• Anxiety over Incomplete Victory:
  • Gulf states (Saudi, Jordan, UAE) fear a ceasefire leaving Iran with the means for retaliation—especially as US attention wanes.
    • "The biggest concern I get...is that there will be a ceasefire and yet Iran still has considerable ability to strike at them and that the US's attention will be diverted elsewhere and Iran will exact revenge." – Milburn ([36:13])
• Sense of Betrayal:
  • Despite their hopes for avoiding conflict, Gulf states feel directly targeted by Iranian actions, including attacks on oil infrastructure.

Notable Quotes and Memorable Moments

• "I think that the US is looking for an off ramp. I hope that the prospect of landing ground troops is a tactic to kind of drive negotiations."
  — Andrew Milburn ([10:19])

• "The threat to shipping comes from drones, missiles…mines. It's very difficult to reduce the threat from those three things to zero…impossible to do so from an air campaign alone."
  — Milburn ([15:10])

• "With everything the Marine Corps has now…landing craft are an archaic way to get ashore."
  — Milburn ([21:00])

• "They've practiced to do this…the 31st MEU recently conducted as part of an exercise a 1600 kilometer insertion."
  — Milburn ([21:58])

• "These missions I've just described are high risk…Even the raids are high risk."
  — Milburn ([29:10])

• "It is a viable mission…and US special operations forces have trained for [seizing Iranian uranium]. But…tremendously complex, tremendously high risk."
  — Milburn ([33:14])

• "The biggest concern…is that there will be a ceasefire and yet Iran still has considerable ability to strike at them and that the US's attention will be diverted elsewhere."
  — Milburn ([36:13])

Timestamps for Important Segments

• [03:07–06:06] – Trump's declaration of victory and war aims
• [06:06–07:56] – Iranian counter-statement and hostage-taking
• [09:31–16:11] – Assessing the current campaign and limits of airpower
• [18:51–22:35] – Amphibious operations: realistic scenarios and limitations
• [22:35–29:55] – Risks, logistics, and strategic value of occupying islands or coastline
• [29:55–31:50] – The Kharg Island debate: leverage and limitations
• [32:13–35:48] – Special operations to seize enriched uranium: feasibility and risks
• [35:48–37:12] – Gulf regional reaction: fears and frustration

Tone and Language

The episode is analytical, pragmatic, and grounded in practical military detail, with Milburn offering a frank assessment of risks, limitations, and the realities on the ground. Roland Oliphant drives the discussion with clear, precise questions, drawing out concrete examples and avoiding sensationalism.

Summary Takeaways

• The US military campaign has severely degraded Iran’s conventional capabilities but faces limits in neutralizing asymmetric threats to shipping and regional security.
• True “opening” of the Strait of Hormuz by force would be perilous, potentially requiring far greater resources than are currently in theater and carrying extraordinary political and operational risks.
• High-value “movie script” missions (e.g., uranium seizure) are possible on paper, but in practice are much less likely given complexity and exposure.
• Gulf states are anxious the US may leave them exposed to Iranian retaliation should a ceasefire come too soon.
• The situation remains highly fluid, fraught with strategic dilemmas and diminishing returns for further escalation.