While promising more strikes against Iran on Thursday, President Donald Trump suggested that the US would soon be “taking” Kharg Island in an imperialist bid to seize “total control” of the country’s oil and gas market, an operation that would likely require ground troops.

“The United States will be hitting Iran (Whose Navy, Air Force, Radar, Anti Aircraft, and all other forms of Defense, together with most of its offensive capability, are GONE!), VERY HARD TONIGHT,” the president wrote in a Truth Social post, following days of strikes that hit military infrastructure and also damaged a pair of reservoirs that left around 20,000 people without drinking water.

“At some point in the not too distant future, we will be taking Kharg Island, and other oil infrastructure points, and assume total control of their Oil and Gas Markets, much like we have with Venezuela, which is working out brilliantly for both Venezuela and the United States of America,” he added.

It’s not the first time Trump has threatened to take the island, which handles about 90% of Iran’s crude oil exports and is of paramount importance, as Iran’s blockade of the Strait of Hormuz in retaliation for the US-Israeli war has sent oil prices skyrocketing and resulted in the most severe inflation the US has seen in over three years.

Like in Venezuela, where Trump said the point of the US operation to overthrow President Nicolás Maduro was to “get the oil flowing” to US corporations, the president said his objective in taking Kharg Island was explicitly about enriching the US by using raw force to commandeer Iran’s natural resources.

Trump: “My preference has always been to take Kharg Island. I don’t know that America has the stomach for it, to be honest with it. You’d make a fortune.” pic.twitter.com/5ub1HK4WMH
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) June 11, 2026

“My preference has always been to take Kharg Island,” he said on a phone interview with Fox News on Thursday morning. “I don’t know that America has the stomach for it, to be honest with you. You’d make a fortune…”

“We did it with Venezuela,” he continued. "Venezuela’s worked out great for everybody. We’ve taken millions and millions of barrels of oil out of Venezuela. We’ve brought them to Houston and various other places, Louisiana. Refineries that we have that are incredible, they’ve gone 24 hours a day. Making a fortune.“

However, he said he wasn’t sure that the country, which is strongly opposed to strikes against Iran according to recent polls, “has the appetite” for it.

As senior CNN political correspondent Aaron Blake explained, “it’s widely assumed that taking and keeping Kharg Island would require ground troops,” an idea that just 18% of Americans said they supported in a May survey from the Institute for Global Affairs. Even Republicans were more likely to oppose boots on the ground than to support them, according to that poll.

The Trump administration has had plans drawn up to invade the island as far back as March, but they were reportedly shelved as US officials feared large numbers of American casualties, especially as Iran had prepared for an invasion by laying anti-personnel and armor mines.

Despite being aware of the plan’s unpopularity with the American public, Trump said on Thursday that taking Kharg Island would be “a guarantee if I want to do it.”

President Trump is now publicly claiming that the United States will SEIZE KHARG ISLAND. What are the advantages to doing so, what are the disadvantages, and is this a viable strategy?

Let’s start with the disadvantages first, because… it’s grim. And stupid.

One of the key… pic.twitter.com/yZeVAPRB3D
— Brett Erickson (@BrettErickson28) June 11, 2026

Brett Erickson, a sanctions and geopolitical-risk expert who serves as managing principal of Obsidian Risk Advisors, said the idea was “grim and stupid.”

“Their exports [from the island] are not even close to what they were prior to the war, or even throughout March and the first half of April,” he explained. “In the last five weeks, Iran has loaded a whopping one vessel at Kharg Island.”

He added that since the island is a “fixed position,” it “would constantly come under fire from drones and missile barrages.”

“We would likely, in the absolute best case, lose hundreds of lives,” he said. Worst case? Well into the thousands. Would it change anything about the war? No. It literally would not matter."

The only thing to be gained, he added, would be “a lot of Americans dying for an oil export hub that is not being used, and that is blockaded anyway.”

Asked by reporters on Capitol Hill about Trump’s threats to invade the island, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) hardly seemed bullish on the idea. He said he believed Trump was “communicating directly with our adversaries over there,” adding, “I would not put too much stock in the details of that right now.”

But the idea does have its cheerleaders. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who is credited with helping Israel persuade Trump to launch the war in the first place.

The notorious war hawk, who previously compared taking Kharg Island favorably to the World War II Battle of Iwo Jima, where the US suffered 26,000 casualties, said on Thursday that Trump was “right to put on the table the taking of Kharg Island” and thanked the president for “going the extra mile to obtain a diplomatic solution to the Iranian conflict.”

US Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) argued that invading the island without approval from Congress “would be brazenly unconstitutional.”

“American troops would die during the invasion,” he said. “And then every day Iran would try to kill more American troops on Kharg Island.”

Four Republicans joined every Democrat last week to pass a war powers resolution meant to halt Trump’s ability to wage war against Iran without approval from Congress.

In the wake of Trump’s threats to invade the Island, Lieu said the “Senate must pass the House’s war powers resolution.”

---

From Common Dreams via This RSS Feed.