CENTCOM strike plans on Iran substitute motion for strategy

By Tom Beckwith · Reporting from Washington · October 26, 2026

As CENTCOM prepares major strike options against Iran for Donald Trump, military posturing without a defined political endpoint risks escalating conflict without offering any strategic outcome.

The strategic bankruptcy of drafting plans without an end Capitals do not launch major combat operations because an ally is nervous or an election is looming. They launch them when interests demand it, capabilities permit it, and the cost five years out looks lower than the alternative. Right now, CENTCOM and the Pentagon have prepared several options for Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, according to CNN and Ynetnews. US forces in the Middle East are positioned to launch military operations against Iran within 96 hours of an order from President Donald Trump.

Axios reported that the Pentagon instructed CENTCOM to prepare for a possible resumption of major combat operations. These preparations target Iranian energy facilities, infrastructure, and nuclear sites. Yet military advisers face hard questions. They must explain what further escalation brings that previous rounds missed, or how these strategies force Iran to the negotiating table. There is no clear answer. That is not a strategy. That is an inventory of munitions waiting for a justification.

The unearned confidence of kinetic management This posture rests on an illusion. Military force cannot be turned on and off like a spigot without altering the regional balance of power. The capability is certainly there. The US is deploying the USS Theodore Roosevelt aircraft carrier strike group, approximately 10,000 additional soldiers, and the 13th Marine Expeditionary Unit to the Middle East by the end of November. Washington also maintains a blockade on Iranian ports, as reported by Al Jazeera and CNN.

But capabilities are instruments of policy, not substitutes for it. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has pushed for an attack ahead of the election, according to ABC Color and Ynetnews. He stated that overthrowing Iran's government remains Israel's primary objective. US officials requested Netanyahu delay attacks until the Trump administration is ready for joint operations. They noted that Israel requires US support for missile defense as its own defensive munitions have been strained. Washington must not sign off on these strike plans simply because target folders are thick and ships sit in the Gulf. Doing so repeats every miscalculation of the Maximum Pressure campaign. It substitutes motion for direction, hoping sheer tonnage of ordnance compels Tehran to capitulate where years of economic strangulation failed.

The predictable cost of an unguided strike The strongest opposing case holds that high-end readiness is not a precursor to war, but the only reliable method of deterrence. In this view, showcased by analysts like Julie Norman of Chatham House, drawing up these plans serves as immediate posturing deterrence to signal strength and force Tehran to negotiate seriously. It also protects American personnel from lethal plots in advanced stages. These threats were detailed in an unclassified October 23 memo from Director of National Intelligence Jay Clayton to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, reported by Al Jazeera and Egypt Independent. Proponents argue that keeping a 96-hour strike window open signals clear resolve. Pulling personnel from regional embassies—such as placing the US Embassy in Riyadh under ordered departure—convinces adversary capitals of American determination. This strategy aims to prevent the very war Washington prepares to fight.

The flaw in this reasoning is simple. Adversaries do not read deterrence the way the Pentagon drafts it, especially when the other side abandons defensive doctrines. Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps spokesman Hossein Mohebi stated that their doctrine was previously defensive. Now, they will respond and launch an offensive if attacked, as reported by Al Jazeera. Iranian security officials told Reuters that Tehran has plans to target undersea communications cables in the Gulf if US and Israeli attacks resume. Iran also reported shooting down a US-developed LUCAS drone over Bandar Abbas. When two heavily armed coalitions spend months signaling preparedness and assembling target lists, deployment friction overrides strategic caution. More than 120 attacks on ships were reported in October, marking the worst month since the war began in February. Seven oil tankers caught fire or sustained damage in and around the Strait of Hormuz during that week. You do not deter an adversary by building a hair-trigger mechanism and assuming nobody will trip over it.

We have seen this script before, and the historical pattern is entirely consistent. Washington has repeatedly relied on kinetic interventions, from the statutory continuity of national emergencies under Executive Order 12957 to the United States bombing of Soleimani. These operations manage immediate tactical friction while creating strategic vacuums. What makes the current moment uniquely perilous is that Iran and the Houthis are not guessing about American intentions. US intelligence assessments indicate they would likely retaliate immediately against American personnel and facilities in the region and beyond if targeted, as reported by CNN and Infobae. The legal architecture under E.O. 12957 remains active. CENTCOM's current force posture mirrors the staging seen prior to the February strikes that initiated the current war.

This time, escalation will not be absorbed quietly by regional trade routes or insulated American bases. Iranian forces are intimately familiar with US tactics. Their newly minted offensive doctrine guarantees that any American campaign targeting nuclear and energy sites will meet asymmetric strikes on Gulf energy infrastructure and international communications. President Trump suggested that the US could strike as soon as tomorrow or do another little Epic Fury, while acknowledging the possibility of a big, beautiful agreement with Tehran. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian stated that negotiations were underway until the cowards messed everything up, though efforts to reach an agreement should continue, according to Al Jazeera. Authorizing major combat operations now, without a defined political endpoint or diplomatic channel, trades a difficult stalemate for an unpredictable conflagration. The strike plans sitting on the defense secretary's desk are not tools of peace. They are fuses waiting for a match.

CENTCOM strike plans on Iran substitute motion for strategy

Sources