What are Trump's options to attack Iran?: How US has tens of thousands of troops in bases across the Middle East - as aircraft carrier steams to the Gulf amid growing fears Trump will wade into war

Da Nang, a port city in Vietnam, had been bracing to receive the behemoth USS Nimitz aircraft carrier this week when the ship announced that it was changing course.
The 1092ft vessel had been conducting 'routine' security operations in the Indo-Pacific when it was called away from its duties and started heading west, towards the burgeoning firefight between Israel and Iran.
A White House spokesperson assured that U.S. forces in the Middle East remained in a 'defensive posture', despite the flurry of activity. But President Donald Trump has been more bellicose, warning Tehran that if the U.S. is attacked in any way, 'the full strength and might of the US Armed Forces will come down on you at levels never seen before'.
Iran has threatened to drag the United States into the conflict by attacking their bases in the region should Washington intervene on Israel's behalf. Britain and France, with smaller strongholds in the Middle East, were also name-checked in the warning.
It could be a brazen bluff from what remains of Tehran's military leadership, anticipating that another war in the Middle East would sit poorly with American voters. But it is not without precedent. Iran struck a key foothold in Iraq with ballistic missiles in 2020, and proxy groups are already believed to have sent drones to antagonise the airbase since Israel launched its surprise attack on Iran on Friday.
While Trump has sought a reduced role for the military in policing the Middle East, U.S. bases remain scattered across the region - the legacy of assuming Europe's role in the area through the Cold War and into the 21st century.
Today, there are an estimated 46,000 American troops across the Middle East, joined by fleets of ships and jets - some state-of-the-art, others battle-hardened after decades of fierce fighting in the desert. As tensions continue to escalate, the Trump administration is seeking to bolster American capabilities in the region even further.
As world leaders meeting at a G7 summit on Monday called a de-escalation of a rapidly spiralling confrontation between Israel and Iran, Donald Trump took a different tone.
In comments on board Air Force One during his midnight departure from Canada, the U.S. president said he wanted a 'real deal' to end Iran's nuclear programme - but caveated that he 'never said I was looking a ceasefire'.
Hours later, Trump remained resolute as he touched down on U.S. soil. He reiterated plainly: 'I'm not looking for a ceasefire, we're looking at better than a ceasefire.' He said he was looking for 'an end, a real end, not a ceasefire.'
Since Friday, the conflict has been limited to unilateral strikes by Israel against Iran, and Iran in turn returning fire. Trump predicted that Israel would not let up anytime soon, telling CBS: 'You're going to find out over the next two days. You're going to find out. Nobody's slowed up so far.'
The United States has so far maintained a defensive posture. It did help Israel with air defence by shooting down incoming ballistic missiles and drones heading towards Israel. But Trump was also said to have vetoed an Israeli opportunity to kill Iran's supreme leader - a sign, perhaps, of restraint.
Bases scattered across the region threaten to upend that. Sources told Axios in recent days that the Trump administration has said it does not plan to get actively involved in the war - unless Iran targets Americans.
Thousands of American troops remain in the area. Troops levels fluctuate, but there are estimated to be 46,000 American military personnel still in the region. There are military facilities across at least nineteen sites, eight of them considered permanent.
Still, this is a far cry from the 160,000 coalition troops sent into Iraq during the initial invasion - a fraction of the personnel needed to prosecute a war. But the U.S. has sought to reinforce its numbers in recent days, sending dozens of Stratotanker refuelers and at least 12 F-22 and F-35s east via Europe.
Iran would risk hurting its own economy or provoking another military power with an attack on foreign soil. But recent history shows the regime in Tehran is not beyond striking an American base in a third party nation if pressed.
Al Udeid Air Base, Qatar
Al Udeid is the United States' largest military base in the Middle East, built in the wake of the first Gulf War.
Since the fall of Saddam Hussein, the base has acted as the main hub for American and British air operations in the Persian Gulf, hosting some 11,000 American troops and more than 100 aircraft, including strategic bombers, tankers and surveillance assets.
Today, Al Udeid is the operational headquarters of the Royal Air Force in the Middle East and a key site for the US Air Force (USAF). The US Department of Defence says it was used as the primary staging ground for most air operations in the campaign to defeat ISIS.
The air base covers 12.3 sq-km and supports two runways, each 3,750 metres in length. They are, as a result, able to accommodate every aircraft the U.S. has at its disposal.
Al Udeid is still home to more than 90 combat and support aircraft, The National reports, including B-52 bombers, KC-135s refuelers, and MQ-9 Reaper Drones.
Qatar has spent around $8bn modernising the base in recent years, including $1.4bn on troop housing and airfield improvements, The Hill reports. An Iranian strike on Al Udeid would agitate the generally cordial relationship Tehran has with Doha.
Qatar, like Kuwait, has reportedly restricted the use of bases for operations against Iran. But Al Udeid would be a useful launchpad for the U.S. to wage war in the Middle East today.
Retired Brigadier General Steve Anderson told CNN that Al Udeid is 'probably the most significant' site in the region, hosting 'quite a number of F-16s, F-35s that can fly out of there'.
Ain Al-Assad airbase, Iraq
Ain Al-Assad base was the second largest US military airbase in Iraq during Operation Iraqi Freedom and has remained a foothold for coalition forces, including British troops.
There are an estimated 2,500 U.S. military personnel in Iraq, spread across facilities like Ain Al-Assad and Union III.
Their future in the region had been called into question, the U.S. expected to resolve the coalition mission it started in 2014 to combat ISIS by September 2025.
There were also some 900 U.S. troops were still in Syria as of September 2024 as part of the campaign.
Ain Al-Assad appeared to have been targeted late last week as tensions in the Middle East reheat.
The Associated Press reported that U.S. forces stationed at the airbase, in western Iraq, had come under attack from three drones on June 14. Analysts believe the drones would have been fired by Iran-backed proxies, rather than Tehran itself.
The drones were intercepted before hitting their targets.
Ain Al Assad was attacked by Iran in January 2020 during the largest ballistic missile attack on American forces in US history.
Iran's attack was launched in retaliation for a US strike ordered by then-President Donald Trump on January 3, 2020, that killed top Islamic Revolutionary Guard General, Qassem Soleimani.
Eleven warheads, each weighing about 1,600 lbs, struck the air base.
Leaked military memos revealed last year suggest that US service members may also have been exposed to toxic and radioactive materials during the attack.
USS Nimitz Strike Group
U.S. aircraft carrier USS Nimitz left the South China Sea on Monday morning heading west after a reception for its planned port call in central Vietnam was cancelled.
The carrier had planned to visit Danang City later this week, but two sources, including one diplomat, said a formal reception slated for June 20 had been called off.
Exactly why was unclear. One of the sources said the U.S. Embassy in Hanoi had informed him about the cancellation, due to 'an emergent operational requirement'.
Data from Marine Traffic showed the carrier on Monday morning was moving west in the direction of the Middle East, where the battle between Israel and Iran is escalating.
The Nimitz-class aircraft carriers are among the largest warships in the world, measuring around 1090ft and hosting more than 5,000 personnel. Two nuclear reactors power the vessels, which are capable of speeds in excess of 30 knots, with practically unlimited range.
The inbound USS Nimitz Carrier Strike Group will arrive with nine aircraft squadrons, the Arleigh Burke-Class Guided-Missile Destroyer, and the Ticonderoga-Class Guided Missile Cruiser, according to the Department of Defence.
Mr Anderson told CNN that, by his understanding, there are two destroyers within range to 'be able to support Israel right now', and '46,000 troops scattered across nine different installations all over the Middle East'.
USS Carl Vinson Strike Group
The USS Nimitz will join the USS Carl Vinson carrier strike group, hitherto stationed in the Gulf of Aden as a show of force to the Yemeni Houthi rebels.
The USS Carl Vinson aircraft carrier is now in the Arabian Sea with the four warships in its strike group. They are not participating in the defense of Israel.
The USS Nimitz has been long scheduled to take over for the Carl Vinson and is heading west from the Indo-Pacific region.
The official said it is slated to arrive in the region by the end of the month, and the two carriers would likely overlap in the Middle East at least for a short time before the Vinson heads home to San Diego.
The USS Carl Vinson travels with the Ticonderoga class guided-missile cruiser USS Princeton and Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyers.
It also has access to nine aircraft squadrons, including F035C Lighting IIs, and F/A-18E/F Super Hornets.
Diego Garcia, Chagos Islands
The United States sent an 'unprecedented' deployment of its heavy B-2 bombers to the Chagos Islands as tensions over nuclear talks with Iran grew in April.
Six stealth bombers flew in to the U.S. airbase on Diego Garcia from Missouri in what was said to have been the 'largest single deployment in US history'.
Asked at the time if the U.S. was gearing up to strike Iranian nuclear facilities, Trump said: 'Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon and if the talks aren't successful I actually think it will be a very bad day for Iran if that's the case.'
The challenge will be refuelling bombers tasked with potentially travelling 3,500 miles from Diego Garcia to the Middle East, Mr Anderson explained. US Air Force tankers were deployed across the Atlantic on Sunday en route to the region.
With the B-2 Bombers, the U.S. would be able to provide vital bunker busters, such as the Massive Ordnance Penetrator (GBU-57), capable of penetrating up to 200ft and putting Iran's remaining nuclear sites in jeopardy.
The U.S. had already been building up its military presence in the region amid ongoing clashes with the Yemeni Houthi rebels and ISIS in Syria.
In May, the Pentagon sent fighter jets to the military base in the Indian Ocean to protect assets there, the War Zone military news website reported.
A senior officer from U.S.-Indo Pacific Command said that F-15s had been deployed to 'provide force protection', without specifying how many.
In March, satellite imagery showed C-17 cargo planes and KC-135 refueling tankers had been moved to Chagos. And by the end of the month, the U.S. said it had sent 'several' additional A-10 Warthogs to the Middle East, along with 300 airmen.
Camp Arifjan, Kuwait
The United States has a mixed-purpose military base in Kuwait, stationing parts of the US Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps and Coast Guard as well as troops from the UK.
The base today serves as the primary logistics, supply and command hub for US military operations in the Middle East.
Announcing new warehouses to ensure combat ready equipment could be housed at the base in 2016, the army revealed there was approximately $5.5bn worth of equipment across the site.
Naval Support Activity, Bahrain
Naval Support Activity Bahrain, or NSA Bahrain, is home to the U.S. Naval Forces Central Command, hosting approximately 8,300 military personnel, Department of Defence civilian staff and their families.
The base is developed from the site of HMS Jufair, a Royal Navy outpost established during World War II and transferred to the United States in 1971.
In the American era, the base was used to support operations during the War in Afghanistan and the Second Gulf War.
Prince Sultan Air Base, Saudi Arabia
The Prince Sultan Air Base (PSAB) was built in 1951 and used by the American during the War in Afghanistan to coordinate offensive air operations launched from other countries.
The U.S. moved its operations at PSAB to Al Udeid in Doha in 2003, during the War in Iraq, after the Saudi government refused to allow them to use the base to strike Afghanistan and al-Qaeda.
Andreas Papandreou Air Force Base, Cyprus
A little over 100 miles from Beirut, Cyprus remains of real strategic importance to powers looking to project power in the Middle East.
Marines were stationed at the American Andreas Papandreou AFB late last year, prepared for potential evacuations during Israel's strikes on Hezbollah. They brought with them a contingent of V-22 Osprey aircraft, Newsweek reports.
Although Cypriot officials insisted that any use of the base by foreign forces would require local sign off and could not be used to coordinate military strikes.
In January, one Cypriot official told the Associated Press that the USAF was looking to upgrade the air base for use as a humanitarian staging post in future operations.
RAF Akrotiri, also on Cyprus, is Britain's largest air force base in the region. Some 2,220 British soldiers were stationed at bases on the island as of April last year, according to the Ministry of Defence.
The British Army permanently deploys two infantry battalions to the bases on Cyprus.
Incirlik Air Base, Turkey
Incirlik is a Turkish airbase in Adana also used by the United States Air Force and, at times, the Royal Air Force and Royal Saudi Air Force.
Continued use depends on Turkish benevolence, however. President Tayyip Erdogan threatened to close down the base, which hosts U.S. nuclear warheads, in response to threats of U.S. sanctions in 2019.
An estimated 50 American B61 nuclear bombs were stored at Incirlik Air Base.
Thousands of U.S. troops stopped at Incirlik as a safe midpoint on the way back to their home post during the Second Gulf War.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Daily Mail​

8 minutes ago

• Daily Mail​

Pentagon insider: Trump's only option to obliterate Iran's deadly labs

Only a tactical nuclear warhead would be certain to destroy Iran's key uranium enrichment base hidden inside a mountain, a military official has told the Daily Mail. It comes amid doubts that 30,000-pound 'bunker buster' bombs would be enough to destroy the secretive facility at Fordo, 60 miles south of Tehran. Tactical nukes are meant for battlefield use and do not carry the same devastating payloads as strategic nukes, which are used to topple cities. In this case, the warhead selected could be sized for the Fordo site, though no tactical nuclear weapon has ever been used in combat before. Israeli officials have urged American forces to deploy multiple GBU-57 bunker busters to cripple Fordo, a plant being used to enrich uranium hundreds of feet underground - the depth shields the lab from airstrikes. On Thursday, Trump gave Iran a two-week reprieve to negotiate a settlement that would see it give up on its quest to develop nuclear weapons. But as the crisis drags on, some military officials have expressed practical concerns that the bunker busters might not be enough. One official said, practically, a nuclear warhead would be the only way to be sure of success. 'The nuclear warhead has to happen, whether it's the first strike, second strike or 17th strike... given the location, from what I've read and for what I've seen, it's a difficult spot,' a military official told the Daily Mail. 'In order to be successful with the least amount of casualties, and to be able to get that target and do what we want to do, which is destroy them, it would have to involve a nuclear warhead.' 'Our bombers are the only ones that could get in there,' the official added. When reached for comment about the use of tactical nuclear weapons in the Middle East, the Pentagon passed along statements from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell. 'Over the weekend, I directed the deployment of additional capabilities to the United States Central Command Area of Responsibility,' Hegseth's Monday statement read. 'Protecting US forces is our top priority and these deployments are intended to enhance our defensive posture in the region.' Taking flight late at night, the US stealth planes along with massive refueling planes would take hours to reach Iran's nuclear sites, likely in the early hours between 2 and 4 am Ahead of them would likely fly stealth US fighter jets such as the F-35 to disable or absorb fire from any final defenses awaiting the bombers. Once the B-2s arrive, they'd drop their payloads from up to seven miles above their targets. The weapons they drop are generally guided by satellites to ensure direct hits. The B-2s can carry up to two bunker busters each or they can carry up to 16 B61 or B83 nuclear weapons. However, using bunker busters does not ensure success. The Pentagon's Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) reportedly found in a study of GBU-57s that a strike on Fordo likely would not be able to completely wipe out Iran's nuclear site. Instead, it would be disabled for years, according to the Guardian. 'It would not be a one and done,' former DTRA deputy director Randy Manner told the outlet. 'It might set the program back six months to a year. It sounds good for TV but it's not real.' Israeli officials, on the other hand, are confident that multiple strikes with GBU-57s would take out Fordo. However, US officials say the architecture of the Iranian lab makes it difficult to destroy - threatening to protract any potential conflict involving the US. They are also concerned about Iranian retaliation with drones. 'If they do strike US military bases, then there's going to be a lot more pressure to go in there, and that's also what I'm worried about,' the US official told the Daily Mail. With the recent use of drone warfare in Iran and Ukraine, drone strikes should be a top concern, the official shared. 'It doesn't have to be a missile, it could just be a drone carrying a bomb that could detonate part of the base,' the official continued. 'We're not thinking about this right now.'

Daily Mail​

8 minutes ago

• Daily Mail​

Opinion: I know why Trump has decided to destroy Iran's threat

I am safely back on US soil after a harrowing trip to the Middle East last week, when I witnessed the first days of Israel 's justified war against the Islamic Republic of Iran , the wellspring of worldwide terrorism. The experience solidified my belief, more than ever before, that President Donald J Trump's commitment to preventing the mullahs of Tehran from obtaining a nuclear weapon is not only critical for peace in the region but for the preservation of Western Civilization. We win… or else. From Tiberias on the shore of the Sea of Galilee to Jerusalem, I watched dozens of Iranian missiles in Israeli skies, triggering the Iron Dome missile defense system, which picked off and destroyed many of the missiles before they could strike their targets. But a few bombs did get through, killing at least 24 people and wounding many more. This week, an Iranian missile struck a hospital in southern Israel that had, thankfully, largely been evacuated. Iran's response to Israel's strikes on its nuclear facilities, military and leadership is sinister in one telling way: Israel targets Tehran's military. Tehran targets Israel's civilians. And with every Iranian missile I saw, I thought: 'Boy, I'm glad that thing doesn't have a nuclear warhead on it.' In those observations lie the great question for President Trump: Should the United States allow a radical dictatorship that seeks to kill innocents, fund terrorism and lead its followers in chants of 'Death to America' possess a nuclear weapon? The answer is quite obviously 'Hell no!' Does any sane person doubt that the Iranian regime, which refers to Israel as the 'Little Satan' and the US as the 'Great Satan,' would kill Americans? Indeed, they have for decades, targeting US soldiers and citizens through their various terrorist proxies. Over one thousand American deaths, in fact, are attributable to the brutal regime. And we must never forget that while the Iranian nuclear weapons program is clandestine, their intercontinental ballistic missile program is not. The regime parades these long-range weapons through their streets, and these missiles are designed to reach the American homeland. 'For 40 years they've been saying death to America, death to Israel, death to anybody else that they didn't like,' President Trump said on Wednesday, 'They were schoolyard bullies… This is just not a threat you can have, and we've been threatened by Iran for many years.' Amen. President Trump has long held this position, consistently and unequivocally – and it's one of the many reasons that I voted for him three times. Now, I am of course aware of the voices on the right arguing against any intervention. The sentiments range from pure isolationism to some bizarre sympathy for Iran and hate for Israel. Many have exposed their ignorance by asking: 'What has Iran ever done to us?' proving that there is such a thing as a stupid question. But Trump, and Trump alone, decides what it means to be 'America First.' And the vast majority of the MAGA movement will support the president if he decides to move against Iran, which does not have to include putting 'boots on the ground' in Iran. Trump is not an isolationist, despite some of his supporters trying to impute this idea to him in desperate social media posts. The president has always been for smart engagement, but that doesn't mean no engagement. What's more, public opinion firmly supports Trump intervening in this situation. Polling explored by CNN this week tells the tale: 83 percent of Republicans and 79 percent of Democrats oppose Iran obtaining nuclear weapons. Nearly 7 in 10 Americans support U.S. airstrikes to stop Iran's nuclear ambitions. For decades, Western leaders have tried to bribe (looking at you, President Obama), coax, or flatter the Iranian mullahs into abandoning their nuclear ambitions. All that failed, because they are fundamentalist radicals who aren't motivated by conventional diplomacy. What did work? Israel's ruthless post-October 7 dismantling of Iran's terrorist infrastructure in the Middle East. Today, the Iranian terror network — from Hamas to Hezbollah to the Houthis — has been decimated. This provides the opportunity to confront Iran without having to simultaneously fight a multi-front war against its terrorist proxies. And President Trump's strategic posture has made this moment possible. Let's be honest – he was cheated out of the Nobel Peace Prize following the signing of the 2020 Abraham Accords, which normalized relations between Israel, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan. And in the five years since, America has courted Saudi Arabia to join the agreement. It was the most significant step towards defusing the Middle East powder keg in decades. Just imagine today's conflict without such alliances? Also in 2020, President Trump ordered the US military to kill the 'Butcher of Iran' Qasem Soleimani, the head of Iran's Revolutionary Guards' Quds Force, which is responsible for operating their terrorist minions. President Trump reinstated sanctions on Iran when others begged for lenience. And he has backed Israel unequivocally while social media's keyboard warriors argued for him to abandon our special partner (we'll have to explore the thinly veiled hatred for Israel and the Jewish people in another column but my goodness is it ugly). Trump's 'America First' foreign policy rests on a simple moral premise: peace through strength, deterrence through certainty. This is now a once-in-a-generation chance to finish this fight by striking Iran's Fordow nuclear enrichment facility, which is a fortress buried deep in the mountains, designed precisely to survive such a strike while enriching uranium to weapons-grade. Destroying Fordow would not be an unprovoked escalation — it is self-defense, a clear signal that there is a price for threatening the civilized world and plotting genocide while crying victim to journalists. It is a righteous act that would protect millions of innocent lives from future war and weaken every tentacle of Iran's terror empire. This is a chance not just to make the region safer, but to restore true American deterrence — the kind that makes bad actors think twice before threatening our citizens and our friends.

The Independent

8 minutes ago

• The Independent

Senate version of Trump's Big Beautiful Bill holds ‘'unexpected' tax break up to $2,000 for nearly all Americans

The Senate version of President Donald Trump's 'One Big, Beautiful Bill' legislation includes a tax break that would benefit 90 percent of Americans, CNBC reported. The Senate Finance Committee released the text for the tax and health care aspects of the Senate's version of the bill that passed the House of Representatives last month. The House version allows people who do not itemize their taxes to deduct $150 for individuals and $300 for joint filers like married couples. But the Senate version would allow $1,000 for single filers and $2,000 for joint filers. Typically, people need to choose to itemize their taxes to receive the charitable contribution deduction. The rare exception came during the Covid-19 pandemic. But 9 out of 10 Americans use the standard deduction, meaning the $2,000 tax break could come to most Americans. 'This could provide some tax savings for folks,' Erica York of the Tax Foundation, a conservative think tank, told CNBC. 'That could be something unexpected if you're not currently deducting charitable giving.' The Senate is currently debating its version of the 'One Big, Beautiful Bill,' as Trump requested Republicans to name it. In addition to the charitable deduction, Republicans hope to extend the 2017 tax cuts that Trump signed during his first tenure in the White House, boost up money for the military, military spending and oil production in the United States. But Republicans remain split on a number of aspects of the bill, including its changes to Medicaid. Fiscal conservatives also say that the bill does not do enough to slash federal spending. Earlier this week, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office released its dynamic estimate and it found that it would increase the deficit by $3.4 trillion. Other Republicans want to keep the renewable energy tax credits that then-President Joe Biden put into place in the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act because many Republican states benefited from the law. Republicans have only 53 seats in the Senate. To sidestep a filibuster, they plan to use a process called budget reconciliation, which allows them to pass legislation with a simple majority as long as it relates to federal spending and taxes. Currently, the legislation is undergoing the 'Byrd Bath,' wherein Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough, a career Senate employee, evaluates whether the legislation follows the rules of budget reconciliation and none of the parts of the bill are 'merely incidental' to the budget.