A recent commentary in the Wall Street Journal advocates for a notable increase in U.S. engagement in Iran. Former Pentagon official Seth Cropsey is calling on President Donald Trump to take decisive action—specifically, reopening the Strait of Hormuz and addressing ongoing issues in southern Iran as part of an “unfinished” agenda.
In an opinion piece published on Sunday titled America’s credibility is at stake in Iran, Cropsey asserts that Trump needs to escalate tensions by deploying ground troops. He insists, “President Trump must step on the ground to open the Strait of Hormuz and demonstrate the unquestioned superiority of American power,” while cautioning that “the job, while admirable, is not yet finished.”
He advocates for sending “thousands of special forces,” backed by conventional military units, into southern Iran to secure the strait after extended conflict. “But to halt now would be a colossal error with ramifications far beyond the Middle East,” Cropsey warns, stating that backing out while Iran still has sway over the waterway would “undermine American credibility” and possibly provoke actions from China against Taiwan or Russia against NATO.
WATCH — Trump: When America is ready, Israel will be ready to end the war:
Cropsey notes that the Islamic Republic of Iran has been a persistent adversary of the U.S. since its establishment in 1979, referencing attacks on American diplomats, military members, civilians, and allies. He believes these factors warrant Trump’s alignment with Israel.
He also suggests that Trump’s public statements send mixed messages, highlighting uncertainty about whether to scale back or intensify military action. “The only way to succeed in this is to have boots on the ground,” Cropsey contends.
Referring to the 1956 Suez Crisis, he warns that failing to complete current operations could damage the United States’ international reputation, suggesting that the episode led to a transformation of powerful nations into weaker ones. He argues that the U.S. risks facing similar consequences if it withdraws without securing the Strait of Hormuz.
LOOK — which navy? Footage showing destruction of Islamist regime ships:
On March 20th, Trump remarked that the U.S. is “very close to achieving our goals” in Iran and is “considering reducing our large-scale military presence in the Middle East.” He added that countries using the Strait of Hormuz “must provide security and policing as needed,” affirming the U.S. would assist if asked.
When questioned about potential troop increases that same day, Trump indicated strong support but wouldn’t disclose specific actions: “As far as the military is concerned, I can’t say what we’re doing.” Just the day before, he stated, “I don’t have troops anywhere,” refuting claims that the administration was contemplating deploying thousands of troops to the region.
The Wall Street Journal commentary aligns with ongoing tensions between Trump and the Murdoch media enterprise. In January, Breitbart News reported that Vice President J.D. Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio did not fully correct an article suggesting they were impeding Trump’s ability to take military action in Iran. Vance’s office characterized the report as inaccurate, asserting that they were providing the president with a balanced array of options, from diplomatic solutions to military measures. This drew criticism from conservatives who labeled the article as misleading and accused the publication of manufacturing discord among Trump and his associates.
In June 2025, Trump expressed uncertainty about his stance on Iran, noting, “I have no idea what I think about Iran!” Reports surfaced suggesting he had approved an attack plan but was delaying final orders. He kept the narrative ambiguous, stating, “I might do it. I might not… no one knows what I’ll do,” while reiterating that Iran is “very close” to obtaining nuclear weapons, which he insists cannot happen.
A June 2025 report by Breitbart News indicated a “barrage” of negative comments targeting Vance from Murdoch-controlled media outlets, highlighting frustrations over economic and foreign policy. The criticism seems to reflect a rift within the Republican party, with some suggesting it clashes with the party’s emerging America First ideology. Since February 2025, Vance has been the subject of 17 opinion pieces and letters attacking him in the editorial pages of Wall Street Journal.
Breitbart further noted that for almost a decade, the Wall Street Journal‘s editorial board has aimed to critique Trump’s policies on trade, immigration, and military restraint. They argue that the publication operates from a perspective seen as outdated and oppositional to the populist approach of Trump’s platform.
