Staff Reports
Professor Seyed Mohammad Marandi’s recent on‑camera interview is not subtle. In a mid‑July appearance on Professor Glenn Diesen’s program, Marandi declared that “the Americans are preparing for a ground offensive,” bragged that Tehran has introduced a “new missile,” and boasted about decades of burying and dispersing Iran’s arsenal. This clip is a message — part warning, part swagger, and all propaganda. Americans and allies should treat it as such, not as proof that Washington has signed off on an invasion.
What Marandi actually said in the interview
In plain language, Marandi told viewers that a U.S. ground invasion is being planned and that Iran is ready. He claimed Iran has a new missile and said Tehran has spent years moving launchers, silos, and drones into underground or hard‑to‑find positions so they can survive air strikes. The program host, Professor Glenn Diesen, posted and promoted the episode, and clips have been circulating online. Whether Marandi was reporting facts or trying to fire up morale at home, the message was loud and clear: Iran wants you to know it is prepared and dangerous.
Reality check: planning is not the same as decision
Let’s be realistic. U.S. forces have moved and planners always prepare options for many contingencies. That is standard military practice, not an automatic marching order. Independent defense analysts have long documented that Iran fields one of the largest and most diverse missile arsenals in the region and has invested in survivability measures. Those facts make any ground campaign costly and complex. But public reporting and U.S. officials have told allies there are no immediate plans for a full‑scale ground invasion. Marandi’s claim reads more like psychological warfare than a leaked operational order.
Why Tehran’s mouthpieces say this — and why we should care
Propaganda has a job: to shape perception and raise the political cost for opponents. Marandi is a high‑visibility English‑language analyst with ties to Tehran’s circles. When he boasts about a “new missile” and underground sites, he’s signaling to domestic audiences, proxies, and regional capitals. He wants to deter action and to make the idea of attacking Iran look costly and reckless. The danger is that bluster can also provoke miscalculation — on both sides — and ordinary people pay the bill when rhetoric turns to rockets and real operations.
What Washington should do next
The U.S. should answer plainly: confirm or deny the specific claim and make public what measures are being taken to protect forces and partners. Deterrence works when it’s clear and credible. Ignoring Marandi’s theatrical claims would be a mistake; inflating them into a panic would be worse. Keep contingency planning quiet, publicly posture resolve, and make sure American families and regional allies know what is being done to avoid a wider war. Iran’s regime can boast about tunnels and missiles — but no amount of subterranean kit should give it license to incite or endanger the world.
