University of Chicago political scientist Robert Pape is warning that the conflict with Iran is approaching what he believes could become its most dangerous phase yet, arguing that the United States is moving toward a major escalation that could ultimately result in American ground forces entering Iran with thousands of U.S. casualties.

In a series of interviews with NBC chief foreign correspondent Richard Engel, broadcaster Andrew Neil, and commentator Mario Nawfal, Pape said recent military developments suggest the conflict is nearing what he calls "Stage Three" of his "Escalation Trap" theory — a point where political pressures increasingly outweigh military restraint.

His latest analysis was also outlined in his Escalation Trap Substack.

"We are on the Titanic," Pape told Engel. "We saw an iceberg and everybody said, 'Don't hit that iceberg.' And we're still going to the iceberg."

He added that he believes there is roughly a "70% likely" chance the conflict will eventually include U.S. ground operations along Iran's coast.

Pape is a leading scholar of airpower, military coercion, and strategic bombing.

He taught airpower strategy at the U.S. Air Force's School of Advanced Airpower Studies and has advised the military and several presidential administrations. His predictions as to the unfolding of the recent Iran conflict have been largely accurate to date.

Pape now argues that the latest escalation extends well beyond the Strait of Hormuz.

According to his latest analysis, Iran-backed Houthi forces launched coordinated ballistic missile and drone attacks against Saudi Arabia's Abha International Airport following strikes on Sanaa, threatening to open what he describes as a "second maritime front" centered on the Bab el-Mandeb Strait.

If sustained, he argues, attacks from both Hormuz and the Red Sea would place two of the world's most important energy chokepoints under simultaneous threat, increasing pressure on Washington and its regional allies to respond militarily.

"The Houthi attack deepens the Escalation Trap because it expands the political stakes for every major actor while shrinking their room to compromise," Pape wrote.

Pape contends the war is no longer being driven solely by military objectives.

Instead, he says two separate forces are now reinforcing one another.

The first is strategic competition over control of the Strait of Hormuz, where he argues Tehran seeks to determine the conditions under which commercial shipping moves while the United States insists on guaranteeing freedom of navigation.

The second is what he describes as a revenge campaign following the deaths of senior Iranian leaders during the war.

Pape argues calls from Iran's new supreme leader for supporters to avenge those killed have transformed retaliation into an independent political objective that now fuels further escalation.

"The two engines of escalation ... are beginning to reinforce one another," Pape wrote. "Every bomb, every revenge attack, and every response drive the next decision to move up the rungs of the escalation ladder."

One of Pape's most striking predictions involves the possibility of U.S. ground forces eventually operating along Iran's southeastern coastline.

Speaking with Engel, he argued that current American military deployments — including expanded carrier strike groups, Marine forces, suppression strikes against coastal defenses, and anti-ship missile batteries — appear designed to create military options should President Donald Trump decide to reopen the Strait of Hormuz by force.

"We are going to likely have ground operations on the coast of Iran," Pape said.

In his interview with Nawfal, Pape expanded on that warning, predicting that what may initially appear to be limited operations could evolve into a prolonged conflict.

"I think ... you could end up with a situation by January where certainly hundreds, but possibly thousands of dead Americans," he said. "This could actually become quite bad."

Pape also pointed to what he views as an increasingly dangerous evolution in Iranian military tactics.

During his discussion with Neil, he noted recent reports that anti-ship cruise missiles had been used against vessels in the Gulf, arguing that such weapons present a more serious threat than drones because of their larger warheads and greater destructive capability.

He said recent attacks against shipping, combined with repeated strikes targeting Gulf states and vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz, suggest Iran is expanding pressure beyond the immediate battlefield.

In his interview with Nawfal, Pape also warned that any expanded U.S. campaign against Iranian infrastructure could trigger retaliatory attacks not only against Gulf energy facilities but also against Red Sea shipping through Iran's Houthi allies in Yemen.

"The easy targets ... are going to be the infrastructure of the Gulf countries that have U.S. bases," Pape said. "And number two, the Red Sea."

Pape believes the military conflict and global energy markets are becoming increasingly intertwined.

He argues that declining global oil inventories combined with disruptions to shipping through Hormuz and potentially the Red Sea could create significant economic pressures.

Using a vivid analogy during his interview with Engel, Pape compared the global economy to the Titanic approaching disaster.

"We are on the Titanic," he said. "We saw an iceberg ... and we're still going to the iceberg."

He warned that shrinking oil inventories could eventually produce severe global economic consequences if maritime disruptions continue.

Looking ahead, Pape says he will be watching three developments most closely.

First, whether Iran continues amplifying calls for revenge through official media and proxy organizations.

Second, whether U.S. bombing expands beyond coastal military targets to include logistics, transportation networks, and deeper military infrastructure inside Iran.

Third, whether additional Marine units, amphibious ships, engineering assets, and mine-clearing forces move into position, developments he believes would indicate preparation for possible ground operations.

While Pape repeatedly emphasized that he is not advocating such a course, he argues the political incentives facing leaders on both sides increasingly favor escalation rather than compromise.

His central warning remains stark: Unless the political dynamics change, the conflict risks evolving from a campaign centered on airstrikes and maritime confrontation into a broader regional war involving American ground forces, mounting casualties, and expanding attacks across the Gulf and Red Sea.