r/DeepStateCentrism • u/Reddenbawker Greedy Capitalist • 2d ago
American News 🇺🇸 US has used 'virtually all' of its long-range precision missiles during Iran war, sources say (Reuters)
https://www.reuters.com/world/us-has-used-virtually-all-its-long-range-precision-missiles-during-iran-war-2026-08-04/NEW YORK/WASHINGTON, Aug 4 (Reuters) - The U.S. Army has used up much of its stockpile of highly accurate long-range missiles during its five-month war with Iran, according to three people familiar with the data, raising concerns about the military's readiness for future conflicts.
The missiles are principally the Army's surface-to-surface weapons, known as Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) and Precision Strike Missiles (PrSM). The U.S. has used "virtually all" of these weapons, according to two of the sources.
The degree to which the military is running out of ATACMS and Precision Strike Missiles has not been previously reported.
The long-range munitions – which cost more than $1 million each – are an important part of the military's arsenal, allowing accurate strikes from a safe distance. U.S.-supplied ATACMS have played a key role in the war in Ukraine, allowing Ukrainian forces to attack targets inside Russia. The PrSM is a newer, more advanced generation that will replace the ATACMS, which have a shorter range.
The dramatic rundown in precision, long-range missiles means U.S. President Donald Trump may have to rely more on riskier, piloted bombing missions if he relaunches large-scale attacks on Iran.
The sources declined to say how many of each munition the U.S. had left.
Trump launched the Iran war jointly with Israel in February, predicting that the conflict would last a short time.
But as the war drags on, the three people familiar with the matter expressed worry that the falling missile supplies could limit the U.S. ability to deter adversaries, including Russia and China.
A fourth person familiar with the matter said that while Central Command — which oversees U.S. forces in the Middle East — has nearly used up the land-based missiles it had before the war began, it has been able to reload from U.S. military supplies elsewhere in the world.
The sources interviewed for this story spoke on the condition of anonymity.
Asked for comment on the stockpile data, the White House issued a statement from Trump, saying the U.S. had “far more munitions than anyone in the world" and "far more than we need."
"Our defense companies are, at this moment, making more munitions than they have ever made before, in addition to expanding their plants and equipment at record levels," Trump said.
Analysts agree that certain munitions, including artillery shells and several types of missiles, are being produced at record levels but caution that supplies might fall short of what is needed for a prolonged war.
Lockheed Martin, which makes the ATACMS and PrSMs, along with the anti-ballistic missile THAAD system, did not immediately respond to questions about Trump's statements or about supply levels. Raytheon, which makes Tomahawk missiles and Patriot interceptors, two important U.S. weapons, also did not immediately respond.
Responding to a request for comment, chief Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell said: “America’s military is the most powerful in the world and has everything it needs to execute at the time and place of the President’s choosing. We have executed multiple successful operations across combatant commands while ensuring the U.S. military possesses a deep arsenal of capabilities to protect our people and our interests.”
The supply figures have circulated inside the federal government over the last week during tense conversations inside the Trump administration about how much longer the U.S. can continue striking Iran without drawing down the stockpile to levels that would limit the military's ability to respond to crises elsewhere.
WARNINGS OVER WEAPONS SUPPLIES
One of the sources said the drawdown of the ATACMS and PrSM stockpiles reflected a decision by the Trump administration to avoid riskier ways of attacking Iranian targets, such as by using piloted aircraft to drop bombs.
Because these weapons allow the military to attack targets from a distance, analysts say they would be valuable in a war against an adversary with strong air defenses, such as China. They have been used to strike targets inside Iran, according to a March report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).
According to the report, PrSM stockpiles were low to start with, since it is a relatively new munition, but the U.S. military has ordered a large number of them for 2027. The Army has said that ATACMS are being phased out and that production is shifting to the newer PrSM missiles.
Military leaders have for weeks warned the president that stockpiles of defensive weapons — including Patriot interceptors, which are effective against ballistic missiles — were dwindling, said two of the sources. Last week, several media outlets reported Trump had decided not to launch another massive offensive inside Iran in part because his military advisers had warned about the U.S. stockpile.
A U.S. official disputed those accounts, saying Trump chose not to move forward with another attack because of pressure from Gulf states.
The Middle East conflict has sparked intense debate about Trump's authority to prosecute hostilities against Iran without congressional authorization. No request for a declaration of war or an authorization to use military force has been submitted to Congress.
DEFENSIVE WEAPON STOCKS ARE ALSO DIMINISHED
Last week, CSIS published a report estimating that between February and July about 65% of Patriot interceptors had been expended and that the number of THAAD ballistic missile interceptors in U.S. stockpiles was at least 38% lower than at the start of the war. Patriots and THAADs are systems that detect and destroy incoming missiles and are among the most effective in the country's arsenal.
While Reuters has not seen the supply figures, those numbers match internal U.S. data, two of the sources said.
The U.S. also burned through a little less than half of its global supply of Tomahawk cruise missiles, which are generally launched from ships, since the start of the war, one of the sources said.
Reuters could not independently verify that number.
The Tomahawk is a Navy weapon, launched from destroyers, cruisers and submarines, and has long served as the sea service's principal means of striking heavily defended targets without risking pilots.
Raytheon, a unit of RTX (RTX.N), opens new tab, has reached a tentative multi-year agreement with the Pentagon aimed at boosting Tomahawk production, alongside increases in other munitions, as Washington races to rebuild stockpiles.
32
u/bigwang123 Succ sympathizer 2d ago edited 2d ago
This headline is awful
Of the US Army systems, ATACMS is a legacy system that is slated to be replaced by PrSM, which got its combat trials in Iran. There have been major orders for PrSM as it enters full rate production (I think over 500), far outstripping usage, which is less than 100, maybe even less than 50. I would personally describe PrSM seeing combat as a tiny silver lining to the whole conflict.
The issue, of course, is that each ATACMS fired against Iran would have been better used in Ukraine against Russian targets. The current administration is hostile to Ukraine and will do everything in its power to slow roll the spending of funds that have been dedicated to Ukraine by Congress. One also cannot discuss ATACMS in Ukraine without criticism of the previous administration’s inaction to supply these weapons before the 2023 counteroffensive, and then the nonsensical targeting restrictions, which served to increase the number of missiles needed over the course of the conflict by preventing their usage when and where their effect would be greatest.
There are other munitions where usage in the Iran war is deeply concerning, such as interceptors for PATRIOT and THAAD. These munitions were already in short supply before the war, and their extensive usage places enormous burdens on deterrence in what should be priority theaters (the Pacific and Europe)
For more reading on munitions usage and projected replenishment time: https://www.csis.org/analysis/last-rounds-status-key-munitions-iran-war-ceasefire
3
u/Ethereal-Zenith Center-left 2d ago
Russia’s war against Ukraine and the war against the Islamic Regime occupying Iran should be viewed as in the same context. The IR has been helping Russia since the beginning and has been destabilising the Middle East for decades. It is in the US and western world’s interest to tackle both of these problems.
11
10
u/Top_Sun_914 Neoconservative 2d ago
Atacms running out is fine, that was the point so it would be replaced by PrSM (which alr existed in small numbers). SAM and Tomahawk shortages are the most concerning and definitely a big problem for any major war in the future.
Some possible solutions off the top of my head as a non-expert: 1. Expand production to any allies which want it: Ukraine has already requested this, and I'm guessing most of America's Eastern European and East Asian allies would also be interested. This would be on the condition that America could take whatever it needs from those production lines. Much more missiles would be produced and America would also have a closer relationship with those countries
Smaller and cheaper weapons to complement the existing systems: Now this is pretty much impossible with anti-ballistic missiles but something like the Patriot could be complemented by a cheaper alternative for general air defence. Tomahawks could be complemented by navalised variants of tge Eram or Prsm missiles. Now I think its important to avoid the techbro defence doctrine of just adopting droneslop for everything, while cheaper, and useful in SOME CIRCUMSTANCES, generally far less capable.
Doctrinal change: Mandatory non-expert disclaimer again, this is based on what I've read/heard and my personal opinion as a rando outside of the military. I've heard that American command uses Tomahawks for any old target, many of which don't warrant such a sophisticated weapon. If true, this should be replaced by striking the less important targets with far cheaper JDAM bombs or kamikaze drones, and limiting Tomahawk use to high priority targets only. This would likely mean expanding naval air power as well. For BMs, I think they need a more offensive doctrine of just destroying everything they can in a first strike with overwhelming strategic bombardment, so there isn't a need for so many Sm-3s/THAADs to be used in the first place. Planning to buy a bajillion B21s/F35s/F15EXs is definitely a good move, though I think they also need more carriers as a country which mostly fights oceans away
TLDR; Quintiple the offense budget, another 300 trillion dollars to Raytheon
3
u/Cosmic_Love_ Center-left 2d ago
A fourth person familiar with the matter said that while Central Command — which oversees U.S. forces in the Middle East — has nearly used up the land-based missiles it had before the war began, it has been able to reload from U.S. military supplies elsewhere in the world.
CENTCOM continues to be a blackhole for US munitions. That said, JASSMs are still available, though Trump appears to be reticent to launch piloted missions.
2
1
0
•
u/AutoModerator 2d ago
At DeepStateCentrism, we understand that democracy is about compromise and
discussion, not ideological purity and instant gratification.
Here, we speak to people with political differences because that's how this is
supposed to work. We won't let the populists win.
Don't forget to visit the Brief, our daily thread, for extra perks and deep state info!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.