Reports: U.S. “Virtually” Out of Long-range Missiles. Army General: U.S. Can No Longer Defend Israel

The Israel First chickenhawk neocons such as podcasters Mark Levin, Ben Shapiro, and Fox News bloviator Sean Hannity are likely in a tizzy, wondering how much longer the United States can continue its quixotic crusade against Iran. The reason: “Virtually all” of the U.S. Army’s long-range missiles are expended, Reuters reported today.

And Army General Alexus Grynkewich, head of the U.S. European Command, said he can no longer defend Israel from missile attacks without another Navy destroyer, The Washington Post disclosed. Without that nearly $3 billion ship, he must choose between defending America, which he swore an oath to do, and defending Israel, which he did not swear an oath to do.

$1 million a Piece, All Blown Up for Nothing

Three sources who know U.S. weapons stockpiles told Reuters that the war with Iran has depleted “virtually all” of the Army’s long-range missiles, “principally … surface-to-surface weapons, known as Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) and Precision Strike Missiles (PrSM).”

The missiles cost about $1 million each. The ATACMS have been wasted on Ukraine. The newer PrSM, which is shorter range, will eventually replace ATACMS. Both are in short supply.

“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,” Reuters reported:

A fourth person familiar with the matter said that despite the high usage of precision weapons, the U.S. can resupply. Central Command — which oversees U.S. forces in the Middle East — has been able to reload from U.S. military ​supplies around the world, the person said.

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.

The Pentagon echoed Trump, claiming “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.”

“Tense Conversations”

That rosy picture aside, Reuters reported “tense conversations” among Trump officials that suggested the United States cannot continue its unconstitutional war against Iran — again, on Israel’s behalf — without compromising overall readiness to answer “crises elsewhere.”

“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,” Reuters continued:

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.…

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.

Reuters also pointed to last week’s report from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), which disclosed that 65 percent of Patriot interceptors are gone, and that the THAAD ballistic-missile interceptor stockpile is down 38 percent. A chart shows just how many munitions have been expended in current war against Iran.

In May, as The New American reported, CSIS warned that restocking the inventory will require months and even years. Examples: 

• Land Attack Missile (TLAM), Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), and Patriot — heavily used in this war — will take three or more years from today to return to prewar inventory levels.
• Standard Missiles (SM-3 and SM-6) will take around two years. These naval missiles were not used as heavily.
• Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM) and Precision Strike Missile (PrSM) will take several months to a year to replace. The prewar PrSM inventory was low because the system had just begun production. JASSM, though heavily used, will see large deliveries from recent procurements.

Bottom line: The war against Iran cannot continue indefinitely.

Top General: Another Destroyer Needed

As if that weren’t enough, the Post reported, Grynkewich, the top Army general in Europe, “privately warned the Pentagon this week that he lacks sufficient naval forces to continue protecting Israel from incoming ballistic missiles, officials said, illustrating how the ongoing Iran war has imposed constraints on the military.”

Indeed, as the Post summarized his written warning, citing two sources, he needs another Navy destroyer or “he will be forced to choose defense of the United States ‘homeland’ over that of Israel.”

“The general’s warning comes at a tenuous moment in the five-month conflict, as near-daily attacks have resumed following the collapse of peace talks between Washington and Tehran and the operation’s intensity has drained U.S. supplies of key defensive weapons,” the Post continued:

The Navy has been particularly taxed, as the Trump administration has directed a blockade of Iranian ports in response to Tehran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz. The standoff has stymied the movement of Middle Eastern oil and other commodities through the narrow waterway, upending the global economy.

Based in Rota, Spain, the Navy’s fleet of destroyers faces “maintenance issues” because of the “war’s tempo,” the Post noted.

CSIS’s missile expert, Tom Karako, told the Post that the general’s warning reveals the Pentagon’s tough choices.

“Being on a wartime footing is going to take a toll in terms of readiness and munitions inventory levels,” he told the newspaper. “Now the question is: What’s the strategy here?”