US depletes long-range precision missiles in Iran war: sources

Washington has expended nearly its entire arsenal of long-range precision missiles in the ongoing campaign against Iran, according to multiple sources familiar with the situation, leaving the Pentagon with a severe shortfall just as President Donald Trump weighs fresh large-scale strikes. The dramatic rundown in these high-end munitions means that any renewed U.S. offensive would likely have to depend more heavily on manned aircraft penetrating Iranian air defenses, a far riskier proposition than launching standoff weapons from ships or bombers.

Ammunition stocks stretched thin

The revelation that the United States has used “virtually all” of its long-range precision missiles underscores the intensity of the air war that has unfolded over the past several weeks. These weapons include submarine-launched Tomahawk cruise missiles and air-launched JASSM-ER (Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile), which allow U.S. forces to strike deep into Iranian territory from beyond the reach of most air defenses. The rapid consumption of such valuable munitions, typically among the most expensive in the U.S. inventory, points to the scale of the bombing campaign and the difficulty of sustaining a high-tempo operation without depleting strategic reserves.

Defense analysts said the depletion is likely a consequence of the sheer volume of targets and the need to strike heavily defended sites, including nuclear facilities, missile launch points, and command-and-control nodes. The U.S. military has conducted at least three major rounds of strikes this week alone, according to CENTCOM statements, with each wave expending dozens of long-range precision munitions. While the Pentagon has not publicly confirmed exact numbers, the sources indicate that the available stockpile is now critically low.

The risk of piloted bombing missions

The shift toward manned bombing missions represents a significant tactical and strategic adjustment. Without a sufficient supply of long-range precision missiles, the U.S. would have to rely on fighters and bombers flying directly over or near Iranian targets, exposing pilots to advanced surface-to-air missile systems, anti-aircraft artillery, and enemy fighters. This not only increases the risk of casualties and aircraft losses but also complicates mission planning and execution, as aircraft would require close fighter escort, electronic warfare support, and airborne refueling.

“The munitions we’re talking about are the very weapons that given us the ability to hit hard without putting aircrews in harm’s way,” said a former U.S. Air Force planner. “Once you run short, the calculus changes dramatically.” The former official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, added that the military could still carry out missions using unguided or shorter-range bombs, but these would require penetrating contested airspace and would be far less effective against hardened targets.

Strategic implications for the White House

The depletion comes at a politically sensitive time. President Trump has threatened to respond forcefully to any Iranian provocation, and the U.S. has already carried out multiple waves of strikes aimed at degrading Iran’s military capability. However, with limited long-range precision missiles, any future an attack would either need to be scaled down, delayed until production catches up, or conducted with a higher number of manned sorties. The United States has a large arsenal of precision-guided bombs that can be dropped from aircraft, but these require the aircraft to be within range of Iranian defenses, which raises the stakes significantly.

The situation also raises questions about the readiness of U.S. forces in the broader region. The military may be forced to reshuffle its inventory, pulling munitions from other theaters or accelerating production timelines. Defense contractors are reportedly working to increase output, but creating more long-range missiles takes months or even years, not days. The White House has not commented directly on the reported shortages, but officials have stressed that the military retains a broad range of options and that the United States continues to monitor the situation closely.

What happens next

As the U.S. assesses its options, the next few weeks will be critical. The military could choose to shift toward more carrier-based strike aircraft flying shorter-range missions, but that would put pilots at greater risk. Alternatively, the U.S. might temporarily suspend large-scale operations to rebuild its stockpile, a move that could be interpreted as a strategic pause or a sign of exhaustion. The decision will likely be made at the highest levels of the White House and Pentagon, with President Trump weighing military effectiveness against political and operational risks.

Allies in the region and adversaries alike will be watching closely. Iran may see the reported depletion as an opportunity to harden its defenses or escalate its own attacks, while U.S. partners may question the durability of American military support. The United States has long relied on its conventional superiority as a deterrent, and the erosion of that edge in one key category could reshape the balance of power in the Middle East. For now, the immediate question is whether the U.S. can sustain its campaign without further stretching its already thin supply of long-range precision strike weapons.