reuters.com
www.reuters.com

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 are an important part 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.

  • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
    7·
    30 days ago

    Nobody’s going to invade the US from the outside, you can sleep tight. Completely pointless to even try, y’all are protected by geography before the expensive military even comes into consideration.

    Canada and Mexico are the only countries that could invade without being completely bogged down by super long supply lines. Both added together still have a much smaller population than the US. And the US has mountains which can be leveraged to slow down enemy advances.

    Let’s say the US finds itself without any allies whatsoever. It would take Canada + Mexico + multiple large, well-equipped countries with large navies to have any real hope of getting the US to surrender. Canada, Mexico and China at the very least, someone would also have to come from the Atlantic side with a large navy. It would have to be from all 4 sides, not necessarily at once either - get the US to concentrate the forces to either the atlantic or pacific coast, then surprise them from the other side with an even larger force.

    Basically pointless to try, nobody is this stupid. The US is more likely to have an internal coup.

    • rynn@piefed.socialEnglish
      1·
      30 days ago

      You are probably right, b ur bu really wonder how the drone + ai situation really changes the economics.

      The situations in Iran and Ukraine are very eye opening and I worry the us military is way more focused on big strong boats.

      • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
        1·
        29 days ago

        Drones work both ways. If the attackers are using drones in the US, what stops the US from using drones in the attacking nations? If anything, it’s even more of a reason not to attack. China in particular wouldn’t want to deal with what Ukraine is doing to Russia. So many high value industrial targets to bomb. A few bombs in Shenzhen and the production capacity that’s lost by people escaping the city is mind boggling.

        But the thing to consider is that the defending nation doesn’t need to be an economic powerhouse, the attacking ones do. You could cripple the US’s economy and more than likely they wouldn’t give up fighting… whereas if you’re on the attacking side and your economy is damaged, people will start asking why the war is even necessary.