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.

  • kestrel7_7@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    So glad we’ve been spending billions building and stockpiling these things for my entire life, only to run out after [checks notes] six months of bullshit that accomplished nothing.

    • anon6789@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Time to buy Lockhead Martin and Raytheon stocks before they hand the resupply bill to the Dems after midterms! /s ?

    • DarkFuture@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Turns out giving a low IQ pedo the keys to the kingdom isn’t such a great idea.

      Really wish conservatives/regressives weren’t so painfully stupid/bigoted.

      • Matty Roses@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        The keys were for a bunch of expensive bullshit though.

        Yes, the idiot deciding to use them is a problem - but so is the fact that they don’t work. America was bragging that other nations would find out why they don’t have healthcare . . . .except there’s not even the capability they thought they had.

  • BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Because Hegseth is obsessed with setting records for numbers of bombs dropped, because he wouldn’t recognize strategic success if he saw it, which he hasn’t, because there hasn’t been any.

  • nullspace@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    It’s just exposing how the weapons belong to a dead end tech tree. The future of war is getting fragged by dollar store drones.

    • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Honestly I don’t think that’s what we’re looking at. This is closer to what happened with machine guns and then later tanks during WW1 and WW2. What we’re looking at is a cavalry charge getting shredded by a machine gun and saying mobile warfare is dead, meanwhile the British and French are doing tank R&D.

      This happens every couple of decades and lasts about a decade before proper counters can be developed, mind you it’s still busted as shit until said counters appear but still.

      • Sylvartas@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        I can’t wait for the weapons industry to unveil the next man made horror beyond my comprehension they’ll think of to counter drone swarms

        • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          In this particular case it’ll probably be something we already have just cheaper and more specified. Personally my money is on automated AA designed for drones specifically using relatively cheap parts and firing cheap munitions like small caliber rounds to detonate drone payloads. Will probably still cost a hundred bucks or two but that’s well within acceptable costs if they work well enough.

  • DarkFuture@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    What would conservatives/regressives be doing if they weren’t wasting all our money on things that don’t benefit Americans?

    It’s almost like we should be voting for the other side that’s proven to be better regarding our tax dollars and economy as a whole. But I guess we could keep voting for the side that’s openly bigoted and really, really bad at managing money. You know, for the lols.

  • rynn@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    How much does this reduce security for Americans locally? Like are we more likely to be invaded because of this or is it just the waste of resources we should be mad about?

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      These are ground attack missiles. Not used for defense.

      Also not used against aircraft or ships

    • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months 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.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months 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.

  • tigermountain@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    This is what you get when you have an incompetent president whose only “strategy” is to use the military as an extension of his angry outbursts and an equally incompetent secretary of “war” who also believes the only thing necessary to solve the world’s problems is an army full of testosterone laden christian warriors let loose with full abandon. And if it diminishes America’s standing in the world or its ability to defend itself, all the better.

  • skozzii@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Well if the goal was to stop talking about the Epstein files then I would say mission accomplished.

  • corbindallas@fedinsfw.app
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    i love broadcasting opsec to the world through social media.

    really makes me feel like we have this shit under control, ya know?