Can the US military sustain a long war in Iran?
Can the US military sustain a long war in Iran?
On February 28, the U.S. initiated Operation Epic Fury against Iran, launching a sustained campaign of aerial, land, and naval attacks. In the following week, over 3,000 Iranian targets were struck, with more than 20 weapon systems deployed. The operation claimed the life of Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, in its initial phase.
Despite the scale of the strikes, confidence in U.S. military endurance remains strong. President Donald Trump asserted the country has “virtually unlimited” arms, while Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth emphasized “no shortage of munitions” during a March 5 visit to Central Command. General Dan Caine, Joint Chiefs chairman, echoed this, stating the U.S. possesses “sufficient precision munitions” for both offensive and defensive operations.
However, the sustainability of the campaign faces scrutiny. Trump acknowledged that while medium-grade supplies are robust, top-tier weapons like long-range interceptors and missiles are in limited stock. “We have a good supply but are not where we want to be,” he noted on Truth Social, hinting at potential constraints in high-end armaments.
Cost Concerns and Efficiency Gaps
Analysts highlight the financial strain of defending against Iran’s drone and missile attacks. A single Shahed-136 drone costs between $20,000 and $50,000 to build, yet countering it requires significant resources. Fighter jets equipped with AIM-9 missiles, for instance, cost $450,000 each, with operational hours priced at $40,000. Kelly Grieco of the Stimson Center remarked that “the cost of operating the fighter for an hour is equivalent to the cost of a Shahed,” calling the exchange “inefficient” and “unfavorable.”
“The United States has tested [interceptor drones], it just hasn’t purchased them in sufficient numbers,” said Grieco, suggesting cheaper alternatives could ease the burden.
Meanwhile, Patriot missiles—designed to intercept ballistic threats—face even greater pressure. At $3 million each, these systems are critical but dwindling. Mark Cancian of the Center for Strategic and International Studies estimated that 200–300 Patriot missiles have already been used. He noted that production of high-grade interceptors, like the PAC-3, has slowed, with only 620 delivered in 2025. “If you asked the company today for another Patriot, it would take at least two years to deliver,” he warned.
Shorter-range weapons, such as bombs and Hellfire missiles, show a more favorable outlook. Cancian stated, “Militarily, I think we could sustain it for a very long time,” citing ample ground munitions as a key advantage. Yet, the war’s long-term viability hinges on replenishing the most advanced systems.
On March 6, Trump convened with defense firms, announcing plans to boost production of premium weaponry. The White House claimed the meeting had been planned for weeks, but Grieco questioned its urgency, calling it “a non-announcement” since similar agreements were already in place. As the conflict continues, the balance between firepower and resource allocation remains a critical test for U.S. military strategy.
