As the breadth of US military strikes against Iran expands, so have concerns about the depth of US munition magazines. Lawmakers and officials from the Trump administration are now considering new supplemental defense funding that could pour money into replacing spent missiles. This debate highlights a critical challenge in maintaining the fighting power of a military superpower in a prolonged conflict.
Every Missile Counts: The Strategic Cost of Intervention
President Donald Trump has indicated that the military operation could last weeks, and in its opening days, US forces have struck more than 1,700 targets in Iran using a variety of munitions, including Tomahawk land attack missiles, according to US Central Command (CENTCOM). In addition to offensive attacks, US forces have also responded to Iranian attacks, using Patriot interceptors and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) anti-ballistic missile systems to neutralize incoming threats.
However, each missile fired is costly and can take years to replace, potentially creating a long-term vulnerability. „The number of interceptors fired this weekend was probably quite considerable. We can’t afford to continue doing this, and the only way to preclude that is some sort of decisive political or military resolution,” stated Tom Karako, a senior fellow with the Defense and Security Department at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Karako added that „the expenditure of long range weapons should also give us pause,” pointing out that every Tomahawk used against Iran is one less that could be employed in a potential conflict with China.
Worries that the US could be depleting its offensive and defensive arsenal appear to have reached President Trump, who sought to reassure his followers about the status of US munition stockpiles. Trump claimed in a Truth Social post that US munitions stockpiles have „never been higher or better” and that the US has a „virtually unlimited supply” of weapons.
Funding in Focus: The Price of War Readiness
Prior to „Epic Fury,” military leaders had expressed a desire to increase the production of munitions like the Tomahawk and the Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM), following operations in the Red Sea against the Houthis that took a toll on stockpiles. In May 2025, Vice Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jim Kilby stated that the Navy is seeking to expedite munitions replacements in the event of a future conflict with China. Subsequently, in June, the Navy employed Tomahawk missiles during Operation Midnight Hammer, targeting Iranian nuclear facilities, though those strikes were relatively limited compared to the ongoing operation.
Katherine Thompson, a senior fellow in defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute, warned that the employment of munitions in campaigns like „Operation Epic Fury” could „limit optionality” for the US if a conflict emerged in another theater, absent a plan for an accelerated replenishment timeline. „The United States is only equipped to support a one-war planning construct,” Thompson stated. „The resourcing question for Tomahawks as well as other critical munitions like Patriot and THAAD will be front and center as this campaign continues. Limits on these resources will ultimately depend on firing rates, potential pull-in of additional resources from other theaters, and whether or not this campaign does in fact extend for weeks and/or months.”
Regardless of how the US maneuvers its missiles, Karako argues that starting the work of producing more is a top priority. „To replenish what we used this week and ramp up production rates dramatically, it will almost certainly require some kind of supplemental,” he said. „The politics on the Hill right now aren’t especially amenable to that, but it needs to be done.”
Risk Mitigation: The Delicate Balance of Availability
Bryan Clark, a retired submariner and fellow at the Hudson Institute, estimates that the US could fire off at least 100 Tomahawk missiles as part of „Operation Epic Fury,” given the massive build-up of Navy warships in the region. However, he emphasizes that a bigger problem is running through air defense missiles. „SM-2, SM-3, and SM-6 missiles are in short supply and the US is not building them fast enough to catch up,” Clark stated. „If another conflict occurred, the US might have to change its shot doctrine to use fewer weapons per engagement.”
The munitions inventory itself isn’t the only factor; „the core issue is risk management,” according to Jud Crane, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for force readiness. Crane stated that modifying shot doctrine is one of the risk mitigations on the table that CENTCOM could consider, if necessary, to preserve munitions. CENTCOM could also potentially substitute alternate munitions and systems, or use different platforms for air defenses. „While those mitigations can relieve inventory stress, they introduce additional risk — which is ultimately borne by service members,” Crane said.
„The Department has been improving its projections of munitions inventories over time and weighing production against competing demands, including potential needs in other conflicts, as part of the process in setting Total Munitions Requirements,” Crane added. „While the Secretary can reallocate more munitions from reserve inventory or other theaters, that just shifts risk to the future as inventories take even longer to recover. Ultimately, it’s the White House and NSC that determine whether the risk to strategic readiness is acceptable.”
Promises and Realities: The Long Road to Arsenal Replenishment
Significant efforts are underway to improve munition production. For example, the Pentagon and Lockheed Martin signed an agreement in January to bolster production of THAAD interceptors from 96 to 400 annually. Likewise, the Pentagon and RTX inked several agreements in February to boost production capacity and delivery of munitions, including the Tomahawk to more than 1,000 a year, and the SM-6 to more than 500 a year.
RTX declined to provide public comment on current annual production levels but has previously indicated that these agreements could amount to four times the current annual production rate. However, Karako warns that while this framework is positive, it is not the same as firm contracts. „The current prospect for ramping munitions is a bit less sanguine than meets the eye,” Karako concluded, suggesting that the path to a replenished arsenal is long and fraught with uncertainties.
