1. A Massive Shortfall in the U.S. Weapons Arsenal The 2026 Iran war has raised a major question mark over that perception.

Recent U.S. and international reports, along with analysis by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), indicate that this is no longer merely a matter of concern. The stockpiles of several critical U.S. precision-guided missiles and missile-defence interceptors have fallen to dangerously low levels within just a few months of the war. Most concerning is that restoring these weapons to their previous levels may take not months, but in some cases three years or even longer.

2. ATACMS and PrSM: Nearly Exhausted

On August 4, Reuters published an important investigation.

Based on information provided by three people familiar with the matter, Reuters reported that during the five-month war with Iran, the United States used a large portion of its stockpiles of Army Tactical Missile Systems, or ATACMS, and the new-generation Precision Strike Missile (PrSM).

Two sources gave an even more serious assessment—the United States had used “virtually all” of these two types of long-range missiles.

In other words, the stockpiles of weapons that are critical assets of the U.S. Army for delivering highly precise strikes against distant targets have now fallen to extremely limited levels. Reuters, however, noted that it could not independently verify the relevant stockpile figures.

CBS News also separately quoted two sources with direct knowledge of the matter, saying that the United States had used almost its entire global stockpile of ATACMS and PrSM.

This raises the first major question:

If a superpower exhausts almost its entire stockpile of highly important long-range missiles in a regional war, what would its state of preparedness be in the event of a much larger war?

3. Patriot: The Biggest Concern for Air Defence

An even more alarming picture is emerging in the case of Patriot interceptors.

According to a July 27 analysis by CSIS, U.S. forces used a huge number of air-defence interceptors during the Iran war. According to its estimates, the U.S. Patriot stockpile had fallen below 1,000. At the same time, the stockpile of THAAD interceptors stood at around 250.

CBS News, citing CSIS’s July estimates, reported that before the war, the United States had approximately 2,330 Patriot interceptors. By the end of July, CSIS estimated that the number could have fallen to between 759 and 827.

In other words, there is concern that up to roughly two-thirds of the Patriot stockpile may have been used compared with the inventory available before the war.

Why is this so important-----

Because Patriot is not an ordinary missile. It is one of the United States’ principal systems for intercepting enemy ballistic missiles and other airborne threats.

4. The Situation with THAAD Is Also Critical

THAAD—Terminal High Altitude Area Defense—is one of the United States’ most important ballistic-missile defence systems.

According to CSIS, the United States had approximately 452 THAAD interceptors before the war. By the end of July, that number had fallen to an estimated 234–278.

This means that roughly 40–50 percent of the stockpile of this system may have been used during the war.

Reuters’ investigation also noted that CSIS’s estimates were consistent with U.S. government internal information.

The most important point here is—

There are no easy substitutes for Patriot and THAAD.

CSIS has made it clear that when the stockpiles of these interceptors decline, the United States has very limited alternatives for countering ballistic missiles.

5. Tomahawk Also Suffers a Major Blow

One of the U.S. Navy’s principal long-range cruise missiles is the Tomahawk.

The Washington Post reported that the United States fired more than 850 Tomahawks in just the first four weeks of the war. According to a subsequent CSIS estimate, the number used exceeded 1,000. CSIS estimated that before the war, the United States had approximately 3,100 to 4,500 Tomahawks in its stockpile.

A Reuters source, meanwhile, said that during the Iran war, the United States used nearly half of its global Tomahawk stockpile. Reuters, however, could not independently verify this specific figure.

As a result, Washington is not merely conducting the war; at the same time, it is committing enormous financial resources and industrial capacity to rebuilding its weapons arsenal.

6. JASSM Has Not Been Spared Either

The Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile, or JASSM, is one of the U.S. Air Force’s most important stealthy long-range missiles.

According to an August analysis by the Washington Post, citing CSIS’s April estimates, the Pentagon used approximately one-quarter of its prewar JASSM stockpile during the war.

In other words, the problem is not confined to a single weapon.

Stockpiles have declined across multiple critical categories—including long-range offensive weapons, cruise missiles, and missile-defence interceptors.

The most alarming issue: Producing weapons is not as easy as it may seem

Some may ask—

“America can simply produce new weapons whenever it wants.”

Of course it can.

But the problem is the pace of production.

CSIS’s May analysis said that restoring the stockpiles of critical weapons such as Tomahawk, THAAD, and Patriot to prewar levels could take three years or more. In the case of Standard Missiles, it could take approximately two years, while JASSM and PrSM could take several months to one year.

In other words, it takes only a few minutes to use a missile on the battlefield.

But it takes months or years to produce a replacement.

This is the greatest reality of modern warfare.

7. Initiative to Increase Tomahawk Production from 60 to More Than 1,000

The strongest evidence that America has recognized the problem is the new production contract.

On August 17, Reuters reported that the United States had signed a seven-year, $22.9 billion contract with Raytheon to dramatically increase Tomahawk production.

While around 60 Tomahawks are currently produced annually, the new plan aims to increase annual production to more than 1,000.

The depth of the crisis can be understood simply by looking at the numbers.

The stockpile of a weapon that has rapidly declined during the war now requires an initiative to increase its production by more than 16 times.

This is not merely news about increasing weapons production.

It is effectively an admission that—

Current production capacity is not sufficient for a prolonged, high-intensity war.

Patriot and THAAD production is also being increased

On August 31, the Pentagon signed seven-year agreements with General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems and Lockheed Martin.

The objective is to increase production of critical components for THAAD and Patriot PAC-3 MSE interceptors and accelerate their delivery.

In other words, Washington is now doing three things simultaneously—

Conducting the war, preserving its weapons stockpiles, and increasing the production of new weapons.

But the decision to increase production itself demonstrates that the Pentagon is not satisfied with the current level of stockpiles and production capacity.

8. What If a War Breaks Out with China?

This is where the issue becomes most important for America’s future military power.

The depletion of the U.S. weapons arsenal caused by the Iran war has also raised concerns among Washington’s allies.

The Washington Post reported on August 26 that U.S. allies in Asia—particularly Japan and Taiwan—were concerned about possible delays in U.S. weapons deliveries.

According to the report, nearly $30 billion worth of U.S. weapons approved for sale to Taiwan had yet to be delivered. This includes Patriot missiles. Concerns have also been raised about possible delays in the delivery of Tomahawks to Japan.

And according to CSIS, depleted stockpiles have placed the United States in a “window of vulnerability”—particularly in the event of a potential Chinese conflict in the Western Pacific.

In other words, today’s question is not simply—

“How many weapons does America have?”

The question is—

“If a major war breaks out simultaneously in the Middle East and the Pacific, how long can America sustain its weapons arsenal?”

So, has America’s decline already begun?

Here, reality and political analysis must be separated.

No—the military power of the United States has not come to an end.

CSIS itself has said that the United States possesses sufficient military capabilities to deal with the potential scenarios of the Iran war. However, the depletion of stockpiles caused by the war has created a period of vulnerability for the future, particularly in the event of a potential major conflict with China.

Therefore, saying that “America’s weapons arsenal has run out” is not entirely accurate.

But the more important truth is—

The stockpiles of some of America’s most critical weapons have been severely depleted, and this shortfall cannot be replenished quickly.

That is the real crisis.

Final Words

The decline of a superpower does not usually happen in a single day.

First, pressure builds on its economic strength.

Then its industrial capacity comes under pressure.

After that, cracks begin to appear in certain areas of its military capability.

Eventually, its rivals begin looking for opportunities to exploit those cracks.

Therefore, declaring the current U.S. weapons crisis to be directly equivalent to “America’s decline” may be a premature conclusion.

But it is entirely reasonable to view it as a serious warning signal for America’s military supremacy.

Because—

The stockpiles of ATACMS and PrSM are nearly exhausted.

CSIS estimates that the Patriot stockpile has fallen below 1,000.

The THAAD stockpile is around 250.

According to CSIS estimates, more than 1,000 Tomahawks have been used.

And restoring the prewar inventory of several critical weapons could take three years or more.

9. So, Where Does the Crisis Lie?

The crisis lies here—

America remains one of the world’s most powerful military powers; but its weapons arsenal is no longer “unlimited” as it may once have appeared.

And in international politics, the most dangerous moment for a superpower comes when its rivals begin to realize—

The power exists, but the stockpile available to sustain the use of that power over a prolonged period is limited.

It is precisely from this perspective that America’s current weapons crisis should be viewed not merely as a military problem,

but as a major geopolitical warning for the future of U.S. dominance.