Follow us on social

google cta
US missiles

Trump: We have 'unlimited' weapons to fight 'forever' war

Um, no you don't. Dan 'razin' Caine told you so just before you launched this war on Iran

QiOSK
google cta
google cta

In a startling Truth Social post overnight on Monday, President Donald Trump defied reality and claimed that U.S. weapons were "unlimited" and the U.S. could fight "forever" with "these supplies."


Of course by all measure, every measure, this is not true. It would never be true, but in the case of today, after four years of emptying our stores for Ukraine, and then more than two years for Israel, fighting the Houthis, defending Israel twice, Operation Midnight Hammer in June, and now Operation Epic Fury — well you remember the nursery rhyme: Old Mother Hubbard, the cupboard is bare, and soon we won't be able to give the dog a bone.

Perhaps what is the most absurd about Trump's words, other than the lack of truth (he did not "rebuild" the stockpiles in one year following President Biden's departure; the missiles were still being sent to Ukraine under previous agreements and then he told the Europeans they could buy them, depleting the stores even further). But then his Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Dan "razin'" Caine also warned, too, that an operation, especially an extended one, could be risky. From the Washington Post last week:

Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, expressed his concerns at a White House meeting last week with Trump and his top aides, these people said, cautioning that any major operation against Iran will face challenges because the U.S. munitions stockpile has been significantly depleted by Washington’s ongoing defense of Israel and support for Ukraine. Caine’s remarks at the White House meeting have not been previously reported.

Trump immediately went to Truth Social to contradict the story, saying the opposite was true. But this concern does not come from nowhere. As we reported here the military was already "razin" the alarms last summer about the "shocking" number of missiles that had been depleted from the stockpiles. According to a deep dive by defense writer Mike Fredenberg, along with all the other diminished capacity, the standard missile (SM-3) variant was down 33% and those cost $12.5 to $28 million a piece.

And with each interception attempt requiring at least two missiles, and often more than that, thwarting a few missiles can easily end up costing more than it does to buy an F-35, making missile defense against a peer adversary seem unaffordable. Now that is truly alarming.

This was of course just SM-3s. According to reports, the U.S. used a quarter of its THAAD missile interceptors during the 12-day war in June alone. The Guardian reported in July that the U.S. only had 25% of the Patriot missile interceptors it would need for the Pentagon’s future military plans — with many already sent to Ukraine (and more promised).

Indeed, we knew back in 2024 during the fighting with the Houthis that the U.S. was expending overpriced, ridiculously expensive missiles to counter cheap Houthi weaponry. According to reports we were expending Tomahawk cruise missiles, air to air, and air to surface missiles at an amazing clip. That is likely one of the reasons Trump ended that conflict so abruptly.

Don't think that experts haven't already warned that Operation Epic Fury could be limited by these realities. On March 1, one day after Trump announced his war, the Wall Street Journal quoted several who said just that.

“The Trump administration has fired TLAMS (Tomahawks) at an extraordinary rate in operations around the globe, in the Middle East against Iran and the Houthis as well as in Nigeria on Christmas Day,” said Becca Wasser, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security. “When we wargame, TLAMS are some of the first munitions to go within that first week of a U.S.-China conflict."

While tons of money has gone into the industry to start rebuilding the stockpiles we know that will take years to happen, especially for the more "high end" stuff, as Trump refers to it.

"We have a peacetime defense industrial base, and we've had that for decades…we're not really set up to quickly produce things,” Fredenburg told RS back in October. “We don’t know how much more capacity they can squeeze out of existing facilities.”

Having Israel as a "partner" in the war is no help either. The WSJ quotes officials who say they are low on supply too, particularly Arrow 3 air-defense interceptors, and air-launched ballistic missiles — "a weapon it used to take out Iranian missile launchers this summer and to attack Hamas leaders in Qatar last year."

Suggesting the U.S. has enough weapons for a "forever" war is wrong and Trump must know he is gaslighting everyone who ever voted for him because he said he would never get America into another forever war. But what he is doing is ultimately destructive to our military and national defense too. He is signaling that he would be willing to bleed the stockpiles dry to prove a point. He might just end up doing it.



Top photo credit: . DoD photo by Staff Sgt. Vince Parker, U.S. Air Force.
google cta
QiOSK
Did the US only attack Iran because of Israel?
Top image credit: President Donald J. Trump holds a joint news conference at the White House with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Feb. 4, 2025. (Shutterstock/ Joshua Sukoff)

Did the US only attack Iran because of Israel?

QiOSK

In the months that led up to the Iraq War, the Bush administration went to extraordinary lengths to convince the world of the need to oust Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. Leading officials laid out their case in public, sharing what they claimed was evidence that Iraq was moving rapidly toward the deployment of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. When U.S. tanks rolled across the border, everyone knew the justification: the U.S. was determined to thwart Iraq’s development of weapons of mass destruction, however fictitious that threat would later prove to be.

In the months that led up to the Iran War, the Trump administration took a different tack. President Trump spoke only occasionally of Iran, offering a smattering of justifications for growing U.S. tensions with the country. He claimed without evidence that Iran was rebuilding its nuclear program after the U.S.-Israeli attack last June and even developing missiles that could strike the United States. But he insisted that Tehran could make a deal with seven magic words: “we will never have a nuclear weapon.”

keep readingShow less
Starmer Macron Merz
Top image credit: France's President Emmanuel Macron, Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Germany's Chancellor Friedrich Merz arrive at Kyiv railway station on May 10, 2025, ahead of a gathering of European leaders in the Ukrainian capital. LUDOVIC MARIN/Pool via REUTERS
Europe's snapback gamble risks killing diplomacy with Iran

Craven Europeans give US and Israel a blank check for illegal war

Middle East

In the aftermath of the new U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran, the transatlantic alliance has offered a response that confirmed what many both in the West and outside knew all along: that for London, Paris, Berlin, and Brussels, the "rules-based international order" has been reduced to a simple, brutal premise: might makes right, provided the might is Western.

The joint statement from the E3 — France, Germany, and the United Kingdom — is a master class in evasion. "We did not participate in these strikes, but are in close contact with our international partners, including the United States and Israel," they declared. The text also lists all the references and rationalizations used by Iran hawks — “nuclear program, ballistic missile program, regional destabilization and repression against its own people.”

keep readingShow less
Trump Iran
Top image credit: Hundreds of people attend a pro-democracy demonstration against U.S. President Donald Trump in Washington, D.C., U.S., on February 28, 2026. Demonstrators cited a number of reasons for their opposition to Trump, including his involvement with sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, ICE raids, authoritarian policies, and today’s bombing of Iran. (Photo by Allison Bailey/NurPhoto) via REUTERS CONNECT

How does this war with Iran end? Or does it?

QiOSK

Now that President Trump has launched an illegal, unprovoked war of choice on Iran, the next question inevitably becomes: how does this end? Or, what are some off ramps Trump can take to end it before the situation turns out of control?

There are three broad scenarios; the first and most likely is that Trump continues this until he gets some sort of regime implosion and then declares victory, while also washing his hands of whatever follows.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.