Can the US military sustain a long war in Iran?
Can the US Military Sustain a Long War in Iran?
On February 28, the United States initiated Operation Epic Fury in Iran, marking a significant escalation in regional tensions. In the subsequent week, the US executed thousands of attacks across the country, utilizing over 20 weapon systems across air, land, and sea. Among the targets struck was Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, who was reportedly eliminated in the first phase of US-Israeli operations.
President Donald Trump claimed the war could extend beyond four to five weeks, emphasizing the US’s “capability to go far longer.” His defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, echoed this confidence, stating that “munitions stockpiles have never been higher or better” and that the nation’s arsenal allows for sustained operations. General Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, concurred, asserting that “precision munitions are sufficient for the task at hand” on both offensive and defensive fronts.
Cost Efficiency Under Scrutiny
However, the financial burden of maintaining this campaign raises questions. Kelly Grieco, a senior fellow at the Stimson Center, highlighted that while the US has ample supplies of lower-tier weapons, the most advanced systems face critical shortages. “There are real limitations on stockpiles at the highest end,” she noted, referring to long-range missiles and interceptors.
“The cost of operating a fighter jet for an hour equals the price of a Shahed-136 drone. It’s not efficient. It’s not a favorable cost exchange,” said Grieco.
Iran’s Shahed-136 drones, costing between $20,000 and $50,000 each, have been a major threat to US and allied targets. Defending against them requires costly measures, such as deploying fighter jets armed with AIM-9 missiles, which cost $450,000 per launch. Additionally, operating these jets demands $40,000 per hour, making the defense effort increasingly expensive.
Grieco suggested lessons from Ukraine could be applied, pointing out that cheaper interceptor drones exist but have not been procured in enough quantity. Meanwhile, more expensive Patriot missiles—priced around $3 million each—are reserved for countering Iran’s ballistic missiles. Mark Cancian, a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, warned that these high-grade weapons are being depleted rapidly.
“At the beginning, I think there were about 1,000 Patriots. Now we’ve already used 200-300 of them,” Cancian remarked. “These top-tier systems take time to produce. Lockheed Martin delivered just 620 PAC-3 interceptors in 2025, and it would take at least two years to acquire more.”
For shorter-range weapons like bombs and Hellfire missiles, the situation appears more manageable. Cancian stated, “Militarily, we could sustain this for a very long time. We have the ground munitions to do so.” Yet, the White House’s recent push to ramp up production of high-grade weaponry remains a point of debate. On March 6, Trump met with defense firms, announcing that manufacturers had agreed to quadruple output of advanced systems. However, Grieco questioned the urgency, noting that many of these agreements had already been finalized in prior months.
As the conflict continues, the balance between offensive momentum and defensive strain becomes increasingly delicate. The US’s ability to sustain the war hinges on both logistical capacity and the speed of replenishing its most critical weapons.
