The United States has fired more than 850 Tomahawk cruise missiles at Iran in just four weeks, a pace that is beginning to worry officials inside the Pentagon, according to The Washington Post.
The Tomahawk, a precision weapon famous since the 1991 Gulf War, costs about $3.6 million each and can take up to two years to build. The U.S. budget last year included only 57 of them, making the recent rate of use unsustainable, several defense officials warned.
One official described the remaining supply in the Middle East as “alarmingly low,” while another cautioned that, without quick action, the U.S. could soon run out of Tomahawks in the region. Pentagon planners are now debating whether to divert missiles from other parts of the world or accelerate production.
Still, officials in Washington are publicly downplaying the concerns. Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell insisted the U.S. military “has everything it needs to execute any mission at the time and place of the President’s choosing.” He accused the media of trying to portray “the world’s strongest military” as weak.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt made a similar statement, assuring reporters that the United States has “ample munitions and stockpiles” to fulfill the goals of Operation Epic Fury, the name of the ongoing conflict with Iran.
Despite these reassurances, analysts suggest the strain on U.S. stockpiles could affect readiness for other global threats. Mark Cancian, a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said that using more than 800 Tomahawks leaves “a large gap for a conflict in the Western Pacific.” His think tank estimated that the U.S. Navy had about 3,100 Tomahawks before the war began.
“It could take several years to replenish them,” Cancian noted.
With each Tomahawk capable of striking targets more than 1,000 miles away from warships or submarines, they have long been prized as one of America’s safest weapons. Now, their rapid use has raised a new kind of question, how long can the U.S. keep up the fire?
