The U.S. Army has used up much of its stockpile of highly accurate long-range missiles during its five-month war with Iran, according to three people familiar with the data, raising concerns about the military’s readiness for future conflicts.
The missiles are principally the Army’s surface-to-surface weapons, known as Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) and Precision Strike Missiles (PrSM). The U.S. has used “virtually all” of these weapons, according to two of the sources.
The degree to which the military is running out of ATACMS and Precision Strike Missiles has not been previously reported.
The long-range munitions are an important part the military’s arsenal, allowing accurate strikes from a safe distance. U.S.-supplied ATACMS have played a key role in the war in Ukraine, allowing Ukrainian forces to attack targets inside Russia. The PrSM is a newer, more advanced generation that will replace the ATACMS, which have a shorter range.
Whoa!
How the hell did you leaped from a discussion about “could NATO without the US defend Europe from a Russian attack on it” to “Europe attacking Russia”???!
I don’t know which hole that Russia-Propaganda-favorite strawman was pulled out of, but it stinks and has nothing to do with the point that was being made, either by me or in my understanding by anybody before me.
All of a sudden it’s like the charge of the tankie brigade around here.
Yeah, I’m a Titoist, not a tankie. Chickenhawks like you apparently can’t conceive of any other reason to not support a war, though - that is, as long as you’re not fighting, right?
Russia isn’t attacking Europe. Europe IS pouring money into Ukraine, with the open purpose of bleeding Russia.
If you want to make sure Russia doesn’t attack Europe, it’s already there - nuclear weapons, which France has, and drone factories. You don’t need to create a massive military industrial complex. The only scenario that doesn’t support is Europe attacking Russia - which, from your nonsense about “crushing” Russia, seems to be what you want.