K2-HMFIC said:

---

DTP02 said:

---

K2-HMFIC said:

---

It will take 5+ years to replace 39 days of munitions used in the Iran war

What an absolute disaster pic.twitter.com/QRhK1f2hi8

— Saagar Enjeti (@esaagar) May 28, 2026

Hope China doesn't decide to invade Taiwan anytime soon…we're basically going to be in the **** chair for that one.

---

I think people casually dismissing the resources we've a used to prosecute this war are being very narrow-minded and short-sighted.

But since you're a military guy I'd expect to see some type of analysis regarding which of those munitions we'd need to engage in Taiwan before assessing how much it handicaps us.

---

A Pacific war is fundamentally a missile war.

China's entire strategy is built around massed missile fires designed to keep the US military OUT of the first island chain long enough to overrun Taiwan before we can effectively respond.

That means:

DF-21 and DF-26 anti-ship ballistic missiles targeting carriers

Massive cruise missile strikes on Okinawa, Guam, Kadena, Andersen, fuel farms, ports, and logistics hubs

Saturation attacks against air defenses and runways

Long-range strikes intended to degrade C2, ISR, and sustainment

The munitions CSIS is talking about are the backbone of surviving that opening phase.

Patriot/THAAD/SM-3:These are what protect bases, ports, logistics nodes, and carrier strike groups from ballistic and cruise missile attack. If those inventories run low, you start losing aircraft on the ground, fuel storage, ports, and air defense coverage.

Tomahawks:These are among the few weapons we can fire in large numbers from submarines and surface ships at long range in the opening days of a conflict. They're critical for suppressing Chinese air defenses, radar sites, missile launchers, and command nodes before manned aircraft can operate more freely.

SM-6:Arguably one of the most important weapons in the inventory because it can do multiple jobs: air defense, anti-missile work, and even anti-ship strike.

The bigger issue is this:China has spent 25 years preparing for an industrialized regional war in the Pacific. The US spent 25 years fighting insurgencies while optimizing for low munition expenditure rates.

The uncomfortable realization now hitting DC is that modern peer war burns through precision munitions at a rate the US defense industrial base was never designed to sustain.

---

So your position is China will start a war with the US and Japan while trying to take Taiwan?

It doesn't hurt our ability to strike, but it definitely hurts our ability to sustain that ability for very long in a major conflict. Surely you don't believe "we could have a surplus in a week". It took arguably the largest wartime mobilization ever and alot more than a week to start cranking out weapons in WWII, and those were weapons that could essentially be built in a machine shop. It is ok to admit we have a problem (using a ton of stuff) and need to fix it (make more stuff faster).

Stupe said:

---

It's almost funny how many people think this is putting a dent in U.S. strike ability.

We speed up and slow down production depending on need.

If the DOW wanted to make more than we launch, we would have a surplus in a week.

---

Your estimate of the lead times is exactly the opposite of everyone with any expertise in the industry. Even Trump fanboys acknowledge that this is and has been an issue.

We're not talking about cranking out another shift of 5.56 rounds in Lake City. These are smart weapons with high tech components using rare earth minerals in many cases. Just sourcing some of the raw materials is becoming a battleground. You can't just flip the switch on these.

Heck, man, the idea that the US Defense bureaucracy can move quickly on anything is a nonstarter.

So, I am confused... aren't those stockpiles meant for taking out large combatants... like, for instance... Iran....

Why are we expecting to not have fewer rockets after taking ... Iran... down in a month?

So we can shoot off most of our arsenal in 39 days? What happens if get into a longer term war with someone that can shoot back - ie like China.

DTP02 said:

---

army01 said:

---

At current rates, he's not wrong. It would absolutely take that long. Contracts have been signed to increase production levels, but those take time to ramp up. Couple in the pricing fluctuations of the raw material required to manufacture said munitions, the cost is increasing as well. Initial lead times will also increase as the raw mat suppliers work to increase their capacity. It's not a good situation to be in for the moment. This administration should have waited a year to launch this large of an attack (especially given last summer's Operation Midnight Hammer attack).

---

Israel called the shot on the timing.

---

I don't disagree. But get your little buddy in line, or let him get swatted down a peg or two rather than your own on the line.

The one thing this administration has proven time and time again is that no one with any real plan is in control. They constantly contradict themselves. Do things that make things harder for other areas of the government. But then they all come together for a cabinet meeting to play kiss ass so that they aren't the next to get ****canned.

Stupe said:

---

It's almost funny how many people think this is putting a dent in U.S. strike ability.

We speed up and slow down production depending on need.

If the DOW wanted to make more than we launch, we would have a surplus in a week.

---

Guessing you are not in any sort of manufacturing industry. When your lead times for raw materials are stretching into years rather than weeks, there is no just flipping a switch. And DPAS ratings aren't going to mean much if every contract is pushed to a DX level.

I just don't lose sleep thinking that social media has any idea what our munitions stockpile looks like.

K2-HMFIC said:

---

eric76 said:

---

LMCane said:

---

Enjeti is a long time Israel hater and part of the Tucker Carlson foreign policy club.

for years he has simped for Russia and Iran and Syria.



the REAL answer: the USA has a @#$@# load more munitions than Iran does!

---

The real question is "do we have a @#$@# load more munitions than other potential adversaries do?"

---

Sure. Everyone.

Except the People's Liberation Army.

---

You have zero clue whether that is true or not!

army01 said:

---

Stupe said:

---

It's almost funny how many people think this is putting a dent in U.S. strike ability.

We speed up and slow down production depending on need.

If the DOW wanted to make more than we launch, we would have a surplus in a week.

---

Guessing you are not in any sort of manufacturing industry. When your lead times for raw materials are stretching into years rather than weeks, there is no just flipping a switch. And DPAS ratings aren't going to mean much if every contract is pushed to a DX level.

---

I'm not.

But what I posted about speeding up and slowing was straight from the mouths of friends that have been in weapons manufacturing or design.

I was being facetious with the "in a week". I just meant that we are not 5 years behind like the guy in the tweet was saying.

K2-HMFIC said:

---

It will take 5+ years to replace 39 days of munitions used in the Iran war

What an absolute disaster pic.twitter.com/QRhK1f2hi8

— Saagar Enjeti (@esaagar) May 28, 2026

Hope China doesn't decide to invade Taiwan anytime soon…we're basically going to be in the **** chair for that one.

---

Fun fact, that guy is the son of an EE professor at TAMU

https://engineering.tamu.edu/electrical/profiles/penjeti.html

On the scale of long term bad things for the US and the rest of the globe Iran having a nuke is #1. If they get nukes those crazy bass-tards will use them. They will also hold the rest of the world hostage like they are doing with the Straight. Everything else is just noise. Re: China/Taiwan let's be real. That threat has been around for decades and has not really changed much. Some saber rattling here and there but nothing has changed. Iran getting a nuke changes the math drastically.

Why America rocks: Four dudes from Austin with a $10 billion grant can make us about 1 million autonomous drones with C4 payloads to replace all of these missiles by Christmas.

CardiffGiant said:

---

On the scale of long term bad things for the US and the rest of the globe Iran having a nuke is #1. If they get nukes those crazy bass-tards will use them. They will also hold the rest of the world hostage like they are doing with the Straight. Everything else is just noise. Re: China/Taiwan let's be real. That threat has been around for decades and has not really changed much. Some saber rattling here and there but nothing has changed. Iran getting a nuke changes the math drastically.

---

That's a bet your making…but just be aware if it goes wrong…China taking Taiwan is likely worse than Iran getting a nuke.

Stupe said:

---

army01 said:

---

Stupe said:

---

It's almost funny how many people think this is putting a dent in U.S. strike ability.

We speed up and slow down production depending on need.

If the DOW wanted to make more than we launch, we would have a surplus in a week.

---

Guessing you are not in any sort of manufacturing industry. When your lead times for raw materials are stretching into years rather than weeks, there is no just flipping a switch. And DPAS ratings aren't going to mean much if every contract is pushed to a DX level.

---

I'm not.

But what I posted about speeding up and slowing was straight from the mouths of friends that have been in weapons manufacturing or design.

I was being facetious with the "in a week". I just meant that we are not 5 years behind like the guy in the tweet was saying.

---

That's basically what hegseth said a few weeks ago, and Cao said in testimony the Taiwan arms sale will be held up because of our munitions shortfalls.

Isn't much of this deficiency going to be negated by the switch to more drone technology which is considerably less expensive and faster to scale? The days of needing a $3 million missile for every job are long gone.

BTKAG97 said:

---

Also hilarious how 2 months in Iran is a complete disastor that has used up our munitions stockpile but 20 years in Iraq and Afganistan wasn't a problem at all.

---

Uhm, they're all problems. Every one of them were and are just money laundering operations.

I was told giving Ukraine infinity munitions and dollars was a conservative bogeyman and that we have to burn through stockpiles regularly.

Anything to attack Trump I guess.

bonfarr said:

---

Isn't much of this deficiency going to be negated by the switch to more drone technology which is considerably less expensive and faster to scale? The days of needing a $3 million missile for every job are long gone.

---

Lol. This is like saying an e-bike should be able to win an F1 race.

Decay said:

---

I was told giving Ukraine infinity munitions and dollars was a conservative bogeyman and that we have to burn through stockpiles regularly.

Anything to attack Trump I guess.

---

How many Tomahawks (5 yrs to replace) did we give UKR?

Quote:

---

That's a bet your making…but just be aware if it goes wrong…China taking Taiwan is likely worse than Iran getting a nuke.

---

Maybe... Unless you're the target of the nuke they'd 100% use if they had it. (note: "use" means deploy or blackmail)

I'm old enough to have had to "duck and cover" in school drills. Remember tanks going down the road during the Cuban Missile Crisis. I'm thankful for Hiroshima and Nagasaki, because w/out those there would have been nukes used since then. Nothing is or can be worse.

#1: Saagar Enjeti's father is none other than the feared ELEN prof who benevolently introduced many 90s Ags to the joy of power electronics.

#2: Our defense production is a gaping vulnerability, a bucket compared to the drop of depletion due to the Iran War. If our campaign there is sufficient to mobilize the needed resources and capacity before China's window to Taiwan opens, it's a generational victory.

#3: Ditto for our entree into drone warfare. We're behind in that race (at least behind Ukraine in terms of drone defense), and this missile "shortage" is also a great launching point for reallocating some focus into that space.

K2-HMFIC said:

---

It will take 5+ years to replace 39 days of munitions used in the Iran war

What an absolute disaster pic.twitter.com/QRhK1f2hi8

— Saagar Enjeti (@esaagar) May 28, 2026

Hope China doesn't decide to invade Taiwan anytime soon…we're basically going to be in the **** chair for that one.

---

I do not trust his spread sheet to use for toilet paper. If you think the numbers on this sheet would be actually numbers that are stockpiled by our military, then I have some numbers on swamp land in East Texas I would like to show you.

FWTXAg said:

---

BTKAG97 said:

---

Also hilarious how 2 months in Iran is a complete disastor that has used up our munitions stockpile but 20 years in Iraq and Afganistan wasn't a problem at all.

---

Uhm, they're all problems. Every one of them were and are just money laundering operations.

---

No arguement there.

It's just disingenuous to act like bombing Iran now is some kind of giant clucster**** that has strategically put the United States in great peril when over my 50+ years on this planet, the US has barely gone a year without bombing the crap out of some other country.

I trust we are watching and learning and adapting to rapid changes in warfare in Ukraine, and already implementing changes and seeking out new platforms, particularly drone and anti drone weapons suited for mass drone battlefields.

Why don't we load up on much cheaper drones? We can still have some of our high dollar missiles for when that makes sense but it makes more sense to have huge stockpiles of drone to overwhelm anyone's defenses, cheaply.

AColunga07 said:

---

Why don't we load up on much cheaper drones? We can still have some of our high dollar missiles for when that makes sense but it makes more sense to have huge stockpiles of drone to overwhelm anyone's defenses, cheaply.

---

Quote:

---

Patriot/THAAD/SM-3:These are what protect bases, ports, logistics nodes, and carrier strike groups from ballistic and cruise missile attack. If those inventories run low, you start losing aircraft on the ground, fuel storage, ports, and air defense coverage.

Tomahawks:These are among the few weapons we can fire in large numbers from submarines and surface ships at long range in the opening days of a conflict. They're critical for suppressing Chinese air defenses, radar sites, missile launchers, and command nodes before manned aircraft can operate more freely.

SM-6:Arguably one of the most important weapons in the inventory because it can do multiple jobs: air defense, anti-missile work, and even anti-ship strike.

---

Drones don't do this.

DTP02 said:

---

army01 said:

---

At current rates, he's not wrong. It would absolutely take that long. Contracts have been signed to increase production levels, but those take time to ramp up. Couple in the pricing fluctuations of the raw material required to manufacture said munitions, the cost is increasing as well. Initial lead times will also increase as the raw mat suppliers work to increase their capacity. It's not a good situation to be in for the moment. This administration should have waited a year to launch this large of an attack (especially given last summer's Operation Midnight Hammer attack).

---

Israel called the shot on the timing.

---

Clarification: Israel had actionable, high quality intelligence on the location of Iran's leadership at a specific point in time. The unique opportunity to perform a decapitation strike on Iran is what dictated the timing.

BTKAG97 said:

---

FWTXAg said:

---

BTKAG97 said:

---

Also hilarious how 2 months in Iran is a complete disastor that has used up our munitions stockpile but 20 years in Iraq and Afganistan wasn't a problem at all.

---

Uhm, they're all problems. Every one of them were and are just money laundering operations.

---

No arguement there.

It's just disingenuous to act like bombing Iran now is some kind of giant clucster**** that has strategically put the United States in great peril when over my 50+ years on this planet, the US has barely gone a year without bombing the crap out of some other country.

---

Haha yeah. We're not in great peril and never were. Haven't been since World War II and maybe not even then.

War just a way for our politicians to pay back their Military Industrial Complex donors. The Middle Eastern wars kill two birds with one stone on that front.

I for one am SHOCKED that the for profit military industrial complex is messaging that we need to pay them trillions of dollars to replace the missiles we used doing the thing they advocated hard that we should do.

Nope, no conflict of interest there at all

G Martin 87 said:

---

DTP02 said:

---

army01 said:

---

At current rates, he's not wrong. It would absolutely take that long. Contracts have been signed to increase production levels, but those take time to ramp up. Couple in the pricing fluctuations of the raw material required to manufacture said munitions, the cost is increasing as well. Initial lead times will also increase as the raw mat suppliers work to increase their capacity. It's not a good situation to be in for the moment. This administration should have waited a year to launch this large of an attack (especially given last summer's Operation Midnight Hammer attack).

---

Israel called the shot on the timing.

---

Clarification: Israel had actionable, high quality intelligence on the location of Iran's leadership at a specific point in time. The unique opportunity to perform a decapitation strike on Iran is what dictated the timing.

---

We might need to change the definition of decapitated.

FWTXAg said:

---

G Martin 87 said:

---

DTP02 said:

---

army01 said:

---

At current rates, he's not wrong. It would absolutely take that long. Contracts have been signed to increase production levels, but those take time to ramp up. Couple in the pricing fluctuations of the raw material required to manufacture said munitions, the cost is increasing as well. Initial lead times will also increase as the raw mat suppliers work to increase their capacity. It's not a good situation to be in for the moment. This administration should have waited a year to launch this large of an attack (especially given last summer's Operation Midnight Hammer attack).

---

Israel called the shot on the timing.

---

Clarification: Israel had actionable, high quality intelligence on the location of Iran's leadership at a specific point in time. The unique opportunity to perform a decapitation strike on Iran is what dictated the timing.

---

We might need to change the definition of decapitated.

---

Why? Iran's executive leadership in place on that day was terminated. That Iran kept finding less experienced replacements to promote doesn't change the reality that their former bosses were killed. The point is that we, thanks to Israel, had a short lived opportunity and took it. Waiting a year would have been pointless.

G Martin 87 said:

---

FWTXAg said:

---

G Martin 87 said:

---

DTP02 said:

---

army01 said:

---

At current rates, he's not wrong. It would absolutely take that long. Contracts have been signed to increase production levels, but those take time to ramp up. Couple in the pricing fluctuations of the raw material required to manufacture said munitions, the cost is increasing as well. Initial lead times will also increase as the raw mat suppliers work to increase their capacity. It's not a good situation to be in for the moment. This administration should have waited a year to launch this large of an attack (especially given last summer's Operation Midnight Hammer attack).

---

Israel called the shot on the timing.

---

Clarification: Israel had actionable, high quality intelligence on the location of Iran's leadership at a specific point in time. The unique opportunity to perform a decapitation strike on Iran is what dictated the timing.

---

We might need to change the definition of decapitated.

---

Why? Iran's executive leadership in place on that day was terminated. That Iran kept finding less experienced replacements to promote doesn't change the reality that their former bosses were killed. The point is that we, thanks to Israel, had a short lived opportunity and took it. Waiting a year would have been pointless.

---

Doing whatever we did will also prove to be pointless.

LMCane said:

---

eric76 said:

---

LMCane said:

---

Enjeti is a long time Israel hater and part of the Tucker Carlson foreign policy club.

for years he has simped for Russia and Iran and Syria.



the REAL answer: the USA has a @#$@# load more munitions than Iran does!

---

The real question is "do we have a @#$@# load more munitions than other potential adversaries do?"

---

ASK THE RUSSIANS

---

We've functionally cut Kiev off finally. Solid rocket motor production isn't easily quadrupled in a hurry, but it will happen. Another reason to cancel SLS as soon as possible, imho (and wasteful rockets such as Vulcan centaur that rely on SRB's). Focus the base (Boeing/Raytheon/NG/LM primarily) on printing as many interceptors of various types as possible, for us and our actual allies.

At the height of the war effort during WW2, the US was pushing out a B-24 heavy bomber once an hour. And that was at a single Ford plant in Michigan.

We're fine.