Is the U.S. Running Out of Ammo?

Is the U.S. Running Out of Ammo?

^{The military needs more munitions, but there are enough for the Iran fight.}

By The Editorial Board WSJ March 3, 2026

A U.S. Airman attaches a GBU-31 munitions system to an F-15E Strike Eagle in the U.S. Central Command area, Dec. 19, 2025. U.s. Air Force/Handout/Reuters

President Trump’s military campaign in Iran is still in its early days, but the press is playing the wrap-it-up music by warning that America and its allies lack air defenses for a long fight. This argument is usually cover for opposing U.S. action for other reasons, but part of the President’s job is asking Congress for money to expand U.S. arsenals.

U.S. forces are intercepting Iranian missiles and drones, and some inside the Administration opposed strikes because the U.S. would burn too many interceptors needed to deter China and other bad actors. The President posted on Truth Social this week that the U.S. has “a good supply” of the “highest end” munitions, and inventories are classified.

The Commander in Chief can’t broadcast to Iran that the U.S. is about to go Winchester, but it’s no secret the free world needs more air defense rounds. That’s a core reason the U.S. needs to eliminate the threat from Iran’s drone production and missile program. The answer isn’t surrender but to exploit U.S. air dominance over Iran and destroy missile launchers on the ground before they can shoot.

Mr. Trump will also have to elevate U.S. weapons lines to a national priority. The Pentagon has been working to expand production of essential fires, including advanced Patriots and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense interceptors (Thaad), both working overtime this week.

Lockheed Martin is aiming to hit 2,000 advanced Patriot rounds a year by 2030, up from about 600 now, and to quadruple Thaad production from 96. But faster deliveries will require the President to make the case for more defense money. Iranian drones honed on the battlefield in Ukraine now pose novel air-defense problems and require cheaper interceptors, which also means budgets have to rise.

The Administration proposed a flat after inflation defense budget for 2026. The Pentagon then late last year informed lawmakers it was short billions for its expanded munitions goals. A Capitol Hill aide tells us about $20 billion needed for critical munitions is still unfunded.

The President will have willing allies if he sends Congress a supplemental military funding request, and GOP Sen. Mitch McConnell has been warning, including in our pages, about insufficient money for munitions. Why not propose some weapons support for Ukraine and the Iran campaign and dare Democrats to oppose it?

Meanwhile, those who say the U.S. should hoard its air defense for another day are wrong for at least two fundamental reasons. The first is about the nature of the Iranian threat.

Iran is a dedicated enemy of the U.S., but it is also a nesting doll inside a larger challenge from Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin. If you doubt it, read the recent press reports that Beijing may sell Tehran sophisticated antiship missiles that could target American aircraft carriers and destroyers. Beijing is playing in every region in the world.

The second error is about the nature of deterrence, because political will matters as much as military power. The U.S. can choose to build more weapons with long-term contracts, bulk ordering scarce parts, and co-production with allies. Ditto for shifting some of the portfolio to cheaper interceptors in development at defense tech companies.

But it doesn’t matter how many missiles are in the cabinet if our enemies conclude America won’t accept risk to defend itself. Secretary of State Marco Rubio is right to suggest that the U.S. can’t let Iran build 100 missiles a month while we build six interceptors. The sleeper risk to U.S. weapons supplies is retreating from the fight before Iran’s capacity to menace the world is eliminated.