Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. used 'virtually all' of its long-range precision missiles during Iran war

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 774 posts

Re: U.S. used 'virtually all' of its long-range precision missiles during Iran war

#321

Post by msabalau »

steveBK123 wrote: post #202
irishcule wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the US military absolutely could control Hormuz. I'm confident it's quite capable of it. It's that the US public wouldn't support the immense cost in lives and treasure it would take to do it, and maintain that control I never understood these kinds of arguments and they always come from those defending US military might. Either they can do it or they cannot, if "the US public wouldn't support the immense cost in l…

Right I think its only an interesting argument in separating existential vs non-existential threats to the country. So it means we aren't fighting in Iran the way we would in defending a hypothetical invasion of the lower 48 states, great. But does it mean we'd fight any differently in the South China Sea, a Russian incursion into Poland, etc. Unclear, and presidential whim based.

The American public has shown willingness over decades and decades to commit to long term wars of choice. Not infinitely patient, but patient.

Of course, other Presidents have been willing to put in some sort of effort to make to make a case. And usually have some of theory of victory or purpose. And generally avoid making weird random claims about invading NATO allies.

Re: U.S. used 'virtually all' of its long-range precision missiles during Iran war

#322

Post by Arodex »

bluegatty wrote: post #175
Arodex wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If you want to see what 'destructive' is, just look at Russian engagement in Ukraine, or Assad in Syria, or Saudi in Yemen. They don't care what they hit, it's a totally different environment. Show us the difference with Vietnam (and Cambodia). And the Caribbean.

The difference is deliberate and arbitrary attack of civilians at scale and total lack of concern - popularly, politically, operationally, and practically for casualties outside military targeting. The notion one would even try to compare 'the Caribbean' - where USN is destroying drug running boats - which is arguably against some maritime laws but is nevertheless exceedingly acute, I think shows how wound up people…

>where USN is destroying drug running boats

>which is arguably against some maritime laws

You get it completely backwards: the US Navy is "allegedly" destroying drug running boats, and it is completely, totally, "inarguably" against maritime laws - and laws of war (but there is no war, right?) and basic law principles in civilized countries.

>it's an Elephant precisely stepping on a single ant.

It is not a cute animal simile. It is US Navy sailors commiting 200+ summary executions. It is burning alive and drowning. It is widows and orphans.

Re: U.S. used 'virtually all' of its long-range precision missiles during Iran war

#323

Post by jonny_eh »

pandinus wrote: post #301

"There's no such thing as public opinion, merely published opinion". While on the one hand we should never discount the impact of incompetence, gross negligence, or deliberate mismanagement there's a reason this story is circulating. For the most-dominant military power in the world to "whoopsy" run out of weapons because of a low-stakes engagement isn't readily believable. Suspicious me likens it to the supposed "wa…

Most dominant does not mean most intelligent

Re: U.S. used 'virtually all' of its long-range precision missiles during Iran war

#324

Post by 0cf8612b2e1e »

nonethewiser wrote: post #81
mupuff1234 wrote: post #64

> A fourth person familiar with the matter said that while Central Command — which oversees U.S. forces in the Middle East — has nearly used up the land-based missiles it had before the war began, it has been able to reload from U.S. military supplies elsewhere in the world. The title seems fairy inaccurate

It also says they declined to say how many the US has left. And saying “person familiar with the matter” is doing a lot of work. It could be anyone with no direct information. This is what laundering a bogus story looks like.

Exactly how many people do you think are allowed to communicate the status of weapon stockpiles? You are only ever going to get off-the-record comments or a top official letting details slip that should have remained secret.

Re: U.S. used 'virtually all' of its long-range precision missiles during Iran war

#325

Post by celsoazevedo »

RobertoG wrote: post #44
redwood wrote: post #23

This is already the lifeline Europe is using to save its auto industry from the electric... the US is next. Just need to open up competitive bidding for the production of these components. Licensing patriot production to Ukraine will be a good start... S. Korea next

yeah, let's start all to produce more weapons. What could possible go wrong. What about this? The USA just go home, nobody is going to invade them.

Someone that wants peace shouldn't be happy that, let's say, China is well stocked while the US isn't when we consider China's position on Taiwan and the South China Sea. Russia having multiple production lines for artillery and drones while Europe has sent everything they had to Ukraine isn't good for the balance. And so on.

I'm not saying that you should support whatever is happening with Iran, but understand that if a country thinks no one can punish them if they start shit, then they may do it, and then you end up with war, not peace... the opposite of what you expect.

I don't like it, but "si vis pacem, para bellum": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Si_vis_pacem%2C_para_bellum

Re: U.S. used 'virtually all' of its long-range precision missiles during Iran war

#326

Post by delecti »

grey-area wrote: post #78
Arodex wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>not whatever this spitting match with Iran is. Are you openly saying the president and the secretary of war are lying when they say they have done "massive" bombings of Iran?

The president openly lies all the time. About his pool refurbishment, the size of his crowds and even how good he is at golf.

Yep. And when he's not deliberately lying, he's often confabulating as a late-stage dementia patient.

In short, Trump is not a source.

Re: U.S. used 'virtually all' of its long-range precision missiles during Iran war

#327

Post by abtinf »

sssilver wrote: post #298
joshmarinacci wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you were to count the margin of everything it would be 100%. At the end of the day everything is either a resource harvested from the earth or human labor.

Help me understand this. There's the cost that the employees pocket, and then there's the share that the shareholders pocket, right? Doesn't "margin" represent the latter?

100% of the money ends up going to people.

It’s not like you get to the end of the chain and trade a fistful of dollars with the ingot of aluminum itself.

Re: U.S. used 'virtually all' of its long-range precision missiles during Iran war

#328

Post by O3marchnative »

jimbokun wrote: post #251
SR2Z wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is production capacity. The US has gutted the lower-value parts of its supply chains, closed refineries and foundries left and right, and is thoroughly unequipped to even produce cheap weapons at the rate required to support a war. The number of airplanes built in the US during WWII is greater than all the airplanes NOT in that category. Obviously we can't maintain that level of industry during peacetime,…

And we still manage to spend more than the next six countries combined on our military!

This argument usually depends on how you quantify defense spending, no? [0] In terms of PPP, the U.S. is falling behind. To be perfectly clear, that doesn't somehow absolve the size of U.S. defense spending. If anything, it's damning of all these wunderwaffe projects defense contractors take on and the taxpayer funds.

[0] https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2026/05/11/by-one-m... (no paywall: https://archive.ph/X9zzc)

Re: U.S. used 'virtually all' of its long-range precision missiles during Iran war

#329

Post by sgc »

joshmarinacci wrote: post #292
sssilver wrote: post #277

I'm always confused by prices of "highly regulated" goods in the United States. When I get a $150,000 bill for a 15-minute hand-reconstruction surgery, how much of that bill is the total margin vs self cost? And how much of that is warranted / acceptable? When a single Tomahawk missile bills the taxpayer $3,600,000, how much of that bill is the total margin? When I say "total margin", I mean not just the margin of th…

If you were to count the margin of everything it would be 100%. At the end of the day everything is either a resource harvested from the earth or human labor.

The more common concept of margin used in this context is net profit after expenses, including labor expenses. The question is therefore roughly "How much is purely for capital profit taking rather than directly involved with compensating labor and purchasing materials?".

Re: U.S. used 'virtually all' of its long-range precision missiles during Iran war

#330

Post by plasticsoprano »

hunterpayne wrote: post #271

The US only used long range precision missiles for the first 3 days of the war. Since then, its been almost all JDAMs. The interceptors got used a lot more but even with those we only went through about 5% of the stockpile. This is CNBC. If you trust them on topics like this, well...that's on you. Please remember that they don't have a single person on staff with any military experience or expertise. PS Their source…

Sure. I bet the Military Times also used the IRCG as a source. https://www.militarytimes.com/industry/techwatch/2026/08/04/...

Probably Reuters too https://www.reuters.com/world/us-has-used-virtually-all-its-...

Post reply on HN