thousands of soldiers converted into Tomahawks that the US no longer has
In recent times, the United States has fought many of its wars without the need to deploy large contingents on the front lines, relying on weapons capable of traveling more than 1,500 kilometers with millimeter precision and being launched from thousands of kilometers away. But there is a detail which can be crucial: replenishing that type of weaponry can take years, not weeks. The Tomahawk countdown. The United States has based the start of the conflict on a key advantage: hit at distance without exposing itself, relying massively on cruise missiles Tomahawk. However, that advantage is evaporating at high speed, with more than 850 missiles launched in just one month, a figure that represents a significant part of the total available arsenal and that has led some commanders to openly speak of “alarmingly low” levels. The problem is not only how much has been spent, but how slowly can be replaced: They are manufactured in limited quantities, they take years to produce and their intensive use in multiple recent conflicts has left a stock much more fragile than the official discourse makes it seem. From remote war to direct risk. Because the Tomahawk is not just another weapon, it is the pillar that allows Washington attack without risk pilots or troops in highly defended environments. From that perspective, its wear and tear completely changes the nature of the conflict, because it forces remote attacks to be replaced. for closer operationswhere planes and soldiers are much more exposed. In fact, the very development of the campaign already points to this turn: after the first long-distance blows, the United States has had to resort to more conventional ammunition and to deeper incursions, accepting a level of risk that at the beginning of the war he had managed to avoid almost completely. The Arleigh Burke-class destroyer USS Bainbridge fires Tomahawk missiles from the deck while underway in the eastern Mediterranean, in support of Operation Epic Fury, March 3, 2026 A scarcity that conditions. It we have counted before. The accelerated consumption of these missiles not only affects the war in Iran, but also opens a much bigger problem: Leaves the Pentagon with less room for other critical scenarios, especially in the Indo-Pacific facing China. Let’s think that Tomahawks are a of the key pieces for any high-intensity conflict against a similar power, and its reduction poses a obvious strategic dilemma: continue spending them in the Middle East or save them for a possible much more demanding confrontation. In fact, the urgency has reached the point of proposing missile transfers from other regions and put pressure on the industry to multiply production, something that, in any case, it will take years to take effect. The arrival of troops. In parallel to this silent attrition, the United States is moving thousands of soldiers to the region, in a buildup that could exceed 17,000 troops ready to operate near Iran. Although officially it is presented as a measure of pressure or preparation for contingencies, the context reveals another reading– As the ability to hit from afar decreases, the need to have options on the ground. Marines, parachutistsspecial forces and logistical support units are being positioned for missions ranging from securing sea routes to capturing strategic objectives or nuclear facilities. Possible missions, real risks. Because the operations that are being considered are not minor or fast, but complex interventions in highly hostile environments: take key islandssecure points in the Strait of Hormuz or even penetrate Iranian territory to neutralize critical assets such as uranium. Each of these scenarios involves facing missiles, drones, naval mines and prepared local forces, with the added risk of operating in tight areas and under constant fire. Unlike missile attacks, there is no safety distance: once on the ground, troops become concentrated and vulnerable targetsrelying on aerial and defensive coverage that is also under pressure. The turn towards a more dangerous war. Inevitably, the result is a profound change in the logic of conflict: what began as a campaign dominated by technology and reach is transforming into a situation where the human factor returns to the center. If you will also, a key idea aims to clearly prevail, one where the war in Iran is approaching a unprecedented scenario for the United States, and where thousands of its soldiers may have to assume the role they previously Tomahawks played. Not by strategic choice, but by necessity, in a context where the shortage of high-precision ammunition coincides with an accumulation growing number of troops ready to intervene in one of the most dangerous environments in the world. Image | US Navy In Xataka | Iran has achieved something unprecedented in the Middle East: that the US has to abandon its military bases In Xataka | While the US bombs Iran, something unusual has happened: drones attacking the nuclear bases in North Dakota
