· 176 comments · Save ·
General Mar 27, 2026 at 2:33 PM

Exclusive: U.S. can only confirm about a third of Iran's missile arsenal destroyed, sources say

Posted by pgtl_10

🚩 Report this post

176 Comments

Sign in to comment — or just click the box below.
🔒 Your email is never shown publicly.
HandSack135 Mar 27, 2026 +476
Man completely obliterated has lost all meaning
476
jimtow28 Mar 27, 2026 +165
It's almost like the dude who keeps telling us that is full of shit.
165
thesaddestpanda Mar 27, 2026 +43
The 77m people who voted for him certainly were.
43
EnigmaSpore Mar 27, 2026 +12
they liked that shit he was fling'n. biggots. the whole lot of them.
12
trydola Mar 27, 2026 +52
the only thing obliterated is the US sense of military superiority and our ammo stockpile
52
TeenyTinyHat Mar 27, 2026 +23
nothing a few trillion dollars and some high-budget war films can't fix, right fellas?
23
xynith116 Mar 27, 2026 +10
\*checks national debt\*
10
Artistic-Wolverine-6 Mar 27, 2026 +5
That's how youngsters learn history these days! Now that schools budgets have been cut and Universities punished for teaching facts!
5
RagingBearBull Mar 27, 2026 +7
i keep meaning to look this up, but 3rd century rome keeps popping up all over the place.
7
GuanoLoopy Mar 27, 2026 +27
Maybe we actually just decimated their arsenal, if you take the original meaning to be we took out 10% (deci = 10).
27
Kaffe-Mumriken Mar 27, 2026 +17
Not to mention “imminent”
17
tallperson117 Mar 27, 2026 +7
Oh my god yes. It was crazy hearing some of these fools literally say "they've been an [imminent](https://youtu.be/G2y8Sx4B2Sk?si=WUKZbxMB7BMTaCWD) threat for 40 years!"
7
obedientfag Mar 27, 2026 +6
could have said decimated and it would have been modest, instead exaggerating makes them look like fools
6
snoogins355 Mar 27, 2026 +6
Trumped up, if you will
6
Hacym Mar 27, 2026 +5
A lot of stuff has lost all meaning. 
5
Saneless Mar 27, 2026 +5
Eh, Hesgeth has said that many times and been accurate. But only when talking about himself
5
BaconJacobs Mar 27, 2026 +4
"Decimated" could have been used properly for once lmao It means to reduce by 10%
4
0neshoein Mar 27, 2026 +2
“Record breaking, nobody has ever seen anything like it before, they tell me ‘sir, this is not possible, nobody has ever done it’, but I did it, nobody thought it was possible, uhhh.” Has lost all meaning.
2
fevered_visions Mar 27, 2026 +2
"nobody has ever seen such misuse of the term 'obliterated' before", more like
2
Upset_Development_64 Mar 27, 2026 +2
He speaks in that backwards ass Russian style of language but in English. Russia’s leaders have been using that shit for 400 years and explains why the citizenry sucks for the most part too. Its a testament to the ideals of socialism and democratic influence from the west that we even had some great Russian thinkers, musicians, and philosophers in the past.
2
BeTheBall- Mar 27, 2026 +737
Perhaps less than that, even.
737
pgtl_10 Mar 27, 2026 +294
Probably, previously the claim was 90%, 75%, or 70%. I read the WSJ citing an Israeli sources that admitted they can't destroy Iran's military but I could never find a link to confirm that.
294
CRUSTBUSTICUS Mar 27, 2026 +55
That was the amount of launches per day that was down those percentages from the opening day(s). Let’s at least be consistent, the point made in this article is about the raw number of munitions not their frequency of launch or the number of capable launchers.
55
TachiH Mar 27, 2026 +44
Yeah, it was obvious once Iran realised they weren't being invaded they would slow down to keep back as much of their missiles as possible. They need a good stockpile incase it escalated. Shaheds can be built in a garage so no need to reserve them! The US reported it being them reducing the launches as its good propaganda.
44
roosterthumper Mar 27, 2026 +43
And they fired their older stock piles first to exhaust the expensive patriot batteries. The new munition are faster, guided, can maneuver around defensive fire, or are cluster munitions that can’t be easily intercepted. Iran knew what they were doing and the chuckle heads that were blindly thinking this was as some one sided war against a bunch of goat herders were fools.
43
pgtl_10 Mar 27, 2026 +2
Mind you we made fun of Afghanistan calling them goat herders...
2
padizzledonk Mar 27, 2026 +24
That was always their plan, hit back as hard and as high a volume as possible if the war started and then settle in to long term throw a few to a few dozen a day for a long time. They were aware that they were going to take HEAVY losses in the beginning because they were well aware of U.S and Isreali air superiority and their inability to stop that This was always going to be a war of attrition and economic damage, they actually made all of that very clear for years
24
GovernorHarryLogan Mar 27, 2026 +19
A missle a day keeps the oil shorts at bay!
19
rrfe Mar 27, 2026 +9
For some reason the US and Israel seem to have assumed they were dealing with morons with no agency, snd who had no ability to adapt or plan: IOW the Arab strongmen they previously dealt with.
9
SuccessfulSpring3354 Mar 27, 2026 +3
Considering Iran is attacking it's neighbors with smaller but powerful $5,000 drones and US and Israel are using interceptors that cost millions the math of attrition is on Iran's side. Also Iran has plenty of surprisingly high tech mines that can be laid by small skiffs. Both the Russia/Ukraine conflict and this one feature drone heavy warfare.
3
TimothyMimeslayer Mar 27, 2026 +9
People need to remember, a missile or conventional bomb explosion is relatively small. Like, one missile would take out one building. To level Tehran, it would take tens to hundreds of thousands of missiles. We literally dropped 70,000 tons of explosiveds on Berlin. That is like 140k tomahawk cruise missiles.
9
francis2559 Mar 27, 2026 +3
True, but then like, have you seen Gaza?
3
TimothyMimeslayer Mar 27, 2026 +11
Yeah, they dropped a lot of bombs.
11
Brambletail Mar 28, 2026 +3
Gaza is smaller than Berlin and waay smaller than Tehran
3
CrankyOldDude Mar 27, 2026 +10
Wait until they figure out that the Russians have started supplying the Iranians. (No, I haven’t seen any proof of this yet - but tell me that’s almost certainly not happening given Ukraine, Afghanistan etc). Edit: We're now starting to see reports: https://www.thestar.com/news/world/europe/russia-is-sending-upgraded-drones-used-in-the-ukraine-war-to-iran-officials-say/article_d4db92dc-4196-5651-bd3a-08e61dc0378c.html
10
NekoCatSidhe Mar 27, 2026 +13
Even if the US managed to destroy all of Iran’s drones and missiles and factories somehow, Russia is still going to send them drones so they can threaten the Hormuz Strait and keeps oil prices high, since Russia benefits from that too. It’s only logical for them to do so, sadly.
13
postercars Mar 27, 2026 +2
isnt it just quid pro quo russian iran vs us ukraine
2
NekoCatSidhe Mar 27, 2026 +2
That too, I remember reading that Iran sent them Shahed drones at the beginning of the Ukraine war, until the Russians made their own copies of it.
2
BeTheBall- Mar 27, 2026 +3
Yeah, I've assumed that's the case. Not to mention they've already been giving them intel.
3
HawkeyeByMarriage Mar 27, 2026 +5
They can't confirm anything. There is no telling what they have hidden. And the weapon they have that is the most effective is drones
5
Modz_B_Trippin Mar 27, 2026 +111
>The intelligence stands in contrast to President Donald Trump's public remarks on Thursday that Iran ​had "very few rockets left". Who would have thought it? Trump lied. /s
111
howdudo Mar 27, 2026 +14
Cant they simply trade oil for weapons from China? Is there any reason at all that they are not simply sending weapons disguised as an oil taker? If nobody can stand up to China, and China is their ally, then wtf are they doing
14
LittleKitty235 Mar 27, 2026 +9
Trump also mentioned we have "infinite ammunition", which is a dead giveaway that he has been told that stockpiles are being depleted.
9
lemonylol Mar 27, 2026 +2
Iran has so totally lost and has zero bargaining power that Trump gave them another 10 day extension.
2
Fractal_Froth7777 Mar 27, 2026 +3
No way! 🤯 Why would he do that?
3
Evanescent_contrail Mar 27, 2026 +514
This has got to be the dumbest, most ill conceived war in the last 100 years. I used to be impressed with the US military, but it seems the MAGA love of stupidity-as-a-virtue has permeated the officer corps.
514
zonatedmarz Mar 27, 2026 +118
Well trump did spend an entire year replacing most of the general he viewed as disloyal. When you have nothing but yes man surrounding you, you tend to do stupid shit as military. Look at Russians currently. I've always said Russians and Americans are more alike than they realize.
118
uniklyqualifd Mar 27, 2026 +30
That's why they gathered them in that big meeting in one room. They were probably filming them individually so AI could examine their faces for micro signs of disgust. Very efficient of Elon Musk.
30
Tadpoleonicwars Mar 27, 2026 +11
TBF he also didn't spend an entire year building up the U.S. strategic oil reserve in preparation for the war he planned to start right in the center of the Middle East
11
BannedBenjaminSr Mar 27, 2026 +7
USSR 1940 vibes too
7
Ok_Yak_1844 Mar 27, 2026 +3
When a bunch of dudes on skis are causing you the same amount of problems as the enemies main defense line you know you messed up.
3
zero573 Mar 27, 2026 +3
And now they are even being lead by the same person!
3
WeddingPKM Mar 27, 2026 +116
The American military up until now has been pretty decent at putting itself only in situations it can win, or that a loss could be blamed on the politicians.
116
CliftonForce Mar 27, 2026 +37
The American military was quite adamant that this was a terrible idea, they were not ready, they could not win. The American Administration did not care.
37
AudibleNod Mar 27, 2026 +111
I remember the build-up of during Desert Shield. Thousands of troops. The press conferences were tight lipped but confident. Bush promised it would not be another Vietnam, which was a good sound bite. We had allies, intelligence and overwhelming firepower. There were thousands of troops on ships awaiting an amphibious assault on Iraqi-occupied Kuwait. Then, fukkin sneak attack across the sand! It was touted as [the 100-hour war.](https://teamrwb.org/blog/the-gulf-war-remembering-the-heroes-of-the-100-hours-war) All of that happened because Bush and his team put the generals in charge. Say what you will of the geopolitical fallout after that. The execution of Desert Storm was textbook.
111
hlgb2015 Mar 27, 2026 +31
Desert storm was actually very prophetic of this after the initial destruction of iraqi troops in kuwait and iraq. The coalition was trying to set up civilian forces to seize power from saddams regime on home turf, but when they started to move, offered little to no assistance. That led to the still hefty remnants of the military absolutely annihilating them and making any surviving opposition forces skeptical of the reliability of US support. Jump to Iran and it seems pretty clear the US at least *wanted* to cut the heads off of iranian govt and destroy military leadership/munitions and then let the civilians do the actual overthrowing. That seems to be off the table now for a plethora of reasons (maybe some of that skepticism of meaningful longterm support, ehh?) and now the US is kind of standing around with its d*** in its hand, stuck in a war we thought would last a week, with a crippled global energy market and Iran wielding complete control of middle east oil flow. Splendid.
31
rattleandhum Mar 27, 2026 +15
> That led to the still hefty remnants of the military absolutely annihilating them and making any surviving opposition forces skeptical of the reliability of US support. If no 'opposition forces supported by the US' learned the lesson from how they left the Kurds in Syria and Iraq out to dry (or countless other places in America's storied history of military coups and regime changes over the last 70 years), then they deserve to get whacked.
15
NekoCatSidhe Mar 27, 2026 +10
I mean, even without the history lesson, the pro-US Iranian protesters already got “whacked” by the regime three months ago after Trump promised them that “help was one the way” and then left them to be massacred by the regime thugs. And the few who did not learn that lesson got shot when they tried to celebrate Khamenei’s death in the streets on the first few days of the war. Then Israel bombed those oil depots and caused toxic black rain to fall on Tehran, even though that is the most anti-regime city of the country, in case some fools here still believed the US and Israel to be on their side. The various opposition movements inside Iran are definitely not sticking their necks out for that one.
10
xynith116 Mar 27, 2026 +7
Worse. Iran gets significantly stronger and the US weaker if they control Hormuz. We may never go back to the status quo before 2/28.
7
TeaAndLifting Mar 27, 2026 +3
Also kinda annoying seeing the US admin telling the world we should be angry at Iran for tolling and locking down the Strait. Like brev, it’s all your fault for starting the war and putting them in a position where they realised they could do this. Things weren’t great, but at least they were stable before this. And now the US does not want to commit to what they need to do if they want to bring back the status quo.
3
Nextasy Mar 28, 2026 +2
Yup. It was extremely clear that Iran was gonna close the straight of they were attacked, it was never a question at all. The huge surprise is that the Americans apparently had 0 plan for how to react when this very public and obvious retaliation was carried out. Watching this war, you could honestly assume the American plan was "hope they don't do the thing they always say they'll do if they ever get attacked" lmao. Grade 2 strategy
2
Johannes_P Mar 27, 2026 +3
> Jump to Iran and it seems pretty clear the US at least wanted to cut the heads off of iranian govt and destroy military leadership/munitions and then let the civilians do the actual overthrowing. That seems to be off the table now for a plethora of reasons (maybe some of that skepticism of meaningful longterm support, ehh?) and now the US is kind of standing around with its d*** in its hand, stuck in a war we thought would last a week, with a crippled global energy market and Iran wielding complete control of middle east oil flow. Splendid. One of the dumbest part was that, unlike 1991 IRaq, there's no organized opposition movement in Iran, meaning that regime collapse would only result in mere anarchy.
3
chatte__lunatique Mar 27, 2026 +4
Turns out that bombing civilians in cities tends to lead to all the civilians fleeing the cities rather than overthrowing the government.
4
rallar8 Mar 27, 2026 +6
I mean we have allies now too, we just don’t have the ability to call our allies and get them not to shoot down our planes. Coalition used to be a strength of ours until that makeup wearing alcoholic took over.
6
Johannes_P Mar 27, 2026 +4
They also had a definite and straightforward goal: expel Iraqi military from Kuwait. No mission creep, tools perfectly fitted to the goal: this is how to run a war.
4
Paladar2 Mar 27, 2026 +21
I mean Desert Shield was also hydrogen bomb vs coughing baby.
21
Not_Campo2 Mar 27, 2026 +37
Only when looking back. At the time it was the 4th or 5th largest army, it was battle hardened from the Iran-Iraq war, it had Soviet, but “modern” weapons. The results were a surprise because by all metrics it shouldn’t have been that one sided
37
Cicero912 Mar 27, 2026 +40
Iraq at the time had one of strongest militaries on earth. Not too dissimilar to Iran now. Just goes to show you how poorly managed the US Government and Military is under Trump. They won't pull out, so the war continues, and they won't fully commit, so nothing gets done except the world economy suffering and people dying.
40
WeddingPKM Mar 27, 2026 +14
Iraq was a lot stronger than the events made them seem.
14
Hesitation-Marx Mar 27, 2026 +3
And then the Highway of Death, which was incredibly horrific and I still get nightmares about after seeing photos.
3
pgtl_10 Mar 27, 2026 +33
Also, we try to claim victory by inflicting massive damage. In reality, strategic objective require more than just destruction and kills.
33
trashboatfourtwenty Mar 27, 2026 +10
Hegseth would never do more than kill, unfortunately
10
Nisseliten Mar 27, 2026 +8
Pretty sure he jerks off thinking about it tho..
8
Davido401 Mar 27, 2026 +2
Didn't he say a day or two back "we only negotiate using bombs" which... is f****** stupid, then you end up with terror cells being activated cause whats the point in trying to sort out a government if a moron like that just bombs the shit out of you.
2
mammogrammar Mar 27, 2026 +5
I remember making fun of J6ers, calling them Gravy Seals, Meal Team Six, etc. We need a good nickname of this administration running the war
5
Incepticons Mar 27, 2026 +6
It's record post WW2 isn't even good though
6
gurney__halleck Mar 27, 2026 +3
they're using chat gpt war plans now
3
Seymoorebutts Mar 27, 2026 +9
Lmao this military hasn't "won" a war since 1945
9
WeddingPKM Mar 27, 2026 +6
Desert Storm, Grenada, and Panama off the top of my head can’t really be considered anything other than victory’s. Granted that except for Iraq these arnt exactly large scale wars against competent militaries, and in no way overshadow the losses, but they have won since the Second World War.
6
Seymoorebutts Mar 27, 2026 +6
Desert Storm is the only thing here you can really describe as a war, while Grenada was a conflict during the Cold War. The Gulf War was *surprise* about our oil interests, and Panama was a chance to depose another regime for the war on drugs, which really just lead to increased social inequality in the region and instability regarding drug trade and trafficking. What is the cost of us "winning?" The wealthy here get wealthier, average joe gets bupkis, and the region we intervened gets another several decades of rule with someone as bad or worse. Maybe we can just stay the f*** out of shit unless we're asked, or it's a legit humanitarian crisis?
6
hlgb2015 Mar 27, 2026 +3
I mean if the mission was just to destroy Iran, they could handle it in a day, no nukes required. It’s the “forced regime change to a western ally by dismantling current govt and military while also not turning the populace against you or destroying infrastructure that would hobble the new regime economically“ part that is a bit difficult to pull together. Unfortunately for the US military, those tend to make up nearly all of the large scale engagements they’ve engaged since the first half of desert storm.
3
goomyman Mar 27, 2026 +4
Trump is literally threatening war crimes by blowing up power plants. (blowing up civilian infrastructure). Maybe it was initially don’t harm things that would affect the new regime but that has been thrown out the window. “Negotiate with me or I’ll bomb your power stations” in 5 days. Also Israel bombed at least some of their oil infrastructure, questionable if it was with US approval. And the US has threatened to bomb oil infrastructure if it doesn’t get its way.
4
hlgb2015 Mar 27, 2026 +3
Oh yeah, don’t get it twisted, this shit is fully off the rails now. Trumps doing anything and everything to find a way out without having to apologize to anyone or cop to him personally forcing control of nearly all middle eastern oil sea exports into Iran’s hands.
3
Skyscrapers4Me Mar 28, 2026 +2
US never signed the geneva convention and look at russia blowing up every energy structure in Ukraine. There's no consequences is the problem. russia now gets to sell its oil expensively.
2
Powerfury Mar 27, 2026 +3
I mean, we are still just absolutely crushing them from the air and sea, pretty much uncontested. But this shit is EXPENSIVE. The amount of billions we spent already.... And our stock is getting low.
3
WeddingPKM Mar 27, 2026 +5
Are we? While yes we are hitting targets we don’t seem to be making any progress on important strategic objectives such as opening the Hormuz. If anything I would say Iran is winning at the moment.
5
progrethth Mar 27, 2026 +2
The US destroyed the Iranian navy and airforce but other than that the US does not seem to have accomplished anything. Iran keeps Hormuz closed, the regime is intact and they are still able to fire missiles and drones.
2
Jackadullboy99 Mar 27, 2026 +7
This a group of people that has proudly displayed (like a badge of honour) their ignorance, stupidity and contempt for intellect and expertise every single f****** day for as long as I can remember. Colour me surprised that they started the dumbest war in recent military history….
7
LivinghighinColorado Mar 27, 2026 +28
Our military is still top-notch. It is the morons running it now that are the problem.
28
oldnjgal Mar 27, 2026 +28
Like a Ferrari being driven by a 2 year old.
28
LivinghighinColorado Mar 27, 2026 +5
Great analogy.
5
raouldukeesq Mar 27, 2026 +22
It's being degraded every day.  Which is part of the plan.  tRump's goal is to isolate and destroy the United States of America. 
22
basshead17 Mar 27, 2026 +18
That's actually his handlers goals. He's too dumb and narcissistic to think that far ahead 
18
ashurbanipal420 Mar 27, 2026 +5
Best money the KGB ever spent.
5
coolon23 Mar 27, 2026 +9
Our military is by far the most expensive, powerful, and ‘intelligent’ in a knowledge resource sense force on the globe. Iran knows this. The issue is that our forces are designed at this point for quick, fast missions that produce results that we want and with the expectation that opposition relents quickly or is toppled quickly. When it comes to occupation and real hard regime change operations on a dug in, entrenched government or force, it’s been more misses than hits since Vietnam
9
highgravityday2121 Mar 27, 2026 +4
regime changes are impossible unless you want to go total war and bomb the civilian population enough that theyre tired of war. Im glad that we dont have the appetite for that kind of warfare anymore.
4
Charlie_Mouse Mar 27, 2026 +10
> bomb the civilian population enough that they're tired of war A rule of thumb in any war over the past century is that this almost always takes a hell of a lot more than planners and politicians believe it will to do that. Take the London Blitz for example: if anything it hardened resolve. And yes, some of the “Blitz spirit” myth was pure propaganda and bad things also happened - but overall as an attempt to break the U.K.’s willingness to fight it was an abject failure. Another example is Vietnam where the US dropped around three times the tonnage in conventional bombs that were used in all theatres of WWII - and lost. North Korea got virtually bombed flat and (unfortunately in many ways) survived. Nuclear weapons may be an exception to this rule - though the only time they were actually used the Japanese leadership already knew that they were effectively beaten. I’m just hoping like hell Trump doesn’t reach for them when he gets frustrated that he isn’t getting the result he wants from conventional bombing.
10
highgravityday2121 Mar 27, 2026 +4
True but the Japanese and Germans were exhausted fighting WWII, millions of civilians died in those wars. Thats why regime changed worked.
4
ArrowsOfFate Mar 27, 2026 +3
The guys at the top running it being the problem is a key problem though. Many poor leaders have led their men to their deaths in history. When war breaks out with Taiwan now, we are going to be horribly unprepared, whether Democrat or Republican. Whether we talk interceptors, bombs, or missiles. It doesn’t matter how many thousands of fancy planes we have if we can’t launch from more than 500 of them and our enemy can launch from 5,000, + a nation of 1.4 billion with rocket and missile divisions close by to Taiwan vs a long sail from america under satellite view.
3
uniklyqualifd Mar 27, 2026 +3
It has now been demonstrated that a drone can down the most expensive fighter jet. The Russians already have had this lesson. It's very bad for sales.
3
Pack_Your_Trash Mar 27, 2026 +3
Belligerent ignorance
3
Taokan Mar 27, 2026 +5
The US military was the greatest in the world. Arguably, it may still be. But, technology has a way of normalizing things. The gun revolutionized warfare: closely packed regiments and formations went from being a strength that could break and rout other melee formations, to a huge liability. It's now a long time ago and kind of a "well, duh" moment, but that's the level to which drone warfare will reshape the concept of warfare. It's no longer enough to have 10x the ships, missiles, and firepower. And taking it to 100x won't change that. Iran's like ... half mountains. Effectively a limitless haven to stash drones. The only thing that's really going to seal that in is to have a fuckton of your own drones, and probably a Skynet style AI system to manage it. But that would mean one good hacker, or one rogue AI, and your entire airforce can be disabled or even turned back upon you. Trump is an absolute maniac and fool, as demonstrated by his overconfidence in controlling this war. But the military insufficiency to do so, that itself isn't a Trump problem. That's the inevitability that as military tech revolutions happen, it will become more and more difficult to wage any kind of gentlemen's war where you try not to just completely flatten the other country. The era of wars even like Iraq and Afghanistan, are over. What we're seeing now happening in Iran, and what's been happening in the Ukraine/Russia war, is the future of warfare. And it means, that it's going to be exponentially more costly to try and wage some 20 year occupation of a country to secure a regime change.
5
Evanescent_contrail Mar 27, 2026 +2
Firing the smart generals and replacing them with yes men is very much a Trump problem, tho.
2
Ashi4Days Mar 27, 2026 +4
Sigh. Its because idiots are leading the charge. The military is really good at one thing, and thats going in and breaking shit. Once shit is already broken, the military really doesnt have much else to do. Nation building, peace deals, and etcetera? All of that comes down to diplomacy. Because once you go in and break everything, the people are still there. And now you really only have two options. Kill everybody (something that I would like to think we have stopped doing). Or negotiate. And guess what this admin is really bad at? Negotiating. Make no mistake, breaking shit is a powerful negotiating tool, but you have to have the capability to negotiate afterwards. And when your opposition doesnt want to negotiate? Then your military is kind of an expensive paperweight.
4
Xivvx Mar 27, 2026 +25
Yeah, they have a ton of missiles stored underground, you know, to withstand US bombing runs and be able to retaliate. It's almost like Iran has been planning how to survive a war with the US for a long time or something.
25
MichaelHunt009 Mar 27, 2026 +42
*only about a third of known arsenal
42
cyb3rg0d5 Mar 27, 2026 +6
So more like a fifth. Even at 90% destruction, those 10% are still A LOT of missiles.
6
Eyfordsucks Mar 27, 2026 +64
U.S. can’t confirm shit besides the fact that they have a rapist pedo for a president.
64
E1M1_DOOM Mar 27, 2026 +22
Ironically, it's the one thing they won't confirm.
22
Rubix321 Mar 27, 2026 +17
And it only took about 20% of the US Tomahawk arsenal to do it
17
Saltire_Blue Mar 27, 2026 +34
The US is trying to fight a conventional war Iran is fighting an economic war
34
Jackadullboy99 Mar 27, 2026 +7
If it comes to boots on the ground, America has much less recent experience of large-scale troop warfare than the Iranians, who fought an eight year war with Iraq as recently as the eighties.
7
musashisamurai Mar 27, 2026 +4
And in the 90s, the Americans fought a large scale with Iraq and have been more or less deploying large formations abroad since then. How manu troops did Bush and Obama deploy? It doesnt matter though. Iran's path to victory isn't through military victories but by making the war painful at home. Likewise, America can deploy better equipped formations but 10k troops isnt enough to take over a nation the size of Iran.
4
thefoodiedentist Mar 27, 2026 +21
They destroyed ones coming at them by spending interceptors that cost 10x more. Some were destroyed by billion dollar energy facilities by ramming into them.
21
UBC145 Mar 27, 2026 +14
Last time I checked a third is about 33.3%, so not 90%. I guess it’s no wonder Trump’s Arab friends are pushing him to continue fighting, lest he pulls out and leaves them with an angry and capable Iran to deal with.
14
redredgreengreen1 Mar 27, 2026 +6
Unfortunately, it's clickbait. First line of the article says the US can only confirm a third or destroyed, with the second line being that another third fall into the "damaged, destroyed, or buried" category. So functionally useless for the remainder of the war. It's all just people playing games with definitions again.
6
uniklyqualifd Mar 27, 2026 +9
Not to mention Israel.  The Arab countries have already found out to their shock America is not even trying to defend them. Iran is pointedly holding back its attacks to retaliation. If Iran's oil production is destroyed, then they will probably still be able to destroy that of the rest of the middle east. This also destroys the Asian countries that depend on this fuel. And apparently fertilizer is also affected, fertilizer that modern high-yield farming requires for every crop. Israel on the other hand would be left out to dry if the US withdrew. Without reparations Iran has no reason to stop attacking. 
9
PlayaNoir Mar 27, 2026 +4
How would they know what the percentage remaining is when they never knew what the total amount was in the first place?
4
Polyzero Mar 27, 2026 +4
Must be hard to say with the worlds other 2 superpowers funneling in resources as we all wage a proxy version of WWIII Surely history won’t look at this time as the emergent first steps in a greater widespread conflict………………..
4
uniklyqualifd Mar 27, 2026 +4
They manufacture their own drones. They've been selling lots to Russia for Ukraine. They can apparently build more. 
4
jockfist5000 Mar 27, 2026 +13
The missiles aren’t the biggest threat, it’s the launchers.
13
Arctic_Chilean Mar 27, 2026 +9
This. They can have +5,000 missiles still in their inventory including their more modern and dangerous ones, but it means little if they have no reliable way to launch them.   This is the same as in medieval times where you could have an arsenal of arrows, but no archers left to shoot them. 
9
Kaiisim Mar 27, 2026 +8
Iran has been preparing for this war for decades. They are well aware of their weaknesses and strengths. Importantly the terrain in Iran is mountainous in many areas so it's easy to hide things underground. Even killing their leaders - they knew they might be killed so most of them have sons they have groomed to take over. It's a stupid war that weakens America greatly.
8
darknekolux Mar 27, 2026 +3
*Now asking for 400 billions*
3
Definitelyhereforshi Mar 27, 2026 +4
90% to victory to now 30%. Id say maybe 10% has actually been destroyed.
4
awesomedan24 Mar 27, 2026 +3
If this is the reported number the reality is probably like 10%
3
pgtl_10 Mar 27, 2026 +6
I did not see a paywall. Not sure why it says soft paywall. I am not subscribed to Reuters.
6
concerts85701 Mar 27, 2026 +4
A third is three, which is more than one so like, 300%? We destroyed it multiple times! We are so winning this.
4
BrandenWi Mar 27, 2026 +6
But I thought the war was 100% won. Beloved Donald said so. You don't think..... he lied to us.....?
6
Fpscharles Mar 27, 2026 +2
I read somewhere that some of their missile capabilities are buried and can be seen only after launch.
2
blastmemer Mar 27, 2026 +2
Article says most are destroyed or buried.
2
ikaiyoo Mar 27, 2026 +2
I don't believe they can confirm 1/3, they confirmed their nuclear refinement capabilities were taken out also.
2
NekoCatSidhe Mar 27, 2026 +2
Since destroying Iran’s missile arsenal was one of the official goals of this war, that doesn’t sound good. And of course, Trump and his henchmen spent their time lately claiming to have destroyed almost all of it. I should have figured out he was lying, as usual, but I did not expect by that much.
2
oldteen Mar 27, 2026 +2
As of yesterday: "It's just that remaining 1%" (we have left to destroy).
2
CommonConundrum51 Mar 27, 2026 +2
Impossible, we were assured they were "obliterated."
2
The_chosen_turtle Mar 27, 2026 +2
So he lied it was obliterated at 100%?!? Who could have seen that coming
2
Ancient_Ship2980 Mar 27, 2026 +2
Thus, we are nowhere close to getting rid of Iran's ballistic missiles and capability to build new ones. The Trump Administration has not made any additional progress in "obliterating" Iran's uranium enrichment program. Israel and the U.S., in a sense, have engaged in "regime change." By killing so many government officials, they managed what would have seemed impossible. The Iranian regime is now more hard-line.
2
luthier_john Mar 27, 2026 +2
They were stockpiling and just waiting to ensnare America in this, then slow wage a war of attrition to weaken us. Without strong leadership and without our allies, this country will wither. With the recent civil unrest in Iran, American military schemed that this they should strike while the iron is hot. We stuck our "democratic" nose in and severely underestimated them, while also alienating ourselves from our allies. What a weak grasp over foreign politics. Hope foreign leaders make an example of Trump, because clearly the American people is too brainwashed to understand the blunder.
2
Solkre Mar 27, 2026 +2
"We've successfully destroyed their missiles by letting them fire them at ourselves and our allies."
2
Initial_E Mar 28, 2026 +2
They just enabled Iran to buy more than they can destroy on a regular basis. To make up numbers on it, for example, imagine for every $1000 Iran spend on drones gets them $100,000 in profit. What do you think they’re going to do? My guess is that they will destroy all refining and shipping, and require all oil to go through themselves. And with this incompetent enemy they can pull it off.
2
SaskyBoi Mar 28, 2026 +2
Many of Iran’s missiles have been destroyed when they exploded on their targets
2
shockaBITW Mar 27, 2026 +4
We were explicitly told their entire military was completely wiped out in the first 24 hours though? Surely you don't mean to tell me that Donnie Diapers lied right?! That can't he true! He's a a bastion of honesty!
4
redredgreengreen1 Mar 27, 2026 +2
Headline is clickbait. Literally the first two lines of the article are that A) the US can only confirm a third have been destroyed outright, with B) another third falling into the category of "damaged, destroyed, or buried." Which kind of burries the lead that the US thinks 2/3 are now unusable, which is a very different headline and closer to the previous estimates they gave. Additionally, this kind of undercuts that the number of missiles isn't really the most important figure. Launchers are. They have way more missiles than launchers, and every single time a launcher fires something, it gives away its position and is destroyed. The launch platforms are significantly more expensive and difficult to build then the missiles themselves. The reuters article itself confirms 70% is the current figure of destroyed launchers, leaving something like a maximum of 150 launch platforms left. Assuming 25% escape before being blown to bits(generous), that only gives Iran something like 200 total launches left, TOTAL. And they aren't one size fits all, either. If all the launchers for a certain category of missile are destroyed, that missile stockpile is effectively useless, more or less for the rest of the war.
2
padizzledonk Mar 27, 2026 +2
I guarantee its even less The numbers they have been throwing around have been based off their Medium Range missiles that can hit Isreal, their *SHORT* Range missiles that can hit the Strait and GCC are virtually unlimited, like we're talking likely over 10k And they were all estimates anyway, Iran has claimed to have MUCH larger numbers of Short and Medium range missiles than western estimates and im incluned to believe them considering how many theyre throwing around after how many have been destroyed
2
gandalfsbastard Mar 27, 2026 +1
They ran out of fingers and toes while doing BDA counts so who knows how many they hit.
1
Transphattybase Mar 27, 2026 +1
Gee, I thought everything was obliterated and, oh yeah, nothing else to bomb. Hmmmmm. Something fishy going on here.
1
Sharp-Calligrapher70 Mar 27, 2026 +1
So…which objectives to this “limited military operation” have we actually achieved to this point?
1
airohpsyd_ Mar 27, 2026 +1
1/3rd of the missiles were destroyed when they were shot at us naval bases in the region, destroying them
1
badasimo Mar 27, 2026 +1
It certainly won't be great for the economies of Israel, UAE etc for even one missile a day to fly at their cities and infrastructure. Even if they're all intercepted
1
Nachooolo Mar 27, 2026 +1
Is this about the total missile arsenal? Or the pre-war amount? Is Iran still capable of producing more missiles? Is Russia sending them weapons and materials?
1
linkardtankard Mar 27, 2026 +1
But Donald said that he won!
1
PotatoBrainZeke44 Mar 27, 2026 +1
Destroyed by our bombs or by them firing them?
1
Sweatytubesock Mar 27, 2026 +1
The war wasn’t over on day one??
1
Straight_Document_89 Mar 27, 2026 +1
All those wasted missile strikes for that’s
1
rom_rom57 Mar 27, 2026 +1
I guess US used 480 Tomahawks in the 4 weeks and they’re pretty much out of them. OH Well!
1
alexefi Mar 27, 2026 +1
nice.. i can say that i obliterated that task at work, when i only did third of what i suppose to do..
1
TXtogo Mar 27, 2026 +1
That is less than “totally decimated”
1
NefariousnessBorn969 Mar 27, 2026 +1
The assessments are c*** until you put boots on the ground….unfortunately. I remember looking at a target years ago when we started the war in Afghanistan. There was something on the ground covered with a tarp and the analyst swore it was a tank. Convinced everyone and when they finally jumped in they discovered it was paint. Stacks of paint and no tank. Guesstimates aren’t very accurate.
1
Specialist_Heron_986 Mar 27, 2026 +1
If this nonsense war keeps up, the U.S. will have to deal with Iran's remaining 2/3rds soon enough.
1
chephin Mar 27, 2026 +1
Well, 33% is a lot different than the 100% that Dear Leader has claimed
1
broke_boi1 Mar 27, 2026 +1
I guess “completely and totally obliterated” doesn’t even mean a third
1
dhusk Mar 27, 2026 +1
And I bet they're inflating THAT estimate to please our 2-Watt president.
1
WeirdSysAdmin Mar 27, 2026 +1
It’s just like the CPI and job reports and everything else they talk about. By the time the actual facts come out, most of the missiles are “destroyed” because they were used to attack targets.
1
Loreki Mar 27, 2026 +1
Destroyed or used? Given the Administration's track record, I really wouldn't put it past them to class any missile they couldn't find as "destroyed" and totally d******* the possibility that some of them will have been deployed and "destroyed" when they struck targets.
1
johnn48 Mar 27, 2026 +1
What does Israel call it “mowing the lawn”. Obviously there’s nothing to prevent Iran from replenishing their missile inventory, just like we are doing. However they’re more inclined monetize the Strait of Hormuz as reparations.
1
PeopleRFuckingDumb Mar 27, 2026 +1
I don't believe anything anymore
1
Duchess0612 Mar 27, 2026 +1
Hahahahaha. Next lie, please.
1
Deadhe_d Mar 27, 2026 +1
If you call popping big balloons, destroying an arsenal. Then yes.
1
Relevant-Doctor187 Mar 27, 2026 +1
Destroyed or just buried? Iran is good at digging.
1
SuccessfulSpring3354 Mar 27, 2026 +1
I thought 'people were saying' that the US destroyed 600% of Iran's capabilities...maybe even 700%
1
Lost-Chair4863 Mar 27, 2026 +1
I was told by the honorable Donald trump it was decimated to less than 10%
1
Calm-Maintenance-878 Mar 27, 2026 +1
The source should just ask POTUS, he’ll say they’ve had no arsenal for weeks.
1
Ja1ax Mar 27, 2026 +1
That can’t be right Trump t*** said they destroyed 90% and we know he only tells the truth. /s
1
sMilling_70 Mar 27, 2026 +1
For a cost of $5t. Good job 😂
1
random_encounters42 Mar 28, 2026 +1
Trump administration lying?!? No way...
1
Crichris Mar 28, 2026 +1
I mean.... They still firing. Might as well wait until they destroy all their own missiles, why the extra work?
1
← Back to Board