By Ehab Shawqi
Hezbollah Secretary General His Eminence Sheikh Naim Qassem explained the concept of strategic victory in simple, accessible terms, highlighting the difference between loss and sacrifice. He said that the resistance remains victorious as long as it stands firm and continues, while the American enemy is the one suffering defeat. Notably, a series of US reports published in recent days have corroborated Sheikh Qassem's remarks, providing detailed accounts of these cumulative losses.
Among the points Sheikh Naim made was that the United States no longer represents a model or symbol. People around the world now view it as a colonial power, a tyrant and a killer. Its losses are gradually coming to light, as confirmed by reports highlighting domestic criticism over the concealment of losses and the dissemination of falsehoods.
Sheikh Qassem also said that the United States is suffering economic and cultural losses, losing through the illusions it projects, and losing its status as a symbol. He added that further losses would emerge later – a point supported by economic reports and media reports documented through satellite imagery.
Sheikh Qassem discussed in detail the country’s debt, which has reached $40 trillion, as well as shortages of ammunition, the deteriorating condition of destroyers, mold in soldiers’ food, and illnesses affecting troops, including scabies and severe psychological disorders. All of these issues, he said, have been documented in US field reports.
Below, we briefly examine several areas that reveal the true nature of the multifaceted strategic crisis facing the United States after its failure to decisively resolve battles through its preferred “shock and awe” strategy. The United States has instead resorted to concealing losses and disseminating falsehoods, in ways that have damaged American prestige and credibility to an unprecedented degree. We also examine the reality of the US strategic stockpile of defensive munitions.
Drawing on US reports, we will also examine America’s intentions for the coming period and identify the biggest beneficiary of its wars of aggression. This serves both as a detailed account and an acknowledgment of the issues addressed by the Secretary General.
First: Scandals Over Concealing Losses
The Pentagon has come under criticism from the media and members of Congress over a decline in the number of deaths and injuries recorded in the "Defense Casualty Analysis System" [DCAS], despite the continuation of Iranian attacks.
The scandal emerged when the system’s data showed that four deaths and dozens of injuries had disappeared from the recorded totals, only for those figures to be restored to the database later.
Nevertheless, even the officially acknowledged figures, despite the concealment, reveal the scale of the losses. More than 750 US service members have been wounded since the war with Iran began. Iranian airstrikes have also destroyed at least 228 facilities or pieces of equipment at US military sites across the Middle East since the start of the war.
US newspapers have detailed the targets struck by Iran, including aircraft hangars, barracks, fuel depots, aircraft and key radar, communications, and air-defense equipment. According to a Washington Post analysis of satellite imagery, the scale of the destruction is far greater than what the US government has publicly acknowledged or what was previously reported.
Iran Blinds US Intelligence
Iran’s target bank was not limited to conventional military and logistical facilities. It also targeted high-value sites, damaging US intelligence facilities and surveillance equipment in the region. An NBC News report revealed that four sources confirmed that the Iranian attacks on these sites caused damage that will cost billions of dollars to repair. The attacks also forced Congress to seek funding to rehabilitate the targeted facilities and prompted officials to reconsider the deployment of intelligence personnel and resources in order to reduce their exposure to Iran’s arsenal.
More importantly, the report concluded that since its establishment in 1947, the CIA has never faced attacks on its facilities and equipment on the scale witnessed during the current war.
This gives us an indication of the boldness and capabilities demonstrated by Iran in targeting an agency that no one had been able to strike since the end of World War II, despite all the wars and conflicts waged by the United States – a country that rose from being the world’s leading power to becoming the sole superpower, and then embarked on aggression and bullying around the world with a free hand.
Munitions and the Greater Strategic Predicament
The depletion of US munitions remains the most serious predicament because it constrains America’s ability to wage war, particularly against a major missile force and large numbers of drones, as well as Iran’s willingness and ability to launch attacks and establish deterrence equations.
According to an estimate by the Center for Strategic Studies, the US military used at least 190 THAAD interceptors and 1,060 Patriot interceptors between February 28 and April 8, representing 53% and 43%, respectively, of its prewar stocks.
Iran Forces the US to Change Its Priorities
Iran has forced the US Department of War to change its priorities in ways that could amount to a shift in its military defense doctrine.
This is reflected in the Pentagon’s fiscal year 2027 budget requests, with munitions priorities shifting toward lower-cost weapons.
Pentagon reports show that approximately 49% of the munition units requested by the department for fiscal year 2027 cost less than $600,000 per unit. This share is expected to rise to more than 70% in fiscal year 2031, based on projected munitions budget requests.
Statistics Point to US Aggressive Intentions
The statistics suggest that the United States is preparing for years of aggression and may once again resort to betrayal. Requests for upgraded Patriot PAC-3 MSE missiles increased by 839%, from 341 missiles in fiscal year 2026 – requested by the US Army and Navy – to 3,203 missiles in fiscal year 2027, requested by the Army and Navy.
Requests for THAAD missiles increased by 2,216%, from 37 missiles in fiscal year 2026, requested by the Missile Defense Agency, to 857 missiles in fiscal year 2027, requested by the Army. Requests for Tomahawk missiles increased by 1,740%, from 57 missiles in fiscal year 2026, requested by the Navy, to 1,049 missiles in fiscal year 2027.
These aggressive intentions are further underscored by the US effort to shorten munitions production timelines. The US Army is also pursuing an “accelerated” timeline for its combat intelligence program. It issued its initial request for information in May 2026 and aims to conduct its first live-fire tests in fall 2026.
Arms Manufacturers and US Decision-Making
The statistics also point to another issue: the biggest beneficiaries of wars and aggression. They also shed light on the US decision-making process, which is not controlled solely by one president or a particular administration, but by a war-making elite that stands to benefit from these conflicts.
According to US reports, once funding is allocated, the Pentagon can award contracts to implement framework agreements, most of which were signed earlier this year.
For example, in July 2026, the US Department of War awarded Lockheed Martin a contract worth up to $58.6 billion to triple production of PAC-3 MSE interceptors by 2030. A month earlier, the US War Department awarded Lockheed Martin a seven-year, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract worth up to $35 billion to implement its framework agreement and quadruple production of THAAD interceptors.
On August 10, 2026, the Missile Defense Agency awarded RTX a $745 million contract for the production and maintenance of SM-3 Block IIA interceptors. The following week, the US War Department announced a $22.9 billion contract with RTX to increase Tomahawk missile production at an “unprecedented pace.”
Capital expenditures for the second quarter, reported in millions of US dollars on an annualized basis, were also reported for publicly traded companies that had signed framework agreements with the Department of War.
No comments:
Post a Comment