How Iran Missiles Prepared US Patriot Units for Pacific War
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
U.S. Patriot air defense units stationed in Northeast Asia likely learned valuable lessons from their recent combat experience in the Middle East as they prepare for potential aggression from China and North Korea.
Iran's missile strikes on U.S. military positions at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar—retaliation for the earlier American bombing of its nuclear facilities—triggered an unprecedented air defense operation on the ground, according to U.S. military leaders who later revealed that Patriot units had been redeployed from Japan and South Korea.
The Pentagon did not respond to Newsweek's request for comment. China's Defense Ministry and North Korea's embassy in Beijing also did not respond.
Why It Matters
Both Japan and South Korea face a growing missile threat from North Korea, while China has steadily expanded its long-range missile arsenal—capable of striking U.S. military bases across Japan. The U.S. has stationed approximately 55,000 troops in Japan and another 28,500 in South Korea, all tasked with defending America's allies in regional contingencies.
Among the American forces stationed in Northeast Asia are two Patriot missile units—the U.S. Army's 38th Air Defense Artillery Brigade in Japan and its 35th Air Defense Artillery Brigade in South Korea. The air defense system, which gained fame during the Gulf War in the 1990s, can intercept tactical ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, aircraft and drones.
United States Army's Patriot missile launchers assigned to 35th Air Defense Artillery Brigade rest in a stand-by position during training in South Korea on March 18, 2023.
United States Army's Patriot missile launchers assigned to 35th Air Defense Artillery Brigade rest in a stand-by position during training in South Korea on March 18, 2023.
U.S. 8th Army
What To Know
The Army's Air Defense Artillery branch, along with the U.S. Navy's destroyers, will enhance their ability to intercept a range of threats thanks to their operations in the Middle East, said Timothy Walton, a senior researcher at the Hudson Institute who specializes in air and missile defense.
Prior to Iran's June 23 attack on the Al Udeid base, all personnel were evacuated except for 44 soldiers who remained to operate two Patriot batteries, according to General Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. They launched "a bunch" of interceptor missiles to defend the base alongside Qatari Patriot crews, Caine told reporters the following week—the precise number launched is classified.
In a July 21 analysis, researchers at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America said that the Army had launched approximately 30 Patriot guided missiles at 14 Iranian ballistic targets heading toward America's largest military facility in the Middle East, at a total cost of $111 million.
One Patriot missile battery consists of a power plant, radar, control station, launchers, an antenna mast group, and interceptor missiles, according to the Congressional Research Service. Each launcher can accommodate either four or 16 interceptor missiles, depending on munition type.
"Iran's missile attack on Al Udeid Air Base drew a considerable amount of coverage, but less heralded have been other U.S. Army units defending critical assets in Israel and longstanding operations countering rockets and drones in Iraq and Syria," Walton told Newsweek.
United States Army soldiers assigned to the 38th Air Defense Artillery Brigade conduct reload operations on their Patriot air defense system at Misawa Air Base in Japan on October 29, 2024.
United States Army soldiers assigned to the 38th Air Defense Artillery Brigade conduct reload operations on their Patriot air defense system at Misawa Air Base in Japan on October 29, 2024.
Staff Sgt. Connor Davis/U.S. Army
In addition to the Patriot system, the Army has also deployed the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, or THAAD, system to Israel to boost its air defenses amid long-range missiles threats from Iran and Yemen's Houthi rebels.
At least two THAAD units are currently deployed in the Western Pacific—one in Guam, the U.S.'s westernmost territory, and another in South Korea—providing air defense for the U.S. homeland and for its allies against ballistic missile threats from China and North Korea.
What People Are Saying
Timothy Walton, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, told Newsweek: "In response to the high demand for air and missile defense units, the U.S. Army plans to grow its force of Patriot batteries and add new Indirect Fire Protection Capability and other counter-air sensors and effectors to its force."
General Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, at a news conference on June 26: "We believe that this is the largest single Patriot engagement in U.S. military history. […] This really demonstrates the combat capability and capacity of our Army air defenders."
What Happens Next
The U.S. will need to replenish its stockpile of Patriot interceptor missiles following operations in the Middle East and after the delivery of air defense systems to Ukraine.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
US EPA proposes axing greenhouse gas rules that apply to motor vehicles
The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed ending rules that address the contribution of motor vehicles to climate change. In a statement, the EPA said that its proposal would 'repeal all resulting greenhouse gas emissions regulations for motor vehicles and engines, thereby reinstating consumer choice and giving Americans the ability to purchase a safe and affordable car for their family while decreasing the cost of living on all products that trucks deliver'. Transportation is the largest source of direct greenhouse gas emissions in the US and for years the EPA has pushed vehicle makers in the US to reduce their contribution with steps that have included strict tailpipe standards and target a big transition to EVs and plug-in hybrids by 2030. In his presidential election campaign, Donald Trump pledged to roll back 'electric vehicle mandates' and boost the oil and gas industry. He framed his policies as about restoring consumer choice. They were also supported by the oil and gas industry and climate change sceptics, as well as parts of the US auto industry who have said tailpipe standards are too strict and costly to meet. The EPA's 'endangerment finding' in 2009 determined that CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions are a form of air pollution that the agency can regulate under the Clean Air Act, because climate change harms human health. The EPA's latest proposal would revoke the endangerment finding, seen by many as a cornerstone of US federal rules designed to tackle multiple sources of greenhouse gases – such as motor vehicles. Although CAFE standards remain in place, the US Department of Transport is reviewing them and Congress has already voted not to enforce big fines for vehicle manufacturer non-compliance. It has also voted to end the State of California's so-called 'EPA waiver' that meant it adopted tougher greenhouse gas policies than federal rules. The Trump administration has also scrapped consumer EV tax credits. 'With this proposal, the Trump EPA is proposing to end sixteen years of uncertainty for automakers and American consumers,' said EPA Administrator Zeldin. 'In our work so far, many stakeholders have told me that the Obama and Biden EPAs twisted the law, ignored precedent, and warped science to achieve their preferred ends and stick American families with hundreds of billions of dollars in hidden taxes every single year. We heard loud and clear the concern that EPA's GHG emissions standards themselves, not carbon dioxide which the Finding never assessed independently, was the real threat to Americans' livelihoods. If finalized, rescinding the Endangerment Finding and resulting regulations would end $1 trillion or more in hidden taxes on American businesses and families.' 'Thanks to President Trump's leadership, America is returning to free and open dialogue around climate and energy policy - driving the focus back to following the data,' said U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright. 'Today's announcement is a monumental step toward returning to commonsense policies that expand access to affordable, reliable, secure energy and improve quality of life for all Americans.' Administrator Zeldin also announced the agency would reconsider the Model Year 2027 and Later Light-Duty and Medium-Duty Vehicles regulation and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards for Heavy-Duty Vehicles. "US EPA proposes axing greenhouse gas rules that apply to motor vehicles" was originally created and published by Just Auto, a GlobalData owned brand. The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Despite war and sanctions, Iran's oil exports surge
'Maximum pressure' ought to mean 'maximum pressure.' Yet despite sanctions and war, the Islamic Republic of Iran's oil exports continued to surge in the first six months of 2025. No doubt, U.S. economic penalties and Israeli strikes severely dented Tehran's missile, military, and nuclear capabilities. But if Washington is serious about dismantling Iran's nuclear weapons program and rolling back the spectrum of threats the regime poses according to President Trump's national security memorandum, more will be needed, and quickly. According to data available for purchase from Tankertrackers, Iran exported nearly 1.7 million barrels per day in June 2025 of crude oil, condensates, and fuel oil, resulting in a total of more than 50 million barrels worth an estimated $3.6 billion. These revenues will be used to fund oppression at home and aggression abroad, as well as to rebuild Iran's shattered air defenses, missile capacity, and terror networks. In February, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent pledged to reduce Tehran's oil exports to nearly zero. That has not happened yet. Tehran's recorded oil exports under Trump 2.0 consistently exceed the levels recorded at the end of the Biden administration in January 2025. From February to June 2025, Iran averaged 1.67 million barrels per day in crude oil exports, 37 percent higher than the January 2025 figure. When including condensates and fuel oil, Tehran's total export average for the February to June period increases to 1.84 mbpd, reflecting a 30 percent rise compared to January 2025. This stands in stark contrast to the maximum pressure period during Trump's first term, when average oil exports hovered around 800,000 barrels per day, with some months dropping as low as 300,000. Maximum pressure was so effective in Trump's first term that Iran's president and oil minister claimed that the sanctions were more damaging to oil exports than the Iran-Iraq War had been in the 1980s. No officials are making these claims today. Last month, Iran exported a total of 50 million barrels of oil, around 1.7 mbpd, with 88 percent being crude oil, 10 percent fuel oil, and 2 percent condensates. Over 92 percent of these exports were destined for China while 6 percent went to the United Arab Emirates. Nearly 80 percent of these shipments came from the oil export terminal at Kharg Island, which continued operating during the 12-Day War. In fact, despite a few symbolic strikes against energy depots and refineries, Israel largely avoided striking Iran's major oil and gas production and export facilities. Moreover, preliminary data from the first half of July indicates that Iranian oil exports are recovering from a slight decline in June, reaching nearly 2 mbpd with 1.8 mbpd being crude oil. The primary destinations for these exports are China and the United Arab Emirates, both of which were jurisdictions featuring major sanctions violations in Trump's first term. The reasons for Iran's continued export capacity are many. Beyond Iran's evolving sanctions-busting capabilities, Washington's insistence on a deal throughout 2025 incentivized illicit shippers and buyers to stay in the sanctions-busting game, assuming a deal may be close. Additionally, Washington has taken a graduated approach toward maximum pressure, focused on expanding the scope of Iran's illicit oil export operations to include its ' shadow fleet,' smaller Chinese private refiners, front companies and ' shadow banking ' networks financing these sales. A brief alleged 'pause' in Iran sanctions enforcement, as first reported by the Wall Street Journal in June, may have also played a role. Thus far, Treasury has not targeted major banks and ports, particularly in China, that are implicated in this illicit trade. A congressionally mandated report from the Biden administration identified 27 countries involved in Iran's illegal oil trade. Data from June 2025 indicates that major ports in Fujairah, Jebel Ali, Zhoushan, Taicang, Qingdao, and Changzhou are part of this network. The U.S. Treasury could expand its list of targets to include major ports, banks, and any firms involved in this illicit trade, particularly those with an international presence. Washington can also designate board members, C-suite level executives, shareholders, and ultimate beneficial owners. But lawfare is only one component of economic statecraft. To effectively take-down Tehran's oil export network as part of a comprehensive strategy against the Islamic Republic, the U.S. will need to leverage all elements of national power. For example, the U.S. Navy could significantly increase its efforts to seize tankers transporting Iranian oil. Additionally, covert operations could target those who defy sanctions, focusing on the most egregious offenders. This will send an unambiguous message: the cost of doing business with Iran has escalated dramatically, and the consequences will be severe. For Trump to achieve his policy goals and Bessent to fulfill his promise, the cost of doing business with Iran must be raised. Otherwise, they risk replicating the failed Biden-era approach to sanctioning Iran.
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Abundance in Orbit—The Case for Democrats Reclaiming NASA's Bold Vision
Advocates for ideas and draws conclusions based on the interpretation of facts and data. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. NASA is in crisis. The space agency that once embodied American ambition—proof that our government could do bold things and solve hard problems—is now unraveling before our eyes. More than 2,000 senior staff are heading for the exits. Without help from Congress, science programs will be slashed to the bone. And a permanent administrator is nowhere in sight. Unless a different vision emerges—one rooted in public ambition and scientific leadership—the U.S. risks forfeiting a field it once defined. The good news? There's a growing hunger for that kind of vision. The success of the "abundance agenda" in other policy arenas has shown that voters are ready to believe in big things again. Space should be next. Jared Isaacman, the billionaire entrepreneur and civilian astronaut many expected to lead NASA, had potential to offer exactly this kind of leadership—until his nomination was scrapped under White House scrutiny. A NASA logo is displayed at the entrance to the Mary W. Jackson NASA Headquarters building on June 2, 2025, in Washington, D.C. A NASA logo is displayed at the entrance to the Mary W. Jackson NASA Headquarters building on June 2, 2025, in Washington, was graceful in his exit, but his recent commentary has had a clear through-line: space is the high ground, one that gives any country who ventures into it a clear advantage. As Democrats struggle to connect with the American people, with recent polls showing a 30-year low in popularity, now is the time to show the U.S. electorate a path of inspiration. And the rise of the abundance agenda, applied to space sciences, can be a critical way to galvanize support. Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson's bestselling book, Abundance, has shifted the conversation primarily in terms of housing abundance, and recent elections have shown the stickiness of that issue with voters. But Klein and Thompson also have a deeper diagnosis: American innovation systems are broken. Risk aversion in funding the sciences, high administrative burdens and the pressure of scientific discoveries needing to be converted into mass production, are what hold us back. Now, as scarcity politics grips Congress, Democrats can seize the opportunity to do more than defend science—they can champion it. By making the case for a bolder, federally-backed innovation agenda, they can show voters how public investment has always been the engine behind America's greatest breakthroughs. What has been referred to as a stagnating of the U.S. innovation ecosystem, and the "undermining of science in America," should be leveraged by Democrats to promise voters not just greatness, but more. As a guest on Andrew Schutlz's Flagrant podcast, former U.S. Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg outlined how federally funded projects have led to monumental ideas later transformed into usable reality, including the internet itself. Still, the challenge Democrats face is significant. These sorts of projects are costly, and they don't come with any certainty, but that's the point. Unlike the private industry, profit isn't the motivating factor behind our exploration of the unknown. Helping voters see the long-term value of such investments will undoubtedly take work. But we've done it before. In May 1961, President John F. Kennedy promised America the Moon. The endeavor would demand "a major national commitment of scientific and technical manpower, material and facilities ... where they are already thinly spread," Kennedy said. And then, it happened. Beyond international prestige and the assurance of democracy's strength over communism, the Apollo program seeded "spin-off" technologies that reshaped everyday life. Just as important, it proved what government can accomplish when it channels its full capacity toward shared purpose. Even after Apollo, NASA had what was referred to as an "aggressive plan" that would continue to position the U.S. as a leader in the exploration and development of the space frontier. That vision was later shelved, a casualty of budget cuts and shifting political winds. Still, the principle remains: science moves when government moves with it. We saw this again with Operation Warp Speed, where President Donald Trump's Department of Health and Human Services and Defense used a "whole-of-America" approach to bring the COVID-19 vaccine to the masses, and quickly. But this spirit is fading. Republicans have seemingly turned their back on the idea of science as a public good. In response to the president's proposed cuts to NASA Science, every prior associate administrator of Science signed onto a joint letter to the House Appropriations Committee warning of the potential reduction of funds. As Congress grapples with what funds to provide NASA in this new fiscal year, Democrats should ask themselves: can we be the party that reclaims science as a shared American project? Can we speak to voters' appetite for ambition? A promise to pursue abundance—in space, in science, in national purpose—may be the boldest and most unifying offer Democrats can make. Trump has promised voters a path of greatness, but he's steering our science agencies dangerously off course. It's high time for Democrats to chart a better one. Riley L. Roberts is a writer, speechwriter, and strategist whose work spans politics, business, sports, and culture. As a ghostwriter and collaborator, he has authored or contributed to more than a dozen books, shaped widely published op-eds and essays—from The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal to TIME, VOGUE, and The Atlantic, among other outlets—and crafted speeches delivered at the White House, the U.N., foreign parliaments, TED conferences, and beyond. Matthew Beddingfield is a whistleblower attorney based in Washington, D.C., and is currently writing a book on the Apollo 1 fire that occurred in January 1967. He previously worked as a legal reporter for Bloomberg. The views expressed in this article are the writers' own.
