Vice President J.D. Vance has repeatedly pressed the Defense Department in closed-door meetings to justify its portrayal of the Iran war, expressing concern that the Pentagon may be understating the severity of U.S. missile stockpile depletion, according to accounts reported by The Atlantic.

Vance has questioned whether Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Joint Chiefs Chairman General Dan Caine have provided accurate assessments of both battlefield damage inflicted on Iranian forces and the availability of critical weapons systems, according to two senior administration officials. The vice president has raised these concerns directly with President Trump.

The stakes are substantial. Military analysts warn that severe munitions depletion in the Iran campaign could compromise U.S. ability to defend Taiwan against China, South Korea against North Korea, or Europe against Russian aggression—conflicts for which the same stockpiles would be essential.

Publicly, Hegseth and Caine have characterized U.S. weapons supplies as robust and portrayed Iran’s military losses as drastic. But Pentagon leaders’ accounts “present an incomplete picture at best,” according to people familiar with intelligence assessments cited by The Atlantic.

Internal estimates suggest Iran retains roughly two-thirds of its air force, the majority of its missile-launching capability, and most of its fast boats capable of mining the Strait of Hormuz and disrupting maritime commerce. In March, Hegseth claimed “complete control” of Iranian skies—a claim undermined in April when Iranian forces downed an American fighter jet, triggering an intensive rescue operation.

According to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, the U.S. may have already expended more than half its prewar supply of four key munitions types. Even before the Iran conflict, stockpiles had been drained by slow manufacturing and weapons donations to Ukraine and Israel.

Vance’s advisers told The Atlantic that the vice president has framed his concerns as independent assessments rather than accusations against Hegseth or Caine, seeking to avoid personal conflict or divisions within Trump’s war cabinet. A White House official characterized Vance as asking “probing questions about our strategic planning.”

Trump has echoed Hegseth and Caine’s optimistic assessments, declaring weeks ago that U.S. forces had already achieved victory and that weapons stockpiles are “virtually unlimited.”

The Atlantic reported that some Trump advisers believe Hegseth’s consistently positive portrayals may be calibrated to appeal to the president. Pentagon press briefings occur at 8 a.m., when Trump typically watches Fox News. “Pete’s TV experience has made him really skilled at knowing how to talk to Trump, how Trump thinks,” one former Trump official told The Atlantic.

Vance opposed the Iran war before it began, which Trump has acknowledged. But both Vance and Hegseth now have significant political stakes in the conflict’s outcome. The Atlantic reported that Vance views his political future—potentially including a 2028 presidential run—as tied to the war’s success. Hegseth, for his part, has been positioning himself politically, recently addressing the National Religious Broadcasters Network and the National Rifle Association on divisive social issues in ways previous defense secretaries typically avoided.

Hegseth’s career depends entirely on maintaining Trump’s favor, particularly after a contentious confirmation process. Since his appointment, he has overseen operations against Iran’s nuclear program and the capture of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro, while also implementing controversial military reforms. The Atlantic reported that he “strives to tell the president exactly what he wants to hear,” a dynamic one former official described as “dangerous.”

In a statement, a Pentagon spokesperson told The Atlantic that Hegseth and other Pentagon leaders “consistently provide the president with the complete, unvarnored picture.”

(YWN World Headquarters – NYC)