Warning: Undefined array key 1 in /home3/lrqlefmy/public_html/.website_2cc140f7/wp-content/themes/jnews/class/ContentTag.php on line 87
Warning: Undefined array key 1 in /home3/lrqlefmy/public_html/.website_2cc140f7/wp-content/themes/jnews/class/ContentTag.php on line 87
Iran’s attacks on American military installations across the Middle East followed a calculated pattern: strike the radar systems responsible for detecting incoming threats, weaken the defensive network, and then target the aircraft, equipment and facilities those systems were supposed to protect.
An investigation by the Associated Press (AP), drawing on satellite imagery and testimony from regional officials, has revealed extensive damage to American military infrastructure, with Iranian attacks damaging or destroying facilities across 26 military bases and other locations housing US equipment.
The findings suggest that Tehran’s campaign was not simply an attempt to retaliate against American and Israeli military action. It was also an effort to systematically degrade the defensive infrastructure supporting the US military presence across the region.
By August, the investigation identified 115 drone or missile attacks claimed by Iran or groups backed by Tehran that had damaged or destroyed facilities at those 26 locations.
The attacks initially concentrated on aircraft hangars, radar installations and early-warning systems designed to detect incoming strikes. Once those assets had been targeted, subsequent attacks struck warehouses, military accommodation and other facilities.
The resulting damage, according to the investigation, involved military equipment worth billions of dollars.
Perhaps more consequentially, regional officials say the attacks have already forced changes in how the United States positions its military assets across the Middle East.
The Damage Washington’s Military Presence Has Sustained
The Associated Press investigation found that Iranian attacks targeted early-warning infrastructure at more than 20 American bases across the region before expanding to aircraft and buildings.
Two regional officials told the news agency that the United States had relocated numerous military assets following the strikes.
One official confirmed that the movements included aircraft, air defence systems, communications equipment and other resources essential to base operations.
The reported relocations suggest that the consequences extended beyond repairing damaged installations. They also affected the distribution of military capabilities across the region.
The findings stand in contrast to the Pentagon’s public assurances about the security of its forces.
Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell maintained that American troops and bases were well protected, insisting that the US military was stronger than ever.
Yet the satellite imagery and accounts examined by the Associated Press document damage to military infrastructure across multiple countries, including some of Washington’s most important regional installations.
The geographical extent of the strikes is particularly striking.
Although Kuwait experienced the greatest concentration of attacks, American military sites were also targeted in Bahrain, Iraq, Jordan, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.
The campaign therefore extended across much of the network of American military facilities in the Gulf and neighbouring countries.
Kuwait: Where American Forces Suffered Some of Their Heaviest Losses
Kuwait emerged as one of the most heavily affected locations during the confrontation.
The deadliest reported attack on American personnel occurred on 1 March, when six US service members were killed in a drone strike on Shuaiba Port.
The country’s military installations also sustained extensive structural damage.
At Ali Al Salem Air Base, Iranian attacks struck the installation at least 30 times.
According to the satellite imagery analysis, the strikes damaged or destroyed at least 15 aircraft hangars, several warehouses and 10 buildings located near a residential area.
The scale of the damage suggests that the attacks repeatedly reached facilities inside the base despite the defensive measures protecting American military installations.
But the destruction at Camp Buehring was even more extensive in certain areas.
Iranian strikes disabled most of the camp’s aircraft hangars. With relatively few aircraft stationed there, however, facilities used by military personnel sustained particularly heavy damage.
A gymnasium was destroyed in March, while a retail facility serving troops was struck in late July.
Another Iranian airstrike severely damaged a garage and dining facility.
The attacks demonstrate how Tehran’s targeting extended beyond combat aircraft and sophisticated military systems to infrastructure supporting the daily operations of American forces.
The broader confrontation has also inflicted damage on Iran itself through American and Israeli strikes.
Nevertheless, Raphael Cohen, director of the National Security Program at the RAND School of Public Policy, argued that American material losses were unavoidable under the conditions of modern warfare.
He explained that contemporary military tactics have made virtually every armed force vulnerable to large-scale attacks involving relatively inexpensive drones.
That vulnerability becomes particularly significant when low-cost weapons can threaten military infrastructure worth hundreds of millions of dollars.
Why Iran Went After the Radars Before the Aircraft
One of the investigation’s most revealing findings concerns the sequence in which Iranian forces selected their targets.
Rather than immediately concentrating on aircraft or troop accommodation, Iran initially prioritised the systems responsible for detecting and intercepting incoming attacks.
The strategy aimed at what military planners regard as the foundation of an effective air defence network.
During the first two days of the war, which began on 28 February, Iranian strikes destroyed protective barriers surrounding American radar systems at Camp Arifjan in Kuwait and Naval Support Activity Bahrain.
Iran also targeted mobile radar installations at Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia and Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan.
The targets were not selected randomly, according to N.R. Jenzen-Jones, director of the technical intelligence consultancy Armament Research Services.
He said Iran had prioritised attacks against the backbone of the American air defence system.
The primary targets included major early-warning radars, which are expensive and particularly difficult to repair or replace.
The logic was straightforward: damaging the systems that detect incoming threats could reduce the ability of American forces and their allies to respond effectively to subsequent attacks.
Jenzen-Jones assessed that weakening this defensive capability was likely a central objective of the initial strikes.
The approach placed particular pressure on sophisticated equipment that cannot necessarily be replaced quickly, even by a military with substantial financial and technological resources.
A Radar Worth Half a Billion Dollars
One of the most consequential reported attacks involved an American radar system stationed in Jordan.
The radar was struck and reportedly destroyed.
Its significance extended far beyond the immediate damage.
According to manufacturer Raytheon, the system was one of only 13 such radars operated by the US military worldwide.
Budget documents indicated that each radar cost approximately $500 million.
The reported destruction of a system of that value illustrates the potential consequences of Iran’s decision to prioritise high-value surveillance equipment.
Unlike ordinary military buildings, advanced early-warning systems involve specialised technologies, complex manufacturing requirements and substantial replacement costs.
Jenzen-Jones believes attacks against such installations were probably intended to weaken the ability of the United States and its regional partners to counter further strikes.
The importance of these radar systems also helps explain why Tehran concentrated on them early in the confrontation.
They were not merely expensive pieces of equipment. They formed part of the infrastructure upon which the wider American defensive network depended.
More Than 50 Successful Strikes in the First Month
After targeting radar systems, Iran expanded its campaign against American military equipment.
During the first month of the war, Iranian forces carried out more than 50 successful strikes across 18 locations, with particular emphasis on areas containing aircraft.
Two regional officials told the Associated Press that the attacks damaged aerial refuelling aircraft, communications systems, fuel storage facilities and military accommodation at various installations.
The reported damage affected capabilities essential to sustaining military operations.
Refuelling aircraft enable extended air missions, communications systems support coordination between units, and fuel depots provide the logistical capacity required for continued deployments.
The attacks therefore threatened not only individual military assets but also the infrastructure needed to keep American forces operational.
One of the most notable incidents occurred in March at Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia.
An Iranian strike damaged the rear section of a Boeing E-3 Sentry airborne surveillance aircraft.
The E-3 is a specialised reconnaissance and airborne early-warning platform, making it particularly relevant to Iran’s broader campaign against American surveillance capabilities.
Another strike targeted a Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) unit at the US Embassy in Riyadh.
These attacks reflected the widening range of facilities and capabilities exposed to Iranian retaliation.
Inside a Saudi Base After the Strikes
The extent of the destruction at Prince Sultan Air Base was also described by a regional military official who had recently visited the installation.
The official reported seeing a heavily damaged facility, with debris scattered throughout the area and broken construction materials surrounding affected buildings.
Damaged military equipment remained visible.
The official also described barracks and dining halls that had been destroyed by the bombardment.
The account provided a ground-level perspective on damage also identified through satellite imagery.
It suggested that the consequences of the strikes extended across operational infrastructure and facilities used by military personnel.
In the United Arab Emirates, Al Dhafra Air Base, located approximately 32 kilometres south of Abu Dhabi, was repeatedly targeted during the early stages of the war.
A second regional military official familiar with the damage said the attacks affected aircraft hangars and other infrastructure.
Early-warning radar equipment and reconnaissance drones were also damaged.
The strikes at Al Dhafra formed part of the wider pattern identified by the investigation: attacks against the defensive, surveillance and operational capabilities supporting American military installations.
A Costly Challenge to America’s Regional Military Network
Taken together, the attacks reveal the extent to which Iran’s military response has placed American infrastructure across the Middle East under pressure.
The investigation identified damage at 26 bases and other locations, while regional officials reported the relocation of aircraft, air defence equipment, communications systems and other essential assets.
The losses included aircraft-related infrastructure, early-warning radars, fuel storage facilities, warehouses, accommodation and operational buildings.
For Iran, the strategy appears to have centred on exploiting the vulnerability of expensive military infrastructure to comparatively inexpensive methods of attack.
The contrast is particularly evident in the targeting of advanced radar systems, including the installation in Jordan reportedly worth approximately half a billion dollars.
As Jenzen-Jones explained, attacks against the backbone of American air defence capabilities could make subsequent strikes more difficult to counter.
Cohen’s assessment points to a broader reality of contemporary warfare: even the most powerful militaries remain vulnerable to sustained attacks involving large numbers of relatively inexpensive drones.
The consequences have also created serious tensions for countries hosting American military facilities.
Jordan and other regional governments have condemned the attacks, describing them as flagrant violations of national sovereignty and international law.
They have also warned that the strikes threaten regional stability.
These objections illustrate the difficult position of countries whose territory hosts American military infrastructure while simultaneously facing the consequences of Iran’s retaliation.
For Washington, the investigation raises questions about the vulnerability of its extensive regional military network.
For Tehran, the reported damage demonstrates how targeting surveillance systems, aircraft and logistical infrastructure can impose substantial material costs on an adversary with far greater military resources.
The most consequential finding is not simply how many American facilities were struck, but how Iran appears to have structured its campaign: first targeting the systems designed to detect attacks, then expanding its strikes against the military infrastructure those systems were intended to defend.
