TEHRAN – The tale of Prophet Dawud (David) toppling the giant Jalut (Goliath) with a single stone echoes in understated tones through the 12-Day War in June. Iran’s missile campaign in self-defense, Operation True Promise III's 22 waves of strikes, challenged the advanced David’s Sling and other U.S.-Israeli air defense systems, revealing not an invincible shield but a fragile, costly facade.

The war forces a stark reassessment of military superiority, exposing vulnerabilities that Iran exploited with precision and persistence.

Iran’s missile strategy during the 12-Day War showcased adaptability and ingenuity. Tehran launched over 500 ballistic missiles, overwhelming defenses with volume and tactical variation.

The initial strikes methodically tested vulnerabilities, paving the way for later salvos to fine-tune timing and scale to exploit exposed gaps. As the conflict progressed, Iran’s precision improved, and its success rate climbed steadily.

The Fattah-1 hypersonic missiles, with unpredictable trajectories and high maneuverability, outpaced THAAD systems, which were designed for conventional ballistic threats.

Coordinated drone swarms and decoys disrupted radar, allowing ballistic missiles to breach defenses.

Economic hemorrhage

The U.S.-Israeli defense effort bled resources at an alarming rate. The U.S. fired over 150 THAAD interceptors, each costing $12.7 million, depleting nearly 25% of its global stockpile, per the Wall Street Journal.

The Journal also reported that Navy destroyers launched 80 SM-3s at up to $25 million each, while the Israeli regime exhausted hundreds of Arrow-3, David’s Sling, and Iron Dome interceptors.

A report by the Washington, D.C.-based neoconservative Israel lobby group and think tank, the Jewish Institute for National Security of America (JINSA), highlighted a stark example: the U.S. military launched 30 Patriot missiles—at a cost of $111 million—to intercept just 14 Iranian ballistic missiles targeting Al Udeid Air Base, underscoring the stark economic asymmetry.

Replenishment poses a dire challenge for Washington. According to the Wall Street Journal, Lockheed Martin produces only about 100 THAAD interceptors annually, meaning recovery could take 3–8 years.

When the Pentagon sought Saudi Arabia’s THAAD reserves mid-conflict, per the Middle East Eye, the refusal exposed the scarcity and desperation.

Iran’s low-cost offensive overwhelmed a financially unsustainable defense model, proving that even “advanced” systems crumble under persistent pressure.

Breaches that shook the foundation

The Israeli regime’s initial claim of a 90–95% interception rate eroded under scrutiny. Post-war analysis suggests the actual percentage is likely much lower, with satellite radar footage—published weeks after the halt in fighting—confirming Iranian missiles struck five military sites.

The JINSA report detailed 57 hits within built-up areas and 316 landings in undeveloped zones out of 574 launches.

Notable penetrations included a missile near the regime’s military headquarters in Tel Aviv, causing extensive damage and panic.

Even more significantly, Iran delivered a precision strike on the Weizmann Institute of Science in Rehovot on June 15. This was no random target; the Institute, often presented as a civilian research center, is deeply integrated with the Israeli military and its clandestine nuclear program, serving as a vital hub for advanced weapons technology and strategic research. The strike, which caused widespread devastation and destroyed irreplaceable research, exposed a critical vulnerability at the heart of Israel's military-scientific complex.

Another bypass the U.S. media and military had to swallow was the strike on Al Udeid Air Base, where Patriot batteries failed to stop Iran’s June 23 barrage of 14 ballistic missiles, matching the warheads Washington used two days earlier on Iran’s nuclear sites. Trump insisted 13 were intercepted and one landed harmlessly, but distant Qatari footage showed multiple impacts, and Ali Larijani, an advisor to the Leader of the Islamic Revolution, later said six missiles struck the base directly.

Iran’s saturation tactics—using decoys and massed launches—overwhelmed systems like THAAD and SM-3, which struggled against hypersonic and low-altitude threats.

On June 18, barrages over Tel Aviv exhausted interceptor batteries with non-critical targets, per analyst accounts. These breaches shattered the myth of invincibility, delivering a psychological and strategic blow to U.S.-Israeli confidence.

Over-reliance on U.S. support

The recent conflict vividly exposed the extent to which the Israeli regime’s defense architecture is fundamentally tethered to American military assets.

Far from a robust, independent defense, it functions as a costly extension of U.S. power projection in the region.

The JINSA report, despite its pro-Israeli stance, inadvertently highlighted this critical vulnerability: THAAD interceptors, operated by U.S. personnel, accounted for nearly half of all successful interceptions. This staggering proportion unequivocally demonstrates that Israel’s so-called indigenous Arrow systems, despite decades of development and immense investment, were demonstrably insufficient to stand alone against Iran’s missile might.

Newsweek's emphasis on the “significant portion” of U.S. THAAD deployed to bolster Israel further deepens this understanding, laying bare not a balanced partnership but a profound, almost existential, dependency.

This reliance underscores a critical and strategic weakness: without continuous and substantial U.S. support, Israel’s much-vaunted multi-layered defenses would undoubtedly falter.

Iranian tactical success

Even though Iran endured heavy blows during the war, the nation celebrated its outcome as a triumph of missile technology. Officials and analysts maintained that enemy defense systems failed to intercept advanced Iranian missiles—a claim reinforced by successful strikes on strategic targets like Haifa’s oil refinery and Be’er Sheva’s tech hub, adding to the strategic win, citing Israel’s failure to destabilize Iran’s government or fracture national unity.

Tehran’s use of older models to “burn through” interceptors, followed by hypersonic strikes, demonstrated a deliberate strategy to exhaust enemy resources.

Iran’s ability to force mass evacuations from cities like Tel Aviv cemented its psychological victory, proving its missiles could dictate the battlefield.

Hebrew-language media reported 28 civilian deaths and over 3,000 injuries during the conflict, but the true toll is likely higher due to unprecedented military censorship. The Israeli regime imposed strict restrictions on coverage of missile impact zones, especially near strategic sites, making independent verification of casualties and damage nearly impossible.

Military censors required prior approval for any footage or reporting from strike locations, and foreign journalists were often obstructed or had equipment confiscated.

Analysts suggest this deliberate opacity was aimed at controlling public perception and concealing vulnerabilities exposed by Iran’s missile campaign.

A shift in power

The war redrew West Asia’s military landscape. Iran’s success exposed vulnerabilities that shifted the balance in its favor. The Asia Times warned that “the U.S. and its allies are unprepared to repel saturation missile attacks,” a sentiment echoed by the THAAD stockpile crisis—only seven global batteries, two diverted to Israel, per analyst Sam Lair.

Regionally, Saudi Arabia and the UAE’s refusal to share interceptors, per the Middle East Eye, validated their warming ties with Iran, weakening U.S.-led alliances.

In just 12 days, Iran’s missile barrage laid bare the limits of billion-dollar defense networks, depleting THAAD and Patriot interceptors and even outpacing David’s Sling. Evoking the biblical David versus Goliath, this onslaught proved that ingenuity, volume, and persistence can overcome costly shields.