The joint US-Israel offensive against Iran combines Tomahawk missiles, suicide drones, F-35s, and massive strikes. Here are the weapons, targets, and initial effects.
Summary
As of March 1, 2026, we must refer to this as a large-scale joint offensive by the US and Israel, not a simple raid. The operation began on February 28. Washington has officially named its part Operation Epic Fury. The first confirmed details show a rare combination of cruise missiles, low-cost suicide drones, stealth aircraft, and massive Israeli air strikes. The stated objectives go far beyond sending a political signal: they include neutralizing command centers, air defenses, missile and drone launchers, and military airfields, and preventing Iran from pursuing a military nuclear program. The immediate results are already significant: Iran has lost part of its chain of command, military infrastructure has been hit, and Tehran has retaliated with missile and drone strikes against Israel and US facilities in the Gulf. But let’s be clear: the precise military toll is still evolving, and the strategic outcome is far from settled.
The nature of the joint offensive
The attack launched on February 28, 2026, was a coordinated operation between the United States and Israel. Both capitals view it as a major strike, prepared in advance, rather than an improvised reaction lasting a few hours. According to public information, the campaign targets command centers, air defense capabilities, missile and drone launch sites, and military airfields. US President Donald Trump has presented the operation as an action intended to destroy Iran’s military capabilities and prevent the emergence of a military nuclear capability. On the Israeli side, the stated rationale is that of a preemptive strike against what is presented as an existential threat.
This point is important: the operation is not just anti-missile. It is also a decapitation strike, i.e., an attempt to break the enemy’s chain of command. Reuters reports that the attack targeted the top echelons of Iranian power and that Ali Khamenei’s death was subsequently confirmed by Iranian state media. Other senior military officials were also reported among the dead. This changes the nature of the campaign: it is no longer just about destroying infrastructure, but about directly neutralizing the regime’s political and military center.
The American weapons that launched the strike
The weapons used by the US against Iran are, at this stage, better documented publicly than those used by Israel.
Reuters and images released by U.S. Central Command confirm the use of Tomahawk missiles, F-35 and F/A-18 aircraft, as well as, for the first time in combat, low-cost LUCAS suicide drones. The specialized press has also reported the use of ATACMS and F-15s in the US arsenal. In other words, Washington has combined naval strikes, piloted air strikes, drone saturation, and long-range ground-to-ground fire. This is not a symbolic show of force. It is a complete strike architecture.
The Tomahawk as a deep strike weapon
The Tomahawk Land Attack Missile remains the classic tool of the first American salvo. It is a precision cruise missile, fired from the sea or from land platforms, designed to strike fixed targets at long range. Reuters reports a range of approximately 1,600 kilometers (1,000 miles), a length of 6.1 meters (20 feet), a weight of approximately 1,510 kilograms (3,330 pounds), and an average cost of close to $1.3 million per unit. Technically, it is the ideal weapon for striking hardened sites, command centers, radars, or critical infrastructure early on, without immediately exposing aircraft over the most heavily defended areas.
In an offensive against Iran, the Tomahawk is mainly used to open breaches. It does not “win” the air battle on its own. On the other hand, it disrupts the first layers of the enemy’s system. It allows several sensitive targets to be hit simultaneously, at long range, with a known, robust operational signature that is compatible with strikes launched from destroyers or other naval platforms already positioned in the region. It is the opening hammer. Not the finishing tool.
LUCAS as a low-cost saturation weapon
The most striking innovation lies elsewhere. For the first time in combat, the United States has deployed LUCAS (Low-Cost Unmanned Combat Attack System) suicide drones, described as similar in logic to the Iranian Shahed drones. Reuters estimates the cost at around $35,000 per unit. This figure is significant: it illustrates the affordable mass logic that is now gaining ground among the US forces. Expensive cruise missiles are no longer used against every secondary target. Much cheaper vectors are also being sent to saturate, draw enemy fire, and strike radars, mobile launchers, or opportunistic targets.
The strategic signal is brutal. Washington is adopting part of its adversaries’ military grammar. Iran has popularized the use of low-cost drones to wear down defenses. The United States is now adopting this logic, but with better integration of sensors, air support, and cruise missiles. In other words, America is no longer responding solely with sophistication. It is also responding with volume.
Combat aircraft as a tool for penetration and suppression
Images and data released by the US military show the engagement of F-35s and F/A-18s, while Aviation Week adds F-15s.
The role of these aircraft is consistent with the mission profile: penetration, suppression of air defenses, precision strikes, escort coverage, and engagement of moving targets. The F-35, with its stealth capabilities and sensor fusion, is particularly well suited for detecting radar emitters, designating targets, and striking in a dense environment. The F/A-18, more versatile and less stealthy but well-proven, provides payload capacity and flexibility. The F-15, if indeed it was engaged as Aviation Week indicates, adds payload and range.
The key point is this: missiles open the way, but aircraft deliver the tactical kill. They exploit the holes created in the enemy’s defenses. They pursue batteries that are still active, launchers that have not been destroyed, reconstituted sites, or aircraft on the ground. This is where the campaign takes on depth.
Confirmed Israeli weapons and gray areas
Regarding the weapons used by Israel against Iran, the volume is known, but the detailed nomenclature is less so. Reuters reports that Israel deployed approximately 200 fighter jets and struck 500 targets in the largest air mission in its history. Aviation Week adds that Israel claims to have fired more than 1,200 munitions on the first day. However, at the time of writing, there is still no complete public inventory, target by target, missile by missile, published in a consistent manner by the IDF in accessible open sources. It is therefore necessary to distinguish between what is confirmed and what remains probable but undocumented.
What is confirmed, however, is the nature of the targets: air defenses, missile launchers, command centers, and the gradual expansion of the campaign towards Tehran. From there, a serious technical reading leads to a cautious conclusion: such a deep and massive raid most likely involves a mix of precision-guided bombs and stand-off weapons fired from outside the densest defense bubble. But at this stage, this remains an analytical inference, not an official list of munitions published in detail. To say more would be to embellish the facts.
The objectives behind the weapons
The attack must be read in three layers. The first is military: to break Iran’s eyes and arms. The eyes are the radars, air defenses, and command centers. The arms are missile launchers, drones, airfields, and forces capable of responding quickly. The Associated Press explicitly cites Revolutionary Guard command facilities, air defense capabilities, missile and drone launch sites, and military airfields among the targets.
The second layer is political: the strike also aims to disrupt the regime’s leadership. The targeting of the area near the Supreme Leader’s offices is unambiguous. It is an attempt to break the central command. Trump, for his part, then made a speech that went beyond the nuclear issue alone, calling on Iranians to overthrow their government.
Let’s be clear: from that moment on, we are no longer just talking about military neutralization. We are touching on the issue of regime change, as assumed in American rhetoric.
The third layer is doctrinal. This offensive demonstrates the combination of expensive and inexpensive weapons within the same architecture. On the one hand, Tomahawks and stealth aircraft for precision, penetration, and strategic targets. On the other, low-cost suicide drones for saturation and attrition. It is a high-tech war, but it is no longer just a high-tech war. It is the meeting of stealth and volume.
Tactical results already visible
The initial results are spectacular, but they must be interpreted with caution. The most significant impact is political and symbolic: Reuters reports that Ali Khamenei has been killed, and this death has since been confirmed by Iranian state media. Reuters also mentions the deaths of other senior officials, including the Iranian defense minister and the head of the Revolutionary Guards, according to several sources. If these losses are confirmed, Iran has suffered immediate disorganization at the top of its political and military leadership.
On a strictly military level, Israel claims to have struck 500 targets, and the attack targeted defense systems that had already been weakened in previous clashes. The Associated Press reports that, twelve hours after the fighting began, the United States reported no human casualties on the American side and only limited damage to its bases, despite hundreds of missiles and drones launched by Iran in retaliation. This means that the first wave of the offensive achieved some of its immediate goals: striking hard, surviving the initial counterattack, and retaining the capacity for escalation in the future. But this is not enough to prove that Iran’s capabilities have been neutralized.
The immediate limits of “precision”
We must also look at the other side of the coin. The strikes caused immediate human casualties in Iran. The Associated Press, citing Iranian state media and the Red Crescent, reported at least 201 dead and more than 700 wounded in the first assessment published on February 28. AP also mentions reports of civilian casualties, including a strike that hit a girls’ school in the south. This brings to mind a simple reality: even when a campaign is sold as “surgical,” an offensive of this magnitude, carried out against dispersed targets intertwined in a dense territory, almost always produces collateral damage and gray areas.
The other limitation is strategic. Iran retaliated against Israel, but also against US facilities in Bahrain, Kuwait, and Qatar, according to AP, and Reuters reports wider strikes in the Gulf. This means that the campaign did not crush Tehran’s initial retaliatory capacity. It has undoubtedly weakened it, but it has not eliminated it in one fell swoop. This is a major difference.
The real interpretation of this arsenal
The arsenal used by the United States and Israel against Iran reflects a broader evolution in modern warfare. The first lesson is that combined strikes are once again becoming central: cruise missiles, suicide drones, stealth aircraft, multi-role fighters,
ground-to-ground fire, and Israeli air power in a single sequence. The second is that unit cost is no longer the only criterion. The Pentagon now accepts putting $35,000 vectors alongside $1.3 million missiles and aircraft worth tens of millions. The third is political: when an operation targets launchers, radars, airfields, and the regime’s leadership, it is no longer a simple message. It is an attempt to reshape the regional balance of power by force.
The point to watch now is not just the number of targets hit. It is Iran’s actual ability to rebuild its chains of command, maintain a volume of retaliation, and preserve its critical programs despite the initial destruction. A strike can be tactically brilliant and strategically incomplete. This is often where the aftermath plays out.
Sources
Reuters, US deploys suicide drones and Tomahawk missiles in Iran strikes, March 1, 2026.
Reuters, Iranian leader Khamenei killed in air strikes as U.S., Israel launch attacks, February 28, 2026.
Associated Press, What to know about U.S.-Israel attacks on Iran, February 28, 2026.
Aviation Week, Israel Strikes Tehran As ‘Operation Epic Fury’ With U.S. Enters Day 2, March 1, 2026.
Associated Press, U.S. and Israel clash with Iran at emergency Security Council meeting, March 1, 2026.
War Wings Daily is an independant magazine.