Pentagon Says Day 11 Will Bring Most Intense Strikes Yet as Iran’s Attacks Decline

(Oldglorychronicle.com) – Iran’s missile and drone campaign is collapsing under Operation Epic Fury—and Tehran’s last big leverage play may be threatening global oil shipping.

Quick Take

Defense officials say Day 11 will be the “most intense day of strikes,” as the U.S. and Israel press a campaign focused on missiles, drones, naval forces, and nuclear denial.
Briefings reported more than 5,000 targets struck and over 50 Iranian naval vessels destroyed as Iranian outgoing attacks sharply declined.
Iran’s remaining pressure points include attempted strikes on regional bases and threats tied to the Strait of Hormuz, a key artery for global energy shipments.
U.S. leaders say the operation is not open-ended, while critics in Washington question cost, duration, and escalation risks.

Day 11 Escalation Signals a Pressure Campaign, Not a Symbolic Show

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth said March 10 would mark the “most intense day of strikes” in Operation Epic Fury, now entering its second week. The Pentagon’s messaging has been consistent: the U.S. is pursuing concrete military objectives rather than limited “pinprick” retaliation. Joint updates from Hegseth and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine framed the effort as sustained, target-driven pressure intended to reduce Iran’s ability to strike U.S. forces, Israel, and regional partners.

Military briefings cited large operational totals by Day 10/11, including more than 5,000 targets hit. Officials also described steep declines in Iran’s outbound attacks, with ballistic missile strikes down about 90% and drone attacks down about 83% compared with earlier days of the campaign. Those claims, while based on U.S. reporting, align with the broader pattern described across multiple briefings: fewer successful Iranian launches as stockpiles, launch infrastructure, and command networks take repeated hits.

What the U.S. Says It Is Targeting: Missiles, Drones, Navy, and “Nuclear Denial”

Gen. Caine described three main operational lines: degrading Iranian missile and drone forces, degrading the Iranian navy, and enforcing “nuclear denial.” Reporting also highlighted strikes aimed at sealing tunnel complexes tied to missile basing, including at locations described as major priorities. The scale of aircraft and weapons cited—fighters, bombers, Tomahawks, and first combat use of long-range precision strike missiles—suggests an effort to break Iran’s ability to regenerate capabilities quickly, not just remove a few launchers.

Naval targets have been especially prominent as Iranian threats increasingly touch maritime pressure. U.S. Central Command released video depicting strikes on Iranian ships and submarines, including a corvette identified in reporting. By U.S. accounts, more than 50 Iranian naval vessels have been destroyed, a number that—if sustained—would meaningfully reduce Tehran’s ability to harass shipping or stage limited attacks in contested waters. U.S. officials also signaled caution about striking oil infrastructure, reflecting awareness that energy disruption would punish ordinary people and destabilize allies.

Iran’s Options Narrow as Proxy Pressure Fades and Direct Retaliation Drops

U.S. framing claims Iran is increasingly isolated, with Tehran’s traditional proxy network described as “broken or on the sidelines.” Iran has still attempted retaliatory pressure, including missile attacks on U.S. positions such as the Al-Harir base and a broader series of drone, missile, and rocket incidents against U.S. facilities in Iraqi Kurdistan since the operation began. Yet the reported trendline—far fewer ballistic and drone attacks—suggests capacity constraints, effective defenses, or both.

Iranian leaders and the IRGC have continued defiant messaging, including threats tied to oil shipping. That posture matters because Tehran’s remaining asymmetric leverage tends to center on disruption rather than conventional force-on-force wins. The reporting also included a drone-linked fire at the UAE’s Ruwais Industrial Complex, underscoring that even “limited” attacks can have outsized economic and psychological impact. The strongest verified takeaway from the available material is not that Iran has no options, but that its options look riskier and less effective over time.

Hormuz Risk and Domestic Politics: The Two Fronts That Still Matter

President Trump has publicly warned of severe consequences if Iran attempts to mine or block the Strait of Hormuz, through which a significant share of global oil supply moves. Some reporting referenced unconfirmed indications of mine-laying activity and U.S. strikes on vessels associated with that threat, but the public record remains mixed on what Iran has actually deployed versus what it may be preparing. The strategic point is straightforward: energy chokepoints create global pain fast, and deterrence messaging is meant to prevent a spiral.

At home, the political divide is visible even amid a major overseas operation. Some Senate Democrats raised concerns about timeline, cost, and the possibility of outside support to Tehran, while the administration stressed the campaign is not open-ended and will end on U.S. terms. The most concrete human cost in the briefings was 140 U.S. service members wounded, most described as minor, alongside recognition of fallen personnel. That reality keeps the constitutional question of war aims, oversight, and accountability firmly in view.