Posted on 10/28/2025 12:05:04 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
The film dispels the comforting illusion that technology can shield us from a nuclear attack.
Director Kathryn Bigelow’s new thriller, “A House of Dynamite,” is not simply a gripping film — it is a wake-up call. The movie dramatizes, in real time, the terrifying 30-minute window between the launch of a nuclear missile bound for the U.S. and its impact. In doing so, the film exposes a brutal truth that too many decision-makers and policy experts in Washington refuse to admit: Long-range missile defense will not protect us. Our only real path to escape nuclear catastrophe lies in reducing global arsenals.
From the film’s first frames, Bigelow dispels the comforting illusion that technology can shield us from a nuclear attack. “A House of Dynamite” depicts U.S. ground-based interceptors launching and failing to stop the incoming missile. “So it’s a f---ing coin toss? That’s what $50 billion buys us?!” exclaims the frustrated secretary of defense, played by Jared Harris. The answer, in fact, is yes. In scripted tests, U.S. missile defenses against intercontinental weapons have succeeded only about 55 percent of the time — under ideal conditions, with known targets, no decoys and perfectly timed launches. Real war introduces deception, saturation attacks and human failures. The system is brittle. A “silver bullet” defense is a fantasy.
Long-range defenses don’t work, and they make it harder to reduce the nuclear threats we face.
The U.S. has spent hundreds of billions of dollars chasing long-range missile defense systems. Not one has delivered dependable protection. The bloated contracts persist, the well-connected lobbyists benefit and the public clings to hope. But the underlying logic is flawed: Long-range defenses don’t work, and they make it harder to reduce the nuclear threats we face. As...
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.com ...
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
“Reducing global arsenals” resulted in WWI and WWII, according to some.
Reducing arsenals emboldened those who sought to gain by war.
Wow… did I just wake back up in 1985?
Or are the democrats dusting off old talking points.
This supposes that there will be an incoming missile. There will be dozens. If not hundreds. Quoting Laz..."We are so screwed."
61% is absurdly optimistic, no doubt quoted from a contractor who constructed a CDR acceptance test to be successful.
I have not seen the film. I presume the incoming missile was not MIRVed? The trailers look absurd.
There is no defense against ICBMs. There is even less defense against SLBMs. We park 80% of our warheads on subs for this reason. The Russkies park 60%. They can be more flexible because their ICBMs are mobile and can move and be missed. Ours are in fixed silos.
This is why bombers are largely insignificant for nuclear exchange. The war is over by the time they arrive with their very few warheads.
With the new hypersonic missiles, it will be a 15 minute window.
It occurred to me that there wasn't a missile at all, that it was a phantom VR missile created by malevolent hackers who were targeting multiple nations at once because other unnamed nations were scrambling their resources the same way the US was scrambling ours.
The ending is very ambiguous. I wasn't sure if Chicago had been nuked or not.
Is this the same APS that is pushing the idea of man-made globull warming?
I think I already saw this movie. With Jason Robards.
I watched it too - seems like a rehash of the old unilateral disarmament argument. “We should disarm regardless of our enemies”. “Having a defense is provocative”. Blah, blah, blah.
I say - peace through strength.
And from a pure entertainment standpoint, it was a huge let-down that they didn’t show everything get blown up at the end - I felt like a fool for watching it.
Who is the supposed attacker in the trailer? A rogue element would not have MIRV missiles
I am a US senator
Not the flex he thinks it is.
I'm not sure what the message was other than the US has bunkers under mountains for the elite to ride out nuclear Armageddon ala "Dr. Strangelove."
That is why it seems that particle beam weapons or laser weapons like Israel’s Iron Beam, which is operational are the only option. They realized that they cannot afford to spend enough on missiles to defend against missiles or even drones. But a beam weapon uses just a few dollars per shot, and it can fire multiple shots at a reasonable cost, until the target is knocked down.
BINGO.
“The U.S. has spent hundreds of billions of dollars chasing long-range missile defense systems. Not one has delivered dependable protection.”
The Israelis shot down hundreds of Iranian missiles. All that’s missing is “...spending money on defense systems while people of color and underrepresented communities are facing uncertainty with the government shutdown.”
Above all, with thousands of satellites in LEO like Starlink, the early warning capabilities are much higher and possibility of launch phase intercepts much higher.
It depends on the tech and how much money we can spend on it.
Kubrick had fun in Dr. Strangelove mocking Turgeson for saying, "no more than 10, err, 20 million dead Mr. President" if we struck first. But one thing that should never be forgotten is that enemies such as China would be wiling to take 10-20% population loss if the US could simply be annihilated.
The fact that we simply ceded our unparalleled economic and military position after 1991 through the most feckless bipartisan policies imaginable should anger every American.
It is never made clear. It seems to have spontaneously erupted from somewhere in the Pacific Ocean.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.