Will Technology Save Us From a Nuclear Attack?

"Kathryn Bigelow's new nuclear thriller, A House of Dynamite, has been criticized by some experts for being unrealistic, most notably because it portrays an unlikely scenario in which an adversary chooses to attack the United States with just a single nuclear-armed missile. Such a move would, of course, leave the vast American nuclear arsenal largely intact and so invite a devastating response that would undoubtedly largely destroy the attacker's nation."

"At one point in the film, a junior official points out that US interceptors have failed almost half their tests, and the secretary of defense responds by bellowing: "That's what $50 billion buys us?" In fact, the situation is far worse than that. We taxpayers, whether we know it or not, are betting on a house of dynamite, gambling on the idea that technology will save us in the event of a nuclear attack."

US missile defense programs have a long record of failures and unrealistic testing. Interceptor systems have failed nearly half of tests and billions of dollars have been spent with limited proven success. Total spending on missile defenses since the Reagan-era initiative has exceeded $350 billion. The Pentagon has not conducted realistic large-scale intercept tests that simulate hundreds of warheads traveling at high speeds with effective decoys. Continued reliance on unproven technology creates a false sense of security and effectively wagers public safety on systems unlikely to perform under real attack conditions.

Read at The Nation