Stephen Young
@atomicwonk.bsky.social
Advocate for more sensible nuclear weapons policies, firm believer that we should not live in a world where hundreds of millions could be dead in an hour. Associate Director for Government Affairs, Global Security Program, Union of Concerned Scientists
Thanks - that wasn't appearing in my thread for some reason.
January 11, 2026 at 3:38 PM
Thanks - that wasn't appearing in my thread for some reason.
Please do share the assertion if you would be so kind
January 11, 2026 at 10:18 AM
Please do share the assertion if you would be so kind
2nd top takeaway: the movie's "suicide or surrender" choice is a false dichotomy. In response to an attack from a single missile, the president would have a wide range of options other than suicide (massive nuclear response) or surrender (doing nothing), starting with riding out the attack.
December 20, 2025 at 11:15 PM
2nd top takeaway: the movie's "suicide or surrender" choice is a false dichotomy. In response to an attack from a single missile, the president would have a wide range of options other than suicide (massive nuclear response) or surrender (doing nothing), starting with riding out the attack.
Here is the piece in the Bulletin, which is well worth your time. First top takeaway: People are - unfortunately - likely to conclude INCORRECTLY that Trump's Golden Dome anti-missile system is the answer to the nuclear threat, thebulletin.org/2025/12/a-ho...
A house of mistakes: what Kathryn Bigelow’s 'A House of Dynamite' gets radically right—and dangerously wrong—about nuclear war
A House of Dynamite gets so many details wrong that the lessons viewers take from the film will likely be counterproductive, even dangerous. If it is a wake-up call, the audience will wake up on the w...
thebulletin.org
December 20, 2025 at 11:10 PM
Here is the piece in the Bulletin, which is well worth your time. First top takeaway: People are - unfortunately - likely to conclude INCORRECTLY that Trump's Golden Dome anti-missile system is the answer to the nuclear threat, thebulletin.org/2025/12/a-ho...
Well, as you state in your article, yes and no, @joecirin.bsky.social. 24,700 Iron Dome batteries would do a semi-reasonably job of defending the US against the types of attacks that slow, mid-range Israel faces, but would do an even worse job than the current US system against ICBMs.
December 12, 2025 at 11:16 PM
Well, as you state in your article, yes and no, @joecirin.bsky.social. 24,700 Iron Dome batteries would do a semi-reasonably job of defending the US against the types of attacks that slow, mid-range Israel faces, but would do an even worse job than the current US system against ICBMs.
Reposted by Stephen Young
I gave a more accurate comparison here: “We would need to deploy more than 24,700 Iron Dome batteries to defend the 3.7 million square miles of the continental United States. At $100 million per battery, that would be approximately $2,470,000,000,000.” www.defenseone.com/ideas/2024/0...
Can Donald Trump really build an Iron Dome over America?
In a word, no. The president-turned-candidate is still selling the same old missile-defense snake oil.
www.defenseone.com
December 12, 2025 at 3:27 PM
I gave a more accurate comparison here: “We would need to deploy more than 24,700 Iron Dome batteries to defend the 3.7 million square miles of the continental United States. At $100 million per battery, that would be approximately $2,470,000,000,000.” www.defenseone.com/ideas/2024/0...
I do have a confession. It is possible that the general did not do the map in his article. That is because, in the article, he cites the COASTLINE of Israel versus the coastline of the US as the areas that need to be defended. WHICH IS JUST AS STUPID IF NOT MORE SO.
December 11, 2025 at 9:06 PM
I do have a confession. It is possible that the general did not do the map in his article. That is because, in the article, he cites the COASTLINE of Israel versus the coastline of the US as the areas that need to be defended. WHICH IS JUST AS STUPID IF NOT MORE SO.