Follow us on social

POGO

Iron Dumb

This week in "The Bunker": US launches another futile effort to render itself invulnerable to 'all' overseas aerial threats

Analysis | Military Industrial Complex

The Bunker appears originally at the Project on Government Oversight and is republished here with permission.

'Those who forget the past…'​

The Bunker watched the Soviet Union’s Sputnik — the first human-made object to orbit the Earth — fly over his Connecticut house in 1957, and grew up witnessing the resulting “space race” (only one nation has landed people on the Moon. It wasn’t the Soviets). It also soon led to U.S. claims of a “missile gap” — Moscow supposedly had more of them than Washington — that turned out to be false. In the 1960s, The Bunker played near a shuttered missile base, built to destroy incoming Soviet bombers. That Nike system was fully abandoned as folly in the 1970s, when the U.S. military built its first missile-defense system in North Dakota. The Bunker walked the Safeguard site years later, eyeballing its strange 123-foot tall pyramid with sprinklers to wipe radiation from its four Cyclops-like radar eyes. It operated for less than a year before it became worthless against a growing Soviet missile force. Then, in 1983 — and more than $400 billion agoThe Bunker covered Ronald Reagan’s call (PDF) to build a Strategic Defense Initiative to render Soviet nuclear warheads “impotent and obsolete.” Quickly dubbed “Star Wars,” it too withered away, into the weak web of 44 ground-based interceptor missiles based in Alaska and California today capable of “defending” us against a limited attack.

But no matter. On January 27, President Donald Trump declared the Pentagon will build “a next-generation missile defense shield” to “deter — and defend its citizens and critical infrastructure against — any foreign aerial attack on the Homeland.” The president told the Defense Department that it had 60 days to propose “The Iron Dome for America” to defend the U.S. against “ballistic, hypersonic, advanced cruise missiles, and other next-generation aerial attacks from peer, near-peer, and rogue adversaries.”

Trump’s executive order is more marketing hype than a plausible military assignment. As if there were any doubt, the Pentagon reached out to industry (PDF) four days after Trump’s announcement, seeking “to understand Industry capabilities to address Executive Order `The Iron Dome for America’” (like U.S. defense contractors are not perpetually hyping what they can do, and have been secretly hoarding missile-defense silver bullets).

It's ambitious, aspirational — and a pipe dream. Such a Mission Impossible might make more sense if the U.S. military could keep one of its helicopters from colliding with a commercial airliner just down the Potomac River from its headquarters and the White House. Keeping two aircraft from colliding is a piece of cake compared to developing and deploying space and ground-based sensors and weapons able to detect, track, and destroy multiple incoming enemy missiles launched at the same time.

“The Iron Dome for America” echoes the much more modest Iron Dome system used by Israel to fend off fewer, slower, and shorter-ranged rockets and missiles. The president’s marching orders constitute a wish list lacking logic — or the money to pay for it (nuclear expert Joe Cirincione’s back-of-the-envelope estimate for it is $2.5 trillion). The U.S. currently spends about $10 billion annually on missile defense.

Unsurprisingly, defense contractors like what they’re hearing. “We’re a major partner in Israel’s Iron Dome today,” Chris Calio, chief executive of RTX, parent of Raytheon, said the day after Trump’s order. “It's the bedrock of Raytheon” — the Pentagon’s second-biggest contractor — “and they are among the best at it…we view this as a significant opportunity for us, something right in our wheelhouse.”

And something right in the taxpayers’ poorhouse.

A new rank rank: Commander-in-Chief Petty Officer

Much of President Trump’s push for missile defense, like those of his predecessors, is designed to thwart an attack by the Russians. Yet he’s emulating them when it comes to “defacing” those who have displeased him, eerily calling to mind Josef Stalin. Such imitation among autocrats apparently is the sincerest form of battery.

The Trump administration has removed two Pentagon portraits of retired Army general Mark Milley — picked by Trump to serve as his chairman of the Joint Chiefs in 2018 — because Milley placed his allegiance to the Constitution above his loyalty to Trump. Beyond that, Trump and his minions have stripped security details and clearances from Milley and several other former top U.S. officials who didn’t toe Trump’s line. They needed protection from Iran after — who else? — Trump ordered the killing of Iranian Major General Qassim Suleimani in 2020.

Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island, the senior Democrat on the armed services committee, denounced Trump for jeopardizing Milley’s life for his own “political satisfaction.” Even Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR), a Trump acolyte and chairman of the intelligence committee, encouraged Trump to “revisit” his decision. Stripping security from Milley and others who have run afoul of Trump means they “could be targeted by Iranian assassins in public where innocent bystanders could be injured,” Cotton warned.

The Bunker turns five today…

It’s hard to believe that we launched The Bunker five years ago today. That’s a lifetime in Newsletter Land. The Bunker remains a proud skeptic, standing athwart all the zaniness that is U.S. national security, declaring: “Are you kidding me?”

The Bunker’s proud parents are Tim Farnsworth, vice president of communications and editorial strategy here at the Project On Government Oversight (POGO), and Mandy Smithberger, who was running POGO’s Center for Defense Information when The Bunker launched. Since then, we’ve had a capable team working behind the scenes to produce and publish The Bunker nearly every Wednesday morning (subscribe here for weekly 7 a.m. delivery via email). They include current CDI chief Greg Williams, Editorial Director Julia Delacroix, producers Jules Lemos-Maldonado and Spurthi Kontham, and ace proofreader/fact-checker Neil “Eagle Eye” Gordon. And three huzzahs to POGO chief Danielle Brian, who recently pushed to get The Bunker co-published on Responsible Statecraft’s website.

This note is just a helmet tip from The Bunker-in-chief to thank this crackerjack crew for a job well done. And a hearty Bravo Zulu to our valued readers. With five years now solidly behind us, The Bunker can’t wait to begin its sixth year. Finally, we’ll be able to start kindergarten.

Here’s what has caught The Bunker’s eye recently

Broken China?

The Chinese military would be unlikely to win a war with the U.S., according to experts from the usually hawkish RAND Corporation, quoted by David Roza in the usually hawkish Air & Space Forces Magazine January 31.

Military pay (PDF)

The median enlisted person in the U.S. military (average age 22) earned $115,400 in total compensation, including benefits, in 2024; median officers (average age 28) earned $184,600, the Congressional Budget Office reported January 30.

About time…

A review of posts on X by top incoming Trump Defense Department officials highlights their disdain for the status quo and a willingness to upset the Pentagon apple cart, Noah Robertson reported January 28 at Defense News.

Thanks for reviewing The Bunker this week. Consider forwarding this on to your pals so they can subscribe here.



Top image credit: Project on Government Oversight
Analysis | Military Industrial Complex
US Capitol
Top image credit: Lucky-photographer via shutterstock.com

Why does peace cost a trillion dollars?

Washington Politics

As Congress returns from its summer recess, Washington’s attention is turning towards a possible government shutdown.

While much of the focus will be on a showdown between Senate Democrats and Donald Trump, a subplot is brewing as the House and Senate, led by Republicans but supported by far too many Democrats, fight over how big the Pentagon’s budget should be. The House voted to give Trump his requested trillion dollar budget, while the Senate is demanding $22 billion more.

keep readingShow less
Yemen Ahmed al-Rahawi
Top image credit: Funeral in Sana a for senior Houthi officials killed in Israeli strikes Honor guard hold up a portraits of Houthi government s the Prime Minister Ahmed al-Rahawi and other officials killed in Israeli airstrikes on Thursday, during a funeral ceremony at the Shaab Mosque in Sanaa, Yemen, 01 September 2025. IMAGO/ via REUTERS

Israel playing with fire in Yemen

Middle East

“The war has entered a new phase,” declared Mohammed al-Bukhaiti, a senior official in Yemen’s Ansar Allah movement, after Israeli jets streaked across the Arabian Peninsula to kill the group’s prime minister and a swathe of his cabinet in Yemen’s capital, Sana’a.

The senior official from Ansar Allah, the movement commonly known as the Houthis, was not wrong. The strike, which Israel’s Defense Minister Israel Katz promised was “just the beginning,” signaled a fundamental shift in the cartography of a two-year war of attrition between the region’s most technologically advanced military and its most resilient guerrilla force.

The retaliation was swift, if militarily ineffective: missiles launched towards Israel disintegrated over Saudi Arabia. Internally, a paranoid crackdown ensued on perceived spies. Houthi security forces stormed the offices of the World Food Programme and UNICEF, detaining at least 11 U.N. personnel in a sweep immediately condemned by the U.N. Secretary General.

The catalyst for this confrontation was the war in Gaza, unleashed by Hamas’s October 7 attacks on Israel, which provided the Houthis with the ideological fuel and political opportunity to transform themselves. Seizing the mantle of Palestinian solidarity — a cause their leader, Abdul-Malik al-Houthi, frames as a “sacrifice in the cause of God Almighty ” — they graduated from a menacing regional actor into a global disruptor, launching missiles toward Israel just weeks after Hamas’s attacks and holding one of the world’s most vital shipping lanes hostage.

The chessboard was dangerously rearranged in May, when the Trump administration, eager for an off-ramp from a costly and ineffective air campaign, brokered a surprise truce with the Houthis. Mediated by Oman, the deal was simple: the U.S. would stop bombing Houthi targets, and the Houthis would stop attacking American ships. President Trump, in his characteristic style, claimed the Houthis had “capitulated” while also praising their “bravery.”

keep readingShow less
TRump  and Mikheil Kavelashvili
Top photo credit: President Trump (shutterstock/Maxim Elramsisy) and Georgian president Mikheil Kavelashvili ( President of Azerbaijan)

Georgia Dream hopes Trump is ticket out of geopolitical purgatory

Europe

For economic reasons but also for self-preservation, Georgia does not want to be dragged into picking sides in its relations with larger powers. Its president’s open letter to Donald Trump may be an effort to balance growing Chinese influence.

President Mikheil Kavelashvili’s letter to Trump urges a restoration of strategic ties with Washington. It struck the tone of a forsaken friend, talking about the lack of U.S. focus, raising “doubts and questions among the Georgian people about how free and sincere your administration’s actions are in terms of strengthening peace in the region.” He even bemoans Trump’s reinstatement of relations with President Putin.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.