Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.
GLENN DIESEN
chats with Prof. Ted Postol
| Traducir—Translate! | |
| Make fonts bigger>>> | Resize text-+= |
Glenn Diesen
FIRST RUN JUN 6, 2025
Follow me: Substack: https://glenndiesen.substack.com/ X/Twitter: https://x.com/Glenn_Diesen
Summary
In this comprehensive discussion, MIT Professor Theodore Postol, an expert in nuclear weapons, missile defense, and international security, provides a critical analysis of the proposed U.S. missile defense initiative known as the “Golden Dome,” which includes space-based components championed by Donald Trump. Postol argues that the Golden Dome is primarily a political construct with little to no technical merit, designed more to appeal to political bases than to offer real defensive capability against missile threats from countries like China, Russia, and North Korea.
He elaborates on the fundamental technical limitations of current missile defense systems, such as the Navy’s SM-3 interceptors and ground-based interceptors, highlighting their low effectiveness due to the ease with which adversaries can deploy decoys that are indistinguishable from real warheads. Postol reveals that these systems are essentially incapable of reliably intercepting incoming ballistic missiles, a fact obscured by misleading claims and institutional interests, including a significant scientific fraud at MIT.
The space-based component of the Golden Dome is particularly concerning because it would require thousands of satellites to achieve any meaningful coverage, leading to prohibitively high costs potentially reaching trillions of dollars. More critically, deploying such a constellation would create a massive anti-satellite (ASAT) capability, threatening the satellites of other major powers such as Russia and China. This could destabilize international security by provoking an arms race in space and increasing the risk of a conflict that would generate long-lasting orbital debris, potentially making low Earth orbit unusable for decades or even centuries.
Postol warns that the deployment of such systems risks emboldening ill-informed political leaders to miscalculate in crises, possibly triggering nuclear escalation due to misunderstandings about missile defense capabilities. He highlights Putin’s concern that American leaders might mistakenly believe in the efficacy of these defenses and act recklessly, increasing the danger of nuclear war.
The conversation also touches on broader issues of intelligence failures and political irresponsibility, including poor communication within U.S. leadership regarding critical events such as false missile alerts in Russia and covert attacks on strategic Russian military assets. Postol points to the systemic incompetence and politicization in U.S. intelligence and arms control communities, which exacerbate risks of miscalculation and conflict.
Finally, Postol critiques the lack of serious pushback within the arms control community and the broader political establishment against these destabilizing missile defense initiatives. He stresses that the Golden Dome’s deployment would sabotage any genuine efforts toward nuclear arms reductions and global stability, while also creating dangerous precedents for weaponizing space.
Highlights
- [01:54] 🛡️ Trump’s Golden Dome missile defense program is a political construct with no technical merit.
- [19:17] 🎈 Missile defense systems are fundamentally defeated by simple decoys indistinguishable from warheads.
- [31:50] 🚀 Space-based missile defense would require 1,500–2,000 satellites for minimal coverage, costing billions to trillions of dollars.
- [35:00] ☄️ Space-based interceptors double as a powerful anti-satellite weapon, threatening global military and civilian satellites.
- [42:34] 💥 Destroying satellites in low Earth orbit would generate debris that could prevent satellite use for hundreds of years.
- [53:28] 🔄 Missile defenses and arms reductions are fundamentally incompatible, undermining global arms control efforts.
- [01:02:00] ⚠️ Recent attacks on Russian strategic assets with likely NATO involvement dangerously escalate nuclear tensions.
Key Insights
[01:54] 🛡️ Political Motivation Behind Missile Defense: Postol emphasizes that the Golden Dome serves more as a political tool to reassure domestic audiences about national security than as a viable technological defense. This highlights how missile defense programs can be driven by political agendas, which risks misallocating resources and undermining genuine security needs.
[19:17] 🎈 Decoys Render Missile Defenses Ineffective: The physics and engineering of intercepting ballistic missiles in space are fundamentally constrained by the inability to distinguish actual warheads from lightweight decoys. This scientific reality invalidates claims of effective missile defense and exposes how technical limitations are often ignored or misrepresented in policy debates.
[31:50] 🚀 Astronomical Costs and Impracticality of Space-Based Defenses: The sheer number of satellites required to maintain a credible missile interception capability in orbit—and the associated launch and maintenance costs—make space-based missile defense economically and logistically unfeasible. This challenges the narrative that space-based defenses are an affordable or scalable solution.
[35:00] ☄️ Dual Anti-Satellite Capability Creates Destabilizing Incentives: Space-based interceptors inherently function as anti-satellite weapons, posing a direct threat to the satellites of other nuclear powers. This creates a destabilizing arms race dynamic in space, increasing the risk of conflict escalation and the weaponization of space despite existing treaties and norms.
[42:34] 💥 Long-Term Consequences of Space Debris: Any kinetic conflict in low Earth orbit would generate massive debris fields that could sterilize key satellite orbits for centuries, crippling global communications, navigation, and surveillance capabilities. This underscores the existential risks of weaponizing space and the fragility of space infrastructure for all humanity.
[53:28] 🔄 Missile Defense Undermines Arms Control and Arms Reduction: The 1972 ABM Treaty and subsequent arms control frameworks recognized that effective missile defenses incentivize adversaries to increase offensive nuclear capabilities, thereby negating arms reduction efforts. Postol stresses that expanding missile defenses like the Golden Dome directly contradicts any meaningful disarmament initiatives.
ADDENDUM
America’s top missile-scientist says Russia’s Oreshnik is ‘uninterceptible’.
“Theodore Postol: The Secrets of Russia’s Oreshnik Missile”
Glenn Diesen, 19 January 2026, interviews Ted Postol
49:58
How difficult is it to inter intercept the Oreshnik?
There’s no interception. This thing is not interceptable. People who are talking about intercepting it because there are ways of uh there’s no intercepting it and the reason you wouldn’t be able to intercept it is because of the trajectory it takes. It has this high trajectory. It releases the um uh the warhead at a um uh at a uh a very high altitude...
MY COMMENTS:
E. ZUESSE: As Postol makes clear, the Oreshnik and the Iskander can carry nuclear warheads, but Russia isn’t doing that now.
BEFORE you leave, PLEASE pay attention to this alert.
[t4b-ticker id="1"]
Print this article [bws_pdfprint display=’print’]
The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post, although, if we publish them, we obviously find them noteworthy and valuable.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License •
ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS
