America's Missile Defense Problem

Audio editing by Eric Schneider
Motion graphics by Vincent de Langen
Thumbnail by Simon Buckmaster
Writing & Direction by Evan

This includes a paid sponsorship which had no part in the writing, editing, or production of the rest of the video.

Video supplied by Getty Images
Maps provided by MapTiler/OpenStreetMap Contributors and GEOlayers 3
Select footage from the AP Archive

[Ghettofinger]

The thing is though, it's impossible to know for certain exactly how robust the US missile defense program really is. Something like this is the epitome of the highest level of top secret classification. The US Defense Budget chaos makes it very difficult to follow the money. Realistically, it doesn't mean we are testing and developing a more advanced missile defense system, but it is impossible to know for certain. Also, it is impossible to know exactly how many GMD missiles the US has. There have been a little over 40 SILOS observed in Alaska, but that has no indication of how many missiles each silo carries or if there are any other silos in locations nobody knows about. Lastly, in 2020, the US demonstrated that a SM-3 Block-IIA can indeed shoot down an ICBM, this includes all the SM-3s on Destroyers, guided missile cruises, all the Japanese Aegis equipped vessels, and countries with Aegis ashore. However, how successfully they can is not publicly available, just that it is possible. Nonetheless, the US Missile Defense network is far more robust than just GMD systems, and impossible to know how extensive our GMD coverage is. Will it be able to stop a full scale launch, unlikely, but how many can it stop, literally nobody knows and I hope we never have to find out.

[Zemog]

If I were the US, I'd want everyone to think my missile defense was terrible regardless of reality so as to not trigger an arms race and destabilize MAD.

[Liftium]

Iron Dome "chooses" not to engage missiles fired into open, not urban areas. It doesn't choose/decide on it's own, it has maps of engagement.

[AadamSaleem]

The nuclear arms race is like two sworn enemies standing waist deep in gasoline, one with three matches, the other with five."

_ Carl Sagan

[danielgrigg]

Ordinarily I find your content extremely compelling, well-researched, and convincingly presented. However, as a defense professional I find this video does not meet your usual standards.
You justly point to many flaws with GMD but never explicitly state that the program has been defunct for more than a decade, superseded by new initiatives. You compare the cost of a research and development program spanning fifteen years to the one-time construction cost of two aircraft carriers; this is a textbook apples-and-oranges situation. You omit the development and deployment of SM-3 Block IIA, a BMD system currently operational and deployed globally, with a long track record of success in frequent and rigorous testing in the exact arenas where GMD was most deficient. Finally, the crux of your argument seems to be “Why haven’t you people solved the single most complex defense engineering problem to date?” This oversimplification demonstrates a lack of the context and wider understanding where you normally excel. You belabor minor problems with BMD systems while ignoring the much more pressing concerns. For example, even if we develop a perfect BMD system tomorrow which can never be circumvented, the political fallout will make nuclear warfare MORE likely in the short to moderate term, not less. Additionally, the extremely highly classified nature of programs like nuclear arsenals and associated systems means that forming reasoned opinions in this sphere typically requires years of study and training and the acquisition of a lofty security clearance. It is difficult for me to believe that you have done so.
I would encourage you to study military research, development, testing, and procurement in much more detail before releasing more content in this sphere. It is easy to write a video script or article saying “this program is over budget, behind schedule, and imperfect.” It is devilishly difficult to build an effective military system and implement it in the real world while under military, budgetary, and political pressures. Frankly, the tone of this video smacks of disrespect to those of us who spend our working lives doing the latter while ensuring misinformed armchair scrutiny from those espousing the former position.

I intend the above as constructive criticism only, and I look forward to your next video with the earnest hope it will be a return to form for you.

[thomasr.jackson]

The American Physical Society took down its report ten days ago and has cited errors in their assessment. It is strange to leave this withdrawn report as the key argument for why near launch defenses can’t work.

[de]

The video is pretty poor through out but the cost comparison seemed the worst. No attempt to consider time scale of the cost. No explanation on if that cost was r&d, deployment, support. It then compared it to the cost of aircraft carriers with what I assume is the unit cost from what I have seen previously. I was also under the impression that aegis with one of the newer SM missiles can be used to intercept in the boost and the terminal phase now as well. Also completely ignored how the USA cannot say if it was effective due to the destabilising nature towards MAD doctrine. Normally this channel does better.

[TheWatchman]

Strategic VS tactical doesn’t mean close vs far. Tactics is the realm of winning a battle. Strategy is winning a war. A nuclear missile would end the war so its strategic. Russia has been talking about tactical nukes, which means it would be using small nukes in the normal course of the war to win battles.

[Avaricumstudios]

Threat of nuclear retaliation is really an underrated defense system

[smitchered]

The problem is also that developing functional anti-ICBM technology changes the balance of the game that is nuclear deterrence by a lot: in other words, if a country announces a functional anti-ICBM missile tomorrow, it will become much more of a nuclear threat, which makes the world a whole lot more dangerous and unstable. Nuclear defense can actually be dangerous, at least in the short term.

[AadamSaleem]

The US and Russian rader and missile bases architecture look like things out of sci-fi movies. It's quite cool to see, but also incredibly scary at the same time.

[AesirMO]

Aegis SM-3 IIA can mid course intercept ICBMs. It has a much better track record than GMD.
The GMD isn't being tested as much because funding is being moved to NGI (Next Generation Interceptor).

From an engineering perspective missiles interception is perhaps one of the most technically complicated problems on earth. You're essentially taking something already difficult, launching a rocket into space. But needing to do it dynamically when an ICBM launches. Rather than a pre-planned course, a chosen date, scrapable with bad weather, with a normal rocket. It must go when the ICBM goes, no matter the circumstances.
On top of the difficulty of a kinetic warhead, an interceptor that physically smashes into the ICBM.
Not even thinking of the systems that sense track and decide when to launch interceptors.
It's flabbergasting it works at all, to be honest.

Comparing it to an Aircraft Carrier as if it's lesser just strikes me as odd. And looking at the end product rather than what's really important, the lessons learned and the experienced gained. It's about creating the technology that can do this and applying it to future generations of interceptors. Because this is a new technology. Not just another iteration of mature products. And it's an incredibly difficult problem, if not frankly impossible. Now, whether or not any of this is worth it is another question.

But I kinda dislike how you painted missile defense and these systems. It lacks a lot of context and a lot of details, and frankly perspective. It just feels like you're pushing a negative and uninformed narrative to people who most likely know nothing about it. They're the best on the planet. And their lack of reliability indicates the difficulty of the problem more than the incompetence of the engineers. Hopefully they will lead to greater systems in the future. From an engineering and technology perspective they're incredibly cool. It's an emerging technology and treating it like a scandal is either misguided or malicious. I couldn't say.

Between SM-3 IIA and GMD we'd likely be able to intercept one off ICBMs from North Korea. But large scale or honestly even multiple would most likely never be feasible.

[Rob_FF]

I don't know why Iron Dome was even mentioned as it is designed to interceptor artillery and short ranged rockets. It is not designed to intercept ICBMS.

[DroneStrike]

You can't compare Iron Dome to at Patriot, THAAD, GMD, Aegis, or any of that. Iron Dome was designed to shoot home made rockets, not ICBM fired into space with no preplanned course. The system we have for ICBM is still the best in the world, so you're giving out false signals about America's defense to those who know very little about military defense period. It's not an easy task to shoot a missile in space with another missile, yet it's still better than any other nation. The best defense is offense anyway. It's always been like that.

[CausticLemons]

The biggest issue with these systems is that a very reliable anti-missile defense nullifies MAD.

[SilvanaDil]

Some countries routinely over hype or prematurely advertise what they have and can do; countries like Russia and China come to mind.
The USA is usually quite willing to keep things quiet until the appropriate time comes.

[nurkleblurker]

Surprised you didn't even mention hypersonic missiles. I work in the missile defense industry. That is the main concern these days.

[technoman]

I learned that before they had the computer mouse, they just used guns.

[lumberc]

That is the LAST notification for a video I’m trying to get bro 😭

[kilojuliet]

I'm suprised at the lack of quality research and failure of logic in this video. This channel is known for better and this honestly puts doubts on previous videos.