Trump’s “Great Iron Dome” Plan for the U.S.
[guest post by Dana]
President Trump wants an “Iron Dome” over the U.S.:
A new executive order from President Donald Trump calls for greater investments for a multilayered homeland air defense system, including a requirement for the development of space-based interceptors.
On the campaign trail in June, then-candidate Trump stated his desire to “build a great Iron Dome over our country, a dome like has never seen before, a state-of-the-art missile defense shield that will be entirely built in America.”
“We’re going to build the greatest dome of them all,” he said at the time.
On Monday night, Trump signed an executive order to that effect titled “The Iron Dome for America”.
Details:
. . .Trump signed an executive order to that effect titled “The Iron Dome for America”. The order gives Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth 60 days to develop a plan to defend the homeland against “ballistic, hypersonic, advanced cruise missiles, and other next-generation aerial attacks from peer, near-peer, and rogue adversaries.”
Read the whole thing.
—Dana
Hello.
Dana (011784) — 1/28/2025 @ 11:26 amLloyd Austin’s DOD in October 2022:
BuDuh (7a5fe0) — 1/28/2025 @ 12:01 pmCan you authorize a major new defense procurement initiative through executive order?
Time123 (5e7517) — 1/28/2025 @ 12:22 pmI think this is the kind of thing that Congress has to include in the budget. But that’s a constitutional law question, I don’t really think Republicans care about the constitution
@Time123 The DoD has billions in discretionary fundings that POTUS can direct.
Most of the initial investment would likely be research and testing but the Skunk-like outfits before full implementation.
whembly (c87394) — 1/28/2025 @ 1:21 pmI’m certain Time has read the EO and knows exactly what is being procured, whembly. It must be massive!
BuDuh (7a5fe0) — 1/28/2025 @ 1:36 pmThis is a case where I would want to see the order rather than just the articles. If Trump is just asking for a plan from his subordinate and calling it an EO — that’s well within his rights and no big deal. It would need to become a proposal to Congress, get passed, etc, etc.
I’m more concerned about the memo announcing the suspension of all grant and other payments, pending review. That would seem to be a challenge to Congresses right and responsibility to pass spending legislation and see that the law so passed is faithfully executed. (I’m also more curious about the reaction of some of our MAGA crowd to this.)
Appalled (cfaf93) — 1/28/2025 @ 1:45 pmFunding it by freezing medicade payments and non profits grants?
asset (f92915) — 1/28/2025 @ 1:46 pmhttps://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/the-iron-dome-for-america/
BuDuh (7a5fe0) — 1/28/2025 @ 1:55 pmI don’t know about the MAGA crowd, but I found this to be concerning:
BuDuh (7a5fe0) — 1/28/2025 @ 2:03 pmWhembly, i had a chance to read the EO. It basically tells the DOD to write a report. The technology to this exists already. It’s just a question of building/ buying enough of it, establishing bases, recruiting and training enough ppl to man it all etc. etc.
Time123 (a43db0) — 1/28/2025 @ 2:04 pmTrump’s EO is no different the mission of the Missile Defense Agency, which already has a current budget of around $10B. By one estimate, MDA has received over $250B between 1985 and 2023. Trump’s EO isn’t anything new, it mostly restates the recommendations the 2019 Missile Defense Review that were set aside by the Biden Administration.
Descriptions of the various systems, and their capabilities and deployment (if any), is available at first link. At best the success rates in testing can be described as “mediocre.”
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 1/28/2025 @ 2:06 pm#8
Thanks. It looks ok to me from a President acting like a normal President standpoint.
Appalled (3a047a) — 1/28/2025 @ 2:07 pmSounds ghastly! I see why you questioned the Congressional Republican’s oath-of-office.
BuDuh (7a5fe0) — 1/28/2025 @ 2:15 pmRIP, I think he real world performance of the Israeli Iron Dome as well as the performance of the older patriot systems deployed to UKE show something better then Mediocre.
Time123 (a43db0) — 1/28/2025 @ 2:15 pmTime
I think the Executive can legally authorize something, but the Congress is not obligated to fund it.
It’s a way to put the ball (and any future blame) very publicly, squarely into the court of Congress.
The executive can, has, and will continue to mine through appropriations for poorly defined, loosely worded funding and start without Congress, but a national Iron Dome is going to take more than “loose change”
The USA has always had the distance of the Pacific and the Atlantic to protect and warn us.
Those days will be over soon. Hypersonic missiles, fast, long-range cruise missiles, etc.
Would we wait and try to develop a US “Iron Dome” after a pre-emptive strike, or should we plan and act ahead?
steveg (cdf9e5) — 1/28/2025 @ 2:17 pmBuDuh, my statement wasn’t about “congressional” republicans not caring about the constitution. It was that republicans Generally don’t really care about the constitution. It wasn’t based on this specifically. Just a general conclusion based on statements and actions over the last few years.
So if I confused you with my comment.
Time123 (a43db0) — 1/28/2025 @ 2:18 pmNot confused at all. I expect your single issue comments to morph into multiple issue comments as necessary.
No surprise there.
BuDuh (7a5fe0) — 1/28/2025 @ 2:22 pmhttps://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2025/01/27/white-house-pauses-federal-grants/
Seems like a pragmatic thing to do.
whembly (c87394) — 1/28/2025 @ 2:24 pmSteve, I’m not sure it’s the best use of defense resources (all things considered) but I’m not opposed to it generally. Our main deterrence is our response to such an attack. Our situation isn’t like Israel’s and our defensive needs are different.
The first time a country attacks the US with ICBM is either the end of the US as an industrial society, or the end of the aggressor. I think that’s a big part of why we have 14 Ohio Class subs.
Time123 (a43db0) — 1/28/2025 @ 2:25 pmBuDuH, I’m glad you were able to catch up.
Time123 (a43db0) — 1/28/2025 @ 2:26 pmD.C. federal judge temporarily blocks Trump plan to pause federal aid spending
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 1/28/2025 @ 2:35 pmTime might say that this Judge doesn’t really care about the Constitution. But one never knows…
BuDuh (7a5fe0) — 1/28/2025 @ 2:54 pm” DEI, woke gender ideology, and the green new deal”
lmao
Davethulhu (14e9e4) — 1/28/2025 @ 4:10 pmAs far as the “Great Iron Dome” is concerned, it sounds like the return of Reagan’s “Star Wars”, which was a ploy to get the Soviets to bankrupt themselves, and not an actual defense system. Actually spending money on it seems foolish, but this is Trump we’re talking about.
Davethulhu (14e9e4) — 1/28/2025 @ 4:12 pmSince the US helped fund Israel’s Iron Dome, maybe they could provide their Jewish Space Lasers at a discount.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 1/28/2025 @ 4:39 pmThe US started a Global Protection Against Limited Strikes system in the 80’s; I belive Clinton discontinued it, Bush restarted it and Obama shelved it.
It ought to be restarted and pursued, since its fairly obvious that having one might be a good idea, especially on the West Coast. Perhaps a better asset than a DEI bureauracy, flying non-STEM scholars to “conferences.”
Harcourt Fenton Mudd (0c349e) — 1/28/2025 @ 5:01 pmGPALS has essentially been replaced by the various strategic and theater systems managed by the Missile Defense Agency.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 1/28/2025 @ 5:50 pmGPALS ended long before the Obama Administration.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 1/28/2025 @ 6:15 pm28 Ok, but I believe the point remains: the end of GPALS meant a resulting mishmash of agencies and programs more directed to theatre area use and not defense of the US. They have more names, including the Missile Defense Agency, and larger budgets, but from what is visible, no intense program or product to defend the mainland US.
Harcourt Fenton Mudd (55a6ba) — 1/29/2025 @ 5:52 amCan you authorize a major new defense procurement initiative through executive order?
I think this is the kind of thing that Congress has to include in the budget. But that’s a constitutional law question, I don’t really think Republicans care about the constitution
Sure you can, so long as you don’t need to appropriate new money. If there is already ongoing efforts, you can aim them in a particular direction. Building the damn thing would probably need Congress to put it in the budget.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 1/29/2025 @ 6:47 pmI very much doubt that Trump will bring clarity to any large bureaucracy.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 1/29/2025 @ 6:48 pmFIFY
Sure you can, so long as you don’t need to
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 1/30/2025 @ 3:43 pmappropriatespend new money. If a program or project isn’t authorized by Congress, no money can be spent.