Is The 'Golden Dome' Just Another Massive Military Boondoggle?
President Trump announced yesterday that plans have been adopted to construct a "Golden Dome" to protect the United States from missile attack. It is sold as a completion of President Reagan's ill-fated (but very profitable) "Star Wars" program. Already a down payment "supplemental" appropriation of $150 billion is being prepared. Also today: Is Israel preparing a strike on Iran without US participation?
President Trump announced yesterday that plans have been adopted to construct a "Golden Dome" to protect the United States from missile attack. It is sold as a completion of President Reagan's ill-fated (but very profitable) "Star Wars" program. Already a down payment "supplemental" appropriation of $150 billion is being prepared. Also today: Is Israel preparing a strike on Iran without US participation?
Hello, everybody, and thank you for tuning in to the Liberty Report.
With us today, we have Daniel McAdams, our co-host.
Daniel, good to see you this morning.
Good morning, Dr. Paul.
How are you?
Doing well.
Doing well.
We're still trying to do that old story.
Could they slow up the spending a little bit?
Please.
Just a little bit.
But we found another one that I sort of agree with.
And it seems like we don't have the money.
So this little project that we'd like to challenge, which costs $175 billion, but that's not too much.
And it's all done by executive order.
The first week Trump was in office, he wrote an executive order to plan for the Golden Dome Missile Defense System.
Now, how can you be against a dome to protect us that's golden?
I wonder if they're going to use up a lot of gold.
You like gold.
I think they'd be better off taking $175 billion, buying gold than back the dollar with it.
But I don't think the Golden Dome is going to back the currency.
Matter of fact, I think more golden domes and more of these projects that are sacred are going to weaken the dollar.
And obviously, the markets are saying that right now.
The dollar is getting weaker.
But first week Trump was in, he wrote an executive order.
He wanted to do this.
And the money they put a little bit in the budget, at least a starter fee, just a token, a little $25 billion.
But the plan is to do this.
And I thought immediately, it's not even going to be done.
You know, Trump's here going to be in just a little over three years.
They're not going to get this bill.
If Reagan couldn't get it billed, Reagan tried to do it.
And evidently we survived not having a defense.
The Star Wars that Reagan liked.
We lived without it.
And now we're saying that we have to have this, and it's very necessary.
And I checked with my friends at the military industrial complex.
And they said, it's right.
We do need this.
And as soon as you wise up, you guys over there that think that defense comes from, you know, having a strong government that perfects liberty and has a good economic system.
Oh, no, we do.
We need the golden dome to protect us from who knows what, who's going to come.
The Houthis are coming.
The Houthis are coming.
But once again, here it is.
And so I'll make a very wild prediction.
It will not be accomplished before Trump leaves office.
But I imagine there will be a lot of advancements and technology and research.
And the deep state, the military industrial complex, won't even complain.
A steady flow of cash is all they're interested in.
And I don't even mean even the wars they start, many times their heart isn't even in it.
Their heart is in just the continuation of spending.
Well, maybe they'd slow up if they thought the treasury was empty.
But guess what?
They are friends of the Federal Reserve System.
And the Fed agrees to dilute the money supply.
And that can go for a long time.
There's a lot of wealth left.
And so we have to consume all that.
But at the rate it's being consumed these days, it's not going to take a long, long time for this whole thing has to be settled because of the dollar weakness.
So I would suggest if anybody calls you and you'll ask you, and they want my opinion and probably your opinion, we don't think it's worth it.
Well, it's almost a little bit coincidental, maybe, that just as the Ukraine war may be winding down, Ukraine having bled itself completely dry in its proxy war between Russia and the U.S., now here comes another new massive military boondoggle.
And the down payment, of course, is this $175 billion.
Now, Trump is claiming that this will pay for it.
This is not even going to pay for studies.
Put that first clip up.
This is from the Epoch Times by way of zero hedge.
The DOD has selected a design for President Donald Trump's Golden Dome Missile Defense Initiative that Trump announced it on May 20th.
I'm pleased to announce we have officially selected the architecture for the state-of-the-art system, next generation technologies across land, sea, and space, including space-based sensors and interceptors.
It does sound like an updated Star Wars.
Now, go to the next one.
It would be fully operational before the end of my term.
That sounds a little bit like the jab.
So we'll have it done in about three years.
I think, Dr. Paul, the chance of that happening is zero.
He said the plan of the DOD has selected should cost about $175 billion to complete.
Now, we didn't just fall off the turnip truck, Dr. Paul.
When we look at them saying, oh, it's only going to cost $175 billion.
We know you're going to have to add probably another zero to that at least.
Yes, and it isn't just like you come up with $175 after you take it out of somebody's pocket and it's paid off.
It just adds to the debt.
Then, how long is that debt going to be?
Well, it will continue forever until the whole system closes.
So it's not even the $175.
It's the accumulated interest I saw today, you know, which we expected.
Interest rates are going up.
And people will buy the treasury bills and pay the extra interest.
And so it's a lot more than $175 billion.
And the odds of it being successful are pretty slim.
But I would say that the American people won't pay a whole lot of attention to this.
But we have Thomas Massey might bring it up when they're debating.
But he's been discredited by the Trump people because he doesn't roll over.
And that's a shame.
They should have.
I can understand why they have to move it along and there's good stuff in the bill.
There's tax cuts in the bill.
But I think he deserves a little bit more of courtesy.
Yeah, no, there's no question about it.
So the next one is: there's an important point about this.
Trump said the plan, if we put it out, the plan the DOD selected should cost about $175 again.
You got to add some couple zeros to that.
It will meld new technologies with existing U.S. missile defense systems.
Now, here's the part.
Put that next one up if you don't mind, please.
This is a part that's interesting, Dr. Paul.
No, go back one, please.
Here's the part that's interesting, and I'm going to get into it a little bit later, too.
Canada may also partner with the U.S. to help develop the improved missile defense shield.
The president said, quote, Canada wants to be part of it, which would be a fairly small expansion, but we'll work with them on pricing.
That word pricing is a very interesting, interesting word indeed.
And I have something more about that later.
But look at the next one.
Now, here's President Trump looking at that beautiful, big, beautiful iron dome.
Now, here's a part that this is what caught my attention because I remember you've said it more than once about this big, beautiful bill.
You said, yeah, but wait, here comes the supplemental bills because something's going to come up.
Go to that next one.
Congressional Republicans have put forth a $150 billion supplemental military spending package, as predicted by Ron Paul.
Oh, it's not in there, but it could well be in there.
That's exactly it.
They're going to put it as part of the reconciliation bill.
So I know that doesn't shock you, Dr. Paul, that it's all going to be supplemental off the books.
I wonder when the last time was that everybody lived up to the budget.
I often think about when the political parties have these campaigns and write up their beliefs in the document, their platform.
And one time I got into trouble because I wasn't voting enough with the Republicans.
I said, well, I'll contest it with you.
Why don't we look at their, I didn't even say the Constitution.
That would have been one way to do it.
But I said, let's look at the Republican platform.
You know, I said, I predict that I probably have supported the platform because there's all this fancy talk in the platform and all the monkey business that goes on.
So I think that they're living in dreamland.
That's the thing that still bewilders me that they might say that, you know, yeah, you're right, but I had one constituent once say to me, and we were going back and forth in the election.
The other guy won, and I won.
He says, I always vote for to vote out the incumbent.
See, because he says he could he could never trust somebody, but he knew it.
He says, and another person said, We really don't want you in Ron because we want you.
We know what's going to go under the dogs, but we can't manipulate you and get our share before it all falls apart.
So, with that attitude, you know, you're not dealing with principles.
Yeah, absolutely.
Well, go to the next one because this is the part I really wanted to bring up, Dr. Paul, as well.
Now, on the surface right now, everything sounds okay.
We're going to get a big, beautiful golden dome.
No one's going to hit us.
No one's going to attack us.
We're going to be impervious.
Go to this next clip now.
This is DD Geopolitics, which I do recommend.
They're very good and very thought-provoking.
There's a lot of deep thought in this substack.
The Golden Dome.
The Golden Dome Misconception00:03:41
Now, this is interesting.
Empire overhead, privatization below.
From subscription-based missile defense to billion-dollar AI targeting, America's latest shield is less about protection and more about privatizing national security.
Now, go to that next clip.
This is from this report that I think just came out yesterday.
In a televised Oval Office address, Trump promised all of them will be knocked out of the air, touting a $25 billion down payment on the system, with Canada reportedly seeking to join.
Yet, independent estimates soar in the hundreds of billions, if not trillions.
And the real story lies not in the missiles, but in who stands to profit.
More than 360 companies led by Elon Musk's SpaceX, Peter Thiel's Planeteer, and Palantir, sorry, and Palmer Lucky's Andoril are already competing for contracts under a fast-track process that bypasses traditional oversight.
The project follows a broader Trump-era trend, the privatization of public infrastructure from mail delivery to immigration enforcement to humanitarian aid.
So, essentially, what it looks like this is going to be, Dr. Paul, is something that's unprecedented in history.
Basically, it's like the Netflix for missile defense.
So, if you're a country and you want to hop on the golden dome, you pay your monthly subscription and you get your golden dome.
And if you miss a month or if you can't afford it anymore, you get switched off of the globe of the golden dome, which is a bizarre concept.
And there's no trouble passing this kind of money.
And it's astounding too that it's bipartisan.
You know, they fight and fume over a lot of things, and they accuse the other side of spending too much money and doing this and that.
But they are doing this at a rate that's unbelievable.
But it is bipartisan.
They get together and the leadership gets together, even though sometimes they're fighting and fuming.
They might have one goal.
That's not always the case, and there's a lot of bitterness.
But when it comes to final thing, when the vote comes up, they can fight it out and yet they'll get their coalition together.
So it'll be interesting to see if that happens again and what happens on this budget.
But it'll get passed.
Maybe it'll be two bills.
Okay, okay.
I think it's, you know, sometimes there's some things in that bill on tax cuts.
I think that'd be good.
Wouldn't it be neat if they made instead of this wonderful big, beautiful bill, I would say this wonderful, ugly bill you have.
Why don't you divide it up into 10 bills and vote for each issue and let the people know where you stand on?
Instead of all this trading out and trying to put a guilt trip on you, if you vote for the tax cut, you have to vote for this and the spending.
So it's total hypocritical, but it represents the philosophy of interventionism.
And that means whoever can get the power and the control will benefit from it.
And I guess there's that deep state.
I'd like to meet some of those deep state guys.
I can almost hear a voice from the beyond saying, oh, Ron, that is so outdated and anachronistic.
We don't vote on bills anymore.
And that's what they used when I mentioned the constitution.
Yeah, no, we don't do that anymore.
We don't use that.
Here's a couple of thoughts about this, though, Dr. Paul.
First of all, this is a defense against ballistic missiles, hypersonic even, who knows?
But the thing that we've learned, I think, from the Ukraine war is that warfare itself is changing dramatically.
Warfare In The Drone Age00:03:08
You know, this is the first war that has become a drone war.
These aren't like big missiles, like big Soviet ICBMs coming over and we knock them out of the sky.
The war itself has changed.
So who's to say between now and $175 billion later, if they build it for that, which we know they won't, it'll be in the trillions.
By the time they have it deployed, the whole way that warfare is done may change.
It may be lasers.
It may be all sorts of things that we don't know.
Now, we're building a massive monstrosity that basically has its ideological roots in the past, in the Cold War, in a world that no longer exists.
But they also compete in trying to challenge China on the size of the Navy and building surface missiles and old time in old airplanes.
The way they are, with all this automatic technology, they still build planes that were available at the end of World War II, basically.
And the drones are just the advancement there.
But they'll still build an airplane that mandates a crew on there and all that.
So that there's somebody there to turn that plane around if something happens.
Yeah.
And the other purpose, I think, of the Star Wars, the SDI strategic defense initiative under President Reagan was the idea that we are going to bankrupt the Soviet Union.
We knew that their economy was in terrible shape.
And so that massive, you know, I think this is more mythology, but necessarily, there's some of it that's true.
The idea that the Soviet Union was on its back, it was broke.
And so just do that extra bit of spending, and we will push them over the edge.
Well, this is the U.S. of 2025 is not the U.S. of the mid-80s.
We're actually the ones that are in the situation that the Soviets were in.
We can't afford a space race, the kind of space race that will be launched by this golden dome.
It's actually going to come back as a slingshot and hit as a boomerang and hit us and knock us out like it did the Soviets.
And that was one of the reasons why we were meddling in Afghanistan way back there for them to, and Afghanistan is a little bit closer to Russia than the United States.
Anyway, in a way, it worked for them.
They couldn't afford it.
And the system broke down.
The Soviet system broke down.
And right now, well, did we spend a couple dollars on Afghanistan?
That we live there, leave there humiliated and broke, and the money is still flowing, and we never leave.
These countries that we conquered for to add to our empire and join our great democratic system, you know, it's not there.
But if we keep spending, spending, spending, and it's a heroic effort to show big size and these sides of these countries, the people like it.
It's a patriotic fervor that they have, that they like bigness and toughness, but they have to realize that so much of it is wasted and it distracts from guess what, liberty and safety.
U.S. And Iran: A Toxic Relationship00:10:47
They take away our safety.
And the thing is for security is really a bunch of baloney.
Probably a cheaper golden dome would be just to stop irritating other countries.
You know, then they won't want to shoot missiles at us.
Oh, no, no, no.
They hate us because of our freedom.
That's why they wanted to.
I remember that story.
Well, let's move ahead to our second thing that we want to look at.
This was out yesterday that made a big splash.
CNN reported that Israel is preparing a possible strike on its own on Iran's nuclear facilities.
Put that, you got to move ahead a little bit.
I'm going to skip some of the.
There we go.
Thank you very much.
The U.S. has now all of a sudden this is from the beginning, Dr. Paul, a little bit suspicious.
The U.S. has obtained new intelligence that suggests Iran is preparing to launch an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities, CNN reported.
It was unclear if Israeli leaders had made a final decision.
The chances of the attack depend on the results of the negotiations between Trump administration and Iran.
Very, very suspicious, these reporting.
You know, this whole issue, my attitude has mellowed or changed a bit 23 years, 25 years, because back in 83, the Israelis bomb Iraq and break up a nuclear reactor.
The details of that was one thing, but I voted, and then that was the old days because the leadership of the Republicans and everybody had to condemn Israel for this.
Nobody does that today.
I mean, look at the chaos over there, and nobody really condemns them on what's going on with the Palestinians.
So back then, they had a vote on the House floor, you know, condemning it.
And I voted no on it.
And it was based on the fact that if this was a truly defensive movement and Israel thought it was necessary for their national defense, I wanted to take a non-interventionist position.
But the way I look at now has been mellowed by the fact that I don't see Israel as being an independent nation.
I see us with a very, very powerful force that we involved.
We have chaos in the world and we dictate.
So now when I see this, I said, I would, if there's a vote on the floor, and I was there now to condemn what's happening if they bomb, I would vote against that, mainly because I would be voting against more weapons, more American weapons being used in these things.
And the evidence has now accumulated that that's where we have become, even in these last 40 years, a lot more involved in maintaining all the weaponry of the world and participating in this type of activity.
So I would vote differently today than I did back then.
Yeah.
I think all of this, Dr. Paul, is neocon maneuvering.
All of these press leaks are neocon press leaks.
I think there's some concern that the U.S. might reach an agreement with Iran.
And the neocons and the Netanyahu government could not stand that.
So I think that's why a lot of this is leaking.
Now, a little bit of truth leaks out with the BS, let's put it that way.
Go to that next one.
Now, this is what it's really about.
The CNN report acknowledged that Israel doesn't have the capacity to destroy Iran's nuclear program without support from the U.S.
I highlighted that part.
A senior U.S. official said the U.S. was stepping up intelligence collection to be prepared to assist in an Israeli attack on Iran, but another source said it was unlikely Trump would support such a move.
I think we're seeing Iran feeling desperate, Dr. Paul, that if a deal does happen, they will see their opportunity slip between their fingers to finally get the U.S. to fight that war for them against Iran.
Yeah, and over the last several months, especially, and maybe even longer, we have suggested that this tough foreign policy that Israel has, only because the world hates them and they have to defend themselves, it's not as strong an argument as it has been in the past.
And I think eventually there's going to be more countries turning against.
I mean, just think how strong the effort is in this country to defend the Palestinians, just out of humanitarian concerns, you know, because evidently they can't deny the reports recently about, you know, there were so many deaths in Gaza.
It's the percentage of just the children that were killed.
You know, hospitals being bombed.
So am I gullible to believe some of that stuff?
Well, I don't know all the details, but all I know is that there's too much bombing going on and there are bombs and we should have more to say about it.
And it ought to be a moral issue as well as a defense issue.
Yeah, absolutely.
And the thing is that this concern in the U.S. over what's happening in Gaza now, early on, it was mostly confined to the left.
But I think what's interesting, you're starting to see the right in America that is really getting frustrated with the slaughter that's going on and with our relationship, our toxic relationship with Israel, which, as we've said on the show many times, does Israel no favors either.
You know, we're not helping.
It's a codependency that is not helping either.
But I would say, exhibit A, I just got a friend of mine, John Hoffman, he's over at Cato, and he put out a piece in the American Conservative today, and I didn't clip it, but it says the Trump-Netanyahu rift hinges on Gaza and Iran.
And I would encourage people to go to the American Conservative and read this.
And also, while reading it, start pondering because there have been a slew, a slew of articles in the American Conservative and other publications that are increasingly concerned in expressing concern from the right.
And that's what terrifies the neocons and the Netanyahu's of the world is when the right starts to be concerned about this, it's going to be very difficult for them.
Well, and in many ways, that was the theme of my foreign policy that I talked about for a good many years.
So I was really surprised that whether it was a liberal or conservative campus, there was a strong support.
And sometimes the liberal campuses were more supportive.
But I think it's an issue that you should be able to bring the American people together on.
Once the politicians wake up and reflect the attitude of the people, the people are saying we're spending too much time, it's too much, but they don't see the connection that there are personal problems that they're facing today, inflation and a slump in the economy, which is going to get much worse, is related to this wasteful spending in the military, which is very harmful, doesn't help our security, and it certainly doesn't help our economic system.
Absolutely.
Well, I'm going to do that last clip.
I think I'll skip one.
We talk about Will Scriver, who's someone that I read a lot and I think is extremely insightful.
He put out a post.
He commented on the CNN report and he said, flirting with disaster, in my view, there is near zero possibility that Israel will launch a major strike against Iranian nuclear sites unless the U.S. is directly and intimately involved.
At the very least, U.S. air refueling, ISR, and SEAD would be essential.
Those are support, technical support for the attack.
So Scriver is saying, don't buy the hype.
They are not going to go it alone.
They're not going to, and we've shown on the show, we saw what happened on October 1st of last year when Iran hit back and knocked out the Israeli military base and intelligence facility.
I think this is fluff.
I think they're not about to go it alone, but they're trying to attract the U.S. into this terrible course.
You know, the conservatives who supported Trump on cutting out some of these wasteful domestic programs like USAID, and people join that, but they don't get what we're talking about presented to them quite like the ASID because that was so bad.
But if you look at the way this money in foreign policy and military industrialization, that is every bit as bad.
And the American people should be outraged over that.
And there's more talking about it and there is becoming negative, but nothing like they were able to stir up in a certain short period of time of USAID how bad that was.
But that was just one of the routine things that happens in government.
I keep thinking that the waste, fraud, and abuse is a characteristic of government.
That's what they're good at.
Well, I'm going to close.
I want to thank Jordist again, who put in 20 bucks for today's show, saying thanks so much for talking about Gaza.
We appreciate your support and we appreciate hearing what you're interested in hearing about.
So I want to thank everyone for watching it and please hit that thumbs up.
Let's see where are we right now.
Oh my gosh, we are at 33.
You guys can do better than that.
It doesn't hurt to click the thumbs up.
Do some comments.
Let us know what you think about the show, what you're interested in hearing about, where you think we can improve and what you think we do pretty well.
And we do appreciate it.
And can't wait to see you again tomorrow and over to you, Dr. Paul.
Very good.
And once again, I want to thank our viewers for tuning in today because we need you and we need you to help spread the message.
And we're not funded like some of the other groups are funded.
And it doesn't discourage me because I see it as an issue of spreading liberty.
And I'm also convinced you can't stop a good idea.
You can't stop ideas.
Even with armies, ideas can spread and you cannot stop them from spreading.
It's cumbersome.
It's difficult and it's costly at times.
But you can't.
If we're on the right track, nobody can stop these messages.
And I think that is our goal, to spread the understanding of liberty and free markets and free individuals and peaceful construction in our foreign policy.
And I'm optimistic enough to believe that we are moving in that direction.
Maybe the daily newspapers and television doesn't reveal this, but I'll tell you what, there are a lot of organizations right now who are shifting their gears where liberals who have finally got fed up or are coming over.
And some of the conservatives are sick and tired of all the spending as well.
So I encourage everybody to participate in spreading the message of liberty.