Please join us for a viewing of a modern-day "Reefer Madness," the Heritage Foundation’s film about nuclear threats "33 Minutes." Missile defense has long been a central tenet of the conservative national security faith. Though the Obama administration has wisely redirected the U.S. investment toward proven missile defense systems, there remains a well-funded and deeply entrenched conservative commitment to larger and larger missile defense programs that are of questionable utility against 21st century threats.
"33 Minutes" makes the case for larger missile defense, arguing that terrorists are primed to acquire nuclear missiles that could strike the United States. "Once terrorist-supporting states get their hands on a nuclear missile," claims the film "they would be free to attack us and our allies with impunity." The film makes a number of startling and claims regarding both the proven effectiveness of missile defense, and the threat that ballistic missiles in the hands of terrorists actually pose to the United States.
Joining us for a critical discussion of this film are two experts in the field of nuclear nonproliferation, Joe Cirincione, president of Ploughshares Fund, and J. Peter Scoblic, executive editor of The New Republic and author of Us Vs. Them: Conservatism in the Age of Nuclear Terror.