How realistic is A House of Dynamite? [T-Minus Deep Space]

Summary

CyberWire Daily – T-Minus Deep Space: "How Realistic Is A House of Dynamite?"

Date: November 24, 2025
Host: Maria Varmazas, N2K Networks
Guest: Retired Lt. Gen. Daniel Karbler, former commander U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command, technical advisor to the film "A House of Dynamite"

---

Overview

This episode examines the realism behind the events of the recent Netflix thriller A House of Dynamite—a film that rocked the space, cybersecurity, and defense communities with its chilling depiction of an unattributed ICBM launch on U.S. soil. Host Maria Varmazas speaks with retired Lt. Gen. Daniel Karbler, a technical advisor to the film with decades of experience in strategic nuclear operations and missile defense. The discussion unpacks not only the film’s technical and procedural authenticity, but also the human element, the complexity of command decisions, and how art can drive public and professional debate about national security.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

Lt. Gen. Karbler’s Background and Entry into Hollywood

(02:57–08:05)

• Karbler summarizes his 37-year military career, focusing on air and missile defense, culminating as commander of Space and Missile Defense Command.
• He shares how he became the technical advisor (and even appeared as an actor) in A House of Dynamite, thanks to a professional recommendation and an impromptu “DDO” conference roleplay that impressed director Kathryn Bigelow.

  "I click on my microphone... and I said, ladies and gentlemen, that's how the worst day of America's history will begin. I hope your script does it some justice." — Karbler (06:05)

• Karbler played himself (with a fictionalized rank) in the film and was actively involved in coaching the cast and shaping script authenticity.

---

How Realistic Is the Movie's Scenario?

Lack of Attribution & Cyber Compromise

(09:37–15:25)

• The film’s driving drama: an inbound ICBM with no attribution—missile defense systems cannot identify its origin, raising fear of internal compromise.
• Karbler describes a real-life precedent: Secretary of Defense Ash Carter once ordered a “no-notice” nuclear exercise featuring an unattributed missile to see how leaders would respond.

  "He [Ash Carter] started with an unattributed missile launch from the Pacific because he wanted to see how everybody would react." — Karbler (10:15)

• Military processes proved robust, while civilian leadership was less prepared for a complex, ambiguous crisis.

  "Cabinet members weren't in place, did not have the right communications... Some of the principals didn't have a good understanding... it was a good exercise to have because people needed to practice." — Karbler (11:45)

• The plot’s premise (potential cyber penetration disrupting attribution) is “not far-fetched,” as cyber operations against early warning systems are a known and constantly drilled threat.

  "All my space compadres... they're like, you know, SBIRS would have seen it. Well, we know that it would have, but it wouldn't have seen it potentially, if there was a cyber attack..." — Karbler (13:16)

President’s Knowledge and Decision Process

(15:58–19:09)

• Karbler clarifies that the President is briefed on nuclear options before taking office, contrary to the ‘surprise’ depicted in the film’s “diner menu” scene.

  "The President gets briefed before Inauguration Day on the book. STRATCOM commander's responsibility is to brief the President on the book." — Karbler (16:22)

• However, presidents rarely, if ever, participate in nuclear response exercises post-inauguration (last known was Jimmy Carter), to avoid political fallout and preserve decision latitude.

  "A president not participating gives himself or herself a great amount of political decision space..." — Karbler (17:09)

• High-ranking cabinet officials, such as Secretary Mattis, were routinely present in real-world scenarios, providing critical input.

---

What Would Diverge in Real Life?

(21:09–24:08)

• Karbler points to a key procedural difference: military advisors stress to the President that an immediate decision is not required if U.S. nuclear response forces are intact, even in the event of an urban nuclear hit.

  "We are trained to say, Mr. President, you do not have to make a decision right now. ... You're not going to lose your ability to respond." — Karbler (21:26)

• The real process is collaborative, considering proportionality and strategic options rather than reflexive retaliation.
• The inevitability of eventual attribution means a tailored response is possible and likely, once the attacker is identified.
• Karbler notes how executive actions like the real “Golden Dome for America” initiative paralleled plotlines as the movie neared release, showing the film’s prescience.

---

The Role of the Movie in Public Dialogue

(24:08–25:12, 32:29–34:47)

• Karbler celebrates the movie for driving nuanced, informed debate across the spectrum—from non-proliferation policy to nuclear modernization, sole-launch authority, and the protection of space assets.

  "Whether you're, you know, for non-proliferation... or for modernization of the nuclear triad... the movie is wonderful because it gives everybody an opportunity to discuss their viewpoints." — Karbler (24:33)

---

Technical Wish List & Space Capabilities

(25:12–26:26)

• Karbler dreams of using mobile space assets like the X-37 for orbital missile interception—deploying space-based interceptors at will to counter launches from any location.

  “If you had some sort of space-based intercept capability that you could park on [the X-37]... that would be a game changer.” — Karbler (25:41)

---

Human Element: Portraying Real Servicemen and Women

(26:53–30:13)

• The movie stands out for its human portrayal of military personnel under existential stress—a dimension rarely explored in actual exercises.

  "The movie now touches on a part that we never even really explore in our exercises, ...the humanity side of it." — Karbler (27:41)

• Karbler’s personal connection—both children are missile defense officers—deepened the resonance of the film’s emotional moments.

  “Both of my kids are missile defenders... my wife was very moved [by the phone call scene].” — Karbler (27:56)

• Recounts real-life episode of his daughter operating under attack in Iraq, demonstrating the professionalism and composure mirrored in the film.

---

Memorable Moments & Quotes

• On the anxiety of command:

  "Many times it'd be 10 o'clock at night and I'm throwing my uniform on, going back into STRATCOM headquarters to the battle deck, because our adversaries, they don't sleep." — Karbler (08:38)

• On aftermath and proportionality:

  "When you look at proportionality that a response might engender... that's where you give the President the opportunity to consult... There are other strategic ways to respond..." — Karbler (21:34)

• On the human side:

  "You have the different human reactions... And so it's kind of sterile [in exercises] when it comes to the humanity side of it." — Karbler (26:53)

---

Parallels Between the Military and Filmmaking

(32:29–34:47)

• Karbler muses on leadership, noting the structural similarities between commanding a military operation and directing a film—both aim to create a profound “effect,” rely on large teams with diverse expertise, and manifest different management styles.

  "A general's got staff and weapon systems... A director has got cast, actors, electricians, props, script... [each] brings it all together to deliver an effect." — Karbler (33:13)

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• [02:57] Introduction to Lt. Gen. Karbler and his background
• [05:18] How Karbler became technical advisor and actor for A House of Dynamite
• [09:37] Assessing realism: unattributed ICBM scenario and cyber compromise
• [15:58] Clarifying the President’s nuclear decision-making process
• [21:09] Where real life diverges from the film (proportionality, delayed response)
• [24:08] The movie’s relevance to current policy debates, “Golden Dome for America”
• [25:12] Space “wish list” and X-37 interceptor concept
• [26:53] Human dimension: military personnel in film and reality
• [32:29] Parallels between military command and directing films

---

Conclusion

Lt. Gen. Karbler affirms that, while A House of Dynamite takes dramatic license, its core scenarios and dilemmas are uncomfortably plausible. The intersection of cyber vulnerabilities, attribution uncertainty, and high-stakes command decisions accurately reflects challenges faced in today’s threat environment. The film’s commitment to procedural and human realism, bolstered by expert guidance, makes it a potent springboard for urgent discussions on deterrence, technology, and policy.

---

Recommended for:
Anyone interested in the interplay between national security, the cyber domain, space defense, Hollywood storytelling, or the psychology of nuclear command. The episode offers chills, insight, and reassurance in equal measure.

Transcript

[A]

You're listening to the N2K space network.

[B]

From phishing to ransomware, cyber threats are constant. But with Nordlayer, your defense can be too. Nordlayer brings together secure access and advanced threat protection in a single, seamless platform. It helps your team spot suspicious activity before it becomes a problem by blocking malicious links and scanning downloads in real time, preventing malware from reaching your network. It's quick to deploy, easy to scale, and built on zero trust principles so only the right people get access to the right resources. Get 28% off on a yearly plan at Nordlayer.com cyberwire daily with code CYBERWIRE28 that's nordlayer.com cyberwire daily Code CYBERWIRE28 that's valid through December 10, 2020.

[A]

There's the old saying that art imitates life, but nine times out of ten, Hollywood gets it totally wrong. Ask anyone in the space industry what the worst space movie is, and yeah, there's going to be some disagreement, but there's a pretty good chance that that film would be Gravity. Sorry, Sandra Bullock. And it's mainly because that movie gets so much of the science dead wrong. So. So I want you to imagine our intrigue here at N2K when so many of us who are in the space, cybersecurity and defense industries watched the recent Netflix film A House of Dynamite and we all found ourselves breaking out in a cold sweat. Could it really be that close to reality? Well, who better to ask than the real life expert? Shall we? I'm Maria Ramazas, and this is T Minus Deep Space. My guest today was the advisor to director Katherine Bigelow on her recent hit A House of Dynamite. The film chronicles what happens when the unthinkable unfolds. If you haven't seen A House of Dynamite yet, we will be discussing it quite a bit in this interview, so I do highly recommend watching the film to get the most out of this chat. With that said, I'll let retired Lt. Gen. Daniel Karbler tell you more about his background and how he got involved in Hollywood.

[C]

I served almost 37 years in the Army. Started way back in 1987. I graduated West Point. My career field was air and missile defense, which I've done my entire 37 years. I culminated as the commander for U.S. army Space and Missile Defense Command, headquartered in Huntsville, Alabama at Redstone Arsenal. But we also had elements of our command global as we provided missile early warning as well as, you know, missile defense with our soldiers in Fort Greely. And prior to that, I spent three years as the STRATCOM Chief of Staff. So it became pretty well versed in strategic deterrence nuclear operations. And at that time, STRATCOM had the missile defense responsibility too. So it was kind of a melding of all your classic elements or your elements of classic deterrence imposed, unacceptable cost, deny benefit and then being able to credibly message it. I also, just by way of some background too, I was the Army's testing evaluation command commander. So as a two star, so all army testing that took place for weapon systems, you name it, I was responsible for that testing, which proved to be pretty very helpful in just different, different other jobs that I had. And then I spent, you know, did my penance up in the Pentagon as well. Several tours up in the Pentagon. Now part of my career too, that I need to mention is the fact that I worked for just some incredible, incredible bosses. John Hyten, when he was the STRATCOM commander, the deputy was Chaz Richard, and I was the chief of staff. And then Chaz went on to become the STRATCOM commander when I was the commander for Space and Missile Defense Command. So I was his army service component commander. And then Tony Cotton, the current STRATCOM commander, Jim Dickinson. So I just had these great space and missile defense experts, leaders, super, just incredibly strategic thinkers that I got to give a lot of credit to.

[A]

Thank you so much for joining me. We're going to be specifically talking about a more recent project that brings us together. I feel like I shouldn't be the one to introduce this, but I will spoil it. The Netflix film A House of Dynamite, which has been just on the lips of everyone I work with lately, you had a major, major part in that film. Can you please give me sort of the pitch about what you were involved in with that film?

[C]

Sure. So, you know, first off, I retired from the army about a year and a half ago. Being a technical advisor to Kathryn Bigelow in a movie was not on my retirement to do list.

[A]

I can't even imagine.

[C]

It didn't even make the top hundred on the one to N list. But what happened was Doug Lute, who was a general, retired Doug Lud, who was Ambassador Lute, he had been doing some advising to Catherine for some of the White House situation room scenes. And she asked him, she said, do you know anybody who knows anything about StratCom or Fort Greeley or missile defense or nuclear? She said, I got a guy who just retired and he actually did all those jobs. And so he put me in touch with the producer, Greg Shapiro, gave me a Call said, hey, would you like to advise in this movie? I said, sounds intriguing. He goes, we'll set up a zoom call with Catherine and myself, a couple other folks as part of the production. And so we set up the zoom call, and much like you and I are having our call here, everybody was kind of popping in. And then I had an idea, and so I left my camera off as everybody's popping in and they're chatting. And then there was a little break in the conversation. And I click on my microphone, but I still left the camera off. Click on my microphone, said, this is the DDO from the Pentagon convening a national security conference. Classification of this conference is top secret. TK SI Poland. USSTRATCOM, US Northern Command. US Indo Pacific Command. SecDef cables. Military Assistant to the secretary. SECDEF cables. Please bring the secretary in the conference. Mr. Secretary, this is the DDO. Because of time constraints in this missile attack, recommend we transition immediately from a national security conference to a strategic deterrence conference. And we bring the president in the conference. Piac. Please bring the president in the conference. And I stopped there, and then I clicked on my camera and. And I said, ladies and gentlemen, that's how the worst day of America's history will begin. I hope your script does it some justice. And that was my cold opening. And Katherine and I kind of kid with my wife on this. Kathryn Bigelow, she's won an Academy Award for best director, so she has to have an eye for good acting talent. Said, oh, my gosh, that was amazing. Dan. I want to have you in my movie. So nailed the audition, and here I am, 12 months, 15 months later, Hollywood.

[A]

I mean, that is a hell of a pitch. And for those who haven't seen the movie, the. The camera off is a really great device in the film. So I'm sure she got that idea from you. That is. That is so. Oh, my God. I mean, yeah, amazing how the. The roads in life take us places, because that is chills just even hearing you saying that. And, yes, you are in the film, and you nailed it, by the way. So it's just great to see you in there. It was really cool.

[C]

I'm glad. And I told Katherine when she said she would cast me in the movie and as the chief of staff, and I said, for you, Katherine, I'll take the demotion. I'll go from three stars to two stars to be the Stratcom chief of staff.

[A]

I was gonna say, you're basically sort of advising the actor version of yourself in the Film, right. Is that.

[C]

Yeah, I should have done a better job advising myself too. I don't know if I delivered my lines as well as I should have.

[A]

But this is what I would have liked to hear. Yeah. On the worst day ever. I mean, honestly. Well, Dan, it is a genuine thrill to be speaking with you. And I was telling you right before we started recording, I just watched the film. So my opening, and I mean this with like fullest respect, is how did you sleep at night doing that job?

[C]

Well, a lot of times we didn't sleep at night. Many, many times it'd be 10 o' clock at night and I'm throwing my uniform on, going back into STRATCOM headquarters to the battle deck because you know, our adversaries, they don't sleep. Particularly in 2017. Kju, he was, I mean he was testing, it seemed like just about every weekend, every other weekend. I mean, the number of Saturdays that were ruined because we were responding to another missile test. Lost count of them, but I did. But you know what, knowing the professionals that we had, whether on the missile defense side up at Fort Greely or the great airmen, sailors and soldiers that were manning, you know, our bombers and the ICBM fields and our subs, they train very, very hard. And we train as an enterprise, of course, quite a bit.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

So. So even though the topic and the subject is, I mean it can be mortifying, we have to stay ready and. And we were. And we practice it quite a bit.

[A]

I don't want to talk too much about like what I thought of the film because I want people to go see it if they haven't already. I wanted to ask you about, oh my gosh, so many things, but one of the threads that goes throughout the film that is a clear driver of the drama is the lack of attribution of this inbound. That to me was a really fascinating point about we didn't know where this ICBM is coming from. We just, our missile defense warning systems sort of just didn't catch where it was starting from. Were we potentially internally compromised? Can you walk me through the realistic, how realistic that kind of scenario is? And like what would that really look like? I don't quite understand.

[C]

Sure. So first off, not a far fetched scenario when, before I came into STRATCOM and just before General Hyten, before John Hyten took command of StratCom, Ash Carter, who was the Secretary of Defense, did a no notice exercise. Now I don't want to say no notice. Like all of a sudden we just saw Nuclear missiles being shot at us and we didn't know what was going on. But he basically said on morning he said we are going to do a nuclear operations conference right now. And he started it. And he started with an unattributed missile launch from the Pacific because he wanted to see how everybody would react. Now this brought in the entire cabinet and as well as the military, that NMCC all the way to STRATCOM and all of our components. And so as you might expect, the military swung to action and went through our processes procedures. The civilian side was a little rusty. I'll charitably say they're a little rusty. Cabinet members weren't in place, did not have the right communications set up to be able to dial into the conference. Some of the principals didn't have a good understanding with their strike advisor and you know what the strike advisor was to do for them as the scene in the movie the nuclear decision Handbook. And so it was a good exercise to have because people needed to practice. Ash Carter made it complicated by having a missile that was non attributed. Now why he did it that way, I could speculate that he didn't want to. Vilify is not the right word. But he didn't want to make an enemy known. Oh, look at the Secretary of Defense just made China the aggressor. On his own, his own exercise. He must really be against China. Right.

[A]

So yeah, yeah.

[C]

So it kept kind of left a vague. Kind of sort of like how the movie did too. No real villain in the movie identifiable because that was. Because you can broaden the discussion then it's too easy to just say, well it was Russia or it was China or it was North Korea. And then the discussion gets very narrow. And Catherine didn't want to do that. She wanted to keep the discussion very broad. Now when you look at the actual attribution and you know, why did it happen that there wasn't attribution? So Gabe Bassel's character, Jake Barrington, deputy national Security Advisor who is the most unlucky, harried staff guy in the government.

[A]

I'm sure you can't wait.

[C]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. The scenes where he's on his phone and going through security, we've all been kind of bent. Oh my God.

[A]

Yeah, right.

[C]

We can relate to him. But he alludes to maybe it was cyber penetration. And that certainly is. We always are concerned about our different. The threat surface areas that are out there that our adversaries could potentially get into. And so that being into the script kind of then helps the believability factor of the plot is, oh, maybe this is what happened. All my space compadres and friends, and of course they're like, you know, sivers would have seen it. Come on. Well, we know that it would have, but it wouldn't have seen it potentially, if there was a cyber attack that somehow penetrated into the system, which again, as Jake Barrington alludes to then too, this is a. Or maybe it was General Brady, Tracy Letts character said, part of a larger, more coordinated attack against the U.S. and so you have to give a lot of credit to Noah Oppenheim, scriptwriter, who did so such fantastic research to make sure that, you know, it's pretty. The plot is pretty. It's pretty ironclad, really. I mean, people are going to pick around the edges, which that's good because you're getting the discussion going. But in terms of the feasibility of it, I thought it was good. That's why I signed up for it, too. When they gave me the script, I didn't immediately agree to work with them. I wanted to look at the script first. When I look at the script and I saw it and I go, okay, yeah, this is all feasible and I can definitely work with this whole scenario.

[A]

Yeah. My background is predominantly in cyber. So when I heard that phrase about the potential of cyber compromise, my mind started going to, oh, my gosh, is there a larger campaign? Is there an insider threat? Is this even a real missile? Are we absolutely sure that the information being displayed is actually accurate or is this completely compromised? And I'm sure that was part of the intent and that was just part of what made it so panic inducing for me, which I'm sure was just like, oh, gosh. I mean, we're all assuming that there's going to be a mushroom club, but what if this is all fake to try and, you know, flush out US defenses? And I'm sure this is all stuff that you all drilled for constantly and just practiced over and over and just, again, harrowing scenarios. I'm not sure there's even a question in there. I'm just going, oh, my God.

[C]

Well, in all the different exercises, practice, rehearsals that we did, it ran the gamut of different scenarios, one off, both out of the blue to existential, you know, 400 missile attack coming onto you, because you have to be able to understand the procedures, processes, communications, decisions, you know, what kind of advice that you're going to present, recommendations you're going to present throughout that whole. That whole range of potential scenarios you might face.

[A]

Yeah, I have A sort of related question, and this is specifically about when the President is looking over the, I'm putting it politely, the diner menu towards the end, this is where I go, is it actually realistic that the President would have no idea what these potential attack options would be until that moment? They don't. Do we know, does the President usually have an idea what those are, or is it really the first time that he would potentially see them?

[C]

The President gets briefed before Inauguration Day on the book.

[A]

Okay.

[C]

STRATCOM commander's responsibility is to brief the President on the book.

[A]

Okay.

[C]

Then in. That can take as long as the President wants to take.

[A]

Okay.

[C]

But. But then following that, when we do exercises, the President does not participate. When I was at stratcom, the highest level cabinet member that participated was Secretary Mattis, Secretary of Defense Rich Correll, who just testified for his confirmation hearing to be the next STRATCOM commander. He testified that Jimmy Carter was actually the last president to participate in one of the nuclear operation exercises. I had been told it was Ronald Reagan, but it goes back even further. It goes back to President Carter. People ask me about that, too. And my thought is this. First, I really can't blame a president for not participating, because even though the conferences are at the highest level of classification, it's my sense that word would get out about what that president's decision was. And whatever the President's decision was, he or she is not going to win. It could be don't respond at all, which is going to get, you know, all sorts of criticism from some camps. Or it could be decide to respond and respond in whatever level they respond with is going to get criticism from the other camps. And so a president not participating gives himself or herself a great amount of political decision space, just as they're just doing the office without having a bunch of distraction about they're trying to run the country. And now, oh, what? They decided this on the whole nuclear thing. And that would take up a lot of their bandwidth. And so again, I can't blame a president for not participating. Cabinet members participation is important. When I was at StratCom, we would often get, you know, first off, we'd have cabinet members come visit STRATCOM headquarters. We'd run them through a scenario as they sat in the chair right next to General Hyten or Admiral Richard and Secretary Mattis, like I said, you know, in 2017, when the North Koreans were testing, you know, every week, every other week, Secretary Mattis was in every one of those conferences. Sometimes he was quiet. And then you'd hear him at the end and you're like, oh, boss was, boss was listening. Gotta remember he was a Marine, Marine general, four star. He's all about rehearsals and practice and then after action reviews and so we got very, we got very practiced at it and always expected Secretary Mattis to be in on the call.

[A]

We'll be right back.

[B]

At Thales, they know cybersecurity can be tough and you can't protect everything. But with Thales, you can secure what matters most. With Thales industry leading platforms, you can protect critical applications, data and identities anywhere and at scale with the highest roi. That's why the most trusted brands and largest banks, retailers and healthcare companies in the world are rely on Thales to protect what matters most. Applications, data and identity. That's Thales. T H A L E S learn [e-mail] cyber. What's your 2am Security worry? Is it do I have the right controls in place? Maybe are my vendors secure? Or the one that really keeps you up at night? How do I get out from under these old tools and manual processes? That's where Vanta comes in. Vanta automates the manual work so you can stop sweating over spreadsheets, chasing audit evidence and filling out endless questionnaires. Their trust management platform continuously monitors your systems, centralizes your data and simplifies your security at scale. And it fits right into your workflows. Using AI to streamline evidence collection, flag risks and keep your program audit ready all the time. With Vanta, you get everything you need to move faster, scale confidently and finally get back to sleep. Get [e-mail] cyber that's V A N T A dot com cyber.

[A]

So I have another question for you about. I mean I know you were heavily involved in this film. I'm curious where you think in real life things would significantly diverge from what was portrayed in the film.

[C]

Yeah, so you know, one of the things that we are always trained when we go through the scenarios is, especially in a scenario like this is we are trained to say, Mr. President, you do not have to make a decision right now. In the case here, you are not going to lose your ability to respond. You still have all of your ICBMs are available, your subs are available, your bombers are available because again, this is just one missile that's coming into a city, not targeting our nuclear response capabilities. So we're trained to say you do not have to respond immediately. Now it's tragic. I mean, you're going to lose the city of Chicago in this Case or whatever metropolitan center, you might lose. But when you look at proportionality, then that a response might engender, or in proportionality that a response might engender, that's where you give the President the opportunity to say, okay, let me consult. And these are very collaborative. The conferences are very collaborative, even though it's only in a 30 minute timeframe. When you bring in the cabinet members, they are collaborative. And then when you say, hey, don't have to respond right away, President can consult. There are other strategic ways to respond to an adversary's attack of something like that. Now, again, 10 million people lost in the case of the movie scenario, I don't know how you atone for 10 million people being killed. But the President then has time to bring together a coherent whole government approach in responding to the adversary. And the other piece too is ultimately you are going to have attribution on that launch. We would figure it out. And then any President's response then would be obviously tailored towards that adversary who shot at us.

[A]

That is especially. Both those items are actually very comforting. I know the movie's a thriller and things are heightened for dramatic effect, but that's actually quite comforting to hear both of those.

[C]

It wouldn't be a very exciting meeting if at the start of the conference trace, Admiral or General Brady said, Mr. President, you don't have to make a decision right now. Okay.

[A]

Like, you're good, we've got you. Yeah. Okay, well, movie over. Yeah, no, I generally do really enjoy heightened thriller films like this one. This one, I think because it feels so of this time. It does feel more immediate and I think it gave me, I had to really bring myself down from it when I was watching. So it was very effective.

[C]

And I very, very prescient too because when we shot it, Golden Dome for America was not a thing.

[A]

Right.

[C]

So imagine we're shooting the movie and then the President comes up with the executive order for Golden Dome for America. And then the movie's plot lines kind of feed right into Golden Dome for America.

[A]

Right. Yeah, that is very true. And that is, I've heard a lot of people discussing this film in that context when I'm having those conversations. And it's been really fascinating how much the these if different ecosystems do really feed on each other sometimes. It is really fascinating to sort of watch that happen as a fly on the wall in my case.

[C]

And that's the beauty of the movie is it gives, whether it gives everybody an opportunity to discuss.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

Whether you're, you know, for non proliferation, you have A lot to be able to discuss if you're, hey, we don't think sole authority is right. You know, it needs to be, you know, something that's more collaborative and decision building or a decision made by more of a consensus or more collaboration. You can talk about that if you're for modernization of the nuclear triad and our strategic deterrent or golden dome for America or space. And you want to make sure that our space capabilities are protected. So that's why the movie is wonderful, because it gives everybody an opportunity to be able to discuss their viewpoints. Yeah.

[A]

Speaking of space, I'm curious if you have sort of a space wish list that you would love to see in the realm of sort of what we've been discussing.

[C]

You know, I would love the X37. So I actually joke with Joe Height about this. I said, you know, we should paint some windows. We should paint a cockpit window on the X37 and fly that around and see what our adversaries think of that. That would be the first wish list, confuse everybody.

[A]

That would be great. I would love that.

[C]

But from space, the ability of that platform to be able to do what it does. And if you were to just take it to the next level and say, hey, look, if you had some sort of space based intercept capability that you could park on that and then get it to whatever place it needed to be in orbit based on indications and warnings, man, that would be a game changer. Especially as we're trying to solve any kind of space based intercept capabilities and you look at a plethora of on orbit platforms that you'd have to have in order to be able to counter any kind of missile launch from wherever as they go into orbit. Having a, having a very mobile platform to be able to get a space based interceptor in a position to intercept. You asked me about my wish list.

[A]

That would be one of them, 100%. I think a lot of people would agree with you on that one for sure. I want to ask about the film's very human portrayal. I know this is not necessarily the lane of what we wanted to discuss today, but I found it very compelling to see the way that servicemen and women were portrayed, doing their duty wonderfully and also being very human. And I just was curious to get your thoughts on that.

[C]

Yeah, a lot of thoughts on it. First off, when we do our exercises, 400 a year, processes procedures, communications, recommendations, we never play a human element in it. Right. We will go through it. We will come up with our options and decisions and they will execute. We will Aar it. Nobody's died. Nobody's been threatened. And so it's kind of sterile when it comes to the human, the humanity side of it. The movie now touches on a part that we never even really explore in our exercises, which is incredible because you have the different human reactions. I can't say that the Fort Greely soldiers, when their missile misses, you have the one guy going, hey, we gotta get some more Interceptors up. We gotta get some more Interceptors up. But we wanted to portray the human element there on those soldiers. And some of my missile defense friends are like, sir, we can't believe that they wouldn't just quit. They wouldn't just give up. And I said, I got it. But the movie wanted to touch on the human element there. And those soldiers that are up there at Fort Greely, they have a human side, too. And personally, both of my kids are missile defenders. And they're the same age as the lieutenant and the. And my daughter's a captain. My son's a lieutenant. Wow. So they're the same age as the crew members there. And so when my wife saw the movie and she. The scene where the lieutenant picks up the phone and calls his mom, my wife was very moved.

[A]

Yes.

[C]

Very moved by that. And then I look at the young staff sergeant there, or Sergeant Mary Nolan, who's the sensor operator, and I think, my daughter's a missile defender. And, you know, how is she going to respond? And then I. Real world, two years ago. It was two years ago on Thanksgiving morning, she was in Iraq and she was under attack from drones and missiles, texting me as she's in the bunker under attack. My first guidance to her was don't tell your mom.

[A]

The universal advice.

[C]

My God, she was cool as a cucumber. Just, of course, very excited with a lot of salty language in there. But how she trusted her system to work and which it did. And so, yeah, so I had a whole range of emotions watching these characters being a leader of soldiers, of these particular soldiers at Fort Greely, and then had my own family dynamic interspersed in that. So, yeah, thanks for asking that question, because the human dynamic piece that gets touched on the movie is really important.

[A]

I appreciate you saying that. And I. I thought it was really incredibly powerful. And I think something that is often, maybe missing in films like this, and that exact moment when he called his mom, too, as a mother. My daughter's only 8, but I remember that that got me crying because I was thinking, you know, that's somebody's son, you know, We've all got families. We all, you know, dread that phone call. So. But my goodness. Yeah.

[C]

And the other thing I tell people, I was like, look at how resilient he is.

[A]

Yes.

[C]

I mean, the worst thing in his training that ever could have happened just happened. But he tells his mom, just want to check on her. Nope. Things are okay, you know, so he's pretty stoic through it all, but he's got the human touch to want to talk to his mom at that point.

[A]

It was really beautiful. And as I said, like, everybody's doing their jobs. They are the height of competence. And it's just very admirable to see them doing what they're doing, what they've been trained to do, and also being human beings, but still doing what they've got to do. And it's just. Yeah, it was. I could say a million wonderful things about this film that you, I'm sure, have heard, but I just really enjoyed it. I'm fresh off of it.

[C]

So did your heart rate come down yet? Is your heart rate still.

[A]

You know, I had to take a little walk. I won't lie. Take a little walk. But it did exactly what I would want a film like that to do. And I will be thinking about it a lot, and I've already. I was already talking to my husband about it because we like. We like films like this, but usually it's. We got to make sure we're ready for it.

[C]

So.

[A]

You have been so generous with your answers. I want to make sure I ask you two last questions. The first one is, what's the sequel to A House of Dynamite that you're working on? No doubt.

[C]

So I joke with people. The sequel's called golden the Empire Strikes Back. There you go.

[A]

It is Star wars all over again, isn't it? It's true.

[C]

Yeah. Believe it or not, I am doing some initial consulting with another director on another military movie.

[A]

Nice.

[C]

Just very, very at its nascent stages right now. So Katherine told me when I first started out with her that she goes, don't be surprised. You know, you're going to get going to get to these calls. And sure enough, instructor reached out to me, so helping him along. So that's one thing. And then, you know what's in the future? My son gets promoted to first lieutenant here in a couple of weeks, so I'm going to. Congratulations. Thanks. Going up to Fort Bliss, Texas, and El Paso for his promotion. And next week, I'll head up to joint base Lewis McCord, where my daughter is stationed at. She's a battery commander out there and she's fielding a new air defense system. And so they're going through their big, long collective training period. And we have a granddaughter up there that somebody has to go watch for a few weeks. And so dad drew the straw to go watch the granddaughter when my daughter's out in the field. So short term things, what I'm working on, and then long term, you know, hopefully this new movie will come to some fruition.

[A]

I look forward to your cameo in that one, too. So I'll be looking for you when I spoke with him. Oh, my gosh, that's so cool. So I want to always give my guests sort of an opportunity for wrap up thoughts. Anything you want to leave the audience, anything at all, the floor is yours.

[C]

Thanks. You know, people ask me about, you know, what's it like in the movie business. And I tell people the amazing parallels between the military and the movie business. And if you look at it this way, you have a commanding general, you have a general who's in charge, and you have a director who's in charge. And if you think about it, that general, their ultimate objective is to, you know, put some effect out onto an adversary. A director, Catherine's job is to put an effect out onto an audience. And then you think about the complicated processes and capabilities and enablers that are underneath it. You know, a general's got staff and weapon systems and HR and maintenance and intelligence and everything that goes into helping deliver that effect. A director has got cast actors, electricians, props, script, you know, all of that brings it all together to deliver an effect. And then the other thing too is just their styles, right? We've all worked for different. I work for bosses who are pretty directive in nature and, hey, just do it this way. You work for other bosses who are empowering, just kind of give you their commander's intent and let you go with it. And I found out in the movie business you have some directors who are just right behind the camera. And they'd be like, no, Maria, I don't want you holding yourself that way. Go this way. And then you have other directors who, like Catherine. She's off set, she's at a playback monitor watching the camera angles from there. And she told me her reasoning is because if she's right there, the actors become too mechanical and she wants them to be able to grow into their character. And you think about it, a commander who empowers the supporters to grow into themselves, professionally develop themselves. And that's kind of. That's where I reside is much more empowered. Just give commanders to 10. Come back to me if you need some additional guidance. And Catherine was the same way. So we got along great on the set and she was wonderful to work for.

[A]

That is T minus Deep Space brought to you by N2K CyberWire. We'd love to know what you think of our podcast. Your feedback ensures we deliver the insights that keep you a step ahead in the rapidly changing space industry. If you like this show, please share a rating and review in your podcast app or you can send an email to spacen2k.com we are proud that N2K CyberWire is part of the daily routine of the most influential leaders and operators in the public and private sector. From the Fortune 500 to many of the world's preeminent intelligence and law enforcement agencies, N2K helps space and cybersecurity professionals grow, learn and stay informed. As the nexus for discovery and connection, we bring you the people, the technology and the ideas shaping the future of secure innovation. Learn [e-mail] N2K's senior producer is Alice Carouse. Our producer is Liz Stokes. We are mixed by Elliot Peltzman and Trey Hester with original music by Elliot Peltzman. Our executive producer is Jennifer Ivan. Peter Kilpe is our publisher and I am T minus host Maria Varmazes. Thank you for listening. We'll see you next time. Sam Foreign.

[B]

Most environments trust far more than they should, and attackers know it. Threat Locker solves that by enforcing default deny at the point of execution. With Threat Locker allow listing, you stop unknown executables cold. With ring Fencing, you control how trusted applications behave. And with Threat Locker DAC defense against configurations, you get real assurance that your environment is free of misconfigurations and clear visibility into whether you meet compliance standards. ThreatLocker is the simplest way to enforce zero trust principles without the operational pain. It's powerful protection that gives CISOs real visibility, real control, and real peace of mind. ThreatLocker makes zero trust attainable even for small security teams. See why Thousands of organizations choose ThreatLocker to minimize alert fatigue, stop ransomware at the source, and regain control over their environments. Schedule your [e-mail] N2K today.