But I agree that the costs of losing a few of our cities to incoming nukes could be even greater. I would not argue the cost factor, were it not for my other concerns. I know something about these states, the last three at least, and there is not one chance in a thousand that any one of them will end up launching nukes at us, whether or not we have invested in the kind of ABM system our leaders propose.
People are occasionally suicidal, but states never are.
Any rogue state that launched nukes at us would face the imminent prospect of retaliation on a scale that would totally destroy it. A nuclear attack by stealth is much more likely than one by ballistic missile, and from the perpetrator's point of view has the advantage of deniability, thus reducing the prospect of an immediate and massive counterattack. The above three arguments are decisive in my opinion and should carry the day by themselves. But there is a fourth, which may be even more important in terms of the future of the USA and the world. Well, I often disagree with China's perspectives, but this time Mr. Sha has a point.