The loss of two buildings in New York City set the New York economy alone back as much as $100 billion. What monetary price would YOU put on an American city? Or a Canadian one, for that matter, since Canada would be comfortably parked behind the same shield at no cost to themselves (what else is new.)

Missile defense is a hot button for many liberals, who see Ronald Reagan's ghost every time the subject comes up. Successful tests don't count, since the conditions weren't "right." On the other hand, tests that fail (anybody remember what the word "test" means?) indicates that the entire system is unworkable forever.

I have no problem at all with deploying a partially-developed system. It makes sense on all levels. If a defensive missile fails to stop an incoming warhead, you are no worse off than if you had no system at all, the liberal preference. But if it works...

And as time goes on, the system will become more reliable. The technology is sound, and combined with a multilayer defense strategy, it would work quite well.