Missile Defense System

[Keba]

That is the problem with Mutually Assured Destruction, if one side develops a completely foolproof countermeasure, what stops them from simply blowing up the enemy, safe in the knowledge that nothing will be reaching them?

While the Missile defence would good against smaller nuclear power, last I heard, the Russians have finished development on some fancy armored missile that is, supposedly, immune to countermeasures. Also, volume would beat the system very likely ... as having several tens of thousands of missiles would probably just swamp whatever defences you did set up.

So, it's a touchy situation. Develop the system and risk sparking nuclear war, or not develop it and risk getting shot at by every madman with an ICBM.

[The Black Ship]

It's a good idea. It's goal is to stop the "rogue state" from lobbing a nuke or missle-based WMD, not to swamp the Russian or Chinese arsenals.

Militaries world wide are funding development programs, and indeed purchasing a rudimentary capability - see Japan's Aegis/SM-3 program, or the European theatre based ABM innitiative. If it's worth protecting military forces in theatre, why isn't it worth protecting civilians at home?