Missile Defense Revisited

Remember the ballistic missile defense system we don't need, even though all of those Russian nukes are still intact, and even though the Chinese, North Koreans, and Iranians are all developing ballistic missile technology? And remember how all of those scientists said that it could never work, that the sheer physics of the system were impossible, and not worth the money that it would take from social programs? Well, not only has it worked in various tests in the past (which I've covered, but don't have the time or inclination to link to right now), but the Navy has successfully destroyed a multi-stage missile. This is an important milestone, because when a multi-stage missile separates, the targeting system has to be able to distinguish between the discarded lift stage, and the second stage (which contains the actual warhead).

So, basically, it works, and all of those pacifist scientists, for all their good intentions, were incorrect about the feasibility of the system. Whether or not the system is needed is, I suppose, up for continued debate; I, myself, am not completely sold on the necessity of the system, but I think that a need exists, and I have no problem seeing a system implemented, particularly on the Pacific Rim (which would be the most likely area to see danger from the nations with the technology in question).

Any thoughts? Do we need it? Is it worth continuing to develop? Post it up, folks.