Would anyone care to speculate on the actual reasons for the WSJ's campaign to continue development of anti-missile defenses? Their ostensive reason is the existence of "rogue states" out there. If that is only an ostensive reason, then WSJ (and whatever fractions of the ruling class they speak for) must be delighted at the Indian and Pakistan tests.
Also, assuming that the expansion of the "nuclear club" is really opposed by by core ruling circles in the U.S. (e.g., the Foreign Affairs Council), then why should we not accept with gratitude *anything* that limits the capacity of the U.S. to throw its weight around?
Carrol