Missile Defense of Europe

EIN News, says "Obama Scrapping Missile Shield for Czech Republic, Poland. The Czech prime minister says President Barack Obama has told him that the U.S. is abandoning plans to put a missile shield in the Czech Republic and Poland. Czech Premier Jan Fischer told reporters in Prague on Thursday that Obama phoned him to say that Washington has decided to scrap the plan that had deeply angered Russia. Fischer says Obama confirmed that Washington no longer intends to put 10 interceptor missiles in Poland and a radar system in the Czech Republic. (google.com)".
I agree with Pres. Obama on this one. We have for more than 60 years spent tremendous sums of money to rebuild Europe and protect it from itself. It is long past time to get out of this.
Our entering World War II was likely justified, through our fear and anticipation that the Japanese and Germans would collectively control our economic and personal liberties. Our subsequent contributions toward reconstruction of Japan and Germany have set them up as primary economic contributors and competitors in the world market, of which we are part.
The present political attitudes of government leaders in Japan and Germany do not indicate a militaristic approach for world domination in the same manner as had been previously demonstrated prior to World War II, nor do we see that with other major powers, such as Russia or China. The saber rattling of North Korea and Iran are annoying, but not significantly worrisome, except as I will explain below.
Since the Western Europeans have demonstrated their ability to establish international cooperation on their continent, through the European Union (EU), it is reasonably apparent that no US military bases are necessary to keep them from each others throats. We don't need missiles and radar in any part of Europe. If the members of the EU feel that they need such devices to protect the membership from from any unilateral actions, they have the ability to set up their own systems.
If we need medical service bases in Europe for logistical reasons to treat our wounded from Iraq and Afghanistan, that is another matter. We should soon be getting out of those wars and can then eliminate the medical service bases in Europe.
For our own protection we need a US-based missile shield, which we already have. The fundamental for this is retaliation in case of an atomic attack after which millions of our citizens would be destined to die. To thwart that possibility, we need both a warning and an interceptor system to pre-explode any foreign missiles for which we are the target. Simply, this is Star Wars defense. It has been proposed many times before, and we still need it. It has been said that it is also very difficult to accomplish. I don't believe it.
I suspect that there are those in our government who still consider that Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) is an appropriate government philosophy for atomic weaponry. The simple aspect of the philosophy is that there should be an international balance of atomic capability, such that no country will fire off an atomic missile knowing that in doing so retaliation from the target country will be such as to basically eliminate mankind in the perpetrator country. It was this philosophy and subsequent transmission of technical information that guided the Russians into rapid atomic capability right after World War II.
The MAD philosophy has been effective for more than 60 years, in spite of some obvious flaws. Those flaws remain and could be potentially destructive to mankind on a worldwide basis. One of the key flaws is a thought that there are already too many people in the world, and a foreign leader will be able to physically protect himself from a retaliatory atomic attack, and will be willing to sacrifice his own country's population. A second flaw is that a foreign country may well establish a Star Wars interceptor system, such that retaliatory atomic missiles will be neutralized.
If the MAD philosophy continues to exist here in the US, portions of the government will continue to resist Star Wars missile neutralization, on the basis that it does not trust its own leadership, which may decide to be an international aggressor. I will grant that possibility, but if I must trust between our own US leadership and potential foreign aggressors, I trust ourselves more.
Let's get on with the Star Wars program of intercepting foreign incoming missiles.