I like the comment from Turbine D :-)
Indeed, the truth evaporates as soon as it leaves development and testing engineers. Industrial "generals", though have good technical education and knowledge, report to mil. customers what they would like to hear. The latters report to the mil hightest mngt (where technical education does not exist any more) about some general user requirements only. And hell knows what do they understand or not. And finally, the ministers report to the guy number 1, all of them having no technical knowledge at all. Then come fantasies and statements like "my red button is much bigger and more red than yours" :-)
The only real thing that I agree with in all this poorly structured stream of information is that it was a bad move from the US back in early 2000's (was it 2000 or 2002) when the US unilaterally broke the 1972 year treaty concerning anti ballistic missile defense. The reason was clear: Russia was in a bad shape at this time and temptation was high, but the Russians warned (I clearly remember): "Don't do that, otherwise we'll be back". Nobody listened.
Now we have Aegis with SM deployed all around, NATO at out door step with 5-10 min flight time. Also showcases like the one in Yugoslavia. Thus, efforts to deal with this new situation are justified.
IMHO, it is more dangerous than it was before, when there were many ICBMs, but only one region per country allowed to be defended by anti-ICBM missiles (Grand Forks and Moscow).