You're wrong for taking it personally. You been shown some very significant hurdles. Nobody has dismissed the concept as much as they've tried to point out the trap doors.
Dinasaur or not, his points have been more valid than your's where a high speed, sub-obital platform are concerned.
No, the "trap doors" are just the typical denials that are to be expected from the "we've always done it this way and ain't gonna change" crowd.
There aren't any remaining technical hurdles. From Space, it is imminently possible to drop a GPS-guided bomb, fire a missile, take a picture, or whatever else that you want.
Getting into Space cheaply has been an issue; no longer. Rutan's whole craft can be built (or copied/modified) for a measely $10 million. Civlians routinely spend that much or more on homes, yachts, and GulfStream V's.
Going hypersonic cheaply has likewise been an issue; again, no longer.
If you want to go where the F-22 can't, if you want to fly faster than the F-22, then a foreign military need merely copy, and perhaps modify (if desired), Rutan's existing civilian technology.
You can build and buy a thousand or more of Rutan's craft for what we currently have spent on each F-22.
It doesn't take a genius to put those components (e.g. cheap, Mach 6, Sub-Orbital) together to figure out that the F-22 is lagging behind existing civilian technology.
Yeah yeah, you can poke holes at it all day long. That's what the battleship guys did to the new aircraft carrier fanatics back in the 1920's....but that didn't make them right.
Naysayers are a dime a dozen. They are to be expected.
Visionaries are a different beast altogether, however.