No. Its a demonstration of capability. A wake-up-call. And far more important still, and what gives credibility to the doctrine of deterrence you are relying on...an undeniable assertion of capability and resolve.
As far as restoring security goes, we still have it, and the bad guys now know they can't find out how well our stuff works by using a cheap fireworks display.
No they don't. They regard us as a paper tiger, and China is busy burrowing out what few secrets we have. I still can't believe Bush caved into the Chinese Premier Hu Jintau's demand for resumed "military exchanges".
China was no doubt behind the launches, they were HOPING we would engage so they could learn how our defenses work.
I suspect China already has a fair idea.
But if they want to know, they have to actually shoot at something. They blinked, not us.
Actually they fired damn close to Hawaii... they didn't blink. They malfunctioned. And way too much comfort is being taken from that.
I'm with you as far as improving missile defense to ensure security.
I do not believe your advice of using a show of force doctrine of deterrence would be wise or effective. It seems to me you think we have an inexhaustible supply of bullets to shoot at "missiles" destined to splash in the water. You also don't grasp the value of having an enemy estimate versus confirming our capabilities. You will get lots of folks around here to praise you for your ideas, however you can have the armchair generals. I have no doubts that we did the right thing on 4 July.