This is an interestingly less expensive deterrent for middle powers to buy (or develop themselves) who don't want to invest in a nuclear program to keep the larger countries at bay. I actually see this as a positive because it offers an alternative to nuclear proliferation. With current technology, a barrage of missiles like this can't be intercepted cost effectively, and you can hide them relatively easily. It has a chance to maintain a peaceful status quo, and perhaps avoid the looming WW3.
To give you a more practical example of the range, pretty much all of the continental US would be within 800 miles of the northern and southern US land borders. Not that Canada or Mexico would actually follow a program to develop these, as the US, Canada, and Mexico are still quite close allies, but my points is that the cost would easily be within the capabilities of those countries, and the range is pretty huge. Even container ships parked off the western and eastern coasts could reach well over 2/3 of the US landmass.
I have no idea what gateway was meant to be for.
I suppose you could argue that it was kind of like how the original Apollo worked. The capsule that brings you back to Earth for re-entry stays in lunar orbit and you just descend in the lander and go back up to lunar orbit. Plus you can maintain a much larger living environment at the gateway station. But it certainly made the whole thing seem like a Rube Goldberg affair. Assuming Starship gets the bugs worked out, then you should be able to do the whole mission with a single re-usable ship, assuming you launch it to low Earth orbit empty of fuel and then send up multiple other Starship flights to refuel it before it goes to the Moon.
most jobs are getting either automated or offshored
This doesn't make any sense. There are more jobs in the US now than at any time in history and the unemployment rate is near historical all-time lows. But go ahead and live on vibes instead of data, and see how that works out for you.
None of them have built a competing product that gained meaningful traction against the U.S. incumbents
...and here I thought SAP was German.
If this is a service economy, why is the service so bad?