Hopefully we discover some sort of gravity physics/tech that makes chemical rockets obsolete!

I don't see Starship being useful for civilian transport use cases, but for military operations sure! But there's not much to distinguish a starship from a nuke launch during a war, so it remains to be seen whether that risk is worth it.

> One hour to anywhere on the planet.

Anywhere they can take off from, which is a decent distance from a population center. The last (forty?) mile problem bites again.

I can imagine Starship landing on a sea launchpad (in coastal cities), and the last 30 miles can be taken by a speedboat in half an hour. The sea usually isn't as traffic-jammed as land communications, and boats, unlike high-speed trains, don't require that much infrastructure.

Which is nonsense. Not only will rockets never have airplane reliability and safety for basic physics reasons, but that rocket profile looks exactly like an ICBM and nobody wants to let that confusion happen.

Airplane flight trajectories look exactly like a V1 missile, and even modern tomahawks could be made to fly such a profile. Or it could be a subsonic B-1B instead of a Boeing 747. Solutions to IFF have decades of development.