There are a bunch more problems than those you listed, and they're more serious. You don't typically keep the fuel in a liquid fueled rocket (because it's highly corrosive), so you load the fuel before launch, which takes time and commits you to either launching or shutting down the rocket for months while it is refurbished.

There are safety issues too. I once heard a story from a missileer about a wrench being dropped into a silo, which caused a leak. When the fuel leaks out, the structural integrity of the missile is lost. Two (low ranked) men were sent in, and they both died.

Solid fuel solves a lot of problems, and is really the best way to go.

Lastly, articles like this are irresponsible because they disclose facts that may not be known to the enemy, and the enemy can adjust their tactics to take advantage -- which is exactly what we've been seeing in Iran over the past month. Half of the US population is against anything that our president does, to the point of actually hoping that he fails in Iran, and supporting the opposition party's efforts to stop him. If that occurs, and the Iranians detonate a nuke, they will have helped create another holocaust.