Shooting Ducks, Trucks. and Counting On Luck? No More
Truesdell Wealth, Inc. is a Registered Investment Advisor (RIA)
Paul Grant Truesdell, J.D., AIF, CLU, ChFC, RFC – Founder
The Truesdell Professional Building
200 NW 52nd Avenue | Ocala FL 34482
Located in the Ocala International Commerce Park
352-612-1000 or 212-433-2525 [Voice or Text]
YouTube: @truesdellwealth
X.com: @truesdellwealth
Facebook: truesdellwealth
Due to our extensive holdings and our clients, you should assume that we have a position in all companies discussed and that a conflict of interest exists. The information presented is provided for informational purposes only. Past performance is not a guarantee of future performance. The Truesdell Companies is a conglomerate of professional service firms, owned in whole or jointly by various members of the Truesdell Family.
Facebook: TruesdellWealth
LinkedIn: TruesdellWealth
X.com: TruesdellWealth
Personal Website for Paul Grant Truesdell: PaulTruesdell.com
February 28 – Sponsorship of The Tunnel to Towers Foundation Benefit Concert
We (Truesdell Wealth, Insurance, Consulting, and Law) are sponsors to the 911 Tunnel to Towers Benefit Concert at the Circle Square Cultural Center – Visit https://eirinnabu.com then click on SHOWS for tickets and details. This is going will be a “blow-out!” event with music from “our” era and more. Since 9/11, T2T have been helping America’s heroes by providing mortgage-free homes to Gold Star and fallen first responder families with young children and by building specially adapted smart homes for catastrophically injured veterans and first responders. T2T is committed to eradicating veteran homelessness and helping America to Never Forget September 11, 2001. One of those whose family benefited was a murdered Tampa Police Officer who I personally knew. Please attend and support T2T.
Rough Transcript
Let me get straight to the point. The United States is facing some serious challenges when it comes to missile defense. A recent study put out by the American Physical Society—now, this is a respected group of physicists—lays it out in no uncertain terms: After 70 years and $350 billion in investments, our missile defense systems are still not up to the task of protecting us from a realistic intercontinental ballistic missile, or ICBM, attack. Let that sink in for a moment. Seventy years. $350 billion. And we still can’t guarantee that we could shoot down a small salvo of missiles from, say, North Korea.
Now, here’s the kicker: This isn’t new information. For decades, studies have shown that our systems fall short in key areas. But instead of addressing these issues head-on, we’ve seen a lot of hand-waving, a lot of testing under controlled conditions that don’t reflect the chaos of a real-world attack. The study even goes so far as to say that it would take at least 15 more years to develop anything that could reliably counter a small number of relatively unsophisticated missiles.
So, what’s the problem here? Well, it’s a mix of technological hurdles, unrealistic expectations, and a lack of political will. Let’s break it down.
First, let’s talk about our current systems. The Ground-Based Midcourse Defense, or GMD, is supposed to be our frontline defense against ICBMs. But this study basically calls it a paper tiger. It’s fragile, it’s expensive, and it’s riddled with vulnerabilities to countermeasures—things like decoys that confuse the interceptors. In 19 tests since 1999, this system has only succeeded in 10. That’s barely a 50% success rate. And let me tell you, if you’re playing defense against nuclear missiles, those are not the odds you want.
Then there’s the Next Generation Interceptor, or NGI. This is the Pentagon’s shiny new toy, designed to fix some of the problems with the GMD. But here’s the thing: It won’t be operational until at least 2028, and even then, it’s not clear it’ll solve the fundamental issues, like telling the difference between a real warhead and a decoy. And the cost? A cool $18 billion over its lifetime. That’s a hefty price tag for something that might still be obsolete before it’s even deployed.
Now, some folks like to pin their hopes on futuristic solutions—things like space-based interceptors or laser weapons for boost-phase interception. Let me translate that: Shooting down a missile right after it launches. Sounds great in theory, right? Well, the study says we’re at least 15 years away from making any of that “technically feasible.” In fact, to counter just one missile, we’d need hundreds of interceptors in orbit. And if we’re talking about a salvo of 10 missiles, we’re looking at thousands. The physics alone make this almost laughable.
So, where does that leave us? Here’s where I want to pivot to the bigger picture. Some people laugh at big ideas like these, just like they laughed at Reagan’s “Star Wars” initiative back in the 1980s. They called it a fantasy. But let me ask you this: Who’s laughing now? That initiative laid the groundwork for modern missile defense, flawed as it may be. And let’s not forget how Hillary Clinton mocked Newt Gingrich in the 1990s when he said every child would have a computer in school one day. She joked about kids lugging around 40-pound machines. Well, today, those kids have tablets that weigh less than a pound. Visionaries often get laughed at before they get vindicated.
Donald Trump, for all his faults, understood this. He established the Space Force, and while people rolled their eyes, it’s a critical step toward addressing these emerging threats. The man thought big, and in this game, thinking small gets you nowhere.
The question we have to ask ourselves is this: Do we want to live in a Pollyanna world, where we pretend everyone gets along, or do we want to face reality? History teaches us that evil exists. There are bad actors in this world—people who will use force and violence to get what they want. Genghis Khan did it. Stalin did it. Putin and Xi Jinping are doing it right now. The brutal truth is that those willing to use extreme measures often rise to power. And if we don’t prepare for that, we’re setting ourselves up for failure.
This is where geography comes into play. The United States has been blessed with two massive oceans that act as natural barriers. But those barriers aren’t enough anymore. We’ve got to extend our reach. Greenland, for example, is strategically vital. It’s not just about resources—it’s about positioning. The Chinese are making moves in South America, setting up shop in ports and even in the Panama Canal. This isn’t just economic posturing; it’s a direct challenge to the Monroe Doctrine, a principle we’ve upheld for over 200 years. If we let that slide, we’re inviting trouble right to our doorstep.
This kind of strategic thinking isn’t new. Think back to the Cuban Missile Crisis. Jack Kennedy understood the stakes. He stared down the Russians and made it clear that there were lines they couldn’t cross. We’re at a similar crossroads today. The question is, do we have the vision—and the guts—to act?
Now, let’s talk about cost, because this is where people start to squirm. Building up our missile defense, securing strategic locations like Greenland, and countering Chinese influence in our hemisphere—it’s all going to cost a lot of money. But here’s the thing: What’s the cost of doing nothing? If we fail to act, the price we’ll pay in the future will make today’s investments look like pocket change.
Here’s another point to consider. When we talk about military spending, it’s not just about defense. It’s also about economic resilience. The defense industry is a major driver of technological innovation, and that innovation spills over into the civilian sector. Think about how GPS, the internet, and even things like weather forecasting all came out of military research. Investing in defense isn’t just about keeping us safe; it’s about keeping us competitive.
And let me add one more wrinkle to this. We’re heading for a recession in the next five years. I don’t know how dramatic it’ll be, but economic cycles are inevitable. Natural disasters, market corrections, panic—they all play a role. In times like these, having a robust military procurement strategy can act as a stabilizing force. It’s not just about national security; it’s about economic security.
So, here’s where I’ll leave you. The threats we face are real. The solutions aren’t cheap or easy. But history shows us that visionary thinking pays off in the long run. Whether it’s Reagan’s “Star Wars,” Gingrich’s computers, or Trump’s Space Force, big ideas often seem foolish until they’re proven right. The question is, are we willing to think big? Are we willing to invest in our future? Or are we content to let others dictate the terms of our survival? That’s the choice before us, and it’s a choice we can’t afford to get wrong.
Paul Grant Truesdell, J.D., AIF, CLU, ChFC, RFC – Founder
The Truesdell Professional Building
200 NW 52nd Avenue | Ocala FL 34482
Located in the Ocala International Commerce Park
352-612-1000 or 212-433-2525 [Voice or Text]
YouTube: @truesdellwealth
X.com: @truesdellwealth
Facebook: truesdellwealth
Due to our extensive holdings and our clients, you should assume that we have a position in all companies discussed and that a conflict of interest exists. The information presented is provided for informational purposes only. Past performance is not a guarantee of future performance. The Truesdell Companies is a conglomerate of professional service firms, owned in whole or jointly by various members of the Truesdell Family.
Facebook: TruesdellWealth
LinkedIn: TruesdellWealth
X.com: TruesdellWealth
Personal Website for Paul Grant Truesdell: PaulTruesdell.com
February 28 – Sponsorship of The Tunnel to Towers Foundation Benefit Concert
We (Truesdell Wealth, Insurance, Consulting, and Law) are sponsors to the 911 Tunnel to Towers Benefit Concert at the Circle Square Cultural Center – Visit https://eirinnabu.com then click on SHOWS for tickets and details. This is going will be a “blow-out!” event with music from “our” era and more. Since 9/11, T2T have been helping America’s heroes by providing mortgage-free homes to Gold Star and fallen first responder families with young children and by building specially adapted smart homes for catastrophically injured veterans and first responders. T2T is committed to eradicating veteran homelessness and helping America to Never Forget September 11, 2001. One of those whose family benefited was a murdered Tampa Police Officer who I personally knew. Please attend and support T2T.
Rough Transcript
Let me get straight to the point. The United States is facing some serious challenges when it comes to missile defense. A recent study put out by the American Physical Society—now, this is a respected group of physicists—lays it out in no uncertain terms: After 70 years and $350 billion in investments, our missile defense systems are still not up to the task of protecting us from a realistic intercontinental ballistic missile, or ICBM, attack. Let that sink in for a moment. Seventy years. $350 billion. And we still can’t guarantee that we could shoot down a small salvo of missiles from, say, North Korea.
Now, here’s the kicker: This isn’t new information. For decades, studies have shown that our systems fall short in key areas. But instead of addressing these issues head-on, we’ve seen a lot of hand-waving, a lot of testing under controlled conditions that don’t reflect the chaos of a real-world attack. The study even goes so far as to say that it would take at least 15 more years to develop anything that could reliably counter a small number of relatively unsophisticated missiles.
So, what’s the problem here? Well, it’s a mix of technological hurdles, unrealistic expectations, and a lack of political will. Let’s break it down.
First, let’s talk about our current systems. The Ground-Based Midcourse Defense, or GMD, is supposed to be our frontline defense against ICBMs. But this study basically calls it a paper tiger. It’s fragile, it’s expensive, and it’s riddled with vulnerabilities to countermeasures—things like decoys that confuse the interceptors. In 19 tests since 1999, this system has only succeeded in 10. That’s barely a 50% success rate. And let me tell you, if you’re playing defense against nuclear missiles, those are not the odds you want.
Then there’s the Next Generation Interceptor, or NGI. This is the Pentagon’s shiny new toy, designed to fix some of the problems with the GMD. But here’s the thing: It won’t be operational until at least 2028, and even then, it’s not clear it’ll solve the fundamental issues, like telling the difference between a real warhead and a decoy. And the cost? A cool $18 billion over its lifetime. That’s a hefty price tag for something that might still be obsolete before it’s even deployed.
Now, some folks like to pin their hopes on futuristic solutions—things like space-based interceptors or laser weapons for boost-phase interception. Let me translate that: Shooting down a missile right after it launches. Sounds great in theory, right? Well, the study says we’re at least 15 years away from making any of that “technically feasible.” In fact, to counter just one missile, we’d need hundreds of interceptors in orbit. And if we’re talking about a salvo of 10 missiles, we’re looking at thousands. The physics alone make this almost laughable.
So, where does that leave us? Here’s where I want to pivot to the bigger picture. Some people laugh at big ideas like these, just like they laughed at Reagan’s “Star Wars” initiative back in the 1980s. They called it a fantasy. But let me ask you this: Who’s laughing now? That initiative laid the groundwork for modern missile defense, flawed as it may be. And let’s not forget how Hillary Clinton mocked Newt Gingrich in the 1990s when he said every child would have a computer in school one day. She joked about kids lugging around 40-pound machines. Well, today, those kids have tablets that weigh less than a pound. Visionaries often get laughed at before they get vindicated.
Donald Trump, for all his faults, understood this. He established the Space Force, and while people rolled their eyes, it’s a critical step toward addressing these emerging threats. The man thought big, and in this game, thinking small gets you nowhere.
The question we have to ask ourselves is this: Do we want to live in a Pollyanna world, where we pretend everyone gets along, or do we want to face reality? History teaches us that evil exists. There are bad actors in this world—people who will use force and violence to get what they want. Genghis Khan did it. Stalin did it. Putin and Xi Jinping are doing it right now. The brutal truth is that those willing to use extreme measures often rise to power. And if we don’t prepare for that, we’re setting ourselves up for failure.
This is where geography comes into play. The United States has been blessed with two massive oceans that act as natural barriers. But those barriers aren’t enough anymore. We’ve got to extend our reach. Greenland, for example, is strategically vital. It’s not just about resources—it’s about positioning. The Chinese are making moves in South America, setting up shop in ports and even in the Panama Canal. This isn’t just economic posturing; it’s a direct challenge to the Monroe Doctrine, a principle we’ve upheld for over 200 years. If we let that slide, we’re inviting trouble right to our doorstep.
This kind of strategic thinking isn’t new. Think back to the Cuban Missile Crisis. Jack Kennedy understood the stakes. He stared down the Russians and made it clear that there were lines they couldn’t cross. We’re at a similar crossroads today. The question is, do we have the vision—and the guts—to act?
Now, let’s talk about cost, because this is where people start to squirm. Building up our missile defense, securing strategic locations like Greenland, and countering Chinese influence in our hemisphere—it’s all going to cost a lot of money. But here’s the thing: What’s the cost of doing nothing? If we fail to act, the price we’ll pay in the future will make today’s investments look like pocket change.
Here’s another point to consider. When we talk about military spending, it’s not just about defense. It’s also about economic resilience. The defense industry is a major driver of technological innovation, and that innovation spills over into the civilian sector. Think about how GPS, the internet, and even things like weather forecasting all came out of military research. Investing in defense isn’t just about keeping us safe; it’s about keeping us competitive.
And let me add one more wrinkle to this. We’re heading for a recession in the next five years. I don’t know how dramatic it’ll be, but economic cycles are inevitable. Natural disasters, market corrections, panic—they all play a role. In times like these, having a robust military procurement strategy can act as a stabilizing force. It’s not just about national security; it’s about economic security.
So, here’s where I’ll leave you. The threats we face are real. The solutions aren’t cheap or easy. But history shows us that visionary thinking pays off in the long run. Whether it’s Reagan’s “Star Wars,” Gingrich’s computers, or Trump’s Space Force, big ideas often seem foolish until they’re proven right. The question is, are we willing to think big? Are we willing to invest in our future? Or are we content to let others dictate the terms of our survival? That’s the choice before us, and it’s a choice we can’t afford to get wrong.