So if Debt Ceiling were not raised, would that one fact stop the Wars?

[truedelphi]

In that way, at least, it might be a good thing.

[TheBigotBasher]

1. No.

It would however stop soldiers from being paid. Those on contracts (the big guy$) will still get their money.

[truedelphi]

3. In any sane and decent world, this would

be reversed.

We have (or will have shortly) only 60,000 GI's in Iraq. But at least that many employees of Halliburton, and K B & R.

We could probably knock off one trillion bucks just by ceasing to deal with these contractors. When Halliburton is charging the federal government 100 bucks for every load of laundry it processes (with GI's facing demotion, KP, or court martial for doing their own laundry!) something is really really worng with our form of government.

Obama could have issued an Executive Order stipulating that all contracts between major contractors must fall within logical pricing structures.

Richard Nixon's price roll backs of the summer of 1972 come to mind.

But Nixon was not in league with the Big Bankers, Big Contractors - and Obama is.

It is painful to type this. As someone who cheered till I was hoarse the night Nixon resigned, I never thought I'd see the day when there is no real choice between the politicians - 99% of both parties are owned by those with Big Fat Ol Wallets.

[FirstLight]

2. they passed the defense bill with no quibbling...

the pentagon gets to keep going indefinitely... however, the sub-sub-contractors would probably get hit.

what nobody's saying is that if/when the govt stops the checks,
there will be people in the streets, and basic services will be crippled,
and the "wars" will end up being right here...

[truedelphi]

4. Our government possesses such crippling "non-lethal"

Weaponry, including Micro Wave pulsing machines that burn a human's flesh, audio sound waves of such intensity that a huuman has to retreat, I fear the days of protesting are over.

And when millions of us marched to protest the War in riraq in Jan and Feb of 2003, what good did it do?

Like Cindy Sheehan has been saying, those who organize the marches always choose a Saturday. And marching from a big city park to a City Hall plaza, whose surrounding buildings are empty does exactly what?

Now if we had true revolutionary protesters, who would shut down the media offices in NYC, Chicago, San Francisco, Washington DC, Seattle, los Angeles et al, that might do some good.

Or if we marched on week days to shut down the places of power.

But the organizers are very attached to the Saturday thing. Makes a person wonder who the organizers reallya re.

[former9thward]

11. Good points.

The argument always is that on Saturdays most people are off work or school. But how committed to a protest are you if you can't miss a day of work or a few classes?

[nadinbrzezinski]

5. It will accelerate the end of the Empire, as in official that is,

It is in decline already

[krabigirl]

6. That would be a good thing.

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. Not with the pain that would come with it

It is already in decline, but default is not something you want to wish... just like I see a civil war is coming, a hot one... that does not mean I WANT one either.

[truedelphi]

10. The pain is coming here to us anyway you slice it.

No difference between the two parties, though sometimes a lot of kabukio theater.

We are heading full tilt towards the Milton Friedman, "Free Market Capitalism" that brought the junta and its disappearances to Allende's Chile, and that brought the junta to Argentina. And mass starvation and mafia mob rule in Russia.

I could only get half way through the video "The Shock Doctrine" before it became just too painful to watch.

But that first half of the movie told me a lot about where we are now, and about where we will be in six months.

[nadinbrzezinski]

12. A hard landing will be far more painful than a soft landing

yes, there is a difference.

[truedelphi]

13. I wish I had your depth of perception. What I see is Humanicide.

I see a nation ruled by a Plutocracy, where the news media has been consolidated to
be propaganda.

Where we are mercilessly groped by homeland security, on our dime, to the point that there are no longer dimes for our social programs.

California has already been cut back to the bone.

In the end, whether the pain is felt in July-August of 2010, or six months later, there is no difference.

Those of us who understand the message of the major truths contained inside "The Shock Doctrine" know that democracy is dead. Well, technically, democracy is probably gasping its last breath, and will die along with the middle class. We do not even have a name for what is abolut to enfold. Since it affects weveryone but the Uber Rich and the cadre of their helpers, I call it Humanicide.

When people on DU are applauding because there will not be an increase in price to seniors using MediCare, but "only" cuts to providers, I understand that what that means is that there will NOT BE ANY FRIGGIN' Providers. The list of providers for MediCare patients was already being thinned out in the mid nineties. Doctors who had the training to provide to the senior population were finding that their staffs had to work night and day doing the paper work, and that there wasn't
the ability to pay salaries, provide the office space, etc.

This is like applauding the fact that there will not be price increases at the grocery store, while overlooking that the onerous measures taken against the grocery store owners will definitely ensure that there will not be any grocery stores!

[nadinbrzezinski]

14. Oh yes there is a difference

that said, we are way past time to actually resist and no, I don't expect the media to cover it. Like they have never actually covered it in US History.

[truedelphi]

15. Again, I must be lacking your depth of perception. And if you would take

A moment to spell out the differences, that would be most helpful.

Succinctness is fine in its place, but despite the user id, I am not a mind reader.

[nadinbrzezinski]

17. Hard landing means Norquist's dream

all shuts down.

Soft landing means that while painful... not all services will shut down.

That is as succinct as it comes.

Hard landing... like soviet troops, US troops will not get paid... soft landing, they will be paid and brought home.

Hard landing, people will starve in great numbers... soft landing... we may be able to keep some of those really basic services going.

Hard landing... civil war... soft landing, we may avoid it.

[truedelphi]

20. We may be looking at the same sketch, but we are seeing different pictures

Sort of like the psych 101 drawing, where half the class sees an old witch, and half sees a pretty young woman.

I see the fact that we are not a democracy, that we have no say in our leaders, that since the Milton Friedman forces are hard at work, we can only end up like Chile during the junta, or like Argentina, or like Russia in the mid to late nineties.

It doesn't really matter what sort of landing we have at the moment.

A frog simmered at low temps for several hours is no less dead than a frog boiled outright for forty minutes.

Hopefully, you are right and I am wrong.

[piratefish08]

8. kill the War Industry?

too much $$ at stake. never happen.

[Iggo]

9. No. They'll starve me and you to pay for the wars. (n/t)

[SDuderstadt]

16. Yes...

we'll just abandon our men and women in uniform on the battlefield.

Please.

[tammywammy]

18. I would think funding has already been allocated

I work on a program that's partly funded by the US govt, we have already received our funding through the end of the year. Even if the debt limit is reached, we're still working.

[jeff47]

19. Nope. Soldiers stop getting paid, and defense contractors already have their FY11 money

So the wars would go on. If it lasts into FY12 (Starts in October) then the defense contractors would stop getting paid.

[truedelphi]

21. Good to know that FY 2012 starts this October.

of course, it really doesn't matter, the war contractors will go on and will be paid no matter what.

[jeff47]

23. Actually, no

The continuing resolution for most of FY11 really screwed things up for defense contractors. Lots of contracts were pushed off or otherwise not awarded, which has resulted in some layoffs in the R&D parts of defense contracting.

Among contractors, there's a lot of fear that the Republicans will screw with FY12, like they did with FY11. Which means more layoffs for anyone who's not working in a war zone.

Keep in mind a lot of defense contractors don't do anything particularly evil. Someone's got to run the helpdesk, feed the troops, clean the bathrooms, figure out how to make jets burn biofuels, and so on. In fact, that's where the vast majority of the money is, even in war zones. There's so few Blackwater-type organizations because there's not a lot of profit in that work.

[tammywammy]

24. I work for a defense contractor. We already have our funding through the end of the year. n/t

[JoePhilly]

22. Only if we abandon the troops where they stand ....

Think it through ...

If you want to remove the troops from Iraq or Afganistan, or anywhere else, THAT costs money. Or, we just leave them, and their equipment there.

Or, when they come back ... do we kick them all out of the military, and ADD them to the UNEMPLOYED in one giant bunch?

Bottom line: there is no silver bullet.