It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Defense Sequestration or no more defense money on 02 Jan 2013

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 26 2012 @ 10:17 PM
link   
According to this article there will be no more money for defense contractors if congress does not do something before October this year.


Under the federal WARN Act, employers must give employees 60 days’ notice of layoffs. That means employees must be notified of sequestration cuts by Nov. 2, 2012 — just days before this year’s election. In some cases, state law requires 90 days’ notice, meaning that some will get the news on Oct. 2.


That article says unless something is done the law will be enacted automatically cutting 500 billion out of the budget for war contractors. I can't say I agree that this is a bad thing.

I realize losing defense jobs will suck for some people, but they must have known going in that these jobs were not meant to last a lifetime. We have been in a race for newer and better weapons and fighting wars constantly for almost 100 years, but at some point it is going to break the bank because our government is too big. War related jobs are good when there is a war, bad when there is peace.

Here is the article: thehill.com...




posted on Jun, 26 2012 @ 10:22 PM
link   
Now there is a good reason to declare a national emergency. Because we all know that the terrorists hate our way of life. If the US does not spend $650,000,000,000 per year on "defense" (not counting black and illegal funds) then the terrorists might find 19 guys to fly airplanes into buildings.

Uh oh! Suspend the elections! Suspend civil liberties! USA!!! USA!!!



posted on Jun, 26 2012 @ 10:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Numbers33four
 


I may have noted a bit of sarcasm in your tone?

I don't care if Congress EVER passes anything again. In one way I wish they would all just quit or admit they can't work together even though they are all owned by the same corporations.



posted on Jun, 26 2012 @ 10:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by onecraftydude
reply to post by Numbers33four
 


I may have noted a bit of sarcasm in your tone?

I don't care if Congress EVER passes anything again. In one way I wish they would all just quit or admit they can't work together even though they are all owned by the same corporations.


Yes. Just sick of it all. And as for them working together, what makes you think that they are not? This is planned chaos.



posted on Jun, 26 2012 @ 10:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Numbers33four
 


I think along the same lines in that it was planned. I feel the timing is odd. This will be the first thing the new president will have to deal with. If they were planning to get this middle east war up and running this would not be a wise decision.



posted on Jun, 26 2012 @ 10:57 PM
link   
I just had a thought to add; maybe this has something to do with the National Emergency declaration. They didn't give a reason for using the measure, but it gives him all the power he would need to enact martial law if we were attacked. I could imagine a false flag event prompting the same scenario.



posted on Jun, 26 2012 @ 11:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Numbers33four
 




I caught the sarcasm. Bravo!



posted on Jun, 26 2012 @ 11:19 PM
link   
I think if there's one certainty in this world, it's that our congress can work together to keep the Military-Industrial Complex from suffering....



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 12:17 AM
link   
reply to post by onecraftydude
 


The democrat and republican presidents play differing character roles. For the most part the republicans play the war president. Clinton is the exception in that he started the Bosnian war. The democrats usually just manitain the smoldering covert wars throughout the world. They have to try to appear different enough to keep the electorate divided, distracted and fighting each other over who is the worst president.

If Romney gets elected I would not be surprised if there was some kind of attack on the US and or its interests and it is blamed on Iran. It will probably happen even if Obama is re-elected. That would line up with Clinton starting a war in his second term and not caring about alienating part of his base. Those people will forget all about it by the time the new democrat candidate enters from stage left. As everyone knows, the new guy is nothing like the old guy, right? Who doesn't know that?

In my gut I feel that these people cannot wait to cut loose the dogs of war on Iran.

If you are still voting you are still sleeping.



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 06:42 AM
link   
I agree about them wanting to release the dog's of war worldwide since this is all about global domination, but it seems like this is the wrong way to do it. Why would they got this far toward a total funding cut off? How was this implemented? Who thought this would be a good idea?

I don't understand what is going on, but I guess other people can fill me in on the who and why of it.




top topics



 
3

log in

join