Obama Wins Nobel Peace Prize

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
161

[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
pat wrote:

Well, first, he has not succeeded in fucking up the country yet. The people have spoken loud and clear. Even with a representative majority, he cannot accomplish his intentions. Second, sometimes it is hard to detect sarcasm but if there is any seriousness to this statement “Btw, Yasser Arafat and Che Guevara rule…” then forgive me for being direct, but you are stupid. If you were being sarcastic, then I apologize for that. Those guys are murderers in cold blood. They were motivated by pure hate and guile. They deserve nothing but disdain.

Lol the US Army kills too…whats your point? Its funny because what the Tea part protesters are doing is some less violent version of what Yasser and Che did. They stood up to the authority and fought for the “little people”; what they believed to be a cause.

Don’t give me this B.S of how Obama is a socialist and Marxist. Most of you and your “boys” have no idea what that means. I presume (and its a big presumption) that those who say Obama is a socialist have never actually been to a “socialist” country or any other country for that matter.

For the past 80 years the USA has kept on growing and become the richest most powerful nation on earth. Great. But you guys are put pretty low on the list of countries with the best quality of life. My country New Zealand and your neighbor Canada are ranked in the top 4 and if you knew anything about how these countries operate you’d label them as “socialist.”

Where the fuck were you when Bush was in office. If you say now that “he hasn’t fucked up the country yet” you must have known you were gonna get fucked eventually. As I see it McCain wasn’t going to do anything different than whats going on now. Atleast you have a guy who can articulate what he wants to do instead of interpreting “I got a B in econ101 (herher).”

[/quote]

LOL…All armies kill nimrod, that’s what they are supposed to do. One that does not is useless.

Yes, less violent is a better form of protest. Sorry that seems lost on you.

I can give you all this shit about obama being a socialist and a marxist all I want. Memebers of my family have gone to jail at the hands of the soviets. My parents were on a watch list because they escaped. I know very fucking well what socialism, communism, and marxism is all about. Yes, obama has socialistic tendencies. He thinks their good ideas, despite the fact that it has never even come close working in practice.

I have set foot in New Zealand. It’s a beautiful place. Our quality of life is just fine here. Yes, you have some socialistic thing we just don’t want. We are to big for a nanny state, it would impoverish us all. It takes a hell of a lot more money to take care of 300 million than it does 4.6 million. It’s simple math.

I was here when Bush was in office, feel free to read the archives. So far we have a guy who has spent an epic amount of money and done very little, thank God. Interesting that you are up his ass.

162

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Forget about criminals and in house crime for a minute.[/quote]

This is what I’m having a hard time grasping. Why should we forget about them? I don’t expect non-citizens to have access to every right we do. Such as, well, citizenship itself. However, when it comes to something as fundamental as deciding if the US of A tortures people, any people, citizenship doesn’t mean alot to me. You’d have a better chance of convincing me that gang-bangers and drug traffickers in this nation should be tortured. To give up their own. They kill, and will continue to kill more Americans than terrorists. They will ruin far many more lives and tear apart many more families. Yet, it’s not their citizenship that keeps me from giving the going ahead to torture these people so law enforcement can unravel their gangs and networks.

[quote] WHAT IF torturing a non citizen enemy, either here or abroad, yielded information that prevented the building she would have been in on a given day from being bombed and by that action saved her life?
[/quote]

I’d be elated she was alive, of course. Yet, it doesn’t change my opinion.

I’d squeeze the trigger until they stopped moving. Yes, in the heat of that moment, I’d take action aimed to stop the aggressor in a manner that would leave no doubt to it’s finality. And yes, I’d extend this to war, too. Let the survivors do their own nation-building.

However, as a man of the west, as a child of the US of A, I like to think I’ve inheritated a tradition, a culture, that has come to reject the idea of torturing another man after he has been subdued. If not for his sake, maybe for our own. Surely, before 9-11, there must have been a reason why it was abhorent to us? Some reason it didn’t need to be argued back and forth?

Could it be that as a people we’d recognized for some time that torture not only scarred, twisted, and mishaped the tortured, but also the torturers? And oh yes, we’ve become the torturers through our representative government. No, leave torture to the savages hiding in hospitals, places of worship, behind their women and children, as they make war in civlian dress. Don’t do it my name, don’t in my family’s name. And, please, don’t do it in the name of this country.

Perhaps, I’m wrong. Maybe I always have been. It could very well be that my version of the US has only ever existed in my head, and never in reality. Even so, it’s the country I’d rather hand off to the next generation of Americans.

I turn the thread back over to it’s rightful owners now.

163

[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
Seneca wrote:

Don’t really know why you are comparing peaceful protest and free assembly guaranteed by the first amendment to the actions of a bunch of murders.

You’re being ignorant. Try and think in multiple perspectives. Put urself in their shoes for a second even if you hate them or whatever. They did ‘something’ for a reason, like all of us do stuff because of a cause.
[/quote]

No you are being ignorant. Everybody has reasons, doesn’t justify the actions. There was no threat to lives or property. They were power hungry, period and the would kill anybody that got in there way.
It’s thinking like that that can justify anything and not everything can be justified. Would you think the jinjaweed in Darfur, Chad and Sudan who kill entire villiges and gang rape children can be justified by thinking in “multiple prospectives”? Of course not.
Che and Yasser were cold blooded murdering assholes. There is no circumstance of theirs that can justify what they did. That’s just stupid.
Trying to justify the unjustifiable is pure ignorance.

164

[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
You’re being ignorant.[/quote]

Said with a Michael Jackson voice :wink:

165

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Gettnitdone wrote:
You’re being ignorant.

Said with a Michael Jackson voice ;)[/quote]

166

“Critical” voices in Sweden are saying that Obama should consider the prize a CHALLENGE, not a REWARD. Nonetheless, he doesn’t deserve it.

167

[quote]archiewhittaker wrote:
“Critical” voices in Sweden are saying that Obama should consider the prize a CHALLENGE, not a REWARD. Nonetheless, he doesn’t deserve it. [/quote]

the prize is intended to encourage peace efforts, as well as reward them. (Mr. Nobel invented dynamite… the award is the family’s way of trying to even out the karmic balance I guess).

I’m getting a really good chuckle over the people who are angry about this. Bitter and angry, and this just irritates them even more… even though they’ve never given a damn about the Nobel Peace Prize before it was awarded to the current President of the United States, Barrack Hussein Obama (I enjoy using his full name).

BUTTHURT LEVELS CRITICAL !!!

168
169

[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
I thought this thread was about Obama and the Nobel Prize.

Let me make another point. Some of you here, like a minority of Americans think Obama is ruining the USA yet you don’t have any substantive evidence to prove this except what you think will happen in the future. Sounds a lot like the Nobel Prize he just won to which you are arguing.

And he has brought people together look at his appeal globally and in the USA. You don’t think any idiot can cut taxes and say we’re gonna bomb North Korea 'cause ‘we are America and we don’t take shit’? The dude is trying to talk to people… Look at the last 100 years of human history. There has been no peace. By nature the Nobel peace prize isn’t for tangible peace its for the hope of peace because there never will be peace.

Lets do a little exercise. Everyone make a list of what needs to materialize for him to actually “deserve” the award. And next to each point make a quick reference to how it can be accomplished.

Btw, Yasser Arafat and Che Guevara rule… [/quote]

Well, we’re on the road to national bankruptcy and he’s accelerating the process. We went into debt for 70+ years and now we have to pay up. Its kind of like “Straw, meet camel and hop on his back.”

170

I think too often we live in a bubble and forget about the rest of the world. We forget what the world thought of us when Bush was in office, we forget not the policy but the general thinking process of the previous man in office vs the current man in office.

I believe they are rewarding not action but a change in thinking and the actions that will come from this way in thinking. It’s incredibly naive to think we can just immediatly pull out of Iraq or Afghanistan when we still have to fix the issue. Remember what Colin Powell said “If we break it, we have to fix it”. Well we broke Iraq and we ignored Afghanistan under the previous regime. To think one man can resolve these issues in a year, regardless of campaign BS, is not reality.

I think he came in with all these campaign promises, got elected, then during his first security briefings took a huge shit in the Oval Office, because the difference between optimism and realism is huge.

I think he pushed his healthcare plan way too early as you can’t do that while the economy is tanking…he should have waited another 6 months.

I think he does open up more avenues of diplomacy whereas Bush basically cut us off from the rest of the world.

The award means nothing…it does however prove a problem if he can’t get shit done in the next 3+ years.

I’m actuallying hoping for the GOP to take back a few more seats because as we all know, absolute power corrupts absolutely. When one party has too much control then nothing gets done because the minority party is going to block you and fuck you as much as they can because with such a minority that is the only thing they can do to get their agenda across…put up a stone cold wall. Clinton found this out in '94 and his administration got more accomplished AFTER the Dems lost control. You need to have balance in politics for anything worthwhile to occur.

171

[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
…you guys are put pretty low on the list of countries with the best quality of life.
[/quote]

HAAA!!!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!

You’ve been to America so you can state this above definitively, right?

What standard are you basing this upon?

I live in Japan. But I spent the first 26 years of my life in America. Do me a favor and let me know where, according to your list, Japan stands on quality of life.

Is there somewhere I could obtain such a list?

Either way, I’m not going to offer anything more until you explain your position a bit better.

172

The idea that any first world country has a “low” quality of life is quite silly. However, there are a few organizations that try to rank such things. Normally it’s done with a greater focus on the “medium” and “low” countries. Google “Human Development Index”

173

[quote]Big Boss wrote:

Damn…don’t know how I missed this. Well,I don’t think he deserves this…but then again half of the people who have received it didn’t either.

But I can’t help but think this was done as sort of a “call out” for Obama. What a fucked situation that is. [/quote]

I’m late to the party, but I think this absolutely captures it - with the award in place, imagine the pressure to live up to it. “The world” - not really the world at large, so the quotes are appropriate - wants the US to do certain things on an international scale, and this is the perfect bait: flatter a president who adores the flattery, and create a bar for performance that he feels obligated to live up to.

The award was, of course, preposterous, and it is shameful to give it on the merits of “apirations” when flesh and blood people face risk to life and limb - think Chinese human rights activists and so forth - to actually promote the ideals the Nobel Prize is supposed to uphold.

If wanting world peace is enough to win the Nobel Peace Prize, then every beauty pageant contestant in the last fifty years should be in the running.

President Obama didn’t deserve the award, and I believe he will ultimately come to regret getting it.

174

[quote]Sloth wrote:
<<< I turn the thread back over to it’s rightful owners now. >>>
[/quote]

Me too. I’m not up to another response on this at the moment anyway. We just profoundly disagree.

175

He’s the first man to become the president of United States illegally (born in Africa) without firing a shot or any major hassle. In other words, peacefully. So obviously he deserved it.

176

I was told that the nominations had to be in by a certain time which was 11-12 days after he took office.If this is true, this is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard.

177

yeah, supposedly he was nominated in feburary. he gets a million dollars for doing jack shit.

178

[quote]Seneca wrote:
yeah, supposedly he was nominated in feburary. he gets a million dollars for doing jack shit.[/quote]

Not like the award had any credibility before, but it has less now if possible.

179

It goes nicely with his two Grammy awards.

180

Thanks Sloth, I had no idea. wow, just wow.