Jump to content

Us President Obama Wins Nobel Peace Prize


webfact

Recommended Posts

Soon you can see the video on demand of the announcement, and get the answer as to why he got it.

So far, the committee are quoted: "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples".

Also, I see a lot of reference to "his vision of and work towards a world without nuclear weapons".

And from my own perspective, regarding the comments about the ongoing wars - well, he didn't start those wars. That was the former guy.

Best/T

Edited by stormstereo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 387
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Soon you can see the video on demand of the announcement, and get the answer as to why he got it.

So far, the committee are quoted: "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples"

Also, I see a lot of reference to "his vision of and work towards a world without nuclear weapons".

And from my own perspective, regarding the comments about the ongoing war - well, he didn't start those wars. That was the former guy.

Best/T

I think you may find they both serve the same masters. Left and right wings belong to the same bird and continue to fly in the same direction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Soon you can see the video on demand of the announcement, and get the answer as to why he got it.

So far, the committee are quoted: "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples"

Also, I see a lot of reference to "his vision of and work towards a world without nuclear weapons".

And from my own perspective, regarding the comments about the ongoing war - well, he didn't start those wars. That was the former guy.

Best/T

I think you may find they both serve the same masters. Left and right wings belong to the same bird and continue to fly in the same direction.

In short: You are correct my friend!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had to do a quick search just to make sure this wasn't a joke.

Increasing the war in Afghanistan and bombing Pakistan is peace now? Not to mention swapping many of the troops that were deployed in Iraq with private mercenaries.

Amazing.

same reaction here.

Sieg & Peace Howdy. Kalifornia Über Alles, 21st Century.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am an American and to me this is downright silly. Was the Thai Doctor who thinks Thailand is too far from the icecaps to be affected by their melting on the committee?

I think he's working on the new nuclear power plant :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bit surprised by this as well, but it's not as if President Obama nominated himself... Alternatively, if nominated former President Bush could have just as easily won (for being the main factor in losing the election;)

In all seriousness though, here's hoping Israel and Palestine 'may' take notice that the Nobel committee apparently placed their votes not for accomplishments, but for hopes...

Personally I share that hope (no matter how bleak). The alternatives are continuation of smear & fear both at home and abroad. Most 'reasonable' people have had enough of this well-worn tactic over the past several years (which finally proved a lose-lose after previous lose/wins designed by the architect Mr Rove).

Here's hoping (for a change;)

Edited by baht&sold
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I give it about even odds that Obama will end up bringing about civil war in America by the end of 2010.

Alright. Now Obama winning the peace prize is the second craziest thing I've read tonite. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a travesty.

I give it about even odds that Obama will end up bringing about civil war in America by the end of 2010.

Indo-Siam

Somewhere in Kenya, a village is missing its idiot .........

oooeeeeoooo.

I thought the full moon was over?

Tea drinker?

classy sig. btw

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well there were several reports over the week that they are short of candidates. This is the easy solution and saves Obama some face after he lost the olympics.

"The Nobel committee received a record 205 nominations for this year's prize though it was not immediately apparent who nominated Obama." AP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Prize has a checkered history, It went to a lot of deseerving recipients. Gandhi deserved it and didn't get it, It went to a US President who gained fame in the War of 1898 (Teddy R); a VP who was in WW 1;Al Gore; a 5-star general (Marshall), various former Jewish and Arab terrorists; etc, The Red Cross, several UN agencies; some great peace groups; etc,

The winners, please:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nobel...Prize_laureates

Congratulations to my President: Sir, go make peace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you kidding me? You have a link showing this? If its true then this really is a joke....

The stunning choice made Obama the third sitting U.S. president to win the Nobel Peace Prize and shocked Nobel observers because Obama took office less than two weeks before the Feb. 1 nomination deadline. Obama's name had been mentioned in speculation before the award but many Nobel watchers believed it was too early to award the president.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091009/ap_on_.../eu_nobel_peace

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Soon you can see the video on demand of the announcement, and get the answer as to why he got it.

So far, the committee are quoted: "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples".

Also, I see a lot of reference to "his vision of and work towards a world without nuclear weapons".

And from my own perspective, regarding the comments about the ongoing wars - well, he didn't start those wars. That was the former guy.

Best/T

Mr. Nixon did not either start the Vietnam War. That was some former guy too, Mr. Kennedy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure Obama was just as surprised as the rest of us. This has to be for his efforts to reverse the USA's "go it alone" attitude, for which he does deserve some credit. He has opened up dialogue on a number of fronts where the previous administration had refused, preferring a unilateral approach. I doubt he would have gotten it if the previous president (Chaney) wasn't such a constitution shedding, warmongering tyrant. I'm not an "Obamanaut", but I did vote for him, and I was very happy the day Bush and co. were out, and I remain optimistic as to what he can achieve, but the Republicans are doing quite well at stopping him at the moment.

Qoute from the Nobel committee" "His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population," That, to me, is in direct reference to the lack of said values and attitiudes by the previous U.S. administration.

A little disappointing that Bush, Chaney, Rumsfield, Wolfawitz weren't held accountable for all the illegal actions and suffering they have caused by manufacturing an illegal war. I was hoping to see some subpoena's after the election. That would have been deserving of a prize! Oh well.

Edited by Scubabuddha
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Soon you can see the video on demand of the announcement, and get the answer as to why he got it.

So far, the committee are quoted: "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples".

Also, I see a lot of reference to "his vision of and work towards a world without nuclear weapons".

And from my own perspective, regarding the comments about the ongoing wars - well, he didn't start those wars. That was the former guy.

Best/T

Mr. Nixon did not either start the Vietnam War. That was some former guy too, Mr. Kennedy.

A significant technical point I'm not gonna spend a lot of time on--JFK opposed initiating a theater war in Vietnam, preferring a far lesser support role of sending 1,000 US military advisors to S Vietnam. Prez Johnson sent the first combat units per se to Vietnam. Kennedy didn't need an act of Congress to send advisors; Johnson's comittment was of such a scale--500,000 troops--he needed the approval of the Senate (and got it). Kennedy was right and Kennedy also was assassinated, clearing the way for Johnson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Soon you can see the video on demand of the announcement, and get the answer as to why he got it.

So far, the committee are quoted: "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples".

Also, I see a lot of reference to "his vision of and work towards a world without nuclear weapons".

And from my own perspective, regarding the comments about the ongoing wars - well, he didn't start those wars. That was the former guy.

Best/T

Mr. Nixon did not either start the Vietnam War. That was some former guy too, Mr. Kennedy.

A significant technical point I'm not gonna spend a lot of time on--JFK opposed initiating a theater war in Vietnam, preferring a far lesser support role of sending 1,000 US military advisors to S Vietnam. Prez Johnson sent the first combat units per se to Vietnam. Kennedy didn't need an act of Congress to send advisors; Johnson's comittment was of such a scale--500,000 troops--he needed the approval of the Senate (and got it). Kennedy was right and Kennedy also was assassinated, clearing the way for Johnson.

IMHO Mr. Johnson belonged to the same Party as Mr. Kennedy and Mr. Obama.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Soon you can see the video on demand of the announcement, and get the answer as to why he got it.

So far, the committee are quoted: "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples".

Also, I see a lot of reference to "his vision of and work towards a world without nuclear weapons".

And from my own perspective, regarding the comments about the ongoing wars - well, he didn't start those wars. That was the former guy.

Best/T

Ditto.

They are getting out of Iran in a measured fashion.

And add that allowing the Taliban to retake Afganistan,

aggressively disseminate the worlds greatest stock of opium,

and get close to taking over Pakistan and it's nuclear arsenal

would in no way be furthering the route to a more peaceful world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.










×
×
  • Create New...