Dude i should get a noble peace prize cos i did exactly what he did. Not a fucking thing. Hostly has he done anything in power of great significance??? Clinton done more work out of presidency for the Palestine/Israel issue then what he has done. Fucking joke that noble prize now. That being said i would love to see W.Bush get one.
President Obama Awarded Nobel Peace Prize
- Thread starter ZeeClone
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I'm sorry but this is bullshit.
I like Obama, would of voted for him if i were American.
But he hasn't done ANYTHING to earn this grand award.
--
I'm sorry but this is bullshit.
I like Obama, would of voted for him if i were American.
But he hasn't done ANYTHING to earn this grand award.
I like Obama, would of voted for him if i were American.
But he hasn't done ANYTHING to earn this grand award.
Ah yes... because we have had several nuclear wars haven't we? Oh wait! I wouldn't call nuclear disarmament a step towards peace- as we've barely ever used them. But this is getting off topic apologies...Trivun said:
--
I'm sorry but this is bullshit.
I like Obama, would of voted for him if i were American.
But he hasn't done ANYTHING to earn this grand award.
Thank You.stabnex said:
God, there's so much dislike here. Do any of you protesting about this really know what he's done, hmm? You've only know what the media has told you. The fact is, even if all he has done is spread the notion of diplomacy before conflict [footnote]A radical move for a U.S. President, it would seem.[/footnote], When America Talks, People Listen.
King- Besides being hardly perfect and having a tiny messiah complex, king only really helped Black Americans. Europe was miles ahead of the Southern states when it came to tolerance, or so I've been taught. Please feel free to correct me, I'm typing all of this with the utmost sincerity.Anacortian said:
Mother Teresa- She opened a few convents (Which she then, admirably, worked in.) and spread the idea of, "Hey, let's try being nice for a change.". Obama's spreading the same idea, and more to the same tune, what makes him less deserving?
Gandhi- From what I understand, he just championed the Indian majority in peaceful protest against the British occupiers at the time. His approach to it was visionary, but take away his words and he is nothing.
Words do have immense power. Just think about how many ancient quotes still reign pertinent in the modern age. Simple little words, that hold a big meaning.
I mean, God, every holy text is just a bunch of words, and look how much change they inspired.
But I digress to re-iterate, no-one here knows the whole picture- what goes on behind the scenes. There's likely more being influenced here than we know, and, besides, we don't know who else was nominated.
Hah. Awesome.ddq5 said:
"Name one country that has taxed itself out of debt."
Obama could learn something from Ben Franklin. So could anyone who thinks raising taxes to pay poor people will make them get jobs... I mean, the less money job-makers and business-owners have, the less they can put toward making new fucking jobs.
I mean, we've seen with some 'hands-off government' presidents have helped put the country in deep shit, but how could you think raising taxes will help? If businesses don't have money, no new places to work are made. Less jobs. The companies will make fewer products. They will get less money, yet still be taxed. They are shoved into the ground. One less company. Thousands fewer jobs.
And, if you get paid because you aren't working, you will find no reason to work. It's like Gilbert Munch said, once you have a way to get free games, it's hard to justify paying for them. Once you get paid because you aren't working, it's hard to justify working if you can get free money. Wellfare is just stupid.
There's my two cents, not that it's relevant. But I needed a rant.
Obama could learn something from Ben Franklin. So could anyone who thinks raising taxes to pay poor people will make them get jobs... I mean, the less money job-makers and business-owners have, the less they can put toward making new fucking jobs.
I mean, we've seen with some 'hands-off government' presidents have helped put the country in deep shit, but how could you think raising taxes will help? If businesses don't have money, no new places to work are made. Less jobs. The companies will make fewer products. They will get less money, yet still be taxed. They are shoved into the ground. One less company. Thousands fewer jobs.
And, if you get paid because you aren't working, you will find no reason to work. It's like Gilbert Munch said, once you have a way to get free games, it's hard to justify paying for them. Once you get paid because you aren't working, it's hard to justify working if you can get free money. Wellfare is just stupid.
There's my two cents, not that it's relevant. But I needed a rant.
You mean because he doesn't deserve it?Anacortian said:
I mean, I even sort of like Bush, but the man just doesn't deserve it. And, I'm not sure what Obama did to deserve it, but I'm sure it's more than Bush did.
But if he had deserved it, let's say not put us into the war and achieved peace over there, I'm sure they would 'have the same cow.'
I really must get off this thread...
About 70% of the Yanks are waiting for the troops to come home or go to Afghanistan, where we should have been in the first place. So you Europeans aren't alone in that endeavor.TacticalAssassin1 said:
The hardest part for Obama to remove troops from Iraq is that the entrenched Republicans then go on a retarded honking spree that drowns out addressing more important things in Congress.
On the same note, the morons who keep saying that we or Obama's PR people are responsible for Obama's Nobel Peace Prize should probably look at who actually awards these things. It's a Norwegian panel that includes a few European representatives. Obama even said he's kinda confused as to why they awarded it to him.
I also don't think he deserves it yet either, but I'm sorta loving it that it's pissing off the Republicans and the right in this country. It proves that it doesn't take much reversal of the wrongheaded direction the previous administration had for diplomacy to make someone seem more impressive than they really are.
.........????stinkychops said:
I have to say 'huh?' to this, and it makes zero sense. If no-one fight INCLUDING Hitler, then I can see is possiblity working. But even then, there'd probably be alot of dead or exspelt jews regardless.
The appeasement policy, whereby the western democracies continuously gave into Hitler only wetted his desire for conquest, and in the case of the USSR, they were defending themselves (the USSR that is) from extermination, given the Germans were wiping out whole villages, towns, and even cities in their wake.
I'm pretty sure that he didn't do anything to deserve this... people act like he's Jesus or something. He's just the president guys. He's no better than any other president we've had.
I'll throw this thought out there for better or worse. The committee may have contemplated the impact on the President's efforts if they bestowed the award upon him. In other words, they were probably keenly aware of the fact that other candidates may have contributed more to peaceful causes and even have more to show for their efforts, but they may have said amongst themselves that presenting this award to Obama would give him more clout in his pursuit of certain iniatives and that in the long term, that would be beneficial for all.
I'm on the bench of "huh?". Honest once a week I'd hear at least one note on all the previous 2 pressies before him but Obama... I hear like twice a month get mentioned. I don't even recall his commitments he swore he'd make in his election campainge except that prison he mentioned like 50+ times. I hate to say it, but I miss old Bill, I'm not an American (Brittish Monarch), but he was MY president and he seemed (and still is) in the media reglaurly.
I hate to say it, but there have been people who have done more for peace, this is something that should have been awarded near the end of his career, not now. Who knows, maybe he'll start WW3 next week for all they know. To me, a leader doesn't earn a right to be awarded anything until at least their 2nd year, by then people have seen how they've handled things. :-/
I hate to say it, but there have been people who have done more for peace, this is something that should have been awarded near the end of his career, not now. Who knows, maybe he'll start WW3 next week for all they know. To me, a leader doesn't earn a right to be awarded anything until at least their 2nd year, by then people have seen how they've handled things. :-/
I think a man who launched 2 wars, one probably against international law, pissed off the Russians by ordering that anti-ICBM base built close to their borders, and generally treated the rest of the world as somewhere to crap on, I don't see how Bush could EVER have been given a Nobel prize for peace. Aside from the possiblity of him pointing the US army at Norway and saying 'give me a Nobel prize, or your against us and with the terrorists!'lwm3398 said:
