Obama Awarded 2009 Nobel Peace Prize.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jiro said:
lemme guess - got it off from a right-wing source which most likely preached about encouraging people to kill Obama or overthrow White House?
Click to expand...

Aren't we supposed to cite when we use another person's ideas?
 
Jiro said:
lemme guess - got it off from a right-wing source which most likely preached about encouraging people to kill Obama or overthrow White House?
Click to expand...

Oh the irony is strong if that's the case here.
 
Reba said:
According to his bio he does have authority, and he's been very active, not just philosophizing:


A Brief Biography
Click to expand...

the authority that was easily ignored by the Chinese government. That's why the Chinese troops gunned down monks. He was powerless to stop it. That's why he sought for safety in India.
 
kokonut said:
Reba,

Wouldn't Obama's own "philosophizing" (i.e. campaign promises) be more apt in the Nobel Literature Prize then?
Click to expand...
No, because Obama didn't act upon them during the period in question.

As you can see by the Dalai Lama's bio, he was very active prior to being selected for the Nobel Peace Prize.
 
kokonut said:
He didn't do any of that in his first 12 days. In fact, during his 2008 campaign he derided Bush for not sending in enough troops in Afghanistan. Sure doesn't sound like he was for the "abolition or reduction of standing armies."
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/14/us/politics/14campaign.html

He couldn't have done "work for fraternity between nations" in his first 12 days. So, that nixes it. And certainly did not hold any peace congresses in his first 12 days either.

Looks like a bust to me.
Click to expand...

kokonut said:
But Obama went after Bush during his 2008 campaigning for not increasing enough troops in Afghanistan. This means he supported additional troop level increase which goes against the idea of any peace philosophy for the Nobel Peace Prize.
Click to expand...

interesting that you're attempting to print this as "sending more troops to Afghanistan means to kill more people"

No, kokonut.... looks like you haven't been reading news. Obama wanted to send more troops to Afghanistan to secure the PEACE, not to kill more people. In case you forget, since he became the President, he changed the military directive for Afghanistan. Bush's policy was to score points - the elimination of targets and Al Queda terrorists. That provided no viable result with end at sight for Afghanistan's future.

How can Afghanistan achieve security and stability if Afghanistan does not have any infrastructure to begin with? That infrastructure was continually attacked and bombed by Talibans to prevent Afghanistan from achieving self-sufficiency aka "democracy" to be governed by "the people." More American troops are needed to secure local towns, training camps (Afghan police/troop), commerce markets, and the local people. Talibans did not want that.
 
Reba said:
No, because Obama didn't act upon them during the period in question.

As you can see by the Dalai Lama's bio, he was very active prior to being selected for the Nobel Peace Prize.
Click to expand...

We can see that the Dalai Lama was very active in his role. Just like Mother Terresa on her decades of service to help others. But I don't see any reason for Obama's nomination. It was just mostly talk, plus skipping most of his senatorial duties for almost two years.
 
Reba said:
No, because Obama didn't act upon them during the period in question.

As you can see by the Dalai Lama's bio, he was very active prior to being selected for the Nobel Peace Prize.
Click to expand...

doesn't Obama's activity with ACORN count? :giggle: I joke

Let's see.... *opening Obama file*

in his past... Obama went to Columbia University to major in political science - to be specific - an international relations and also went to Harvard law school... where he was the editor and president of Harvard Law Review. He worked for Business International Corporation, New York Public Interest Research Group, Public Allies, Developing Communities Project, etc. etc. (all related to fighting for "the people"). His Chicago job was impressive for a community leader... did a stint as professor of Chicago law school. and he became Illinois legislator... and then Senator.

That's pretty active enough for me, don't you agree?
 
Reba said:
No, because Obama didn't act upon them during the period in question.

As you can see by the Dalai Lama's bio, he was very active prior to being selected for the Nobel Peace Prize.
Click to expand...

Active in submitting proposals. Same as Obama.
 
Jiro said:
interesting that you're attempting to print this as "sending more troops to Afghanistan means to kill more people"

No, kokonut.... looks like you haven't been reading news. Obama wanted to send more troops to Afghanistan to secure the PEACE, not to kill more people. In case you forget, since he became the President, he changed the military directive for Afghanistan. Bush's policy was to score points - the elimination of targets and Al Queda terrorists. That provided no viable result with end at sight for Afghanistan's future.

How can Afghanistan achieve security and stability if Afghanistan does not have any infrastructure to begin with? That infrastructure was continually attacked and bombed by Talibans to prevent Afghanistan from achieving self-sufficiency aka "democracy" to be governed by "the people." More American troops are needed to secure local towns, training camps (Afghan police/troop), commerce markets, and the local people. Talibans did not want that.
Click to expand...

But Obama *hasn't* sent any additional troops to "secure the peace." In fact, his indecisiveness is creating greater and greater instability in Afghanistan by ignoring the Generals request for more troops. But here's the conundrum, the NPP doesn't doesn't say for the increase of troops but rather "for the abolition or reduction of standing armies." Conundrums upon conundrums here on exactly what qualifies Obama for the nomination.
 
kokonut said:
So, Obama didn't break any of his campaign promises as the source of his nomination during his 2007 and 2008 campaigning?
Click to expand...

Still a fallicious comparison. Do you need me to explain what a fallicious comparison is?
 
kokonut said:
But Obama *hasn't* sent any additional troops to "secure the peace." In fact, his indecisiveness is creating greater and greater instability in Afghanistan by ignoring the Generals request for more troops. But here's the conundrum, the NPP doesn't doesn't say for the increase of troops but rather "for the abolition or reduction of standing armies." Conundrums upon conundrums here on exactly what qualifies Obama for the nomination.
Click to expand...

The award didn't have anything to do with Afghanistan. Please read what the committee had to say.
 
kokonut - you have not answered my question. I repost -

kokonut said:
Which only begets more question as to why the NPP committee picked Obama if he didn't even meet three of Nobel's requirements.
Click to expand...

and what are those 3 requirements you speak of?
 
Jiro said:
doesn't Obama's activity with ACORN count? :giggle: I joke

Let's see.... *opening Obama file*

in his past... Obama went to Columbia University to major in political science - to be specific - an international relations and also went to Harvard law school... where he was the editor and president of Harvard Law Review. He worked for Business International Corporation, New York Public Interest Research Group, Public Allies, Developing Communities Project, etc. etc. (all related to fighting for "the people"). His Chicago job was impressive for a community leader... did a stint as professor of Chicago law school. and he became Illinois legislator... and then Senator.

That's pretty active enough for me, don't you agree?
Click to expand...

So, a nomination is predicated also on local works and good deeds in the United States that has nothing to do with at the international level?
 
kokonut said:
But Obama *hasn't* sent any additional troops to "secure the peace." In fact, his indecisiveness is creating greater and greater instability in Afghanistan by ignoring the Generals request for more troops. But here's the conundrum, the NPP doesn't doesn't say for the increase of troops but rather "for the abolition or reduction of standing armies." Conundrums upon conundrums here on exactly what qualifies Obama for the nomination.
Click to expand...

uh how? Obama wasn't the President at that time of Nobel Peace Prize nomination. and even while he was barely the President for 12 days, he didn't touch Afghanistan issue until much later.

grasping for straw there, si? it's ok... it's ok... get all of your anger out. :grouphug:
 
kokonut said:
So, a nomination is predicated also on local works and good deeds in the United States that has nothing to do with at the international level?
Click to expand...

perhaps you might want to read his books. It has answers to your questions.
 
Jiro said:
kokonut - you have not answered my question. I repost -

and what are those 3 requirements you speak of?
Click to expand...

Please see your own post in #157 that you put it in quote. You didn't read it??
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top