User Tag List

First 3456 Last

Results 41 to 50 of 52

  1. #41
    mountain surfing nomadic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Posts
    1,709

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    And it wasn't awarded to Obama because him being voted in to end the Bush era...
    How do you know that? Its obviously not their "official" reason, but their "official" reason doesn't make sense. So how do u know thats not the real reason? You don't. Thats the thing. You don't know.

  2. #42
    Senior Member Ethereal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    104

    Default

    Obama has been in office for longer than the "overnight" duration. He's had chances to end the Patriot Act, warrentless wire-tapping on American citizens, and there's been plenty of time to start on an Iraq withdrawal. Instead, he expands the Patriot Act and wire-tapping, and consistently pushes back any plans for Iraq.

    Furthermore, he's even used Bush rhetoric and scare tactics (During the campaign he was a strong advocate for net neutrality, but then in his announcement for the creation of the cyber security act, he actually used the words "weapons of mass disruption" while hearkening to popular images of terrorists)

    And lets not forget that all this legislation was brought about in response to 9/11. Lets also not forget that the official investigation began 5 years after the actual event, and that this investigation was full of holes and cover ups (9/11 Panel Suspected Deception by Pentagon - washingtonpost.com). Plenty of evidence has come out by now showing that the government enabled 9/11 to happen through negligence and incompetence.

    Yet, after the event there was no house cleaning, and the same officials who couldn't even see it coming then created the programs to prevent another one. These programs have been used against the American people plenty of times, and it is these programs that Obama continues, even though he has had ample time to confront them.

    People should be awarded for what they have done, not what they might do...

  3. #43
    Senior Member Ethereal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    104

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nomadic View Post
    How do you know that? Its obviously not their "official" reason, but their "official" reason doesn't make sense. So how do u know thats not the real reason? You don't. Thats the thing. You don't know.
    Winners of the Nobel Peace Prize

    List of Nobel Peace Prize laureates - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    The Nobel Peace Prize 2009 - Press Release

    Plenty of the Laurettes don't make sense. I do not know the official reason. However the prize was given to Obama and not the American people. The prize has been given to organizations as well as people plenty of times, even the UN has received it. And besides, you take my purpose out of context. For whatever reason they gave him the peace prize, he has promoted war and the policies of his predecessor. My point is in hypocrisy.

    And if the real reason was to award a country for voting someone out, then the other nominees would have been more plausible. Then again, the committee has had some poor choices in laureates, so who knows what they're thinking...

  4. #44
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    976

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by visaisahero View Post
    Here's an excerpt from the will of Alfred Nobel himself.

    "The whole of my remaining realizable estate shall be dealt with in the following way: the capital, invested in safe securities by my executors, shall constitute a fund, the interest on which shall be annually distributed in the form of prizes to those who, during the preceding year, shall have conferred the greatest benefit on mankind. The said interest shall be divided into five equal parts, which shall be apportioned as follows: one part to the person who shall have made the most important discovery or invention within the field of physics; one part to the person who shall have made the most important chemical discovery or improvement; one part to the person who shall have made the most important discovery within the domain of physiology or medicine; one part to the person who shall have produced in the field of literature the most outstanding work in an ideal direction; and one part to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses. The prizes for physics and chemistry shall be awarded by the Swedish Academy of Sciences; that for physiology or medical works by the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm; that for literature by the Academy in Stockholm, and that for champions of peace by a committee of five persons to be elected by the Norwegian Storting. It is my express wish that in awarding the prizes no consideration be given to the nationality of the candidates, but that the most worthy shall receive the prize, whether he be Scandinavian or not."

    I must acknowledge that upon reading what Alfred Nobel himself intended, it certainly seems like Obama isn't a deserving recipient of the prize at this point in time.
    Are you suggesting that having the CIA send drones into Pakistani airspace to drop bombs on Pakistani civilians in an undeclared, unacknowledged war is, like, not a good thing?

  5. #45
    mountain surfing nomadic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Posts
    1,709

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Plenty of the Laurettes don't make sense. I do not know the official reason. However the prize was given to Obama and not the American people.
    Well, yeah, I think its something other than their "official reason" too. I still think it is the relief from "Agitation without Representation" that the world felt.

    Well, by all means, I think the only reason that Obama didn't do what you wanted yet is because he doesn't want to be assassinated. He has to live in some amount of self preservation too you know.

  6. #46
    Senior Member Ethereal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    104

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nomadic View Post
    Well, yeah, I think its something other than their "official reason" too. I still think it is the relief from "Agitation without Representation" that the world felt.

    Well, by all means, I think the only reason that Obama didn't do what you wanted yet is because he doesn't want to be assassinated. He has to live in some amount of self preservation too you know.
    Take a look into his cabinet. It is filled with lobbyists from all sides, including weapons companies and bankers (Timothy Giethner was head of the NY Federal Reserve, and now he is secretary of the treasury, any coincidence Obama is a strong supporter of the Federal Reserve). This is the same thing Bush did with his staff. One of the changes Obama promised was that he would not hire lobbyists into his staff, which he had already failed to do even before he took office. There was much evidence from the start that Obama would follow in the footsteps of his predecessor.

    Also bear in mind that there is very little empirical evidence to support your claim. Even if what you are saying is true, it is far more likely that it was not the main reason but rather a factor. If that is the case, then there are many other factors, which have already been mentioned in this thread, that would list much higher than "agitation without representation". Even so, Obama is still agitating the world.

    And for whatever reason the Nobel committee awarded Obama with a peace prize, they still awarded it to a war-hawk, with war-hawks working under him (Hillary Clinton) and advising him (Zbigniew Brzezinski), and pretty much took a page out of George Orwell's book...

  7. #47
    Senior Member Ethereal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    104

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fecal McAngry View Post
    Are you suggesting that having the CIA send drones into Pakistani airspace to drop bombs on Pakistani civilians in an undeclared, unacknowledged war is, like, not a good thing?
    Where is Mordor?

  8. #48
    mountain surfing nomadic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Posts
    1,709

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Take a look into his cabinet. It is filled with lobbyists from all sides, including weapons companies and bankers (Timothy Giethner was head of the NY Federal Reserve, and now he is secretary of the treasury, any coincidence Obama is a strong supporter of the Federal Reserve). This is the same thing Bush did with his staff. One of the changes Obama promised was that he would not hire lobbyists into his staff, which he had already failed to do even before he took office. There was much evidence from the start that Obama would follow in the footsteps of his predecessor.
    I have no idea what you are talking about at this point. Timothy Giethner is a war monger now?

    Central bankers, treasury officials have zero influence on foreign policy. Monetary policy meant to be independent from the rest of the government.

    Anyways, youre entitled to your opinion. I don't think Obama is a war hawk. Just a realist with the situation he was handed.

  9. #49
    Senior Member Ethereal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    104

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nomadic View Post
    I have no idea what you are talking about at this point. Timothy Giethner is a war monger now?

    Central bankers, treasury officials have zero influence on foreign policy. Monetary policy meant to be independent from the rest of the government.

    Anyways, youre entitled to your opinion. I don't think Obama is a war hawk. Just a realist with the situation he was handed.
    Thank you for acknowledging that we have entitlements to our own opinions, so I shall clarify mine. I wasn't very clear before. I mentioned Timothy Giethner and the Fed to illustrate a point. Right now, the Fed's strongest supporter is the Obama administration. Obama has former Fed and bank lobbyists in his administration, and he is supporting the Fed and the bank bailouts while the American people want it audited or abolished (317 representatives and growing are sponsoring this bill. This number crosses party lines and is a result of grass-roots activism). It is to illustrate a point, that Obama is a supporter of the firms and institutions that his staff used to work in and not the American people.

    On the campaign trail he also promised not to hire lobbyists or others with such conflicted loyalties. This much he failed before even taking office, and thus his integrity compromised before he even started.

    Furthermore, if Obama really was a realist and the wars were truly so difficult to pull out of, then what he is doing now is not reflecting it. The very least he could do is contain the wars and steadily shrink them to stop the bleeding. Instead, he rapidly expands them in ways not even Bush did.

    My main angst is that Obama was pushed as the "peace" candidate during the election, and now he furthers the policies of his predecessor, and people are overlooking that (partly because health-care reform is being pushed as the current big-issue) and often automatically assume that he is being responsible. The Peace Prize exacerbates this assumption. It is also a disgrace upon the prize. It used to mean something, people being awarded for promoting peace, then it became people being awarded for doing things, now its people being awarded for nothing. Now its more a political boon than an award...

  10. #50
    mountain surfing nomadic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Posts
    1,709

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Thank you for acknowledging that we have entitlements to our own opinions, so I shall clarify mine. I wasn't very clear before. I mentioned Timothy Giethner and the Fed to illustrate a point. Right now, the Fed's strongest supporter is the Obama administration. Obama has former Fed and bank lobbyists in his administration, and he is supporting the Fed and the bank bailouts while the American people want it audited or abolished (317 representatives and growing are sponsoring this bill. This number crosses party lines and is a result of grass-roots activism). It is to illustrate a point, that Obama is a supporter of the firms and institutions that his staff used to work in and not the American people.
    The mortgage crisis bailout was passed before the election. It was actually passed under the last Treasury secretary, Hank Paulson. I thought it was a good idea at the time. A lot of the money is being paid back at this point, but I disagree that only the bank executives are guilty of hiding risk in their portfolios and helping cause a systemic risk. (I think a lot of them should go to prison) People who took out mortgages that are now underwater are also guilty. Every other country has severe punishments for people walking away from mortgages, except the United States. Its kind of crazy, but oh wells. I think its stupid to have a mortgage for anyone who puts down less than 15-20% down payment. That should just be against the law.


    My main angst is that Obama was pushed as the "peace" candidate during the election, and now he furthers the policies of his predecessor, and people are overlooking that (partly because health-care reform is being pushed as the current big-issue) and often automatically assume that he is being responsible. The Peace Prize exacerbates this assumption. It is also a disgrace upon the prize. It used to mean something, people being awarded for promoting peace, then it became people being awarded for doing things, now its people being awarded for nothing. Now its more a political boon than an award...
    I think its normal to mix up Iraq with Afghtanistan. Thats how the mass got stupified into going into Iraq in the first place. So its normal to mix up pulling out of Iraq, with pulling out of Afghanistan going the other way. I never expect the American "mass mentality" to be able to look into an issue thoroughly. So I understand why you would be mad. Its no different than being stupified into going into Iraq when Osama is probably chilling anywhere but Afghanistan or Iraq.

Similar Threads

  1. Nobel Peace Prize for Malala
    By Bilateral Entry in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-14-2012, 02:55 PM
  2. Nobel peace price 2012 goes to the EU
    By entropie in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 10-18-2012, 01:04 AM
  3. Obama wins Nobel Peace prize...
    By Magic Poriferan in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 127
    Last Post: 10-19-2009, 03:20 PM
  4. Was it “politically expedient” for Obama to “accept” the Nobel Peace Prize
    By Vizconde in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 169
    Last Post: 10-13-2009, 05:28 PM
  5. Nobel Peace Prize: A world sigh of relief?
    By coberst in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 10-11-2009, 02:11 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO