Nobel Prize for Peace to ... Barack Obama

......................... giving the Nobel Prize for Peace to an American President....

I thought I've seen everything

its a first step and every first step is a bit naive

They could have waited a few years more. He hasn't had time to do much yet.

He got it because he wasnt a republican right wing manic and europe needs to have closer ties with the usa. What has he done well not a lot,he's stopped the us army attacking more soverign countries without un securty council permission i suppose thats a step forward since its their fav pass time,but hey iran better get worried !

I am not Anti-Obama in fact I voted for him. But I think he hasn't done enough to warrant a nobel peace prize.

----=+=---- ----=+=---- ----=+=---- ----=+=----
Note: This turned into a big post, so I made a summary for quicker reading near the bottom of my post.
----=+=---- ----=+=---- ----=+=---- ----=+=----

I will just for now say I think this is BS, since I do not believe he has done anything at all too deserve it. Now if he somehow got everyone too get rid off their nuclear arsenals then I would be impressed. If anyone can have an opinion then mine stands too.. I think he is tricking everyone (along with his admin being in on it) into believing that he is this peace lover or some sort of great guy. Well I don't know where you all get your news, but the USA's war efforts are not very diminished at all and it is not planned for them too be. We WILL stay in Iraq, we will occupy Afghanistan and Pakistan, and we will backup Israel when they attack Iran. All it takes apparently is more then 2 layers of digging and you find out that a lot of lies float too the top and the truth sinks down in this media sinkhole filled with toxic fluids.

OFC I know that I am supposed too give it more time.. well I disagree, when you discover things your supposed too act on them and investigate. I would hope that if this whole globalization thing does lead too some sort of a horrific future (in perspective ofc), that we don't yet again forget the deeper lessons and let it happen after that.. if it is actually something which will end.. with the potential of making something new.

If you think this is off topic I don't see how. (preemptive)

I know most of you don't live in the USA so I will forgive you, but what exactly does the UN in any form have anything AT ALL too do with how the USA is operating? IT IS A FOREIGN BODY, it has NO reach onto the USA... Now for some reason SOME people believe that the USA is up for grabs. I as a citizen of it, do not believe so. I as a citizen, think that the USA will be forced into agreeing too end its constitution or radically alter it, in order too join with the NAU.. (similar too EU) Now I do not understand why it is so hard too understand 2 parties being controlled by same group? Another topic for that ofc but just wanted too finish it off with that.

I seriously thought this was a joke post btw, I didn't really believe it at first.. but I can totally understand why now. Al Gore got a NPP and he is a POS if you ask me, so Obama getting one doesn't make me shrug anymore. Some sort of a BS is what it is m8s, stop buying into the BS and jump out of the multiple boxes they have put you all in.. just don't go insane doing it! lol

Oh and can someone get their NPP revoked? I mean if they prove too be obviously against peace.. ofc peace is subject to perception, same as evil, good, justice, honor, all sorts of things are subject too perception and we some how are oft too forget this. It is like someone saying, "I will bring peace too the middle east." They could easily mean killing everyone, putting in regimes, constant policing.. So someone getting a NPP right now means nothing too me.. Besides didn't they give it too a Eugenicist at least once? Sure would be peaceful without some people and with some people not being able to reproduce and maybe be separated from the rest. Yet for some reason I don't want too agree too the slaughter or slow kill of billions of people.

Sorry for parts being off topic.. I suppose I may edit it.. would be in space but getting E12 for some reason going too try some fixes tonight.

If you don't want too read all that then here is the summary.

----=+=---- ~~~~ (SUMMARY BELOW)~~~ ----=+=----

Obama getting this NPP to me is BS and I put it in a spot near Al Gore getting his.

I thought it was a joke at first and now just slightly more disgusted then I was before learning it was real.

Obama doesn't deserve it unless you have some warped idea of peace and peace is subject too perception anyway. Nothing he has done really calls for him even being in the thoughts of those deciding... whoever they are, I don't really know right now.

What does the UN have anything too do with what the USA does? The GOV here is what has say.. I guess the idea that the UN has the say is some sort of brainwashed idea. The congress has the say of war m8s.

People are believing a lie and will continue too do so until maybe 40 years on down the road? hehe ok maybe 20 years, less if "they" slip up a lot. but don't hold your breathe.

Seriously wake up mateys!

~~(end of summary)~~

There.. now you can read the bigger part or the shorter summary of my post, maybe better then me spending time editing my post. Spend more time fixing my problem [E12] which I think I know what it is. Anyway, enough for now, enjoy and I hope too see ye pilots in space!

I woulp prefer the Peace prize to go to .......someone who has accomplished something

I was confused by this choice at first as well... On the record, it is said that President Obama received the prize "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples." For my part, I can think of a few things the American President has done in terms of foreign affairs that may merit this.

For starters, in the words of the New Zealand Herald, "Not being George Bush was a good start. For Bush represented an arrogant, belligerent, unilateralist style of American foreign policy which served the world ill. Obama arrived with a heart for peace and an openness of mind to other nations which was in itself a huge transformation." President Obama has shifted U.S. diplomatic efforts in a more multilateral direction and is not so dismissive of the UN.

Talks with Russia regarding nuclear disarmament are to continue after years of rebuilding Cold War tension. The President backed away from prior plans to build an ABM system in Eastern Europe (which had been prompting Russia to deploy mobile launchers on its borders). Relations have been lackluster, especially following efforts to incorporate former Soviet republics into NATO and condemnation of its actions in Georgia (which remains a conflict more complex than it appears). The new and more amiable approach may even get Moscow to become more cooperative with American efforts to put pressure on Iran over its nuclear program.

The President has also been addressing anti-Western sentiment in the Middle East to some extent. While a speech about Islam and recent diplomatic efforts don't seem to amount to much, he has been inspiring a lot of people around the world. It could be argued that he is more popular abroad than he is here in the United States. While this is certainly no clean break with outmoded, 20th century realpolitik, President Obama does in a way take a step away from it. The Noble Peace Prize is about promoting good relations between nations, pursuit of peaceful resolutions to conflicts, and the reduction of armed forces. Perhaps he didn't deserve it - in his speech today the President himself suggested this - but to be honest I cannot think of someone else who has had a greater impact in the past year.

Other American recipients going back to 1950 include: Al Gore; Jimmy Carter; Jody Williams; Elie Wiesel; Henry Kissinger; Norman Borlaug; Martin Luther King, Jr.; Linus Pauling; George Marshall; Albert Schweitzer; and Ralph Bunche. The other candidates for this year's prize will not be disclosed until 2059, so if anyone wants to know who else was being considered they'll have to wait.

Edit:

Quote

Originally posted by Spiky-
......................... giving the Nobel Prize for Peace to an American President....
I thought I've seen everything

It was also given to Presidents Jimmy Carter, Theodore Roosevelt, and Woodrow Wilson.

Quote

Originally posted by SMG_Diablo
Interesting how most of the Nobel prizes given so far have gone to the people we have never heard of before the prizes and never heard of after the prizes were given (there are a few exceptions) - not just with the Nobel Peace Prizes

Ya I almost never recognize the names of Nobel prize recipients.

Quote

Originally posted by HALDIR
He got it because he wasnt a republican right wing manic and europe needs to have closer ties with the usa. What has he done well not a lot,he's stopped the us army attacking more soverign countries without un securty council permission i suppose thats a step forward since its their fav pass time,but hey iran better get worried !

I agree at least with what you say about the U.S. needing to be closer to Europe. In the coming century the world is going to be increasingly interdependent. Isolation and fierce nationalism are no longer in peoples interests. Good relations and free trade make war between nations less likely. While globalization remains controversial, globalism itself may not be such a sticky goal for the world to be eyeing in the long-run. After all, the U.S. cannot remain the worlds superpower forever. The pre-Cold War, multipolar arrangement will eventually return and promote stability and balance between nations. In the meanwhile, it would be nice if my country would resist its occasional urge to behave like a rogue state (and I say that with all due fondness and respect ^^).

Quote

Originally posted by I am D
I will just for now say I think this is BS, since I do not believe he has done anything at all too deserve it. Now if he somehow got everyone too get rid off their nuclear arsenals then I would be impressed. If anyone can have an opinion then mine stands too.. I think he is tricking everyone (along with his admin being in on it) into believing that he is this peace lover or some sort of great guy. Well I don't know where you all get your news, but the USA's war efforts are not very diminished at all and it is not planned for them too be. We WILL stay in Iraq, we will occupy Afghanistan and Pakistan, and we will backup Israel when they attack Iran. All it takes apparently is more then 2 layers of digging and you find out that a lot of lies float too the top and the truth sinks down in this media sinkhole filled with toxic fluids.

You raise a good point, but I think what has happened here is naïveté. The President believed that he could come into office his first week and easily find a way to end both wars. I imagine he has gotten acquainted with the hard truths and has decided to be pragmatic rather than stick to his campaigns idealism on the matter. I, too, have very mixed feelings about that decision. As for Israel and Iran... they are both nice countries but the world would be a safer place is neither had nuclear capability. Irans government has suggested it may use nuclear weapons against Israel. Israel, meanwhile, has a nuclear arsenal in storage and the West turns a blind eye as it behaves just as immorally (albeit in different ways).

Quote

Originally posted by I am D
I know most of you don't live in the USA so I will forgive you, but what exactly does the UN in any form have anything AT ALL too do with how the USA is operating? IT IS A FOREIGN BODY, it has NO reach onto the USA... Now for some reason SOME people believe that the USA is up for grabs. I as a citizen of it, do not believe so. I as a citizen, think that the USA will be forced into agreeing too end its constitution or radically alter it, in order too join with the NAU.. (similar too EU) Now I do not understand why it is so hard too understand 2 parties being controlled by same group? Another topic for that ofc but just wanted too finish it off with that.

The UN is flawed and in many ways undemocratic. That having been said, nationalism is a plague set upon humanity by itself. When it comes to matters of global interest, some decisions are a lot more important than national sovereignty. As for the North American Union, that was more than anything a popular conspiracy theory during the Clinton administration. It was intended to scare voters about international trade (especially NAFTA). That having been said, I would welcome such an arrangement. For a variety of reasons Mexico would not fit into such a union anywhere nearly as well as Canada, but still why would a NAU be a bad thing? Why are so many convinced that international dealings are a zero-sum game? I might be mislead, D, but its an interesting subject though either way.

Quote

Originally posted by I am D
The congress has the say of war m8s.[/i]

And yet Congress hasnt exactly been approving all the wars, has it? It could technically withdraw funding, but itd be political suicide (on roughly the same scale of campaigning on I pledge here today that I shall, if elected, raise your taxes while rolling back retirement benefits for seniors!).

Just a few thoughts. Hehehe

The award shows that Obama is nothing but a sock puppet for the left wing.

Quote

Originally posted by burro
The award shows that Obama is nothing but a sock puppet for the left wing.

Maybe, but I see the President as moving towards the centre with policy (yet losing it to the reorganizing right-wing). What ever happened to no more wars in the Middle East? He won't even set a time-table for withdraw in Afghanistan while considering to send more troops. Maybe he'd back single-payer health insurance like the rest of the developed world has? Nah - he immediately leapt to a compromise, and when the GOP balked he let Baucus have a swing at it (whose proposal was so conservative and lobbied by insurance companies that I might not vote for re-electing him to the Senate next time). I don't see gays' civil rights being advanced. Or a hard enough turnaround on U.S. environmental policy. Expansion of welfare? Abolishing the death penalty? What about labor unions? Hell - he hasn't even done anything yet to restore proper regulation to the economy (not that he's had a whole lot of time yet). That isn't to say he isn't a very "liberal" individual, but he's certainly no social democrat of the flavor found in Canada or overseas. The President is trying to play things smart. He needs the support of Independents and conservative Democrats more than his left flank, and he knows it. That's how it should be, too - otherwise not a whole lot will get accomplished.

I still am very fond of him and quite optimistic about the upcoming years though, and seriously doubt that there is some kind of political conspiracy behind the awarding of this prize.

hehe Yes I was thinking same Burro..

Drakon yes they are interesting topics.

As for why the NAU would be bad, (could be being more accurate since plans do get altered) In the previous plans involving the Bush Jr Admin Era, the USA was going too be transformed into a transportation hub web network of railways and roads. This would also happen too a slightly lower degree too Mexico and Canada. However the USA and Canada would've been paying the a vast majority of all of the new infrastructure and such. Also there were lots of deals being made which would have taken even more jobs away from people here in the USA. Especially transportation jobs... which only in my opinion gained the attention it did due too security issues as well as safety issues but more so for security reasons. There are also court/legal type reason for the NAU being bad for the USA mainly. It ofc wouldn't stop with the NAU, it would combine with others.. so if you discuss NAU, you have too think it could get too one government ruling over all. Personally I am against this for many reasons, some people think it is a good idea and I agree it can be, but it much more likely not to be so. Power is well not for the plebs, it is for the elite "care takers" or controllers/managers of humanity.

I will go ahead and mention what I used too be. I used too be an Eugenicist and Globalist, I used too think that 80%-90% of the population of the world needed too either be massively brainwashed or killed off. You might be interested in knowing how many of our "leaders" are such, you might agree with them or disagree. I hope you disagree, just like you should disagree with Obama actually earning a NPP. OFC How does anyone expect more when Al Gore can get one!

PS: I don't believe Obama actually intended on "ending the wars" and I don't even know what anyone else other then me, thinks that means. For me it means ALL war efforts are over, not removing troops and replacing them with merc forces. While ofc moving those troop numbers into Afghanistan. THERE WERE NO WMDs found in Iraq! The wars are not over and are still illegal and still accepted and allowed too continue, because as Drakon pointed out our congress is almost all sell outs and will never stand up unless it gets them re-elected and since the populace of the USA isn't aware and active in majority.. we get what we allow.

My point being, Obama is just another face for the NWO/Globalization/Unification/Collection/etc group. Which includes a lot of bankers ofc since that makes perfect sense for them. Which btw I would say they cause more wars too actually happen and get too were they do. I sure hope your countries aren't stuck in debt like we are currently.. inescapable debt is pretty bad..

PSS: Maybe I need too research the NPP more so I can understand the entity fully. It will help when I go visit my family in Kansas, which are ALL Obama supporters lol I mention Obama's first appointee once too my Grandmother, and she said, don't tell me that I like him I am not racist! lol I wasn't sober so I laughed, but still kinda sad my Grandmother thought that way.

BYE for now and wish me luck with my getting back into space!

the issue might not be if he deserved it or not.... its more a responsibility he has to carry on his shoulders now

Drakon

No more wars in the middle east.......
M8 many in the USA get distracted with the various red herrings ie.. Iran, Iraq,Isreal,Saudi, bla bla bla.
There is one and only one real solution to wars in the middle east. The USA must make an energy independence project on the same scale as we did for the Manhattan project. If the USA could create and deploy atomic weapons in 4 years then we can do the same for energy if we put the same effort and resources into energy independence.

According to a Wiki, the Manhattan project cost 2 billion dollars. In terms of today's value it would be 22 billion dollars. I as one USA citizen would be more than happy to pay more tax to fund an energy independence project for even 100 billion dollars. But the project would have to follow the same methods as the Manhattan project ie.. Draft the best Scientists and sequester them until they complete the project, just as we did for the Manhattan project.

Until we do this, we will continue to piss into the wind and hand out useless medals and awards to egomaniacs, and continue to poison our planet, and destroy innocent lives on all sides.

I highly recommend watching the documentary film below, which holds a lot of info too research from and also some nice interviews, relevant videos, and information about Obama's Admin as well as the global elite and also works on dismissing the false left/right paradigm.

The Obama Deception High Quality Full Film on YouTube

OP-R8R: I agree that it could put more pressure on him too actually accomplish things.

burro: I also agree that we need energy independence. However I am unsure on when we will, at least for as long as we have this "Federal" Reserve we have here. Maybe when we loose it and the other controls over our country we could really do it. If you read either "Blueprint for Iron Mountain" or "Project for a New American Century", then you can see how the past years have been planned out. I name both, because at this time I cannot remember which held those plans.

__-----___----Side notation----____---___--_-_-_-
I also, wonder exactly what weapons would be included.. I mean it is not as if Nuclear Weapons are the worst and end all be all of massive death. After all tech is improving, so taking away the Nuclear ones doesn't really make a big dip in my opinion. This is due mainly for the technology of now and the worked on tech and the theorized tech which is actually likely too be worked on.

So that is another reason I don't really care anything good about this NPP awarding other then as SWAT_OP-R8R said, it should put pressure on him and his admin in turn (in my view) too accomplish tasks which would actually make our lives "safer." (is the period supposed too be as (." or ".)?) hehe

I however will hold back "final" judgment for the next few "checkpoints" in the non existent race. (Left - Right Paradigm being false)

Btw did Al Gore get his NPP taken back? For some reason I have some memory of either him loosing it or people talking about petitioning for it too be taken. heh

(Edit: Included relating link (dealing with Obama) I don't have any videos off the NPP and this with interviews and such.. nor have I looked, might later.)

Quote

Originally posted by I am D
I highly recommend watching the documentary film below, which holds a lot of info too research from and also some nice interviews, relevant videos, and information about Obama's Admin as well as the global elite and also works on dismissing the false left/right paradigm.

The Obama Deception High Quality Full Film on YouTube

OP-R8R: I agree that it could put more pressure on him too actually accomplish things.

burro: I also agree that we need energy independence. However I am unsure on when we will, at least for as long as we have this "Federal" Reserve we have here. Maybe when we loose it and the other controls over our country we could really do it. If you read either "Blueprint for Iron Mountain" or "Project for a New American Century", then you can see how the past years have been planned out. I name both, because at this time I cannot remember which held those plans.

Display More

@I am D: The documentary was produced by Alex Jones' infowars.com. Alex Jones is a self-proclaimed paleoconservative and talk radio host from Texas who is considered by mainstream media outlets to be a conspiracy theorist. He has released at least a dozen videos since the late 1990s that (more or less) all relate to his negative perception of federal government and international affairs.

According to Stephine Dubois, paleoconservatism refers to an "Old Right" faction in the U.S. that sees itself as being in keeping with the Founding Fathers' original ideals. People with this ideology reject modern culture and strongly oppose welfare, federal government, free trade, immigration, and U.S. dealings with other countries. Paleoconservatives are to the right-wing as progressives are to the left. In other words, the documentary is roughly as unbiased as a Michael Moore film (who certainly has a flair of his own for documentaries).

As for the paradigm, I keep it because there are major differences between the competing political theories and ideologies. In the U.S. this namely comes down to differing moral standpoints on social issues, the role of religion in our society, and human nature. At present the two "sides" tend to mostly agree on the size of government but differ slightly on which economic models should be embraced.

@OP: That's a good point. Didn't they award the prize to Premier Gorbachev with similar potential in mind back in the early 90s?

burro: Yes, I would like to see that kind of progress on the front on energy - especially when it comes to solar, wind, tide, and the replacement of baseload coal-fired plants with Gen. III (and later, Gen. IV) nuclear reactors. A bit more investment in fusion would certainly not be a waste of money, either. Lowered demand for oil will lower prices and may encourage development of poorer parts of the world. It could be a bit of a win-win.

probably

@ Drakon, Your lost m8, I would try too change your mind, but I think you're where you will be for quite a while. So I move on save myself some time for other things.. like re-installing CF and smoking a cig, while I try too figure out why you are the way you are, so I can prevent people from becoming that.

Police State = BAD

Warrant-less wire taps and searches (including entry of houses etc) = bad (it is used on lower crimes as well)

Federal Reserve = BAD

Pres. Obama = BAD MAN!

~FIN~