Jump to content

Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize


StrangeSox

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Oct 9, 2009 -> 01:12 PM)
Today is the first time I've ever actually deleted comments from my facebook posts. The stupidity coming from people... and specifically one person was staggering! The fact that one guy tried to link Obama's abortion and gay marriage policy to him getting the peace award made my mind hurt!

you should turn him in to Uncle Sam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 285
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

The Nobel Committee gave South African Bishop Desmond Tutu the Nobel Peace Prize in 1984 for his leadership of efforts to abolish apartheid in South Africa. Apartheid wasn't fully abolished in South Africa until 1994. The committee could have waited until after apartheid was abolished to say, "Well done!" But the point of the award was to help bring down apartheid by strengthening Bishop Tutu's efforts. In particular, everyone knew that it was going to be much harder for the apartheid regime to crack down on Tutu after the Nobel Committee wrapped him in its protective cloak of world praise.

 

That's what the Nobel Committee is trying to do for Obama now. It's giving an award to encourage the change in world relations that Obama has promised, and to try to help shield Obama against his domestic adversaries. The committee is well aware that history is contingent and that Obama might fail. It knows very well that the same country that elected Obama also gave the world George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan.

 

 

Read more at:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 9, 2009 -> 02:53 PM)
He had also been leading protests for about 10 years at that time, and had been actively speaking against Aparthied since the middle 60's.

 

 

Too bad Reagan supported Aparthied.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Oct 9, 2009 -> 01:43 PM)
You know, he could just refuse the award and ask that they give it to whoever came in second place.

First of all, that'd be an impressive insult to the people on the Nobel committee. Secondly, when there's a unanimous vote, there's not exactly a 2nd place finisher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 9, 2009 -> 03:43 PM)
First of all, that'd be an impressive insult to the people on the Nobel committee. Secondly, when there's a unanimous vote, there's not exactly a 2nd place finisher.

The Nobel commmittee has proven themselves to be a jobe before with some of their award winners, like this, or Arafat. Maybe they need to be insulted back into reality?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Oct 9, 2009 -> 03:46 PM)
The Nobel commmittee has proven themselves to be a jobe before with some of their award winners, like this, or Arafat. Maybe they need to be insulted back into reality?

 

Conservatives always bring up that Arafat got one. He got one with Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres for the work on the Oslo Accords. Which Rabin paid for with his life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its their award, they can give it to whoever the hell they want.

 

Why do people care? It doesnt change anything, its a damn award that is entirely meaningless.

 

Its like arguing about the Oscars, Heisman, MVP or any other award voted by people.

 

They set the criteria, they got to vote and in the end their vote matters and our opinion doesnt.

 

No way should Obama give it back, he won fair and square.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Oct 9, 2009 -> 04:08 PM)
Its their award, they can give it to whoever the hell they want.

 

Why do people care? It doesnt change anything, its a damn award that is entirely meaningless.

 

Its like arguing about the Oscars, Heisman, MVP or any other award voted by people.

 

They set the criteria, they got to vote and in the end their vote matters and our opinion doesnt.

 

No way should Obama give it back, he won fair and square.

Yep. That's right. And that says it all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Tex @ Oct 9, 2009 -> 11:11 AM)
We may not have a billion or two to provide health care to our residents, but we have hundreds of billions of dollars, and hundreds of thousands of young men and women to open a can of whoop ass on any country.

 

I do not intend to take this sentence out of context by isolating it, but you bring up something that often has me scratching my head.

 

The United States has been at the top of the economic world for about a hundred years now and dominated militarily for roughly the last 65 years. In many ways, our national pride is now driven by our ability to kick ass (militarily, economically, athletically). So my question is, hundreds of years from now, after our society experiences an economic (and subsequent military) decline, will we be a memorable and important contributor to the advancement of civilization (ie Rome, Greece, China, Great Britain, etc.) or will we simply be a historical footnote along the lines of the Ottoman empire?

 

Maybe I am not seeing the bigger picture of American advancement of civilization, but to me we have the constitution, jazz and baseball. Unfortunately, baseball and jazz will be lost eventually and we are left with our form of government. Is that enough of a legacy for the history books to remember us? Or, do we need to invest more of our wealth in education, arts and humanities versus ways to demolish our "enemies"?

 

I personally feel we are squandering our greatness and will be forgotten. Sorry for getting off topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The ottoman empire's culture was not proliferated nearly the same amount as American culture is. Our reach is incomparable. Though we never "ruled" as many lands as England, no country has imported it's culture and business the way we have. None. So no, if it all crashed tomorrow we'd be far more than a historical footnote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Oct 9, 2009 -> 04:08 PM)
Its their award, they can give it to whoever the hell they want.

 

Why do people care? It doesnt change anything, its a damn award that is entirely meaningless.

 

Its like arguing about the Oscars, Heisman, MVP or any other award voted by people.

 

They set the criteria, they got to vote and in the end their vote matters and our opinion doesnt.

 

No way should Obama give it back, he won fair and square.

 

You and I have our disagreements, but I could not agree anymore with this post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...