PDA

View Full Version : Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize - why?


rockdawg21
10-09-2009, 01:43 PM
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33237202/ns/politics-white_house

He won for "his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples," the Norwegian Nobel Committee said, citing his outreach to the Muslim world and attempts to curb nuclear proliferation.

According to this, all one has to do is make an attempt and you can win a prize. So, if I were to JUST make an attempt at earning my doctorate in physics, then I should be given the degree. Does that make any sense? Businesses don't award for effort, but RESULTS. The Nobel Prize is a joke.

Barack Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize
Committee says president gives world’s people ‘hope for a better future’

updated 40 minutes ago

OSLO, Norway - President Barack Obama won the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize on Friday for "his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples," the Norwegian Nobel Committee said, citing his outreach to the Muslim world and attempts to curb nuclear proliferation.

The stunning choice made Obama the third sitting U.S. president to win the Nobel Peace Prize and shocked Nobel observers because Obama took office less than two weeks before the Feb. 1 nomination deadline. Obama's name had been mentioned in speculation before the award but many Nobel watchers believed it was too early to award the president.

"Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future," the committee said. "His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population."
Story continues below ↓advertisement | your ad here

The committee said it attached special importance to Obama's vision of, and work for, a world without nuclear weapons.

"Obama has as president created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play," the committee said.

Record number of nominations
Theodore Roosevelt won the award in 1906 and Woodrow Wilson won in 1919. Former President Jimmy Carter won the award in 2002, while former Vice President Al Gore shared the 2007 prize with the U.N. panel on climate change.

The Nobel committee received a record 205 nominations for this year's prize.

In his 1895 will, Alfred Nobel stipulated that the peace prize should go "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations and the abolition or reduction of standing armies and the formation and spreading of peace congresses."

Unlike the other Nobel Prizes, which are awarded by Swedish institutions, he said the peace prize should be given out by a five-member committee elected by the Norwegian Parliament. Sweden and Norway were united under the same crown at the time of Nobel's death.

The committee has taken a wide interpretation of Nobel's guidelines, expanding the prize beyond peace mediation to include efforts to combat poverty, disease and climate change.

County Mike
10-09-2009, 01:50 PM
That's some bullshyt right there.

rearnakedchoke
10-09-2009, 02:12 PM
Congratulations my American friends. It must be so amazing knowing that you have such a great man like Barack Obama leading your nation. He is not only a great leader for your country but for our entire world. Too bad you only have about 7.5 more years of this. Maybe they will change the laws and have the presidency changed to unlimited terms. I guess that is wishful thinking for you and the rest of the world.

NateR
10-09-2009, 04:00 PM
Clearly the Nobel Peace Prize is a joke.

MattHughesRocks
10-09-2009, 04:24 PM
It was just said on the news that he was chosen for it about 12 days into his presidency.

NateR
10-09-2009, 04:58 PM
Even Obama is skeptical that he's done enough to deserve the Nobel. But of course, he's just being humble. Maybe they should give him a second Nobel Peace Prize for inspiring the world with the humility in which he accepted his first Nobel Peace Prize. :rolleyes:

Anyways, they gave one to Yasser Arafat so how prestigious could it possibly be?

Chuck
10-09-2009, 05:18 PM
Even Obama is skeptical that he's done enough to deserve the Nobel. But of course, he's just being humble. Maybe they should give him a second Nobel Peace Prize for inspiring the world with the humility in which he accepted his first Nobel Peace Prize. :rolleyes:

Anyways, they gave one to Yasser Arafat so how prestigious could it possibly be?

Hey if humility is a criteria then my vote goes to ChrisF!

Twinsmama
10-09-2009, 05:22 PM
Clearly the Nobel Peace Prize is a joke.


it is a joke....do some google searching to find out who has won in the past. Most are for efforts made .....not actual accomplishments.

adamt
10-09-2009, 06:23 PM
it's relative....

who defines peace?

didn't the atom bomb lead to more peace than anything else in history has.... it ended the war of all wars right?

Josh
10-09-2009, 07:01 PM
This might be as bad as Al Gore getting it instead of the lady that smuggled countless children out of the path of the Nazis.

NateR
10-09-2009, 08:24 PM
Wow, even the more liberally biased news organizations think this is a load of crap:

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1929395,00.html?xid=rss-fullnation-yahoo

Obama's Nobel: The Last Thing He Needs

The last thing Barack Obama needed at this moment in his presidency and our politics is a prize for a promise.

Inspirational words have brought him a long way — including to the night in Grant Park less than a year ago when he asked that we "join in the work of remaking this nation the only way it's been done in America for two-hundred and twenty-one years — block by block, brick by brick, calloused hand by calloused hand."

By now there are surely more callouses on his lips than his hands. He, like every new president, has reckoned with both the power and the danger of words, dangers that are especially great for one who wields them as skillfully as he. A promise beautifully made raises hopes especially high: we will revive the economy while we rein in our spending; we will make health care simpler, safer, cheaper, fairer. We will rid the earth of its most lethal weapons. We will turn green and clean. We will all just get along.

So when reality bites, it chomps down hard. The Nobel committee cited "his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples." His critics fault some of those efforts: those who favor a missile shield for Poland or a troop surge in Afghanistan or a harder line on Iran. But even his fans know that none of the dreams have yet come true, and a prize for even dreaming them can feed the illusion that they have.

Maybe the prize will give him more power, new muscles to haul unruly nations in line. But peacemaking is more about ingenuity than inspiration, about reading other nations' selfish interests and cynically, strategically exploiting them for the common good. Will it help if fewer countries come to the table hating us? To a point. But it's a starting point, not an end in itself.

At this moment many Americans are longing for a president who is more bully, less pulpit. The president who leased his immense inaugural good will to the hungry appropriators writing the stimulus bill, who has not stopped negotiating health care reform except to say what is non-negotiable, whose solicitude for the wheelers and dealers who drove the financial system into a ditch leaves the rest of us wondering who has our back, has always shown great promise, said the right things, affirmed every time he opens his mouth that he understands the fears we face and the hopes we hold. But he presides over a capital whose day-to-day functioning has become part-travesty, part-tragedy, wasteful, blind, vain, petty, where even the best intentioned reformers measure their progress with teaspoons. There comes a time when a President needs to take a real risk — and putting his prestige on the line to win the Olympics for his home town does not remotely count.

Compare this to Greg Mortenson, nominated for the prize by some members of Congress, who the bookies gave 20-to-1 odds of winning. Son of a missionary, a former army Medic and mountaineer, he has made it his mission to build schools for girls in places where opium dealers and tribal warlords kill people for trying. His Central Asia Institute has built more than 130 schools in Afghanistan and Pakistan — a mission which has, along the way, inspired millions of people to view the protection and education of girls as a key to peace and prosperity and progress.

Sometimes the words come first. Sometimes, it's better to let actions speak for themselves.

Play The Man
10-09-2009, 08:44 PM
Perhaps someone who voted for Obama could tell us what exactly he has done to merit this prize.:unsure:

NateR
10-09-2009, 08:52 PM
Congratulations my American friends. It must be so amazing knowing that you have such a great man like Barack Obama leading your nation. He is not only a great leader for your country but for our entire world. Too bad you only have about 7.5 more years of this. Maybe they will change the laws and have the presidency changed to unlimited terms. I guess that is wishful thinking for you and the rest of the world.

Fixed.:tongue0011:

rearnakedchoke
10-09-2009, 08:57 PM
Fixed.:tongue0011:

No .... I really do consider you guys my American friends.

NateR
10-09-2009, 08:59 PM
No .... I really do consider you guys my American friends.

Okay, then how about this?

Congratulations my American friends. It must be so amazing knowing that you have such a great man like Barack Obama leading your nation. He is not only a great leader for your country but for our entire world. Too bad you only have about 7.5 more years of this. Maybe they will change the laws and have the presidency changed to unlimited terms. I guess that is wishful thinking for you and the rest of the world.

:wink:

rearnakedchoke
10-09-2009, 09:01 PM
Okay, then how about this?



:wink:

that's a print ....

Crisco
10-09-2009, 09:02 PM
Wow, even the more liberally biased news organizations think this is a load of crap:

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1929395,00.html?xid=rss-fullnation-yahoo

Nate that was an excellent read thank you for posting it.

que
10-10-2009, 01:29 AM
yea that's pretty stupid

adamt
10-10-2009, 01:37 AM
http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/sendler.asp

Chris F
10-10-2009, 01:40 AM
Hey if humility is a criteria then my vote goes to ChrisF!

Thank you my fellow humanitarians I humbly and most graciously accept this allustrious honor. You love me you really love me. :laugh:

flo
10-10-2009, 02:56 AM
Clearly the Nobel Peace Prize is a joke.

It was a joke when Al Gore won over Irena Sendler. Sadly, she died the next year.

I lost all respect (what little I had) for the Nobel panel after that. This doesn't surprise me one whit.

flo
10-10-2009, 02:58 AM
This might be as bad as Al Gore getting it instead of the lady that smuggled countless children out of the path of the Nazis.
Sorry, Josh, I hadn't read your post yet when I wrote about that.

Chuck
10-10-2009, 04:18 AM
Thank you my fellow humanitarians I humbly and most graciously accept this allustrious honor. You love me you really love me. :laugh:

Clearly prooftexting but I'll let is slide... I love Sally!!! :laugh:

Josh
10-10-2009, 05:44 AM
Sorry, Josh, I hadn't read your post yet when I wrote about that.

It's ok. I was happy since I couldn't remember the ladies name and my post generally sounded dumb.

Buzzard
10-10-2009, 08:28 AM
Is this going to be another thing folks are going to use to bad mouth Mr. Obama?

Clearly this was in his master plan when he decided to take over the world. I thought you all knew this already. It's not just a conspiracy theory, it's fact. I think I read it on some conservative website earlier.

If one had to choose between the current president and the last president for a nomination, which one should get it? Yes I know my question means squat in reality, but I wonder which one of the two you think is more deserving of it? I agree, it is a stupid question to ask, but someone needed to ask it and it may as well be myself because I like to pose these kind of questions to hear the responses. I just read about this a few minutes ago, and I am still trying to digest it and make sense of it if sense can be made of it.

Wouldn't it be something though if his actions in the following years showed that he was deserving of the prize?

Have a safe and happy weekend, though with that news I don't think many of you will.:laugh:

Jonlion
10-10-2009, 12:57 PM
Really cheapens the prize, it means absolutetly nothing

rockdawg21
10-10-2009, 12:58 PM
Is this going to be another thing folks are going to use to bad mouth Mr. Obama?

Clearly this was in his master plan when he decided to take over the world. I thought you all knew this already. It's not just a conspiracy theory, it's fact. I think I read it on some conservative website earlier.

If one had to choose between the current president and the last president for a nomination, which one should get it? Yes I know my question means squat in reality, but I wonder which one of the two you think is more deserving of it? I agree, it is a stupid question to ask, but someone needed to ask it and it may as well be myself because I like to pose these kind of questions to hear the responses. I just read about this a few minutes ago, and I am still trying to digest it and make sense of it if sense can be made of it.

Wouldn't it be something though if his actions in the following years showed that he was deserving of the prize?

Have a safe and happy weekend, though with that news I don't think many of you will.:laugh:

I'm not sure if this was a joke or if you're serious, lol.

Ronald Reagan ENDED the Cold War and what did HE get for it? Absolutely nothing from the Nobel Prize committee. Obama simply made a couple of speeches that had NO impact, whatsoever, to the cause and he won a prize?! It's activity without accomplishment, and he was awarded for it.

The last time I got a 50% on a test, I wasn't awarded a passing grade based on my effort, even if I TRIED. A person isn't promoted to the CEO of a company based on EFFORT, but RESULTS (unless that company is Ford, Chyrsler, GM, or Bank of America, but that's another story :laugh:).

This simply proves the Nobel Peace Prize is a joke.

Neezar
10-10-2009, 02:51 PM
Is this going to be another thing folks are going to use to bad mouth Mr. Obama?

Clearly this was in his master plan when he decided to take over the world. I thought you all knew this already. It's not just a conspiracy theory, it's fact. I think I read it on some conservative website earlier.

If one had to choose between the current president and the last president for a nomination, which one should get it? Yes I know my question means squat in reality, but I wonder which one of the two you think is more deserving of it? I agree, it is a stupid question to ask, but someone needed to ask it and it may as well be myself because I like to pose these kind of questions to hear the responses. I just read about this a few minutes ago, and I am still trying to digest it and make sense of it if sense can be made of it.

Wouldn't it be something though if his actions in the following years showed that he was deserving of the prize?

Have a safe and happy weekend, though with that news I don't think many of you will.:laugh:

What does the last president have to do with the Nobel peace prize?

Your defense of Obama is always to attack others. That isn't truly a defense. That is a cop out. And for most it doesn't work anymore after elementary school.

VCURamFan
10-10-2009, 03:19 PM
What does the last president have to do with the Nobel peace prize?

Your defense of Obama is always to attack others. That isn't truly a defense. That is a cop out. And for most it doesn't work anymore after elementary school.
YOU DON'T WORK AFTER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL!:punch:

(sorry, just trying to help Buzz out & supply some comebacks for him)

Neezar
10-10-2009, 04:10 PM
YOU DON'T WORK AFTER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL!:punch:

(sorry, just trying to help Buzz out & supply some comebacks for him)

Well you have to wonder why there was not one word to defend why Obama should have gotten the prize. Only some question directed at attacking Bush (like the prize MUST go to a President and they had no choice but to pick Obama :laugh:). And picking Obama over Bush still wouldn't make Obama the best choice. So what have you accomplished with your question other than providing an outlet to attack Bush?

VCURamFan
10-10-2009, 04:38 PM
Well you have to wonder why there was not one word to defend why Obama should have gotten the prize. Only some question directed at attacking Bush (like the prize MUST go to a President and they had no choice but to pick Obama :laugh:). And picking Obama over Bush still wouldn't make Obama the best choice. So what have you accomplished with your question other than providing an outlet to attack Bush?
O, I didn't actually read his "response", I was just making a quick assumption based on your critique.:laugh:

flo
10-10-2009, 06:05 PM
I'm not sure if this was a joke or if you're serious, lol.

Ronald Reagan ENDED the Cold War and what did HE get for it? Absolutely nothing from the Nobel Prize committee. Obama simply made a couple of speeches that had NO impact, whatsoever, to the cause and he won a prize?! It's activity without accomplishment, and he was awarded for it.

The last time I got a 50% on a test, I wasn't awarded a passing grade based on my effort, even if I TRIED. A person isn't promoted to the CEO of a company based on EFFORT, but RESULTS (unless that company is Ford, Chyrsler, GM, or Bank of America, but that's another story :laugh:).

This simply proves the Nobel Peace Prize is a joke.

Spot on.

VCURamFan
10-10-2009, 06:19 PM
Spot on.
I'm shocked how little my peers seem to know about Reagan. Greatest president in recent history, top 10 all time & he's just "the guy before the first Bush".:frantics:

VCURamFan
10-10-2009, 06:40 PM
In case y'all missed it last week, here's Obama's nationwide address:

http://www.hulu.com/watch/99945/saturday-night-live-obama-address#s-p2-sr-i1

Chris F
10-10-2009, 07:38 PM
Clearly prooftexting but I'll let is slide... I love Sally!!! :laugh:

Sally? That line was from THE MASK. :)

Play The Man
10-10-2009, 07:48 PM
Well you have to wonder why there was not one word to defend why Obama should have gotten the prize. Only some question directed at attacking Bush (like the prize MUST go to a President and they had no choice but to pick Obama :laugh:). And picking Obama over Bush still wouldn't make Obama the best choice. So what have you accomplished with your question other than providing an outlet to attack Bush?

I think the quoted portion below, especially the highlighted words, answers your rhetorical question:

I just read about this a few minutes ago, and I am still trying to digest it and make sense of it if sense can be made of it.

Buzzard
10-10-2009, 08:36 PM
What does the last president have to do with the Nobel peace prize?

Your defense of Obama is always to attack others. That isn't truly a defense. That is a cop out. And for most it doesn't work anymore after elementary school.

You obviously missed the sarcasm which I thought was apparent. You then missed the part where I openly admitted the question I asked was stupid, but that I would ask it anyway just to see if anyone thought that the almighty Bush was more deserving than the antichrist Obama.

I never attacked Bush in my post, but I guess you didn't see that either when you immediately jumped in to say I attacked Bush to defend Obama. I can understand, my eyes take a bit of time to adjust after I wake up and get some coffee in me. :wink:

Again I will ask this question. Wouldn't it be nice if in the years to come it was shown that Obama was deserving of the prize? If, and that's a big if Obama were to help in making the United States and the rest of the world a better place, would it be a bad thing?

Neezar
10-10-2009, 08:49 PM
You obviously missed the sarcasm which I thought was apparent. You then missed the part where I openly admitted the question I asked was stupid, but that I would ask it anyway just to see if anyone thought that the almighty Bush was more deserving than the antichrist Obama.

I never attacked Bush in my post, but I guess you didn't see that either when you immediately jumped in to say I attacked Bush to defend Obama. I can understand, my eyes take a bit of time to adjust after I wake up and get some coffee in me. :wink:


I amended that after my coffee, lol. (see below) Thank you for keeping me in line there though.


Well you have to wonder why there was not one word to defend why Obama should have gotten the prize. Only some question directed at attacking Bush (like the prize MUST go to a President and they had no choice but to pick Obama :laugh:). And picking Obama over Bush still wouldn't make Obama the best choice. So what have you accomplished with your question other than providing an outlet to attack Bush?


Again I will ask this question. Wouldn't it be nice if in the years to come it was shown that Obama was deserving of the prize? If, and that's a big if Obama were to help in making the United States and the rest of the world a better place, would it be a bad thing?

If he proves it in the years to come would that mean that he is deserving of the prize today? Do you give someone a prize for what you think or hope they will accomplish?

As to your second question, I'm not sure if it is meant as a true question but I will answer it anyway. Of course, it would not be a bad thing. But I really don't see how that pertains to this topic.

Buzzard
10-10-2009, 08:51 PM
I'm shocked how little my peers seem to know about Reagan. Greatest president in recent history, top 10 all time & he's just "the guy before the first Bush".:frantics:

Are you speaking from experience of living through the Raygun years or just from what you have read from pro-Raygun sites? There are many other presidents whom are deserving of being it the top 10. (Did I use whom correctly? That one always messes me up. I usually try to work around it.)

Do you remember the Iran-Contra scandal and the trickle down theory? I wouldn't give credit for the end of the cold war solely to Reagan.

Crisco
10-10-2009, 09:50 PM
You obviously missed the sarcasm which I thought was apparent. You then missed the part where I openly admitted the question I asked was stupid, but that I would ask it anyway just to see if anyone thought that the almighty Bush was more deserving than the antichrist Obama.

I never attacked Bush in my post, but I guess you didn't see that either when you immediately jumped in to say I attacked Bush to defend Obama. I can understand, my eyes take a bit of time to adjust after I wake up and get some coffee in me. :wink:

Again I will ask this question. Wouldn't it be nice if in the years to come it was shown that Obama was deserving of the prize? If, and that's a big if Obama were to help in making the United States and the rest of the world a better place, would it be a bad thing?

Can you justify giving Obama the prize over a man like this?

Compare this to Greg Mortenson, nominated for the prize by some members of Congress, who the bookies gave 20-to-1 odds of winning. Son of a missionary, a former army Medic and mountaineer, he has made it his mission to build schools for girls in places where opium dealers and tribal warlords kill people for trying. His Central Asia Institute has built more than 130 schools in Afghanistan and Pakistan — a mission which has, along the way, inspired millions of people to view the protection and education of girls as a key to peace and prosperity and progress.

Buzzard
10-11-2009, 12:45 AM
Can you justify giving Obama the prize over a man like this?

Nope. I am still trying to understand and make sense of why he was given it. I don't think it right to blame him for it, not that anyone here has. It remains a mystery to me.

I amended that after my coffee, lol. (see below) Thank you for keeping me in line there though.

Keep you in line? Like that will ever happen.:laugh:


If he proves it in the years to come would that mean that he is deserving of the prize today?

Nope.

Do you give someone a prize for what you think or hope they will accomplish?

No, but in kids sports today everyone is a winner.:laugh:That is actually not funny but it is a joke.

As to your second question, I'm not sure if it is meant as a true question but I will answer it anyway. Of course, it would not be a bad thing. But I really don't see how that pertains to this topic.

It doesn't really pertain to this topic. It's nice to know that you wouldn't let personal views on someone cloud a positive accomplishment. That is commendable.

KENTUCKYREDBONE
10-11-2009, 12:58 AM
I've come to the conclusion that the Nobel Peace Prize has become a joke! I don't plan to complain to much about it. Instead I plan to laugh at it!

atomdanger
10-11-2009, 01:05 AM
Clearly the Nobel Peace Prize is a joke.

+1
Not just because of this,
but honestly, why do so many people care if some foreign panel of people give people an award.
*shrug*

Neezar
10-11-2009, 01:10 AM
Neezar
Do you give someone a prize for what you think or hope they will accomplish?

Buzzard
No, but in kids sports today everyone is a winner.:laugh:That is actually not funny but it is a joke.


I agree.

Buzzard
10-11-2009, 01:11 AM
This is a post from another forum which I read. Here are some of President Obama's accomplishments both before and after his election.

I did not create this list, and am not sure if the person who originally posted this created it. I do not claim credit for this list. If one wishes to know the site where I acquired this list, ask. Though there are numerous sites which offer up some or all of this list.

3/18/8 – Obama caught world-wide attention for his moving speech on race relations

7/24/8 - Obama lays the foundation for a new era of international relations and began inspiring renewed hope in American leadership during his campaign speech in Berlin

11/6/8 – Obama’s victory was hailed as a promise of hope for the world.

12/1/8 – Obama began plans to restore U.N. ambassador to cabinet rank.

1/22/9 - Appointed a Special Envoy for Middle East peace

1/22/9 – Ordered the closing of Guantanamo Bay

1/22/9 – Ordered comprehensive review of detention policies

1/22/9 – Prohibited use of torture

1/22/9 - Signed an executive order to close CIA secret prisons

1/23/9 – Lifted “Global Gag Rule” on international health groups

1/26/9 – Began to address climate change by increasing fuel standards for automobiles

1/26/9 – Appointed Special Envoy for Climate Change

1/27/9 - Signs Lily Ledbetter “Fair Pay” Act

2/1/9 – Expanded healthcare for children by signing SCHIP

2/5/9 - Again addressed energy conservation by increasing standards for appliances.

2/24/9 – Directed almost $1 billion for prevention and wellness to improve America’s health

2/25/9 - Initiated international efforts to reduce mercury emissions worldwide

2/27/9 – Committed to responsibly ending the war in Iraq

4/1/9 – Agreed to negotiation of a new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty with Russia.

4/1/9 – Enhanced U.S. – China relations

4/2/9 - Led global response to the economic crisis through the G20, obtaining commitments of $1.1 trillion to safeguard the world’s most vulnerable economies

4/4/9 - Renewed dialog with NATO and other key allies

4/5/9 – Announced new strategy to responsible address international nuclear proliferation

4/13/9 – Began easing tension with Cuba through new policy stance

4/17/9 - Secured $5 billion in aid commitments "to bolster economy and help it fight terror and Islamic radicalism"

4/22/9 - Developed the renewable energy projects on the waters of our Outer Continental Shelf that produce electricity from wind, wave, and ocean currents.

5/8/9 – Proposed International Affaires budget that included funds to create a civilian response corps -- teams of civilian experts in rule of law, policing, transitional governance, economics, engineering, and other areas critical to helping rebuild war-torn societies; Provide $40 million for a "stabilization bridge fund," which would provide rapid response funds for the State Department to help stabilize a crisis situation.

6/4/9 - Gave historic address to the Muslim World in Cairo - "American is not at war with Islam" Foreign affairs experts insist that Obama's engagement with the Muslim world has been remarkable. "He has been able to dramatically change America's image in that region"

8/4/9 - Used DIPLOMACY to free 2 American journalists from a North Korea prison

9/18/9 - De-escalation of nuclear tension through re purposing of missile defense prompting Russia to withdraw its missile plan.

Neezar
10-11-2009, 01:20 AM
This is a post from another forum which I read. Here are some of President Obama's accomplishments both before and after his election.

I did not create this list, and am not sure if the person who originally posted this created it. I do not claim credit for this list. If one wishes to know the site where I acquired this list, ask. Though there are numerous sites which offer up some or all of this list.


First, I want to know what he was doing in March and July? :laugh:

Second, I thought Bill Clinton got the journalists out? :unsure-1:

Tyburn
10-11-2009, 08:12 PM
Because he failed to get the Olympic Bid for Chicago.

They would have gone for Chicago...but the Olympics have never been to Latin America...and with the shortages of applicable cities, when Rio applied...well even a personal visit by the US President himself would not swing the vote.

If you ask me.

This is nothing short of appeasement. He hasnt done anything to deserve this. He isnt known yet to back up his hardline words, whether in Korea, Iran, or The United Nations...heck...he called off Starwars embarissing those countries who supported Bush against the russians...you watch...if those Governments topple now...it will be HIS fault.

No...they gave it to him because they needed to give him something after they had to give the olympics to someone else.

bradwright
10-11-2009, 08:22 PM
Because he failed to get the Olympic Bid for Chicago.

They would have gone for Chicago...but the Olympics have never been to Latin America...and with the shortages of applicable cities, when Rio applied...well even a personal visit by the US President himself would not swing the vote.

If you ask me.

This is nothing short of appeasement. He hasnt done anything to deserve this. He isnt known yet to back up his hardline words, whether in Korea, Iran, or The United Nations...heck...he called off Starwars embarissing those countries who supported Bush against the russians...you watch...if those Governments topple now...it will be HIS fault.

No...they gave it to him because they needed to give him something after they had to give the olympics to someone else.

i think that might be a bit of a stretch there Dave....i think they gave it to him simply because he is a swell guy.:) and because he's black of course....funny no one else pointed that out.:unsure-1:

Tyburn
10-11-2009, 10:48 PM
i think that might be a bit of a stretch there Dave....i think they gave it to him simply because he is a swell guy.:) and because he's black of course....funny no one else pointed that out.:unsure-1:

Yeah...well the guy who should have won it, was that guy who managed to rope in the Zimbabwe Dictator called Mugabe and finally chain him to a power sharing Government. THAT is peace making...he had to survive all kinds of things from going into hiding, to assassination attempts...in order to survive long enough to stand against Mugabe...you know how with Dictators, the political opponents tend to meet with unfortunate accidents before an ellection...

...tell me...compared to that...who is Barack Obama? Nobody...thats who he is. He's faced nothing compared to Morgan, he's not managed to bring peace or reconcilliation either within or without his own soverignty, He's faced the same racism faced by a gazzillion others, he's not faced it alone, being the first Black President...and he appears mixed race to me at the very least, does not qualify you ahead of a politician who has lived in a warzone and has fought for his peoples freedom against a dictator, survived all the incarcerations and attempts that come with that...and won.

Its quite dissgraceful IMHO. I am sick to death of the worlds nutthugery of Barack Obama...the guy has done nothing but talk and be a shade darker in his skin then any previous President...He might be a good person, he might even be a good President...but he isnt a Nobel Peace Prize winner. Not Nearly. :angry:

VCURamFan
10-12-2009, 01:16 AM
Because he failed to get the Olympic Bid for Chicago.

They would have gone for Chicago...but the Olympics have never been to Latin America...and with the shortages of applicable cities, when Rio applied...well even a personal visit by the US President himself would not swing the vote.

If you ask me.

This is nothing short of appeasement. He hasnt done anything to deserve this. He isnt known yet to back up his hardline words, whether in Korea, Iran, or The United Nations...heck...he called off Starwars embarissing those countries who supported Bush against the russians...you watch...if those Governments topple now...it will be HIS fault.

No...they gave it to him because they needed to give him something after they had to give the olympics to someone else.
I think that's completely false, Dave. If Chicago only loss because of Rio, then it wouldn't have been ousted in the very first round by 18 votes!:laugh:

Tyburn
10-12-2009, 01:36 AM
I think that's completely false, Dave. If Chicago only loss because of Rio, then it wouldn't have been ousted in the very first round by 18 votes!:laugh:

:laugh: Well there is that. You know I sat in Washington Airport and watched the crowds gather on TV in Chicago in places like the Millenial Park for the celebrations...and it was a swift cull wasnt it...and after they looked so sad...and I felt bad for them. :sad:

I think Chicago would be a good host for the Olympics :)