Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize

But that's the will of the people, not the work done by the president himself. Are Nobel Prizes just popularity contests now?

 

I agree with iRaynne completely. He really said everything I would have before I saw the topic. One good example for people who need it:

 

i never said mccain could have. the point is there is nothing to do better than: anything he could have done during his presidency could not have possibly done anything really noticable.

i read your posts and links. i read that list of 10 things he supposedly has done. didn't see anything on there that really mattered besides negotiating with the "muslim world" more, which anyone could do.

 

Isn't it the work of the president? He chose to run, he chose to believe in his principles, and he chose to change a country (maybe even a world). Because of this election, foreign countries don't absolutely hate us like they did during the last two terms. Because of his ideals, we are willing to negotiate with Iran. Because of him countries are now willing to come to peace negotiations with the U.S.

I think of it like he was awarded not for what he did, but for what he himself (and the election) stands for.

Believing in this train of thought, you would have to believe Jimmy Carter doesn't deserve the NPP, or Teddy Roosevelt, or Woodrow Wilson.

 

see, this sentence shows that no matter what, you will always support obama whole-heartedly and unconditionally. George Washington changed the country (well, made it but that's not the point), Teddy Roosevelt changed the country, Abe Lincoln changed the country. The only president(s) I can think of that changed the world is probably FDR and Truman; only due to WWII, and for turning the worlds nations into true superpowers at a nuclear stand-off.

In short: Obama has not changed the country. He's a black president...and thats the only thing that has changed really.

And the only reason he looks good at all is that Bush kinda jumped the gun on the whole WMD thing. Regardless, it's not negotiating with Iran or countries, its trying to get Al-Qaeda to STFU and GTFO

 

I'm pretty sure I provided reasons why I like him, I didn't just say I like him for no reason. Please don't assume.

Do you agree that our nation has changed to one that is more open to peaceful discussion and has its efforts at nuclear disarmament? How is that not change? You can't really argue that the country hasn't changed. Sure, there has been little tangible evidence to it, but our whole ideology has taken a complete u-turn.

 

First man to be considered the most peaceful by doing nothing.

 

The peace prize has always been a popularity contest.

'Cause I'm too lazy.

Sure, he hasn't done it, but from what I hear of when the prize is given out, it's supposed to encourage him to finish the job.

 

They must be desperate. Who were the other nominees for the Nobel Peace prize?

 

pfff, whatever, the prize lost all meaning after Kissinger won it anyways.
That's right, I was disillusioned about the Nobel Peace Prize before it was cool.
*takes drag of clove cigarette*
Everything is pointless.

 

you never provided reasons. dont try bullshitting me.

No, I do not agree to that. the only peaceful discussions are in the middle east, and there is no nuclear weaponry quite obviously. and remember Bush's famous ****-up with the WMD's? if there were nukes then thats not a ****-up, so obama is just continuing bush's policy on that.

and i can argue that the country hasn't changed. what has changed for the better in the last 9 months? and you just admitted having little tangible evidence; that means that he shouldn't get the NPP.

our ideology has taken a complete u-turn? how so? mine hasn't. i don't think anyone elses has either. what ideology has changed?

 

I provided reasons why he won the NPP (peaceful negotiations, nuclear disarmament), which were some of the reasons why I like him. Sorry I didn't make that clear.

The Middle East is the most unstable region in the world. Of course that would be the first place you go to ease international tensions, especially with our track record in that area.

Since when did you need tangible evidence to win the NPP? The fact that he became president is a message that the U.S. is finally willing to take a step in a peaceful direction. You say there is no tangible evidence from this, and I say the evidence was in the election, and his platform.

Your ideology certainly counts for yourself, but it is not the societal standard. Before, we would not sit down with tyrannical leaders without preconditions. Now we are willing to meet with all nations, friend or foe, to advance American interests.

There's more in the link, but I didn't bother to copy paste the whole page. His whole platform is about the peaceful solutions to many international problems.

 

any website you go to will give you a biased opinion or spin on the story either way. i bet for every "Obama is awesome he does everything perfect" website you give me i can give you one that says he sucks ass.

you continually make obamas actions into the thoughts of the american people. We are not willing to meet with tyrants without preconditions, he is. he will not change anyones opinion on what we should do in foreign affairs, neither will any other president or other leader.

since when did you need tangible evidence to win one of the (used-to-be) most prestigious awards ever? well, i just assumed that you would want to see if they deserve it or not. please refer back to my "What if they had given it to Hitler pre- WWII?" statement.

he didnt do anything with nuclear disarmament!!!! i just said that if there were any nukes or WMD's, then its Bush's actions that uncovered them/tried to get them to get rid of them.

and we are not at war with any nation! you cant have peace talks with.....nobody. who exactly is he talking to and what is he saying?

 

Hitler did no foreign relations at all pre WWII... He burned down the German capitol building and blamed it on communists as extreme propeganda for his own people. Reallll deservant.

As for "we're not really at war with people," bullshit. Read the news. And support your posts with evidence, not random public-driven opinions.

 

you see, this is why there are 6 pages. you just said we are not at war with people, but you didnt say who we are at war with. THERE IS NO WAR AGAINST ANOTHER NATION GOING ON!!!

 

I like how you avoid my Hitler counterattack.

Anyway, maybe there's no war written in stone, but if you think this is a whole peaceful world not needed good foreign relation politicians like Obama, again, go stick your head in the dirt some more.

Iran? Afghanistan? Korea? Iraq? We're on reallll good terms with them, now aren't we?

 

That website didn't have any false information, I linked it because I wanted to know his whole foreign policy plan. It doesn't matter if it's biased, that website merely provided information on what Obama's platform was, not the interpretation of that platform. If the website's goal was to interpret his platform, then you could consider bias, but all that website did was provide information on his platform.

We (the majority) elected him, and because of that America has told the world they are willing to change directions.

You make it sound like Obama is going to betray America. He has given you no reason to think that way. All of his actions have been in the pursuit of peace. Why even consider that scenario?

If you want tangible evidence, then I cite the 2008 presidential election as his efforts at promoting peace. Whether you want to believe it or not, the world as a whole looks at America in a less resentful light because of that election. Even from this election the Middle East terrorists have been dealt a blow. Their recruitment tactic before was to show how horrible America was (which wasn't that hard a few years ago). Now that you take that away, it is even harder to recruit people into their program.

We don't just have peace talks with nations we are warring against, there are nations out there who have tensions with eachother (Middle East) that the U.S. tries to work out. And we are at war, Iraq/Afghanistan? If you say these are not wars, provide reasons why.

 

this debate aint goin anywhere obviously. im going to continue to cite the fact that you 2 are obama-fags who believe he can do no wrong, and you will continue to say "Nuh-uh!"

bye

 

Pretty much all you've done is declare that Obama hasn't done anything, compare Obama to Hitler(which according to Godwin's Law means you already lost the argument), and proclaim that iRaynne and P3P6I love Obama no matter what he does. Then you said there was no war going on, presumably because there hasn't been a formal declaration of war against any specific enemy. There wasn't a formal declaration of war against the communists in Vietnam either, but that most definitely was a war, and so are the current ones.

Here are the facts:

1. Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize.
2. Obama has been in office for less than a year.
3. Internationally, the United States is liked a lot more due to Obama's words and actions.
4. Obama has promoted the idea of nuclear disarmament internationally.
5. Obama has promoted tactics of peace talks and economic sanctions against nations such as Iran rather than simply threatening military action at every conflict.
6. He hasn't ruled out military action should it become necessary, just to cut you off before you say he won't defend us if we are attacked..
7. Many people, including myself, think the prize would have been more appropriate later in his term.

 

High five Ladnil, we won the argument.