Obama awarded Nobel Peace Prize - Page 7

sputnik · October 11th, 2009, 04:56 AM

i see it as the nobel committee making a bet on obama, and as a nobel as a call to action for him to continue acting in the way he promised he would.
not saying i agree with the choice - in fact it's way premature and if they were going to give it to a US president i think clinton has done plenty of work in the past few years that would qualify him.

lurkur · October 11th, 2009, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grimmlok

Uh, Afghanistan was invaded. Bombed to shit first, and then ground troops rolled it. What else would you call it?

It was war, but not war-war.

Grimmlok · October 11th, 2009, 05:24 PM

the only way it wasn't war-war is because there was no central government to fight against and no formal declaration, but if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck.. it's a damn duck lol

CornFlakegrl · October 11th, 2009, 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grimmlok

Uh, Afghanistan was invaded. Bombed to shit first, and then ground troops rolled it. What else would you call it?

Based on this award, a peace-keeping mission?

Grimmlok · October 11th, 2009, 08:11 PM

^ hah! win

bychance · October 12th, 2009, 07:49 PM

I'm not trying to defend Bush, if that's what you think.

There was no reason to be at war with Iraq. Afghanistan was a different case altogether. That's what I'm saying, I thought that was pretty obvious. No weapons of mass destruction, no 9/11 connection, lying to the troops about why we're there in the first place (to overthrow Saddam Hussein). He just wanted the oil and most importantly, the man who tried to kill his daddy dead.

Anyway, with that said...I love Rachel Maddow.

YouTube Video

Chilly Willy · October 13th, 2009, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bychance

And Afghanistan is not a war that was "invaded".

I don't even know where to begin. Grammar? Content?

Did you go to school at all?

McJag · October 13th, 2009, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sputnik

i see it as the nobel committee making a bet on obama, and as a nobel as a call to action for him to continue acting in the way he promised he would.
not saying i agree with the choice - in fact it's way premature and if they were going to give it to a US president i think clinton has done plenty of work in the past few years that would qualify him.

Agreed. Who can explain the mysterious ways of the Nobel committee?

Grimmlok · October 13th, 2009, 10:47 AM

maybe.. THE SPANISH INQUISITION! nobody ever expects them!

bychance · October 13th, 2009, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chilly Willy

I don't even know where to begin. Grammar? Content?

Did you go to school at all?

Did you read what I wrote after that?

And why'd you cut the last part of the quote? Which was my whole point? No need to be condescending by asking me if I "got to school at all".

In case you didn't know, Iraq was a war based on false pretenses. Afghanistan was not. Why is that so hard to understand?

Mel1973 · October 14th, 2009, 08:15 AM

And now the jokes are coming:
Over the weekend, Obama watched a football game. He will now be awarded the Heisman...
On Monday, he watched a movie. He will now receive an Oscar.

I predict Kanye-like fun with this shit!

Chilly Willy · October 14th, 2009, 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bychance

Did you read what I wrote after that?

And why'd you cut the last part of the quote? Which was my whole point? No need to be condescending by asking me if I "got to school at all".

In case you didn't know, Iraq was a war based on false pretenses. Afghanistan was not. Why is that so hard to understand?

"And Afghanistan is not a war that was "invaded".

1. A war can't be invaded. You can invade a country, but not a war.

2. Afghanistan was invaded just as often as Iraq - the first time in 1839 by the Brits, the last time (so far) in 2001 by American forces and their alliances. Just because you happen to agree with the decision, doesn't mean it's not an invasion.

3. I cut the last part of the post, because I chose to address the first part. Adding "Iraq was" to your "sentence" doesn't make it any more comprehensible. I was referring to your usage of the word "to invade", which was grammatically and semantically out of place.

4. It's hard to understand, because you don't express yourself properly. Try not base your whole point on an expression you didn't even bother to look the fuck up.

5. I was not being condescending, I was giving you the benefit of a doubt. Who knows, maybe you are an autodidact. Maybe you never had the privilege of a regular education. Because I learned in school to keep my big mouth shut, if I don't know shit about the subject at hand. In this case, invasions.

MontanaMama · October 14th, 2009, 10:02 AM

I don't understand why Obama is getting the heat for this, he didn't lobby for the Nobel Prize.

Rachel Maddow usually seems to make sense and that was an excellent piece.

Grimmlok · October 14th, 2009, 11:32 AM

Um, maybe cuz a peace prize for someone ramping up a war seems a bit out of place

MontanaMama · October 14th, 2009, 11:41 AM

Well I would agree with that, but where things stood on Feb 1 and his intended goals were in line with previous awards. He did always say he would finish things in Afghanistan (or with Al Qaeda - not nec. the same thing, but I can't recall the specific words). I just don't see how the fallout of this lands on Obama, it's the prize committee that jumped the gun (so to speak).