| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Ankhsy
Homosapien
United Kingdom
7861 Posts |
 Posted - 09 October 2009 : 11:13:44 AM
|
Well, I am gobsmacked! He's only been in office a little over half a year.
But I have to say I fully support his vision of a nuclear-weapons-free-world, his concern over climate change, and his multilateral approach to diplomacy. It may be idealistic, but at least the starting point isn't "You are either with us or against us".
And thank goodness it wasn't Tony Blair.
Legum servi sumus ut liberi esse possimus.
|
|
|
John Prigent
Homosapien
United Kingdom
8794 Posts |
Posted - 09 October 2009 : 12:45:37 PM
|
A Peace Prize? For what, exactly, bringing peace to Afghanistan? (sarcasm, if you hadn't guessed.)
Cheers
John
Sum, ergo cogito |
 |
|
|
Mace
Small mammal
United Kingdom
738 Posts |
Posted - 09 October 2009 : 1:39:10 PM
|
TBF, Blair deserves some small kudos for the Irish peace treaty. Just not nearly enough to outwheigh the Afghan/Iraq wars.
But this seems like arse kissing from the Nobel prize judges. He's made some pretty strong stamenets about health care, nukes, etc. Anyone can make those statements. I will be astounded if he manages to get most of them made into law. And it's not a reflection on him: from what I see he's surrounded by Democrats who seem to be so overawed to be in office that they're unable to make any constructive arguments for Obama's policies. When the health care row first errupted, the only Gov official that apeared to know what it meant was the President himslef. The others just seemed lost and confused.
"My Mom says I'm cool"
Millhouse. |
|
|
|
Livia
Single Cell Organism
USA
17 Posts |
Posted - 10 October 2009 : 08:54:53 AM
|
What were the Nobel prize judges thinking? I'm all for Obama getting a Nobel prize, but I think they gave him the wrong prize. He should have been awarded the Nobel prize for Physics or Chemistry. I think he deserves either of those two more than the Peace Prize. The States spend more than every other country in the world on War making.(We do have some cool Airplanes) I could argue that in his most recent spending legislation they have funded hundreds of different Chemistry and Physics research projects. Peace-not so much.
Poison is Queen |
|
|
|
Parmenion
Homosapien
United Kingdom
14676 Posts |
Posted - 10 October 2009 : 3:46:42 PM
|
im torn, he has laid out a very clear nuclear weapon free world and made strides towards it. but it hink it might be too soo for this type of award, the bloke from zimbabwe (sp) was way more deserving
Centurion Parmenion
LASCIATE OGNE SPERANZA, VOI CH'INTRATE
|
|
|
|
Livia
Single Cell Organism
USA
17 Posts |
Posted - 11 October 2009 : 05:08:12 AM
|
You're fooling yourself if Obama would ever give up US nukes. He would be impeached before that happened. No way. That nuclear free world doesn't mean the States. It means everyone else. He is just blowing smoke up your behind. If you want to be disappointed, go ahead and believe he will try it. Climate change and multi lateral diplomacy-absolutely. He will make some big strides on those items, and have the backing of the majority of Americans. But please understand, Americans(on the whole) like their nukes. They don't like other peoples' nukes, but ours are special.......
Poison is Queen |
|
|
|
Ankhsy
Homosapien
United Kingdom
7861 Posts |
Posted - 12 October 2009 : 10:28:44 AM
|
Blast! My problem is I'm too idealistic. I am also pragamatic enough to realise that the world isn't going to go nuclear-free in my lifetime. But credit to Obama for going for it.
However, I believe that Obama would have had more kudos if he had refused the Peace Prize, saying something along the lines that "I'm honoured blah blah blah...but we are not there yet...or...it's early days yet..." Now, that would have REALLY given him credibility.
Legum servi sumus ut liberi esse possimus. |
|
|
|
John Prigent
Homosapien
United Kingdom
8794 Posts |
Posted - 12 October 2009 : 10:46:21 AM
|
I'd be very surprised if the world _ever_ went nuclear-weapon-free. (I'm assuming that none of us want to give up nuclear power, please start a separate thread if you do, so we can argue about that.) Centuries ago there was a Papal interdict (I think that's what it was called) against - wait for it ------ crossbows. They were an unchristian weapon because a even a peasant could use them to kill a knight. Only those rulers whose armies didn't have them thought it was a good idea. Sorry, but the genie is out of the bottle and there's no way to stuff him back in. This is nothing to do with deterrence, just a simple fact: the methods of making them are widely known so there's no way to stop them being made.
Cheers
John
Sum, ergo cogito |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
Obama wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize
