• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Obama wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
What has skipping Church, have to do with any thing. Not all your presidents have even been practicing Christians. And those that were, like Bush, have shown their Christianity by wanting to nuke every thing that moved.

You have a President who is prepared to engage with the rest of the world.
A prosperous and peaceful world will at last make a prosperous and respected America.
 
Last edited:

gnomon

Well-Known Member
What has skipping Church, have to do with any thing. Not all your presidents have even been practicing Christians. And those that were, like Bush, have shown their Christianity by wanting to nuke every thing that moved.

You have a President who is prepared to engage with the rest of the world.
A prosperous and peaceful world will a last make a prosperous and respected America.

How so?

edit: Yeah I'm bustin' your chops. I cannot argue against Obama trying to move away from Bush's foreign policy and "preparing to engage the rest of the world" but I just want to see your reasons. Like his recent efforts at the UN on nuclear disarmament.
 
Last edited:

DallasApple

Depends Upon My Mood..
A lot of Christians dont go to church every week(or ever)..I would rather him be honest about it and go when he feels led than go every week just to put on a show for people.

Love

Dallas
 

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
How so?

edit: Yeah I'm bustin' your chops. I cannot argue against Obama trying to move away from Bush's foreign policy and "preparing to engage the rest of the world" but I just want to see your reasons. Like his recent efforts at the UN on nuclear disarmament.

He has re-engaged the USA in the work of the UN
He has persuaded China to support resolutions over Iran.
He has persuaded Russia to start dialog over defense matters involving the middle east, by withdrawing the threat of the Bush proposed defense shield in Turkey. Russia at last sees that they have a common interest in this matter with the USA

He has acknowledged and discussed the interdependence of the USA with the rest of the world on both energy recourses and global warming.

He has also made it clear to Israel that it can no longer expect unthinking support for its policies on the left bank.

All five of these are unique achievements for an American president, in recent times.
And represent a sea change in American policy.
 

gnomon

Well-Known Member
He has re-engaged the USA in the work of the UN
He has persuaded China to support resolutions over Iran.
He has persuaded Russia to start dialog over defense matters involving the middle east, by withdrawing the threat of the Bush proposed defense shield in Turkey. Russia at last sees that they have a common interest in this matter with the USA

He has acknowledged and discussed the interdependence of the USA with the rest of the world on both energy recourses and global warming.

He has also made it clear to Israel that it can no longer expect unthinking support for its policies on the left bank.

All five of these are unique achievements for an American president, in recent times.
And represent a sea change in American policy.

I would argue that the US has always been at work with the UN but agree that he has changed our diplomatic measure and apparent respectability within the UN. And Obama's position towards Iran during the protests over the elections was not accepted as well as it seems by many leaders. Though I happen to agree with his position because I felt trying to give the appearance of intervening would have been worse.

When did Obama scrap the missile defense system. They scrapped the plans for Poland and the Czech Republic but decided to use short range missiles in Turkey. As of two weeks ago plans to sell missile defense systems to Turkey and a definite end to insalling those systems in Eastern Europe were the current administrations goals. Yes, this is a favorable move for Russia but not for our alliances with those Eastern European states.
Technical, Political Hurdles Await Obama Missile Plan - Defense News
Obama administration officials are selling the range, flexibility and interoperability of its new missile defense shield, but the envisioned framework - which includes numerous nations and systems - faces key technical and political hurdles.
U.S. Marine Corps Gen. James Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the Senate Armed Services Committee on Sept. 24 that the new missile shield will be an upgrade over the now-scrapped Bush administration plan to deploy a sophisticated radar to the Czech Republic and 10 interceptors to Poland.
The newly envisioned system, Cartwright said, will feature more sensors that can see farther out, adding range the Bush system never imagined.
That's from the end of September. There were plans in October for an envoy to meet with officials to continue the plans on the purchase of missiles from the US. though I don't hold this as necessarily good or bad at the moment.
 

Kathryn

It was on fire when I laid down on it.
Yeh - as soon as I saw "skipped church" I didn't even bother to read the rest.


Oh come on, where's your sense of humor? The list is OBVIOUSLY tongue in cheek!

I don't give a rat's *** if he goes to church or not - wait, I take that back. I actually prefer that he AVOIDS the Reverent Wright's rantings.

But apparently he didn't pay a bit of attention to him the twenty years he attended that church, so on second thought I don't guess I care after all.
 

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
That's from the end of September. There were plans in October for an envoy to meet with officials to continue the plans on the purchase of missiles from the US. though I don't hold this as necessarily good or bad at the moment.

Europe finds the new arrangement far more acceptable to the Bush one.

The last thing the east Europeans need is to spend their cash on missiles, they are near enough broke as it is. There is no realistic level of arms that can ensure their protection from either Russia or any where else.
I am sure there will be plenty of lobbying and bribes on offer from the arms industry, both on their, and American, politicians to spend as much as possible, including long term debt arrangements.

This shield is not necessary at all, as Eastern Europe will never be the target.
 

gnomon

Well-Known Member
Europe finds the new arrangement far more acceptable to the Bush one.

The last thing the east Europeans need is to spend their cash on missiles, they are near enough broke as it is. There is no realistic level of arms that can ensure their protection from either Russia or any where else.
I am sure there will be plenty of lobbying and bribes on offer from the arms industry, both on their, and American, politicians to spend as much as possible, including long term debt arrangements.

This shield is not necessary at all, as Eastern Europe will never be the target.

But that doesn't alter the fact that the Obama administration never made a move to remove the missile defense system. They merely moved it.

As far as the threat of Russia it depends upon whose point of view you take during the conflict last year. Namely did Russia instigate the Georgia bombing of South Ossetia or did Saakashvili? Most people pointed their finger at Russia. Those individuals very much find Russia to continue to be a military threat in Eastern Europe. Add on top of that the issue of the pipeline as well and I'm sure many Eastern Europeans disagree with your sentiment. However, given it's most likely Saakashvili that started the whole conflict and the US was seen as pure hypocrites in slamming Russia during that conflict remains the most reasonable analysis of the situation.

Given the poor relations between Iran and Turkey, not to mention the fact that while everyone speaks of a marked improvement of US favorability around the world that improvement does not apply to the Middle East, I fail to see how this administration essentially continuing a policy of the former administration is considered good for them but bad for the last administration. That's nothing more than biased perception.

Of couse, it still may be that the whole plan is scrapped but if it is it's appears it will be a NATO decision and not a US one.
 

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
But that doesn't alter the fact that the Obama administration never made a move to remove the missile defense system. They merely moved it.

As far as the threat of Russia it depends upon whose point of view you take during the conflict last year. Namely did Russia instigate the Georgia bombing of South Ossetia or did Saakashvili? Most people pointed their finger at Russia. Those individuals very much find Russia to continue to be a military threat in Eastern Europe. Add on top of that the issue of the pipeline as well and I'm sure many Eastern Europeans disagree with your sentiment. However, given it's most likely Saakashvili that started the whole conflict and the US was seen as pure hypocrites in slamming Russia during that conflict remains the most reasonable analysis of the situation.

Given the poor relations between Iran and Turkey, not to mention the fact that while everyone speaks of a marked improvement of US favorability around the world that improvement does not apply to the Middle East, I fail to see how this administration essentially continuing a policy of the former administration is considered good for them but bad for the last administration. That's nothing more than biased perception.

Of couse, it still may be that the whole plan is scrapped but if it is it's appears it will be a NATO decision and not a US one.


I am afraid I find that all a bit of a ramble.

The key point about the shield is that the new arrangement was made after discussion with Russia not simply imposed. The chances are, what remains of it will never be implemented.

Russia is an economic threat to the whole of Europe, because all of us have become Dependant on its continuing supply of liquid natural gas. ( up to 30% in the case of the UK )
We are far less fearful of its Arms as their use would gain it nothing.

The Georgia incident, was not an unexpected spat, it was almost an inevitability.

I would say Obamas initiative in the middle east are causing some alarm in Israel, and some provisional welcome amongst the Muslim factions, who have , in the light of experience, expressed some doubt about its likely success.

Turkey is not directly threatened by Iran, I can think of no country who would willingly fight against the Turks. They have, long held, serious disputes, that in other countries would have led to war.
 

gnomon

Well-Known Member
I am afraid I find that all a bit of a ramble.

The key point about the shield is that the new arrangement was made after discussion with Russia not simply imposed. The chances are, what remains of it will never be implemented.

Russia is an economic threat to the whole of Europe, because all of us have become Dependant on its continuing supply of liquid natural gas. ( up to 30% in the case of the UK )
We are far less fearful of its Arms as their use would gain it nothing.

The Georgia incident, was not an unexpected spat, it was almost an inevitability.

I would say Obamas initiative in the middle east are causing some alarm in Israel, and some provisional welcome amongst the Muslim factions, who have , in the light of experience, expressed some doubt about its likely success.

Turkey is not directly threatened by Iran, I can think of no country who would willingly fight against the Turks. They have, long held, serious disputes, that in other countries would have led to war.

My overall point is that this administration has not scrapped the idea of a missile defense system. They have moved it from one area to another. However, that may still get scrapped and I think it will. The move to place the system in Turkey was Russia's idea from the start when Putin argued this in 2007. From this perspective this move can be seen as an overture to reduce US tensions with Russia.

Now it can be argued that this move is a move towards trying to increase the peace but it was not, as I've read on numerous forums, a complete scrapping of the system. Given that the US will begin a naval based missile defense system in that region to be implemented by 2011, arguably as a system still against an Iranian nuclear threat, it still remains that this administration is pursuing some form of militarization with our Eastern European allies. There is still the fact that the Obama administration seeks to pursue a missile defense system, both land and naval based, to be implemented even later.

It's one thing to note that scrapping a specific plan in one location eases tensions between the US and Russia. It's another to say that the whole concept has been scrapped. Also, that none of this can be reasonably concluded to lead to further world peace via decreased militarization.

edit: It should be noted that not even the administration stated it was scrapping the existing plan based on any overtures of peace at all. That's pretty much final for any argument that this was deserving of the Peace award. It was new technology and a reevaluation of the threat from Iran which determined a new placement for a system and lower costs.
 
Last edited:

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
My overall point is that this administration has not scrapped the idea of a missile defense system. They have moved it from one area to another. However, that may still get scrapped and I think it will. The move to place the system in Turkey was Russia's idea from the start when Putin argued this in 2007. From this perspective this move can be seen as an overture to reduce US tensions with Russia.

Now it can be argued that this move is a move towards trying to increase the peace but it was not, as I've read on numerous forums, a complete scrapping of the system. Given that the US will begin a naval based missile defense system in that region to be implemented by 2011, arguably as a system still against an Iranian nuclear threat, it still remains that this administration is pursuing some form of militarization with our Eastern European allies. There is still the fact that the Obama administration seeks to pursue a missile defense system, both land and naval based, to be implemented even later.

It's one thing to note that scrapping a specific plan in one location eases tensions between the US and Russia. It's another to say that the whole concept has been scrapped. Also, that none of this can be reasonably concluded to lead to further world peace via decreased militarization.

edit: It should be noted that not even the administration stated it was scrapping the existing plan based on any overtures of peace at all. That's pretty much final for any argument that this was deserving of the Peace award. It was new technology and a reevaluation of the threat from Iran which determined a new placement for a system and lower costs.

The whole shield plan is faulty. No one would wait to shoot down Iranian missiles if they had long range missile capacity. The Russians were probably correct in thinking the shield had at least a dual defensive role Involving both them and Iran.

I am sure that the award was never based on the removal of the shield, as it was only a proposal, and it is the least of the points I listed.
If the concept is still alive it can only be through the efforts of armaments lobby, as it make no tactical sense. Its only true purpose was for preemptive strike capability. That is better done on a mobile platform, or it would itself be a target.

The reduction in the heightening tension between Russia and the USA certainly would have been a factor in the award.
 

Sententia

Well-Known Member
Wow. Amazed by the responses.

Maddow: It’s Obama Derangement Syndrome - Daily Kos TV (beta)

The Nobel Peace Prize 2009
"for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples"

Gratz Obama! For those that disagree or think the prize has some how been cheapened I would guess you think yourselves rather original. Of course almost every time a nobel peace prize is granted a large percentage of people get riled. (Look at past controversies) I just did not think it would be so many american people upset that their president is getting a prize for working towards peace.
 

kai

ragamuffin
Wow. Amazed by the responses.

Maddow: It’s Obama Derangement Syndrome - Daily Kos TV (beta)



Gratz Obama! For those that disagree or think the prize has some how been cheapened I would guess you think yourselves rather original. Of course almost every time a nobel peace prize is granted a large percentage of people get riled. (Look at past controversies) I just did not think it would be so many american people upset that their president is
getting a prize for working towards peace.

Where? When? working towards Peace with who?
 

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
Where? When? working towards Peace with who?

Read through my back posts and you will find out.

You must remember most Americans are not interested in world affairs, so little is reported in the home media.

Bush never knew where even the leading countries were, or which leader belonged to which. It was like he was proud of his ignorance.

You are clearly suffering from ODS
 
Last edited:

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
Wow. Amazed by the responses.

Maddow: It’s Obama Derangement Syndrome - Daily Kos TV (beta)



Gratz Obama! For those that disagree or think the prize has some how been cheapened I would guess you think yourselves rather original. Of course almost every time a nobel peace prize is granted a large percentage of people get riled. (Look at past controversies) I just did not think it would be so many american people upset that their president is getting a prize for working towards peace.

Excellent
Thanks for the link
 

DallasApple

Depends Upon My Mood..
Wow. Amazed by the responses.

Maddow: It’s Obama Derangement Syndrome - Daily Kos TV (beta)



Gratz Obama! For those that disagree or think the prize has some how been cheapened I would guess you think yourselves rather original. Of course almost every time a nobel peace prize is granted a large percentage of people get riled. (Look at past controversies) I just did not think it would be so many american people upset that their president is getting a prize for working towards peace.

Im really glad someone respected like Maddow spoke up.I think she told it like it is.I was appalled watching Americans cheer that Obama failed at winning the Olympic bid.So we are cheering when he fails at something..and sqawking and and booing when he is honored by the rest of the world.

Thats really sad.

Love

Dallas
 

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
Im really glad someone respected like Maddow spoke up.I think she told it like it is.I was appalled watching Americans cheer that Obama failed at winning the Olympic bid.So we are cheering when he fails at something..and sqawking and and booing when he is honored by the rest of the world.

Thats really sad.

Love

Dallas

Are they just saying I told you so...
A black man fails as expected...
It confirms all the usual prejudices...
 

DallasApple

Depends Upon My Mood..
Are they just saying I told you so...
A black man fails as expected...
It confirms all the usual prejudices...

I dont know what the reason is but when you are HAPPY that your president fails at something that is pathetic.Maybe he hasnt gootne a lot of his ideals accomplished "yet" ..but he certaintly hasnt done anything to deserve the kind of hatred aimed at him.

You know its really childish..It reminds me of someone(a child) laughing at another child if they fall down and get hurt just because they dont like them.And then booing them when they win a school award for something....

Except this is worse..wanting your own president to fail is ignorant.I dont care if you hate his guts or not.(I suppose it does matter what it is you want him to fail at..but the U.S.A hosting the summmer Olympics? thats an HONOR for the whole country)Its like saying YAY !!! WE ALL LOST! Ha ha ha ha ha!:facepalm:

Love

Dallas
 

linwood

Well-Known Member
I dont know what the reason is but when you are HAPPY that your president fails at something that is pathetic.Maybe he hasnt gootne a lot of his ideals accomplished "yet" ..but he certaintly hasnt done anything to deserve the kind of hatred aimed at him.

You know its really childish..It reminds me of someone(a child) laughing at another child if they fall down and get hurt just because they dont like them.And then booing them when they win a school award for something....

Except this is worse..wanting your own president to fail is ignorant.I dont care if you hate his guts or not.(I suppose it does matter what it is you want him to fail at..but the U.S.A hosting the summmer Olympics? thats an HONOR for the whole country)Its like saying YAY !!! WE ALL LOST! Ha ha ha ha ha!:facepalm:

Love

Dallas

I`d have to qualify that statement Dallas.

When your president fails at something like getting the Olympics to your nation it is foolish to be happy about since getting the Olympics is a positive thing for the country.

If your president should fail at pushing the Patriot Act through congress I think that warrants a little joy and or celebration since it`s not a "good" thing at all.

I unfortunately never got that joy or celebration.
Oh well.
 

gnomon

Well-Known Member
Are they just saying I told you so...
A black man fails as expected...
It confirms all the usual prejudices...

********.

I've detailed for everyone many of the problems with Obama's administration and addressed the reasons you finally scraped together. That you failed to even get it right when you said the administration scrapped the missile defense system in Turkey, rather than what actually happened, only shows your spouting off about things this American shows more knowledge and understanding of. That you were also quick to slam Americans down shows the only prejudice revealed in this thread.

I'm amazed by the people upset that the Nobel committee is taking heat over this but cannot provide their own reasoning. Cannot even think for themselves and show their own knowledge.

That's what this is about. People will forget about this whole thing by year's end or at least by the time awards are handed out next year.

How about people take some time to actually brush up on the administration's position on those issues I brought up. What do people know about our policies with the Americas? What about Plan Colombia? Does a small overture to Cuba really balance against the continuation of failed foreign drug policies?

It's quite evident that the award was granted upon perceptions, rhetoric and what people hope Obama will achieve.

Rachel Maddow is another talking head who offered up just enough wisdom to flush down the toilet. I can't believe she actually used those examples. How stupid are people going to be over this.

I'll side with Obama on this one. There were far more deserving people and a lot of folks are being premature.
 
Top