YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
And Obama's lack of acumen may end up costing us all much more that we might want to pay.
-
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
- Thread starter twinmama
- Start date
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
so no one actually accomplishes any peace?
.........well atleast they tried
why not change the name of the award to "Nobel Attempted Peace Prize"? its like the purple ribbon they give to the kids that come in 7th place in the race.
World peace has never been achieved.
But it is worth every effort.
That is why the award exists.
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
Your Judgement not ours.
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
Indeed, Terry... indeed. I am normally very supportive of you and your viewpoints and with my point made, I won't trouble you any further on this matter.
JMorris
Democratic Socialist
you cant give an American president a Peace Prize and say they are working towards world peace. america is the most outwardly aggressive nation on earth. making no judgments on the wars (in this case) that america involve themselves in, in the end their still wars.........and wars, be they just or not, by definition do not add to world peace.
im quite sure there were more suitable candidates for the award. ngo's work far more for world peace. surely someone in one of those organizations were more deserving of the award than a president running 2 wars (whether they were started by him, or be they just or not)
thats not to say he hasnt made commendable gestures to assure peace in other areas. but things being as they are, im quite sure there more suitable candidates.
Alceste
Vagabond
You live in Canada, don't you? What's Obama costing you?
Alceste
Vagabond
I disagree - who is better placed to make meaningful advances in the interest of peace and disarmament than the president of the most violent, most heavily armed nation on earth? The fact that he has expressed any interest in peaceful objectives at all sets a revolutionary tone in American politics, especially in light of the past decade - Obama's administration is succeeding America's most violent and dangerous administration in living memory. If he ends up succeeding in realizing these stated objectives (disarmament, diplomacy, peaceful leadership), it could be the most significant advance in peacemaking since the end of WWII.
Well, NGOs didn't topple the Republican administration, thereby interfering with the neo-con policy of continuous warfare and averting the huge risk of a THIRD war with Iran. With the Democrats in charge, there is at least the possiblity of an end in sight in Afghanistan and Iraq. I too would like to see it sped up a bit.
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
Can you wait a few years for the answer? Time will tell how wise Obama's machinations are.
Alceste
Vagabond
I'm pretty confident I know what will happen - the ball started rolling a long while ago, way before Obama (before Bush, even). You want me to wait a few years so I can blame Obama for the inevitable economic disaster brought about by the trade liberalising, deregulating, anti-tax policies of Reagan / Bush I / Clinton and Bush II? Obama has an opportunity to mitigate the human impact of the disaster, but not avert it.
DallasApple
Depends Upon My Mood..
I completely agree..I think thats why he won the award just for the "hope" that he will be good to what he speaks of and reach a hand across the table rathher than painting war pain on his cheeks .And being obsessed with with flexing his muscles and showing his POWER.
Love
Dallas
JMorris
Democratic Socialist
point taken. he is obviously quite a bit more sane than Bush, but historically, the democrats have been just as prone towards military aggression as the republicans, and i dont see a huge difference between him and historic democratic presidents. while the difference between that and bush is significant, starting insane wars for close to no reason, democrats have made wars & conflicts of choice about as often as republicans. but, given the insanity that was the bush admin, perhaps he does deserve praise for simply not being as insane
point taken. got no argument with that
kai
ragamuffin
No i will just have to reappraise my opinion on the the Nobel Peace Prize.
kai
ragamuffin
Oh come on Terry have you read those awards? there is no comparison.
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
kai
ragamuffin
and you would place Obama in the list ? do you think time may be a common denominator? havnt most of those people been doing their thing that got them the prize for years?
2008:
for his important efforts, on several continents and over more than three decades, to resolve international conflicts.
2007:
for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change. Founded in 1988
2006:
for their efforts to create economic and social development from below
by the look of it been doing said work since 1974
2005:
for their efforts to prevent nuclear energy from being used for military purposes and to ensure that nuclear energy for peaceful purposes is used in the safest possible way.
founded in 1957
Last edited:
JMorris
Democratic Socialist
given the state of american politics.......... it is an accomplishment
kai
ragamuffin
so whoever came next would have got it?
