• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama the Warmonger and Nobel Peace Prize Laureate

LowDown

LowDown

Curmudgeon
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2012
Messages
14,185
Reaction score
8,768
Location
Houston
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Members of the Nobel Peace Prize committee have started to think that it was mistake to give Obama the prize. [Whow! You think??]

According to the AP:

By some sobering measures, the case for Obama the peacemaker is difficult to make. Analysts who track conflict, refugee populations, terrorist attacks and political upheaval say the world has only become less peaceful during Obama’s tenure, a trend that began just before he took office. Instances of terrorism have peaked, deaths in battle around the world are at a 25-year high, and the number of refugees and displaced people has reached a level not seen in sixty years, according to the 2016 Global Peace Index, a report on international stability produced by the nonpartisan think-tank the Institute for Economic and Peace. The researchers attributed the trends to the expanded warfare in the Middle East and North Africa and broad ripples across the region and in Europe.
Click to expand...

Obama is aware of all of this. When he says he's leaving the world better off he's lying through his teeth.

Let's look at some of the smooth moves this huckster made:

Militarily toppled the government in Lybia, then left and let it fester into a haven for terrorists.

Left Iraq and then waited a while until ISIS grew up to a size where it could no longer be ignored, then let troops, an inadequate number of troops, trickle back in.

Guaranteed the Taliban in Afghanistan a victory by setting a date for American pull out.

Implied he would support Syrian rebels, and then failed to do an adequate job of that.

Russia has been allowed to stink up the place with its invasion of neighboring countries and its support for Assad in Syria. Obama has been completely unable to handle Putin despite the fact that Putin heads a depleted, third rate military. This is because Putin knows that the US under Obama is feckless and will not stand behind its friends.

Our European allies no longer trust the US to back them up. Neither does Japan, which is re-arming. The Philippeans, seeing American weakness and fecklessness, is talking about aligning with Russia and/or China.
 
LowDown said:
Members of the Nobel Peace Prize committee have started to think that it was mistake to give Obama the prize. [Whow! You think??]

According to the AP:



Obama is aware of all of this. When he says he's leaving the world better off he's lying through his teeth.

Let's look at some of the smooth moves this huckster made:

Militarily toppled the government in Lybia, then left and let it fester into a haven for terrorists.

Left Iraq and then waited a while until ISIS grew up to a size where it could no longer be ignored, then let troops, an inadequate number of troops, trickle back in.

Guaranteed the Taliban in Afghanistan a victory by setting a date for American pull out.

Implied he would support Syrian rebels, and then failed to do an adequate job of that.

Russia has been allowed to stink up the place with its invasion of neighboring countries and its support for Assad in Syria. Obama has been completely unable to handle Putin despite the fact that Putin heads a depleted, third rate military. This is because Putin knows that the US under Obama is feckless and will not stand behind its friends.

Our European allies no longer trust the US to back them up. Neither does Japan, which is re-arming. The Philippeans, seeing American weakness and fecklessness, is talking about aligning with Russia and/or China.
Click to expand...

It makes it clearly obvious that the Nobel Prize committee is a political agenda of someone/s. They were able to bet on hope but won't change and rescind the award. I do think the President of Colombia was a good choice this year. I hope he can get the peace deal working again.
 
LowDown said:
Members of the Nobel Peace Prize committee have started to think that it was mistake to give Obama the prize. [Whow! You think??]

According to the AP:



Obama is aware of all of this. When he says he's leaving the world better off he's lying through his teeth.

Let's look at some of the smooth moves this huckster made:

Militarily toppled the government in Lybia, then left and let it fester into a haven for terrorists.

Left Iraq and then waited a while until ISIS grew up to a size where it could no longer be ignored, then let troops, an inadequate number of troops, trickle back in.

Guaranteed the Taliban in Afghanistan a victory by setting a date for American pull out.

Implied he would support Syrian rebels, and then failed to do an adequate job of that.

Russia has been allowed to stink up the place with its invasion of neighboring countries and its support for Assad in Syria. Obama has been completely unable to handle Putin despite the fact that Putin heads a depleted, third rate military. This is because Putin knows that the US under Obama is feckless and will not stand behind its friends.

Our European allies no longer trust the US to back them up. Neither does Japan, which is re-arming. The Philippeans, seeing American weakness and fecklessness, is talking about aligning with Russia and/or China.
Click to expand...

I was rather perturbed by the Swedes giving that man a Prize before he had a real CV. But they had hated Bush and felt they had to do something to support the new leader. It was the worst kind of decision they could have made as it showed clearly how biased and motivated by political partisanship the Peace Prize is.

That Obama has been a disaster is not in doubt. What we do not yet know is, whether he had discussed the policies and measures with the allies ahead of time. The effects on foreign relations will depend on that down stream. This is possible and would explain some of the reactions that would have seemed rather complacent.
 
joG said:
I was rather perturbed by the Swedes giving that man a Prize before he had a real CV. But they had hated Bush and felt they had to do something to support the new leader. It was the worst kind of decision they could have made as it showed clearly how biased and motivated by political partisanship the Peace Prize is.

That Obama has been a disaster is not in doubt. What we do not yet know is, whether he had discussed the policies and measures with the allies ahead of time. The effects on foreign relations will depend on that down stream. This is possible and would explain some of the reactions that would have seemed rather complacent.
Click to expand...

The Norwegians are responsible for awarding the Peace Prize. The Swedes award the other Nobel prizes.

Last time I looked Obama was still not Bush, so there's that. On the other hand, war and conflict under Obama has exceeded what occurred under Bush, so I'm not sure it makes a difference any more.
 
LowDown said:
The Norwegians are responsible for awarding the Peace Prize. The Swedes award the other Nobel prizes.

Last time I looked Obama was still not Bush, so there's that. On the other hand, war and conflict under Obama has exceeded what occurred under Bush, so I'm not sure it makes a difference any more.
Click to expand...

You're right about the Norwegian/Swede thing, but not about you thoughts concerning Bush. Though, there was no official notice connecting Bush to the award to Obama that I saw, the journals and media interpreted it from public radio and television to the large print media editorials. And it does make a difference in situation, where precedence lingers on. A bad decision is remembered and disqualifies the decision maker, when honesty is discredited.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom