President Obama celebrates his Nobel Peace Prize by...

Discussion in 'News / Current Events' started by preachinjesus, Dec 9, 2009.

  1. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    99
    ...sending 30,000 troops into Afghanistan and escalating the war.

    I'm still trying to get a picture of why the committee gave him this prize. Does anybody have a clue?

    The irony of his address last week and Peace Prize celebration this week is just speaking to me today. I dunno...can't make heads or tails of it.

    (Please, let's keep the bashing of our President to a minimum.) :)
     
  2. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    The peace prize issue aside, sending additional troops into Afghanistan is a wise move. It should have been done sonner, imo.
     
  3. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,609
    Likes Received:
    157
    Were you this cynical when Bush started the totally unnecessary war in Iraq?
     
  4. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    Makes no difference. Pres Bush was never awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. That is the point of the post.

    The Nobel Prize Peace is a joke.
     
  5. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    99
    Well actually I was, and still am, completely against the military action in Iraq. It was a foolish act forced by mega-corporations.

    My point is that it is very ironic that President Obama will be receiving a Nobel Peace Prize while the ink is still wet on orders sending a large force of military servicemen into hostile territory to kill the enemy. It doesn't seem peaceful to send troops, en masse, into battle.
     
    #5 preachinjesus, Dec 9, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 9, 2009
  6. sag38

    sag38
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    4,394
    Likes Received:
    1
    Yep, it didn't take long for the Baptist Board's chief Bush basher to chime in. After all President Obama is only trying to end what Bush started. Right? It's all Bush's fault. :cool:
     
  7. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    Pres Obama's Afghan plan has got to be the silliest war effort I have ever heard of.

    'So pre-pare, say a prayer, send the word, send the word to be-ware. We'll be o-ver, we're com-ing o-ver, And we won't come back 'til , well, a few months, O-ver There'
     
  8. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's a common misnomer to equate "peace" with "not fighting". Pacifism and peace are not synonymous.

    That's a completely different topic, though, from whether awarding the NPP to Obama was warranted.
     
  9. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    PLEASE - try just once to STAY ON TOPIC
     
  10. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    99
    Not necessarily. It's hard to say I'm being peaceful while holding a gun to your head.

    While I understand the argument that in order to have peace you must use force to accomplish it, that is an argument from the world's perspective that is deeply flawed. (Lest we forget our Christian foundation, God's plan for peace never begins with force.) Show me any of the last ten Nobel Peace Prize winners (not including President Obama) and show me how they accomplished their peaceful goals through force. It is not the hope of this award.

    Peace through force is not peace, it is subjugation until the man with the gun is looking the other direction.

    I'm waiting for him to show up in NY on Saturday and collect the Heisman...;)
     
  11. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    But if someone is holding a gun to your head, and I kill or disarm that person, I can be said to be a peacemaker, since I prevented someone from doing violence upon you.
    Not so. Jesus said "blessed are the peacemakers", not "blessed are the peacekeepers". Frequently, it takes force to make peace.
    The NPP is not necessarily an accurate representation of true peacemakers, since it is not consistently given based on accomplishment.
     
  12. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,287
    Likes Received:
    780
    Peace is not the lack of war but the lack of the threat of war. There is no peace when anyone has a gun in their hand. But having a gun in your hand does not prove the lack of desire for peace. unreasonable people have to be dealt with and if those unreasonable people want to use force to impose their will on others then they must be dealt with and it may be necessary to do it with equal or greater force to obtain peace.
     
  13. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    99
    Yet you have created "peace" through violence. A strange mix.

    I respcetfully disagree with this completely. :)

    Well the Prize is to be awarded (according to their rules) on the basis that: during the preceding year [...] shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.

    I don't see how sending 30,000 troops into a combat arena is any of this. That is my position for this thread. :)

    Now back to my point, which I believe you overlooked, is that I don't see anywhere in the past 10 years where a Nobel Peace Prize laureate has been awarded this prize and then sent troops into battle within a proximity of the award.
     
  14. sag38

    sag38
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    4,394
    Likes Received:
    1
    Pacifism will be the runation of this nation. I love the United States. I don't want to see it handed over to Muslim radicals, the Russians, or anyone else for that matter because some can't seem to grasp the true concept of turning the other cheek.
     
  15. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Indeed, I know it sounds odd, but it is what it is. Jesus, Prince of Peace, drove the merchants out of the temple in a fury. I don't think it was referring to the kind of car he drove ;)
    Understood, and appreciated.
    Given that, the the year preceding, Obama wasn't even POTUS (he was only POTUS for a few weeks when he was nominated), it stands to reason that the prize committee isn't adhering to its own resipient standards. Seeing as how past recipients have often shown abundant moral corruptness, such as Yassir Arafat, it's quite self evident that a Nobel laureate's actions don't necessarily contribute to (or detract from) the subjectivity of eligibility.
     

Share This Page

Loading...