• 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!

Who should have received the Nobel Peace Prize this year?

Catz Part Deux

Catz Part Deux

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2009
Messages
28,721
Reaction score
6,738
Location
Redneck Riviera
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
If you agree with Obama's selection, great. Personally, though, I would have awarded it to Mousavi and Karroubi. Your thoughts?
 
:ranton:

Micheal Jackson or maybe the most influential human rights person in China. Or even someone from the Iraq Veterans Against the War who shows up to big events to try to get their voice heard and build momentum to a cause on their own. I think if Obama would have been even more stern with Israel I'd be more open to think he was a peace dealer. If they are big enough to not listen to us on settlements then Obama should be big enough to defund them. But then again he can't really chastise so long as he is willing to nation build.

:rantoff:
 
dirtpoorchris said:
:ranton:

Micheal Jackson or maybe the most influential human rights person in China. Or even someone from the Iraq Veterans Against the War who shows up to big events to try to get their voice heard and build momentum to a cause on their own. I think if Obama would have been even more stern with Israel I'd be more open to think he was a peace dealer. If they are big enough to not listen to us on settlements then Obama should be big enough to defund them. But then again he can't really chastise so long as he is willing to nation build.

:rantoff:
Click to expand...



I don't know if you were serious about Michael Jackson, but they don't award posthumously, so he wouldn't have been eligible to be nominated.
 
I've been surprised at the embrace of Mousavi and Karroubi by the U.S. neoconservative movement, as Mousavi has traditionally been a hard liner; he supported the hostage capture and strongly opposed acceptance of Western aid after the war with Iraq, while Karroubi favors leftist economic policies anathema to most rightists. The support of Mousavi in particular is odd, as he most certainly did not favor laissez-faire domestic policies during his tenure as prime minister. And neither has actually engaged in any concrete action that truly furthered global peace; moreover, the fact that Mousavi failed to condemn his supporters who engaged in legitimate looting and vandalism alongside similarly large but peaceful rallies in favor of Ahmadinejad was troubling. It's also disconcerting that Rezaee is ignored even though he gained a larger percentage of the vote than Mousavi did; is he not a legitimate candidate because he's a hard-liner?
 
Whoever the people in charge of selecting pick.
 
David Patreaus.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Who should have received the Nobel Peace Prize this year?
Click to expand...


The guy who won it, whose name was always going to be: "Not Bush".


73129c.jpg
 
Redress said:
Whoever the people in charge of selecting pick.
Click to expand...

I gotta agree with Kandahar here:

Kandahar said:
I don't know how many time I've seen someone create a thread criticizing some (completely legal) policy by a private company, school, or church...only to have someone else immediately pipe in with "They're a private entity, they can do what they want." As though this somehow negates the point that the original poster was making.

If someone feels offended by a private company's actions, I think they can and should voice their disapproval. And unless the critic is suggesting that the government needs to step in and PREVENT private entities from implementing their policy, responding with "Private entities can do what they want" is completely irrelevant, and generally misses the point entirely.
Click to expand...
 
David Carradine (posthumously).
 
I think the winner should've been whoever publicly condemned and unceremoniously ended the US's systematic implementation of torture.

Oh, wait: it was.
 
Nobody should have.
There was no major movement towards peace in 2009, there was nobody to award a peace prize to.
I think that by giving the prize anyway, the committee has just declared it as unimportant and irrelevant.
 
If anyone at all, then the prize should be issued collectively to the US military.

They freed tens of millions of people from the oppressive tyranny of the Taliban and the Baathists. If those same people fail to keep their newfound freedom, that's their own fault.
 
Goshin said:
If anyone at all, then the prize should be issued collectively to the US military.

They freed tens of millions of people from the oppressive tyranny of the Taliban and the Baathists. If those same people fail to keep their newfound freedom, that's their own fault.
Click to expand...





I thanked you cause of your thoughts, but its a worthless prize given to some of the biggest despots, terrorists and bums on this planet. The US military is above that piddly liberal lackey "prize",
 
If the prize is to be given to those who have the greatest 'aspirations,' those who may in the future do something, those who inspire the most people and that (if given the prize) could create the most peace (if they felt like it, or made some vague promises); I believe the canidate is obvious.

By giving a Nobel Peace Prize to a nuclear warhead, the NPPC would have met each one of its laughable criteria when it selected Barry. Not only that, but it would have gone above an beyond the criteria.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
If you agree with Obama's selection, great. Personally, though, I would have awarded it to Mousavi and Karroubi. Your thoughts?
Click to expand...

It should have been awarded to me. :cool: My vision of peace is the best. My body of work is quite large, with my postings on various forums over the years...
 
1069 said:
I think the winner should've been whoever publicly condemned and unceremoniously ended the US's systematic implementation of torture.
Click to expand...

Technically, that would be George W. Bush.
 
The person who should have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize is Dr. Sima Samar from Afganistan, she is an activist for womens rights and has long been providing much needed health facilities and care for girls and women in Afganistan. She even stood up to a taliban commander who was responsible for bombing her clinic, and managed not only to survive but to have he equipment restored by the taliban. She has risked life and limb to help win freedom for her fellow countrywomen, and she is doing things that Obama can only talk about doing. She was the one who deserved to win, but instead the award went to our "bowing" president Jimmy Carter the 2nd, oops I mean Barack Obama.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
If you agree with Obama's selection, great. Personally, though, I would have awarded it to Mousavi and Karroubi. Your thoughts?
Click to expand...
George Bush - I mean if Obama gets a peace prize for continuing the war in Afghanistan then we might as well have given it to Dubya. :lol: What has Obama actually done to abolish nukes anyway?
 
Toothpicvic said:
George Bush - I mean if Obama gets a peace prize for continuing the war in Afghanistan then we might as well have given it to Dubya. :lol: What has Obama actually done to abolish nukes anyway?
Click to expand...

That is not why Obama got this:roll:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom