The Bogosity Forum

http://www.huliq.com/8738/87619/nobel-panel-defends-obama-peace-prize-award

I didn't read it really extensively but it looks to me like their argument is basically that they're awarding it based on future potential and such.  Silly, you could make that argument about just about anybody.  -_-

From the article:

QuoteIn remarks in Oslo, Jagland said the committee was "not awarding the prize for what may happen in the future but for what [Obama] has done in the previous year,"

So, then, they awarded him the prize for invading Somalia, continuing to bomb Iraq, bombing hospitals in Pakistan, bombing weddings in Afghanistan, beating the Iran war drums...

Quote from: MrBogosity on October 14, 2009, 08:22:34 PM
From the article:

So, then, they awarded him the prize for invading Somalia, continuing to bomb Iraq, bombing hospitals in Pakistan, bombing weddings in Afghanistan, beating the Iran war drums...

But he just looked soooo dreamy while doing it!  *swoon*

The noble peace prize is a joke.

Tom Lehrer quit doing political satire after Kissinger won the Nobel Peace Prize because he said that political satire was irrelevant after that.

Here's my blog post from a couple of years ago when Al Gore won it: http://www.shanekillian.com/blog/index.php?/archives/107-Thoughts-on-the-Nobel-Peace-Prize.html

Quote from: MrBogosity on October 15, 2009, 09:20:00 AM
Here's my blog post from a couple of years ago when Al Gore won it: http://www.shanekillian.com/blog/index.php?/archives/107-Thoughts-on-the-Nobel-Peace-Prize.html

In the immortal words of Stan Lee, "'nuff said".

Quote from: MrBogosity on October 14, 2009, 08:22:34 PM
From the article:

So, then, they awarded him the prize for invading Somalia, continuing to bomb Iraq, bombing hospitals in Pakistan, bombing weddings in Afghanistan, beating the Iran war drums...

@the person speaking in the article:  *facepalm*

What LadyAttis had to say about this:  [yt]4vxhUWlMhY0[/yt]


Oh, and speaking of Al Gore's prize:
"When Hitler and his Nazis built the Warsaw Ghetto and herded 500,000 Polish Jews behind its walls to await liquidation, many Polish gentiles turned their backs or applauded. Not Irena Sendler. An unfamiliar name to most people, but this remarkable woman defied the Nazis and saved 2,500 Jewish children by smuggling them out of the Warsaw Ghetto. As a health worker, she sneaked the children out between 1942 and 1943 to safe hiding places and found non-Jewish families to adopt them.

Today the old woman, gentle and courageous, is living a modest existence in her Warsaw apartment - an unsung heroine.

Her achievement went largely unnoticed for many years. Then the story was uncovered by four young students at Uniontown High School, in Kansas, who were the winners of the 2000 Kansas state National History Day competition by writing a play Life in a Jar about the heroic actions of Irena Sendler. The girls - Elizabeth Cambers, Megan Stewart, Sabrina Coons and Janice Underwood - have since gained international recognition, along with their teacher, Norman Conard. The presentation, seen in many venues in the United States and popularized by National Public Radio, C-SPAN and CBS, has brought Irena Sendler's story to a wider public.

The students continue their prize-winning dramatic presentation Life in a Jar. They have established an e-mail address isendler@hotmail.com.

Irena Sendler was born in 1910 in Otwock, a town some 15 miles southeast of Warsaw. She was greatly influenced by her father who was one of the first Polish Socialists. As a doctor his patients were mostly poor Jews.

In 1939, Germany invaded Poland, and the brutality of the Nazis accelerated with murder, violence and terror.

At the time, Irena was a Senior Administrator in the Warsaw Social Welfare Department, which operated the canteens in every district of the city. Previously, the canteens provided meals, financial aid, and other services for orphans, the elderly, the poor and the destitute. Now, through Irena, the canteens also provided clothing, medicine and money for the Jews. They were registered under fictitious Christian names, and to prevent inspections, the Jewish families were reported as being afflicted with such highly infectious diseases as typhus and tuberculosis.

But in 1942, the Nazis herded hundreds of thousands of Jews into a 16-block area that came to be known as the Warsaw Ghetto. The Ghetto was sealed and the Jewish families ended up behind its walls, only to await certain death.

Irena Sendler was so appalled by the conditions that she joined Zegota, the Council for Aid to Jews, organized by the Polish underground resistance movement, as one of its first recruits and directed the efforts to rescue Jewish children.

To be able to enter the Ghetto legally, Irena managed to be issued a pass from Warsaws Epidemic Control Department and she visited the Ghetto daily, reestablished contacts and brought food, medicines and clothing. But 5,000 people were dying a month from starvation and disease in the Ghetto, and she decided to help the Jewish children to get out.

For Irena Sendler, a young mother herself, persuading parents to part with their children was in itself a horrendous task. Finding families willing to shelter the children, and thereby willing to risk their life if the Nazis ever found out, was also not easy.

Irena Sendler, who wore a star armband as a sign of her solidarity to Jews, began smuggling children out in an ambulance. She recruited at least one person from each of the ten centers of the Social Welfare Department.

With their help, she issued hundreds of false documents with forged signatures. Irena Sendler successfully smuggled almost 2,500 Jewish children to safety and gave them temporary new identities.

Some children were taken out in gunnysacks or body bags. Some were buried inside loads of goods. A mechanic took a baby out in his toolbox. Some kids were carried out in potato sacks, others were placed in coffins, some entered a church in the Ghetto which had two entrances. One entrance opened into the Ghetto, the other opened into the Aryan side of Warsaw. They entered the church as Jews and exited as Christians. "Can you guarantee they will live?" Irena later recalled the distraught parents asking. But she could only guarantee they would die if they stayed. "In my dreams," she said, "I still hear the cries when they left their parents."

Irena Sendler accomplished her incredible deeds with the active assistance of the church. "I sent most of the children to religious establishments," she recalled. "I knew I could count on the Sisters." Irena also had a remarkable record of cooperation when placing the youngsters: "No one ever refused to take a child from me," she said.

The children were given false identities and placed in homes, orphanages and convents. Irena Sendler carefully noted, in coded form, the children's original names and their new identities. She kept the only record of their true identities in jars buried beneath an apple tree in a neighbor's back yard, across the street from German barracks, hoping she could someday dig up the jars, locate the children and inform them of their past.

In all, the jars contained the names of 2,500 children ...

But the Nazis became aware of Irena's activities, and on October 20, 1943 she was arrested, imprisoned and tortured by the Gestapo, who broke her feet and legs. She ended up in the Pawiak Prison, but no one could break her spirit. Though she was the only one who knew the names and addresses of the families sheltering the Jewish children, she withstood the torture, refusing to betray either her associates or any of the Jewish children in hiding.

Sentenced to death, Irena was saved at the last minute when Zegota members bribed one of the Germans to halt the execution. She escaped from prison but for the rest of the war she was pursued by the Gestapo.

After the war she dug up the jars and used the notes to track down the 2,500 children she placed with adoptive families and to reunite them with relatives scattered across Europe. But most lost their families during the Holocaust in Nazi death camps.

The children had known her only by her code name Jolanta. But years later, after she was honored for her wartime work, her picture appeared in a newspaper. "A man, a painter, telephoned me," said Sendler, "`I remember your face,' he said. `It was you who took me out of the ghetto.' I had many calls like that!"

Irena Sendler did not think of herself as a hero. She claimed no credit for her actions. "I could have done more," she said. "This regret will follow me to my death."

She has been honored by international Jewish organizations - in 1965 she accorded the title of Righteous Among the Nations by the Yad Vashem organization in Jerusalem and in 1991 she was made an honorary citizen of Israel.

Irena Sendler was awarded Poland's highest distinction, the Order of White Eagle in Warsaw Monday Nov. 10, 2003.

This lovely, courageous woman was one of the most dedicated and active workers in aiding Jews during the Nazi occupation of Poland. Her courage enabled not only the survival of 2,500 Jewish children but also of the generations of their descendants.


She passed away on May 12, 2008, at the age of 98.


In 2007, she was nominated to receive the Nobel Peace Prize because of her sacrifce in the pursuit of peace and justice. She lost out to Al Gore and his PowerPoint slide show about Global Warming."
- Friend's journal entry on it.

Quote from: surhotchaperchlorome on October 15, 2009, 12:36:51 PM
@the person speaking in the article:  *facepalm*

What LadyAttis had to say about this:  [yt]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/4vxhUWlMhY0&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/4vxhUWlMhY0&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/yt]


Oh, and speaking of Al Gore's prize:
"When Hitler and his Nazis built the Warsaw Ghetto and herded 500,000 Polish Jews behind its walls to await liquidation, many Polish gentiles turned their backs or applauded. Not Irena Sendler. An unfamiliar name to most people, but this remarkable woman defied the Nazis and saved 2,500 Jewish children by smuggling them out of the Warsaw Ghetto. As a health worker, she sneaked the children out between 1942 and 1943 to safe hiding places and found non-Jewish families to adopt them.

Today the old woman, gentle and courageous, is living a modest existence in her Warsaw apartment - an unsung heroine.

Her achievement went largely unnoticed for many years. Then the story was uncovered by four young students at Uniontown High School, in Kansas, who were the winners of the 2000 Kansas state National History Day competition by writing a play Life in a Jar about the heroic actions of Irena Sendler. The girls - Elizabeth Cambers, Megan Stewart, Sabrina Coons and Janice Underwood - have since gained international recognition, along with their teacher, Norman Conard. The presentation, seen in many venues in the United States and popularized by National Public Radio, C-SPAN and CBS, has brought Irena Sendler's story to a wider public.

The students continue their prize-winning dramatic presentation Life in a Jar. They have established an e-mail address isendler@hotmail.com.

Irena Sendler was born in 1910 in Otwock, a town some 15 miles southeast of Warsaw. She was greatly influenced by her father who was one of the first Polish Socialists. As a doctor his patients were mostly poor Jews.

In 1939, Germany invaded Poland, and the brutality of the Nazis accelerated with murder, violence and terror.

At the time, Irena was a Senior Administrator in the Warsaw Social Welfare Department, which operated the canteens in every district of the city. Previously, the canteens provided meals, financial aid, and other services for orphans, the elderly, the poor and the destitute. Now, through Irena, the canteens also provided clothing, medicine and money for the Jews. They were registered under fictitious Christian names, and to prevent inspections, the Jewish families were reported as being afflicted with such highly infectious diseases as typhus and tuberculosis.

But in 1942, the Nazis herded hundreds of thousands of Jews into a 16-block area that came to be known as the Warsaw Ghetto. The Ghetto was sealed and the Jewish families ended up behind its walls, only to await certain death.

Irena Sendler was so appalled by the conditions that she joined Zegota, the Council for Aid to Jews, organized by the Polish underground resistance movement, as one of its first recruits and directed the efforts to rescue Jewish children.

To be able to enter the Ghetto legally, Irena managed to be issued a pass from Warsaws Epidemic Control Department and she visited the Ghetto daily, reestablished contacts and brought food, medicines and clothing. But 5,000 people were dying a month from starvation and disease in the Ghetto, and she decided to help the Jewish children to get out.

For Irena Sendler, a young mother herself, persuading parents to part with their children was in itself a horrendous task. Finding families willing to shelter the children, and thereby willing to risk their life if the Nazis ever found out, was also not easy.

Irena Sendler, who wore a star armband as a sign of her solidarity to Jews, began smuggling children out in an ambulance. She recruited at least one person from each of the ten centers of the Social Welfare Department.

With their help, she issued hundreds of false documents with forged signatures. Irena Sendler successfully smuggled almost 2,500 Jewish children to safety and gave them temporary new identities.

Some children were taken out in gunnysacks or body bags. Some were buried inside loads of goods. A mechanic took a baby out in his toolbox. Some kids were carried out in potato sacks, others were placed in coffins, some entered a church in the Ghetto which had two entrances. One entrance opened into the Ghetto, the other opened into the Aryan side of Warsaw. They entered the church as Jews and exited as Christians. "Can you guarantee they will live?" Irena later recalled the distraught parents asking. But she could only guarantee they would die if they stayed. "In my dreams," she said, "I still hear the cries when they left their parents."

Irena Sendler accomplished her incredible deeds with the active assistance of the church. "I sent most of the children to religious establishments," she recalled. "I knew I could count on the Sisters." Irena also had a remarkable record of cooperation when placing the youngsters: "No one ever refused to take a child from me," she said.

The children were given false identities and placed in homes, orphanages and convents. Irena Sendler carefully noted, in coded form, the children's original names and their new identities. She kept the only record of their true identities in jars buried beneath an apple tree in a neighbor's back yard, across the street from German barracks, hoping she could someday dig up the jars, locate the children and inform them of their past.

In all, the jars contained the names of 2,500 children ...

But the Nazis became aware of Irena's activities, and on October 20, 1943 she was arrested, imprisoned and tortured by the Gestapo, who broke her feet and legs. She ended up in the Pawiak Prison, but no one could break her spirit. Though she was the only one who knew the names and addresses of the families sheltering the Jewish children, she withstood the torture, refusing to betray either her associates or any of the Jewish children in hiding.

Sentenced to death, Irena was saved at the last minute when Zegota members bribed one of the Germans to halt the execution. She escaped from prison but for the rest of the war she was pursued by the Gestapo.

After the war she dug up the jars and used the notes to track down the 2,500 children she placed with adoptive families and to reunite them with relatives scattered across Europe. But most lost their families during the Holocaust in Nazi death camps.

The children had known her only by her code name Jolanta. But years later, after she was honored for her wartime work, her picture appeared in a newspaper. "A man, a painter, telephoned me," said Sendler, "`I remember your face,' he said. `It was you who took me out of the ghetto.' I had many calls like that!"

Irena Sendler did not think of herself as a hero. She claimed no credit for her actions. "I could have done more," she said. "This regret will follow me to my death."

She has been honored by international Jewish organizations - in 1965 she accorded the title of Righteous Among the Nations by the Yad Vashem organization in Jerusalem and in 1991 she was made an honorary citizen of Israel.

Irena Sendler was awarded Poland's highest distinction, the Order of White Eagle in Warsaw Monday Nov. 10, 2003.

This lovely, courageous woman was one of the most dedicated and active workers in aiding Jews during the Nazi occupation of Poland. Her courage enabled not only the survival of 2,500 Jewish children but also of the generations of their descendants.


She passed away on May 12, 2008, at the age of 98.


In 2007, she was nominated to receive the Nobel Peace Prize because of her sacrifce in the pursuit of peace and justice. She lost out to Al Gore and his PowerPoint slide show about Global Warming."
- Friend's journal entry on it.

Wow. I went from cynical amusement to indignant rage in under one post.

The excuses keep piling up.  Now they're going with getting into technicalities.

First it was that the award is only for things you did on that year so Irena Sendler doesn't qualify. (somehow I doubt that if I check every single winner, I'll find they won it for something they did that very year)

Next it's...

Quote"[the recipient] shall have done the most or the best work (in the previous year) for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses"

Please point me to where anyone has actually done more to foster multilateralism, diplomacy and demilitarization recently? Like it or not, he's done a solid job of fulfilling the prize's requirements. Even before he became president, he might not have been a loud voice, but he was definitely an audible one in the requisite fields. You have only to look at the opinion polls and history books to see what obama's campaign did for international relations. He salvaged america's image around the world without actually being in charge. You need to remember that often peace (or at least the critical time required to establish it) is achieved through looking good and talking big as opposed to doing anything material. The obama campaign may not be the best example of that ever, but it ranks up there.

I agree that Irena was an astounding human being, but look at the selection criteria- she did nothing direct in any of the nomination categories, and probably achieved little indirectly either. Awarding her the peace prize would be like awarding the medal of honor to an american footballer for 'supreme bravery on the field of battle'. It doesn't work like that. She recieved due praise and suitable accolade from those awards established for bravery. From her story, I doubt she would have accepted more...

Now, perhaps there are others who have done more, but most of them are already laureates. Perhaps there are others more deserving to get some money because they're great human beings, but if you read the freaking wiki article on the prize, even with that minimal research the decision seems sound and the criticisms being made seem spurious at least on technical terms. On moral terms, well, *shrug*, your guess is as good as mine, and we're probably all fundamentally under qualified to make that guess.

Quote from: Lord T Hawkeye on October 22, 2009, 08:33:01 AM
The excuses keep piling up.  Now they're going with getting into technicalities.

First it was that the award is only for things you did on that year so Irena Sendler doesn't qualify. (somehow I doubt that if I check every single winner, I'll find they won it for something they did that very year)

Next it's...

Not to mention how Jack Kilby (?) and that other guy got the 2004 Nobel Physics Prize for work done like...what was it...40 years ago?
Man...the stuff they're willing to go through...
As far as I'm concerned, the Nobel Peace Prize is worthless.
The Nobel Economics prize (after that idiot Krugman (sp?) won it) is also damn near close.

Quote from: MrBogosity on October 14, 2009, 08:22:34 PM
From the article:

So, then, they awarded him the prize for invading Somalia, continuing to bomb Iraq, bombing hospitals in Pakistan, bombing weddings in Afghanistan, beating the Iran war drums...

Someone's response to this:

Quote1) AFAICT there has been no more US military involvement in somalia recently than at any time in the recent past. I would like to refresh your understanding of invasion in military terms: 1. The act of invading, especially the entrance of an armed force into a territory to conquer.. One surgical strike on a target supposedly against the government of Somalia since he entered office doesn't seem to qualify. Apart from the stupid designation of the president as CIC there's hardly even a link.

2) The US army might be continuing to bomb Iraq, but that's tolerable given the amount of forces still there. Forces which are being withdrawn. Would you prefer that more of your servicemen got killed on the way out because they lacked the systems they have been trained to utilise to ensure they're a bit more useful than toy soldiers? I stress again that Obama quickly and competently put a full withdrawal plan into effect almost immediately on coming into office. At this stage getting everyone out in three years is a solid, conservative strat. Faster and you'll leave whirlpools and vacuums everywhere which will just make things worse. Currently the operations are purely defensive. How is this contrary to the award's stipulations, preferably in the format 'what should he actually have done?'

3) I'm not sure what you mean here as there doesn't seem to be any information on it. A medical facility was bombed, aiming at a military target. While I disagree with that, as per the rules of war it's fair game to attack a military leader in civilian facilities unless he has surrendered or called for sanctuary and made his location clear. Information is splotchy but it doesn't appear that any civilians were killed in that particular strike. Perhaps elaborating might be in order.

4) I'm not going to do this the military way. If your army relies on joint forces to be effective, particularly an airforce, and you are fighting a fluid guerrilla force, you will kill civilians. Lots of them. If you are willing to sacrifice troops on a 1-1 basis with enemy troops you can probably do it with very, very few civilian casualties. So, Hawk, would you be willing to put out that order? Other alternatives include abandoning the occupation completely and allowing the situation to evolve naturally. At the present time the only viable crop in afghanistan is opium. A natural evolution of the situation might be problematic for a diversity of first world countries and further damage the USA's public image leading to further destabilisation. Alternatively you could go guns to the wall and simply evacuate the civilian population and carpet bomb and irradiate the country until nobody can use the land to do much any more. Again, this would probably cause more harm than good.

The issue is, Obama did not get you into this war. He wasn't even in the federal government when it started. Now he must deal with the issue as best he can. Again, I ask you, is there a better way than how he is doing it?

5)So, er, opening discussions with Iran, NOT being a firebrand when the country was on a knife-edge, putting tacit pressure on Israel to behave, at least more than any of his predecessors, and generally being as calm as is humanly possible given the situation is called 'beating the war drums' is it? Sure, he's threatened Iran. EVERYBODY threatens Iran. Have you noticed that? When Bush was threatening Iran, half the world said 'um, dude, not cool'. When Obama does it, everyone- like, really, everyone (ok, except for Chavez :P) backs him up. This is called multilateralism. It works. Pay attention, will you.

Response to someone:

Quote1) AFAICT there has been no more US military involvement in somalia recently than at any time in the recent past.

First of all, that's just completely incorrect. Second, even if it weren't, since the last President was such a vicious war-monger, shouldn't we be demanding a LOT less before giving someone any kind of peace prize?

Quote2) The US army might be continuing to bomb Iraq, but that's tolerable given the amount of forces still there.

If it was a lie to go in, then why isn't it a lie to stay? If Bush is a warmonger for getting us in, why isn't Obama a warmonger for continuing it?

QuoteForces which are being withdrawn.

Because the government of Iraq isn't giving us any choice. This exit plan was in place when Bush was still in office.

QuoteI stress again that Obama quickly and competently put a full withdrawal plan into effect almost immediately on coming into office.

This is a lie. The withdrawal plan was already there, on the timetable the Iraq government insisted on. Obama has actually been trying to delay it.

QuoteAt this stage getting everyone out in three years is a solid, conservative strat.

Pathetic excuses. As Ron Paul said, "We just marched in, we can just march out."

Quote3) I'm not sure what you mean here as there doesn't seem to be any information on it. A medical facility was bombed, aiming at a military target. While I disagree with that, as per the rules of war it's fair game to attack a military leader in civilian facilities unless he has surrendered or called for sanctuary and made his location clear. Information is splotchy but it doesn't appear that any civilians were killed in that particular strike. Perhaps elaborating might be in order.

Blatant special pleading. He deserved the peace prize because he's waging war???

Quote4) I'm not going to do this the military way. If your army relies on joint forces to be effective, particularly an airforce, and you are fighting a fluid guerrilla force, you will kill civilians.

Which is PRECISELY why it should be avoided at all costs--and PRECISELY why people who engage in such activities DO NOT DESERVE THE PEACE PRIZE.

QuoteThe issue is, Obama did not get you into this war. He wasn't even in the federal government when it started

But he supported it every chance he got. He ALWAYS voted to expand the war, and expand the troops.

QuoteAgain, I ask you, is there a better way than how he is doing it?

Yes: move to the foreign policy we're SUPPOSED to have. A humble, non-interventionist foreign policy would prevent most of these problems from happening to begin with. Ask Ron Paul; he knows all about it.

Quote5)So, er, opening discussions with Iran,

"Opening discussions" apparently meaning "insist that they give us information on nuclear weapons programs we already know they don't have"...

Quoteputting tacit pressure on Israel to behave,

And how does helping them keep THEIR nuclear weapons program a secret factor into that?

QuoteSure, he's threatened Iran. EVERYBODY threatens Iran.

Ron Paul doesn't.

QuoteHave you noticed that? When Bush was threatening Iran, half the world said 'um, dude, not cool'. When Obama does it, everyone- like, really, everyone (ok, except for Chavez Tongue) backs him up. This is called multilateralism.

No, it's called "partisan politics."

Oh, and how does Obama's continued cover-up of prisoner abuses in GiTMO make him eligible?

Well we'll see.  Knowing him, it will probably include accusations of you being a blind Ron Paul fanatic and a rather pathetic attempt at psychological analysis of your "anger problems" or whatnot.  Don't worry though, he'll likely do it to me too as I was quite venomous where I put in my own 0.02$.  That bit about "you are fighting a fluid guerrilla force, you will kill civilians." really set me off too.

Hey!  If my prediction is right, think I can be eligible for Randi's million dollars?

Update: Someone else chimed in on the matter and had this to say...

Quote"First of all, that's just completely incorrect. Second, even if it weren't, since the last President was such a vicious war-monger, shouldn't we be demanding a LOT less before giving someone any kind of peace prize?"

We the American people should. And we are. However the people who gave him the award are not. Again, this is something that neither Americans nor our president have any say over.

Quote
"If it was a lie to go in, then why isn't it a lie to stay? If Bush is a warmonger for getting us in, why isn't Obama a warmonger for continuing it?"

Obama isn't staying, he's working on getting us out, but as it's been said a MILLION times before in a million different places, Obama can't just snap his fingers and the troops will be gone, and even if he did take them all out in a week, Iraq wouldn't be any more stable or safe and it would all be a waste of effort. Then you'd be laying into him for screwing that up. When he does what you want, he's wrong, when he doesn't, he's wrong, you leave him in an impossible position.

Quote
"Because the government of Iraq isn't giving us any choice. This exit plan was in place when Bush was still in office."

Yeah, about the last year of Bush's EIGHT, let me repeat that, EIGHT years of presidency. When he went into Iraq there was NO plan for leaving.

Quote
"This is a lie. The withdrawal plan was already there, on the timetable the Iraq government insisted on. Obama has actually been trying to delay it."

While you're not actually here, I demand evidence or I claim shenanigans.

Quote
"Pathetic excuses. As Ron Paul said, "We just marched in, we can just march out.""

Ron Paul is an idiot who catered to internet junkies who didn't know squat about politics. I met them, I tried to have even basic conversations with Ron Paul fans. The most clear cut answer I got was "he's cool man!" "He's a third option!" "I like his ideas!"(none of which could be named). Remember Vietnam? THAT is what happens when we just "leave".

Quote
"Blatant special pleading. He deserved the peace prize because he's waging war???"

Many people believe that war will lead to peace. Remember that the phrase "If you wish for peace, prepare for war." Has been around for millennial. Not everyone believes peace is achieved through being nice.

Quote
"Which is PRECISELY why it should be avoided at all costs--and PRECISELY why people who engage in such activities DO NOT DESERVE THE PEACE PRIZE."

(Hawkeye's 0.02$: I HEARTILY agree! Seriously Saur! Unfortunate but neccessary sacrifices? Spoken like a true fascist!)

You both lack understanding of reality. Should have had some in greater amounts, I suspect you would be able to actually make an argument instead of yelling.



Quote
"But he supported it every chance he got. He ALWAYS voted to expand the war, and expand the troops."

(more pennies: I love the way people harped on McCain because he voted with Bush on so many things but ask them to check how often Obama did and they very swiftly change the subject)

And you can verify this with voting records? All Obama did was "oppose" the war. Why? Because he wasn't in an office allowed to vote on it. Did you just forget his campaign? People rammed him over "I never supported the war!" Well of course your didn't Mr Obama, you weren't even elected into an office that could vote on it!

Quote
"Yes: move to the foreign policy we're SUPPOSED to have. A humble, non-interventionist foreign policy would prevent most of these problems from happening to begin with. Ask Ron Paul; he knows all about it."

Ron Paul doesn't know jack, which is why he didn't get elected. You know one of Bin Laden's reasons for attacking us? Because we set up a temporary base in the Saudi desert to HELP Kuwait. Apparently the whole desert is sacred and when non-muslims go there, it means we need to die. Yeah, Lets not intervene, lets let them all kill each other, it'll save us all a whole world of headache.

Quote
(Worked for Switzerland. Even the Nazis went out of their way to avoid invading them, though that's also partly because everyone there owns firearms ^^ )

You know why the Nazi's didn't invade them? Because the Swiss aided the Nazi's and the Nazi's found them useful. Look it up. Switzerland did not keep "out" of the war because they were tough. They just like to say that was why.

Quote
""Opening discussions" apparently meaning "insist that they give us information on nuclear weapons programs we already know they don't have"..."

I'd like to see some source documents please, talking out of your instrument of comfortable seating does make one a believer.

Quote
"And how does helping them keep THEIR nuclear weapons program a secret factor into that?"

Because they're our allies. We HELP our allies and we don't help our not-allies. This is really basic stuff.

Quote
(Here's a hint, ordering people around to promote peace has worked about as often as astrology. Look at the real world a little more often)

Here's a hint: take your own advice and stop drinking the Ron Paul koolaid.

Quote
"Ron Paul doesn't"

(Argumentum ad Populum I believe it's called)

"everyone" as in "world leaders", considering that Ron Paul isn't, and won't ever be one of them, I think his opinion can be safely excluded. You can't claim to have not done something when you were never in a position to do it.

Quote
"No, it's called "partisan politics.""

That tends to happen when the leader of a country decides to be a jerk to his friends.

Quote
"Oh, and how does Obama's continued cover-up of prisoner abuses in GiTMO make him eligible?"

You mean the abuses that his administration has repeatedly denounced and play into why he's shutting the place down? Or were you talking about some MORE thing Ron Paul thinks he knows from some secret Pentagon document?

I'll rip into him myself of course but in the meantime, he demanded proof that Obama has delayed the pulling out.

Definitely post the rebuttal to that BS. :)

I did a point by point rebuttal but I later posted this as a bit of a summary.

QuoteI'll start with this then.

I get accused of being closed minded and refusing to look at new ideas. It's really an accusation out of ignorance and desperation to discredit me. The very fact that I used to embrace those ideas myself is proof of that. I don't reject them because I'm afraid of new ideas. I reject them because they're old ideas I have long discarded when they failed under objective testing. Most of the arguments employed here, I used to use them myself.

I have explained this repeatedly. Disagree all you want but don't try accusing me of never trying to see your position. I have seen it, I have once embraced it, I moved on from it and it was not something I did lightly either.

Now, quiz time!

To those who defend Obama's award on the basis of him uniting people under a promise of peace, can you name me a scientist who won a nobel prize in physics, astronomy, biology or otherwise because they PROMISED to deliver a major breakthrough in their field?

To those who defend the rule saying that Irena Sendler is inelligible because her accomplishment happened decades ago, what say you to the example I present to you of Jack Kilby who won the 2000 Nobel Prize in physics for inventing the integrated circuit back in 1958?
I don't deny the rule is there, it's the fairness and validity behind it as well as motives that I question. Does the nobel peace prize just play by different rules? Being as it's the only one decided by politicians rather than scientists and experts in their respective fields, that would certainly be par for the course.
If you say "It's their award, they can give it how they choose," would you take this position if they excluded certain people from eligibility based on circumstances of birth, religious or political reasons?

To those who say the US's foreign policy is just and neccessary for peace, let me just say that accusing me of being a cold hearted wretch for opposing it is on par with saying I'm in favor of domestic violence because I oppose prohibition...or that I hate the poor because I think welfare is ineffective...or that I want ignorance to run rampant because I think government controlled schools do an inexcusably poor job of educating...or whatever other topic people like to polarize for their convenience.

The truth is simple: I oppose it because I believe, based on historical precedent, that it won't work and will only leave you AND the people you're trying to help worse off in the end and you'll make more enemies in the process thus making your own people poorer and less safe. There is nothing to admire out of spending your people's money and sending them to risk their lives as sacrificial lambs to what you think is a good idea. It is dangerous and irresponsible and a despicable violation of their oaths.

Simple version: I don't oppose those things because I disagree with the intended goal, I disagree with them BECAUSE THEY DON'T WORK!!

If you actually DO create peace in those places and it remains as such, your government is an absolute genius and I will take back every cruel thing I ever said about them. I give you my word of honor on that.

But to the one who refered to me and those who hold my views as, and I quote, "internet junkies who didn't know squat about politics", you are a bigot and deserve nothing but ridicule and contempt for having the nerve to try to pass such filth off as rational debate.