Minimorty - 13 October 2009 06:47 PM

no_vaseline - 13 October 2009 05:55 PM

Minimorty - 13 October 2009 04:21 PM

Are you saying Tutu should have won the Nobel Prize…..again?

No.  Keep the comparisions coming.  You’ll figure it out.

Born outside the United States?

The Peace Prize has been awarded to a Black 13% of the time in the last 20 Years ?

1950 Ralph Bunche became the first Black to win the Nobel Prize
1960 Albert John Luthuli became the first African to win the Nobel Peace Prize
1964 Martin Luther King, Jr became the youngest person to win the Nobel Peace Prize
1984 Desmond Tutu became the second South African to win the Nobel Peace Prize
1993 Nelson Mandela, alongside FW de Klerk, became the third South African to win the Nobel Peace Prize
2001 Kofi Annan became the first Ghanaian to win the Nobel Prize
2004 Wangari Maathai became the first Black woman to win the Nobel Peace Prize
2009 Barack Obama became the third African-American to win the Nobel Peace Prize

bltserv - 13 October 2009 06:54 PM

The Peace Prize has been awarded to a Black 13% of the time in the last 20 Years ?

No.

Minimorty - 13 October 2009 06:47 PM

Born outside the United States?

No. 

Another hint:

Wilson was the last sitting president to win the award.

No idea what about tutu.

Wilson pushed for and succeeded in creating the League of Nations, a precursor to the UN that failed spectacularly. However, at the time people thought it was the way to peace. Both Wilson and Tutu actually did something before being awarded the prize.

Nude - 13 October 2009 08:55 PM

Wilson pushed for and succeeded in creating the League of Nations, a precursor to the UN that failed spectacularly. However, at the time people thought it was the way to peace. Both Wilson and Tutu actually did something before being awarded the prize.

Very close.

It was awarded as a sign of support?

I gave you a “thanks” bltserv because this one post exemplifies why you aren’t worth the effort it takes to pay attention to you.

Lighten up Nude. Its just a cartoon.
Why do Conservatives have such thin skin ?

I think this one is more appropriate to the discussion ...

My Favorite.

Minimorty - 12 October 2009 03:47 PM

[

If Obama stops the war overseas, our enemies will only grow stronger. They will train their troops. They will make devastating weapons. And they will bring the war to our soil. You dont get it, do you? There are people and organizations out there whose sole purpose is to see the demise of the United States. They will not rest until they have succeeded.

Say whatever you want about Bush. One thing is undeniable. Since 9/11, he has kept us safe.

WOW… spoken like a true Bush drone.

“Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding.” ALBERT EINSTEIN

trrenter - 13 October 2009 02:31 PM

BLT,

The country you want the US to become sounds like Canada why not just move there?

They have the Obama Care already and they have the same mentality as you about war.

If I had a dollar for every time I see the phrase “Well just move then!”.... oh man, I would be one rich beeatch sitting on a beach sipping a Pina Colada.

gypsyuma - 14 October 2009 01:06 AM

Minimorty - 12 October 2009 03:47 PM

[

If Obama stops the war overseas, our enemies will only grow stronger. They will train their troops. They will make devastating weapons. And they will bring the war to our soil. You dont get it, do you? There are people and organizations out there whose sole purpose is to see the demise of the United States. They will not rest until they have succeeded.

Say whatever you want about Bush. One thing is undeniable. Since 9/11, he has kept us safe.

WOW… spoken like a true Bush drone.

“Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding.” ALBERT EINSTEIN

If you could just get: Iran, North Korea, Al Quida, the Taliban, etc. to buy into that we would be in great shape.

Sometimes dropping bombs is a necessary evil.

trrenter - 14 October 2009 01:48 AM

Sometimes dropping bombs is a necessary evil.

Does that then also justify any threatened nation/group to launch an attack against its perceived aggressors? This only works when you are on the delivering end of that kind of logic ...

green_cactus - 14 October 2009 02:11 AM

trrenter - 14 October 2009 01:48 AM

Sometimes dropping bombs is a necessary evil.

Does that then also justify any threatened nation/group to launch an attack against its perceived aggressors? This only works when you are on the delivering end of that kind of logic ...

History, all of it, is filled with people killing other people. It resolves any conflict in an absolute and final manner… eventually one side surrenders. In a world ruled by law and order, such resolution isn’t needed. When someone ignores the law and disrupts the order, that resolution is usually the only one that works. You focus only on our actions, willfully ignoring the action that provoked our own.

Ironically, Woodrow Wilson would have loved seeing us in Iraq and Afghanistan.

bltserv - 13 October 2009 09:19 PM

http://www.bltserv.com/images/Nobel.jpg

I didn’t see a lot of Republicans grumbling when Obama won the peace prize.  In fact, I haven’t seen so many Republicans that happy in a long time.  It validated all their arguments about liberal celebrity worship of Obama even though he has no accomplishments.  Obama’s lack of accomplishments before his run for the presidency was a major campaign theme, if you recall.  This just brings it all back to the spotlight.

It’s a lot like when Palin stepped down as governor.  There was Democratic “outrage” at her abandoning her position, but does anyone actually believe they were unhappy that she did that?  It was and will be fodder for jibes and jokes for years to come.  I’m sure HuffPo and DemoUnderground were having non-stop parties that day.  Same with Obama and the peace prize.  There’s “outrage” that he was awarded that, but most Republicans I saw online that day were giddily coming up with jokes about no-accomplishment Obama and silly European leftists.

Nude - 14 October 2009 02:19 AM

green_cactus - 14 October 2009 02:11 AM

trrenter - 14 October 2009 01:48 AM

Sometimes dropping bombs is a necessary evil.

Does that then also justify any threatened nation/group to launch an attack against its perceived aggressors? This only works when you are on the delivering end of that kind of logic ...

History, all of it, is filled with people killing other people. It resolves any conflict in an absolute and final manner… eventually one side surrenders. In a world ruled by law and order, such resolution isn’t needed. When someone ignores the law and disrupts the order, that resolution is usually the only one that works. You focus only on our actions, willfully ignoring the action that provoked our own.

Who`s law ?  The United States of America was not voted as owner of this Planet last time I checked.
With your thought process we will make war against the Muslim world until they become Christians or Jews.
Are Soverign Countries allowed to be secure in their borders and laws ?
Should every Muslim Country that has any Al-Qaeda cells be subject to our attack ?
Should the Taliban not be allowed to practice their extreme form of Islam ? As strange as it is.
Last time I checked the Taliban never attacked us. Their crime was to allow Al-Qaeda to exist and be recognized in their borders.
And 8 years later. We are still fighting the Taliban. And not doing too well I might add. We cant kill the Civilians any more.
That eliminates almost all Air Support in the Urban areas.

bltserv - 14 October 2009 02:35 PM

Nude - 14 October 2009 02:19 AM

green_cactus - 14 October 2009 02:11 AM

trrenter - 14 October 2009 01:48 AM

Sometimes dropping bombs is a necessary evil.

Does that then also justify any threatened nation/group to launch an attack against its perceived aggressors? This only works when you are on the delivering end of that kind of logic ...

History, all of it, is filled with people killing other people. It resolves any conflict in an absolute and final manner… eventually one side surrenders. In a world ruled by law and order, such resolution isn’t needed. When someone ignores the law and disrupts the order, that resolution is usually the only one that works. You focus only on our actions, willfully ignoring the action that provoked our own.

Who`s law ?  The United States of America was not voted as owner of this Planet last time I checked.
With your thought process we will make war against the Muslim world until they become Christians or Jews.
Are Soverign Countries allowed to be secure in their borders and laws ?
Should every Muslim Country that has any Al-Qaeda cells be subject to our attack ?
Should the Taliban not be allowed to practice their extreme form of Islam ? As strange as it is.
Last time I checked the Taliban never attacked us. Their crime was to allow Al-Qaeda to exist and be recognized in their borders.
And 8 years later. We are still fighting the Taliban. And not doing too well I might add. We cant kill the Civilians any more.
That eliminates almost all Air Support in the Urban areas.

And you have no problem with that? You have no problem with the Taliban providing a safe place to Al Qaida to plot the next 9/11? F that! I dont care who is in charge there. If the US has credible evidence that organizations are planning on doing harm to the US on US soil, I say we go in and attack them. Civilian casualties, while unfortunate, are a part of war.

Do you have anything good to say about the United States? Are you grateful for the freedoms you enjoy?

green_cactus - 14 October 2009 02:11 AM

trrenter - 14 October 2009 01:48 AM

Sometimes dropping bombs is a necessary evil.

Does that then also justify any threatened nation/group to launch an attack against its perceived aggressors? This only works when you are on the delivering end of that kind of logic ...

At some point in History the US was designated a “superpower”, most would say it was after WWII.  Democratic, Peaceful countries started to look toward us for help.  We gladly oblige because as a stable country we want to hold the weapons of mass destruction.

Do I personally like war and killing? No not really.  Do I like the idea that we are currently running a deficit and we continue to police the world? No.

We are the Police, like it or not.  This happened well before any of us really had any say in the course of this nation.

Even though I don’t necessarily like having to be the police I don’t see another option.

Do you suppose that we sit around while Iran and N. Korea build nuclear weapons?  Should we have allowed Saddam Hussein keep Kuwait.  I am sure he would have stopped there. 

What would you suggest we do with the likes of Hussein, Ahmadinejad, Kim, Bin Laden and even Putin at this point?  Should we sit down and trying to pursuade them to be nice with candy and hugs?

Very Gratefull.
But should we let the tragedy of 9/11 ruin our common sense and kill more and more for decades to come ?

I see our leaders repeating the errors of our past.
Fighting a prolonged war in a far away land without the support of the local population.
An ill defined enemy that blends in with the civilians. Lack of support at home.

You cant just keep throwing blood and treasure at the problem.
History is filled with examples of this strategy failing. Especially in Afghanistan.