Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
This forum is used with the NationStates web-game designed and run by Max Barry. While not officially affiliated, this serves as the regional forum for the regions: Middle East, African Continent, American Continent, Asian Continent, and European Continent.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and can "read only".

In order to get the most out of these forums, please become a member and read this guide - http://z3.invisionfree.com/nationstates/index.php?showtopic=3060


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Obama: Nobel Peace Prize Winner
Topic Started: Oct 9 2009, 10:02 AM (1,328 Views)
New Harumf
Member Avatar
Bloodthirsty Unicorn
Ulgania
Oct 9 2009, 06:44 PM
To be honest, the most concrete views that I know are NH's libertarian views, but that's because I tend to stalk him (but you didn't read that here...).
:unsure: :o :|

I am being stalked??
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tristan da Cunha
Member Avatar
Science and Industry
Atticus
Oct 9 2009, 06:14 PM
And why the hell are we comparing star wars to social equality.
Because it's the right thing to do.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

New Harumf
Oct 9 2009, 07:01 PM
Ulgania
Oct 9 2009, 06:44 PM
To be honest, the most concrete views that I know are NH's libertarian views, but that's because I tend to stalk him (but you didn't read that here...).
:unsure: :o :|

I am being stalked??
oh stop, you know you want it. :P
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Telosan
Member Avatar
The Foremost Intellectual Badass
Tristan da Cunha
Oct 9 2009, 07:02 PM
Atticus
Oct 9 2009, 06:14 PM
And why the hell are we comparing star wars to social equality.
Because it's the right thing to do.
You haven't been here long enough to know this is usually what happens? The topic is derailed by someone likening the topic to somthing vaguely related, and then it continues from there.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Union
Member Avatar
Pyrenees Republic
I voted Obama.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quaon
Member Avatar
A Prince Amoung Men-Shoot First and Ask Questions Later
I would have voted Obama if I was of a legal age and still would have, given his opponent.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ulgania
Member Avatar
A better Zarathustra has never rode a horse
Realism vs idealism is always hard to deal with. We're basically at the point of immobilism. It's only a little lame. Only a little.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tristan da Cunha
Member Avatar
Science and Industry
McCain's just a white version of Obama.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
New Harumf
Member Avatar
Bloodthirsty Unicorn
Ulgania
Oct 9 2009, 11:43 PM
Realism vs idealism is always hard to deal with. We're basically at the point of immobilism. It's only a little lame. Only a little.
"Realism is the Rage of Caliban seeing his reflection in the mirror.
(Idealism) is the Rage of Caliban not seeing his reflection in the mirror." - Oscar Wilde
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
flumes
Member Avatar
CLEVELAND ROCKS!
Here is something I don't get when it comes to Bush bashing:

Let's say there is a major terrorist attack today in the US, comparable in scale to 9/11, and let's say it was found that the terrorists were based in (random country), and majorly backed by that country's government... Obama would have NO choice but to send troops, Congress via the American people wouldn't have it any other way. Even with Iraq and Afghanistan having gone like such... No matter what the international community thinks, the majority of America wouldn't stand for it, period. We'd be in (random country) as fast as Bush sent troops to Afghanistan.

Argue all you want about Iraq's merits, but to say that Bush even had a choice in entering Afghanistan when he did is simply wrong. Voting for Obama is one thing... Not retaliating when an act of war is initiated against us is another...

Regardless, Obama has done nothing to merit a peace prize other then promise peace. Really, Obama has done nothing period but make promises. Any politician can do that... Delivering is something else. I'm talking a wonderful advertising principles class, there is this thing called Expectancy Disconfirmation..... Basically says that it doesn't matter whether people like a product they get, unless it meets or exceeds the hype coming when they got it, they won't be satisfied with it. Obama had a major hype factor coming in, his ratings are already falling fast...

I also question how anyone here could know that Obama is a better man then George Bush. I know neither personally, and remind all that what you see on TV is not always what you get in person...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Very well said. ^^
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quaon
Member Avatar
A Prince Amoung Men-Shoot First and Ask Questions Later
I base my opinions on Obama on the fact that I know a few people who have met him (my father met him at a gym, away from media coverage and such). I identify with him because, from what I have been told, he is similar to me in that he is a realist/idealist intellectual. He's in far over his head, I'm sure. And I agree, Bush had no choice but to invade Afghanistan. That doesn't take away from the fact that we should be the Hell out of there and the same for Iraq. Obama doesn't deserve the peace prize. I still like him as a President, and think many of his failings were unavoidable given the state of the country.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
New Harumf
Member Avatar
Bloodthirsty Unicorn
Let me explain something. I don't need to meet someone to know someone. Obama was a Chicago pol, a black Chicago pol, an inside the loop black Chicago pol. That means something to me. It means he is crooked, corrupt, will use anything and any body to get what he wants, and does not care about the people he serves, only his political cronies. This is a given for a well-connected Chicago pol. Don't bother trying to say "maybe he is the exception." There is no exception. Its like trying to talk about the good mafia killer.

He is also arrogant because he is a black man who is well educated, and therefore must look down his nose at everybody.

Because of his big time education, he thinks he knows everything. This makes him a very dangerous man.

I know for a fact that Bush is a better person than Obama. Why? Bush has never been a connected inside the loop Chicago pol.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tristan da Cunha
Member Avatar
Science and Industry
Quaon
Oct 10 2009, 12:39 PM
I base my opinions on Obama on the fact that I know a few people who have met him (my father met him at a gym, away from media coverage and such). I identify with him because, from what I have been told, he is similar to me in that he is a realist/idealist intellectual.
Lenin was another realist/idealist intellectual, and also a highly personable man, if my sources are correct.

Quaon
 
Obama doesn't deserve the peace prize. I still like him as a President, and think many of his failings were unavoidable given the state of the country.


Which of his "unavoidable" failings are you thinking of? Perhaps his "unavoidable failure" to end the Iraq and Afghanistan wars? Ending the Iraq and Afghanistan wars was not unavoidable. Yet, Obama has precisely managed to avoid ending those wars.

flumes
 
Argue all you want about Iraq's merits, but to say that Bush even had a choice in entering Afghanistan when he did is simply wrong. Voting for Obama is one thing... Not retaliating when an act of war is initiated against us is another...

We initiated the war by placing military bases in Saudi Arabia and subsidizing Israel. This is an astonishingly simple fact that so many people fail to grasp and has resulted in the United States literally being brought down to its knees - not by terrorism - but by American policies and American wars. Trillions of dollars and thousands of American lives tossed away like garbage, and a great country has passed, done in by its own hand.
Edited by Tristan da Cunha, Oct 10 2009, 03:06 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quaon
Member Avatar
A Prince Amoung Men-Shoot First and Ask Questions Later
Quote:
 
Which of his "unavoidable" failings are you thinking of? Perhaps his "unavoidable failure" to end the Iraq and Afghanistan wars? Ending the Iraq and Afghanistan wars was not unavoidable. Yet, Obama has precisely managed to avoid ending those wars.
I am speaking in regards to the economy. Obama's failure to withdraw from Afghanistan and Iraq leaves me deeply troubled with his administration.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ulgania
Member Avatar
A better Zarathustra has never rode a horse
Scenario: Obama pulls out of Afghanistan.

Media does stories on former pro-US/anti-Taliban villages that have been "left to the wolves", as a resurgent militancy takes power in Kabul. Obama is blamed.

Obama is not reelected in 2012.

...what motivation does he have to end that war right now. Mind you, if it's going to be wrapped up, it should be done so in a way that leaves behind a government that the people choose, not one that a small armed fraction of the population decide on.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rhadamanthus
Member Avatar
Legitimist

Ulgania
Oct 10 2009, 10:21 PM
...what motivation does he have to end that war right now. Mind you, if it's going to be wrapped up, it should be done so in a way that leaves behind a government that the people choose, not one that a small armed fraction of the population decide on.
So then you favor the dissolution of Afghanistan and division into constituent ethnoi? Because in Afghanistan everyone just votes for their tribe. Democracy is a (quasi-)peaceful proxy for tribal warfare.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ulgania
Member Avatar
A better Zarathustra has never rode a horse
Rhadamanthus
Oct 10 2009, 10:26 PM
Ulgania
Oct 10 2009, 10:21 PM
...what motivation does he have to end that war right now. Mind you, if it's going to be wrapped up, it should be done so in a way that leaves behind a government that the people choose, not one that a small armed fraction of the population decide on.
So then you favor the dissolution of Afghanistan and division into constituent ethnoi? Because in Afghanistan everyone just votes for their tribe. Democracy is a (quasi-)peaceful proxy for tribal warfare.
I can hardly tell you what kind of government would benefit the people most, but tribal alliances are hardly reliable or sustainable. The geography, demography, history, tribal differences, etc... will never result in anything useful for years. Even the insurgency is disunified. If the only solution for a national government is a feudal style confederation than so be it. People living in peace is still better than people coming into your village in pickup trucks and shooting you for wanting to feel safer
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rhadamanthus
Member Avatar
Legitimist

Ulgania
Oct 10 2009, 10:46 PM
I can hardly tell you what kind of government would benefit the people most, but tribal alliances are hardly reliable or sustainable. The geography, demography, history, tribal differences, etc... will never result in anything useful for years. Even the insurgency is disunified. If the only solution for a national government is a feudal style confederation than so be it. People living in peace is still better than people coming into your village in pickup trucks and shooting you for wanting to feel safer
Yes, alliances shift like water in Afghanistan. That said, I think your idea of a feudal style confederation is a good one. A centralized democracy is an incredibly poor choice for the country, and I don't understand why it is being implemented. The weather in the mountains means that it is hard to conduct most business of government between provinces for about half the year. For that reason, and due to the contentiousness of the various ethnic groups, a highly decentralized form of government is the only sort that is actually feasible.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ulgania
Member Avatar
A better Zarathustra has never rode a horse
A central government to keep the tribal regions in Pakistan separated from those in Afghanistan is still rather necessary. But Pakistan is just another problem in itself. Also keeping opium under control is another issue...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

I say we just blow them all up. :unsure:
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ulgania
Member Avatar
A better Zarathustra has never rode a horse
Atticus
Oct 10 2009, 11:17 PM
I say we just blow them all up. :unsure:
Why? There's a massive amount of economic potential in that area! If we get them to take the focus off opium and on to cash crops there's massive economic potential for the businesses/firms that would be handling the crops, which YOU could be a part of!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Ulgania
Oct 10 2009, 11:19 PM
Atticus
Oct 10 2009, 11:17 PM
I say we just blow them all up. :unsure:
Why? There's a massive amount of economic potential in that area! If we get them to take the focus off opium and on to cash crops there's massive economic potential for the businesses/firms that would be handling the crops, which YOU could be a part of!
Think about it like this, they have been fighting for hundreds of year, and absolutely nothing has solved it. So if we completely kill the problem, then we are good. But do you think any of those people will accept a United Sates business over there? No, we'd be shot before sunrise.

Also, think of what the media will say in the Headline news:

Americans exploit Afghans
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ulgania
Member Avatar
A better Zarathustra has never rode a horse
Atticus
Oct 10 2009, 11:21 PM
Ulgania
Oct 10 2009, 11:19 PM
Atticus
Oct 10 2009, 11:17 PM
I say we just blow them all up. :unsure:
Why? There's a massive amount of economic potential in that area! If we get them to take the focus off opium and on to cash crops there's massive economic potential for the businesses/firms that would be handling the crops, which YOU could be a part of!
Think about it like this, they have been fighting for hundreds of year, and absolutely nothing has solved it. So if we completely kill the problem, then we are good. But do you think any of those people will accept a United Sates business over there? No, we'd be shot before sunrise.

Also, think of what the media will say in the Headline news:

Americans exploit Afghans
Then get the EU to do it. Either way, in the end cash speaks louder than religion. Thus the opium.

Mind you, who says it needs to be a government-sponsored venture? Wal-Mart could step in and say "hey, we have a proposal", and the gears would be in motion.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Ulgania
Oct 10 2009, 11:27 PM
Atticus
Oct 10 2009, 11:21 PM
Ulgania
Oct 10 2009, 11:19 PM
Atticus
Oct 10 2009, 11:17 PM
I say we just blow them all up. :unsure:
Why? There's a massive amount of economic potential in that area! If we get them to take the focus off opium and on to cash crops there's massive economic potential for the businesses/firms that would be handling the crops, which YOU could be a part of!
Think about it like this, they have been fighting for hundreds of year, and absolutely nothing has solved it. So if we completely kill the problem, then we are good. But do you think any of those people will accept a United Sates business over there? No, we'd be shot before sunrise.

Also, think of what the media will say in the Headline news:

Americans exploit Afghans
Then get the EU to do it. Either way, in the end cash speaks louder than religion. Thus the opium.

Mind you, who says it needs to be a government-sponsored venture? Wal-Mart could step in and say "hey, we have a proposal", and the gears would be in motion.
I'm pretty sure these people aren't that retarded and can put 2 and 2 together and get that Wal-Mart is American. There is no way you can pay these people to lose their traditions. They have lived all their lives hating Americans, why should they like us now? They have been raised on these misguided teachings of Allah, and religion is everything to them. You can't offer them money to strip away their religion. If you did, you would have to pay them gratuitous amounts of money, but you surely couldn't pay all of them.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Enjoy forums? Start your own community for free.
Learn More · Register for Free
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Off-Topic · Next Topic »
Add Reply