BS: Peace Prize to Crap Talker????

Subject: BS: Peace Prize to Crap Talker????
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 09 Oct 09 - 05:29 PM

Does Obama make sense???? Or does he talk crap??

Subject: RE: BS: Peace Prize to Crap Talker????
From: Stringsinger
Date: 09 Oct 09 - 05:43 PM

Absolutely! It makes no sense. U.S.(Obama) destroying Kyoto Protocol and escalating
the Afghan war shows how shallow and meaningless the Nobel Peace Prize has become.
They also awarded it to Kissinger in the past..

Why would anyone care if it is offered to Pete Seeger?

The crap talker is the Nobel Committee.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace Prize to Crap Talker????
From: CarolC
Date: 09 Oct 09 - 05:45 PM

That guy's talking crap.

;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Peace Prize to Crap Talker????
From: Stringsinger
Date: 09 Oct 09 - 05:50 PM

Oh yes, I remember that Obama said he would get us out of Iraq.

He also supports AIPAC which demeans the peace process in the Middle East. No progress in the Middle East peace talks.

Noam Chomsky deserves it more than anyone.

Also, a bogus pressure on Iran (this is peaceful?)

Subject: RE: BS: Peace Prize to Crap Talker????
From: Donuel
Date: 09 Oct 09 - 05:50 PM

I am sure we all crapalishously stand as one when we heard the pure crap about Obama quadrupling the Bush deficit. The bald guy is full of crap.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace Prize to Crap Talker????
From: Stringsinger
Date: 09 Oct 09 - 05:56 PM

Oh, I forgot the military buildup in Guam. Peace prize awarded for this?

Crap Peace Prize to Crap Talker.

Vietnams and Afghanistans cause huge deficits.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace Prize to Crap Talker????
From: gnu
Date: 09 Oct 09 - 06:17 PM

I saw today that there is a call for 40k more US troops in Afghanistan? Am I remiss in my understanding?

Not that that has anything to do with any crap.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace Prize to Crap Talker????
From: CarolC
Date: 09 Oct 09 - 06:27 PM

I think 40k is the amount that the commander in Afghanistan is saying would be needed in order for the military to be able to carry out the mandate they currently have there. The question that I think Obama is looking at right now is whether or not to keep the current mandate, or create a new one. The answer to that question needs to be asked before any decisions are made with regard to sending any more troops over.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace Prize to Crap Talker????
From: Peace
Date: 09 Oct 09 - 06:33 PM

Does anyone know what Afghanistan is costing NATO countries? US, Canada, etc?

Subject: RE: BS: Peace Prize to Crap Talker????
From: Emma B
Date: 09 Oct 09 - 06:45 PM

Try this Peace and an article in the UK press on equipment spend


"US equipment spend in Afghanistan for 2009 is equivalent to nearly £463,000 for each of its 61,950 soldiers.
For Britain's 9,000 troops in Helmand the Afghan-specific equipment spend equates to just £288,889 per head.
For Canadian troops currently fighting in Kandahar province, the spend is equivalent to £507,539 per soldier.
Only the Germans' 4,000 troops in the more peaceful north of Afghanistan come in lower than the UK, at around £152,000 per head.

The Ministry of Defence points out that the figures only illustrate equipment spending – and don't reflect on the capability of British forces or include salaries and benefits costs. "Equipment is only a small part of protecting our soldiers – 70% comes from the training and tactical experience"

Subject: RE: BS: Peace Prize to Crap Talker????
From: Peace
Date: 09 Oct 09 - 06:52 PM

Thanks, Emma. I just looked at an article from CBC and it seems we spent about 9 billion between 2001 and 2006 (the article said the expense has been between 7.7 and 10.5 billion dollars). That figure has shot up in the past few years. And it doesn't include about 110 KIA and 350 wounded. War is a waste of time. Coulda saved lots of lives by paying the Afghanis NOT to grow poppies.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace Prize to Crap Talker????
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 09 Oct 09 - 06:56 PM

If poppies are the only problem, we and other nations should buy the poppies and have them made into medicines and stockpile them. There is no greater miracle in this earth than morphine and we should be thrilled to have people growing poppies for everyone. Should be the basis of our health care plan..at least pain relief for everyone..worldwide. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Peace Prize to Crap Talker????
From: Peace
Date: 09 Oct 09 - 06:57 PM

Heroin is a much better analgesic, but your point is well taken.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace Prize to Crap Talker????
From: pdq
Date: 09 Oct 09 - 07:10 PM

Opium , morphine and heroin all come from the same species of poppy: Papaver somniferum.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace Prize to Crap Talker????
From: Azizi
Date: 09 Oct 09 - 07:29 PM

1.The Nobel Peace Prize Committee receives thousands of nominations a year.

2.All heads of state probably have their names submitted by someone every year.

3.President Obama did not lobby for this award.

4.This award came as a surprise to President Obama.

5.The Committee gave its reason why they chose President Obama.

6.If you disagree with the Committee's decision, stating that disagreement is your right. However, I'd bet that Committee isn't surprised at all the CRAP that Republicans andprogressives are giving President Obama and giving them (the Committee) about their decision. Yet, it is embarrassing for this nation.

7. What do you want President Obama to do, give the award back? (Some people are actually saying that). And if he did that, the same people would probably be talking sh*t about that too.

8. Regardless of what you or other people may think about President Obama getting the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize, he was the one the Committee chose for it, and he'll receive it.


Live with it!

Subject: RE: BS: Peace Prize to Crap Talker????
From: Emma B
Date: 09 Oct 09 - 07:55 PM

It's been reported there were 205 nominations this year

Not all the disagreements with the committee's decision are coming from American Republicans however although it may be difficult to 'live with' that!


"This year's reputed candidates included the Cluster Munition Coalition, which played a central part in getting nearly 100 countries to agree a treaty banning cluster bombs last year; Hu Jia, the imprisoned Chinese dissident, environmentalist and Aids activist; Morgan Tsvangirai, who has fought so courageously for democracy in Zimbabwe; and Greg Mortenson, an American mountaineer whose mission to combat terrorism with literacy began when he fell sick in Pakistan and decided to build a school to repay the kindness he was shown. Any one of these would have been a more deserving winner.

Instead, the five judges chose Obama for his "vision" of a nuclear-free world.
The vision thing is easy.
Unfortunately, as the situation in Iran shows, it is rather harder to turn dreams into reality.

He was also praised for his "efforts" to strengthen co-operation around the world.
You can give school children awards for effort, but it does not really seem the correct barometer for something that is supposedly the world's most prestigious prize for peace.

It is also a very foolish award.

This month, Obama faces an agonising decision that could define his presidency: whether to support his generals, and send another 40,000 young Americans to fight in Afghanistan, or side with doves led by his Vice-President and risk fewer troops by focusing on counter-insurgency.
He is expected to side to some extent with the generals, propping up a feckless regime in the hope of imposing a semblance of order in one of the world's most chaotic places.

It is, of course, easy to mock the idea of a peace prize created by an arms manufacturer. And there have been many debatable winners (although, fortunately, the nominations of Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin and Fidel Castro were rejected).
But more times than not, the prize has gone to the good guys.
It is either the ultimate accolade for genuine heroes, such as Nelson Mandela, Lech Walesa, Elie Wiesel and Aung San Suu Kyi, or serves to highlight less well-known figures deserving the world's acclaim, such as the microcredit pioneer Muhammad Yunus, or the Kenyan environmentalist Wangari Maathai.


President Obama was typically humble and eloquent in his response yesterday. But he should have refused the award, politely saying that he was flattered and, while appreciating the motivation, was as yet unworthy of such distinction. Instead, he is once again lauded for his symbolism and potential rather than his actual deeds. One day, he might be a worthy winner. But not today."


from an article in todays Independent - one of the more 'liberal' of the UK press

Subject: RE: BS: Peace Prize to Crap Talker????
From: robomatic
Date: 09 Oct 09 - 09:31 PM

It was worth it to hear Rush Limbaugh's head explode this morning!

The best news since McCain appointed Sarah Palin as his VP nominee.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace Prize to Crap Talker????
From: GUEST,Bill D---out of town
Date: 09 Oct 09 - 09:39 PM

"You can please all of the people some of the time..."...etc

Subject: RE: BS: Peace Prize to Crap Talker????
From: Riginslinger
Date: 09 Oct 09 - 10:32 PM

Well, I agree with Stringsinger, either Pete Seeger or Noam Chomsky would have been a better choice, based on the merits. I suspect the president would agree.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace Prize to Crap Talker????
From: Stringsinger
Date: 10 Oct 09 - 12:36 PM

I want to say that Obama is a tremendous improvement over Bush and his dismantling
of the Nuclear Star Wars program is a great accomplishment. I don't want to be in the position of trashing his accomplishments. The defeat of that airplane is one.

Still, innocent people (scores of thousands) are being killed, maimed and displaced by
unnecessary wars in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq. This doesn't warrant a peace prize.

I don't think that Obama or Kissinger should give the Prize back. But it reflects poorly on
the Committee who administers the Prize and cheapens it.

Instead, we should not be looking for awards but meaningful change in our foreign policy as being important.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: Peace Prize to Crap Talker????
From: bankley
Date: 10 Oct 09 - 02:01 PM

opium production was nearly eradicated under the Taliban (so was Rock and Roll)...since the NATO invasion, opium/herion production has skyrocketed and comes in third globally after oil and armaments as a cash cow... a fraction ends up in Taliban coffers... so if you follow the money you might be surprised where the rest ends up             I'm not...

Subject: RE: BS: Peace Prize to Crap Talker????
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 10 Oct 09 - 02:23 PM

All the rightwing boobirds are in full cry.
I much preferred Hillary, with Obama a poor second, but he is in a tight spot what with the economy going bust and the Middle East problems.
So far, I give him a plus on the economy- with the other major economic players- UK, Germany, etc., stimulus and incentive packages have helped get business back on an even keel. As everyone should know, from Mom-Pop operations to large corporations, jobs will be late in coming back; businesses need to be sure of sales increases before expanding.
On PBS, I heard last night that 80% of stimulus money has not been spent. Building infrastructure for the future is needed, but that will be very costly, and government cannot do much more that provide incentives and seed money.

Obama cancelled the missile installations in Poland and has begun talks with Russia on decreasing missile stocks; all Europe heaved a sigh of relief. Russia could be our best ally in getting Iran pointed toward nuclear power rathewr than nuclear missiles {although I don't blame Iran for wanting to balance the missile power of Israel and its expansionist tendencies}.

Obama has thrown out the "evil empire" talk of the confrontational Bush team and called for talks, also calming some fears.

Decisions on Afghanstan must be made, but will satisfy no one.

On balance, I think Obama was a good choice for the Nobel prize.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace Prize to Crap Talker????
From: Emma B
Date: 10 Oct 09 - 02:46 PM

'if you follow the money you might be surprised where the rest ends up '

answer here ?
         
and here

"..it is corruption rather than patronage which is discrediting the legitimacy of the government at a moment when it is facing a new challenge from the Taliban. In Transparency International's list of the most corrupt countries in the world, Afghanistan ranks 176 out of 180.

In few countries is corruption so widespread or so open as it is in Kabul.
There are the notorious "Poppy Palaces", supposedly built by the profits of the heroin and opium trade.
Government ministers with small salaries are somehow able to afford to spend over £1m each on constructing mansions.
The former finance minister, Ashraf Ghani, says "the whole country is criminalised."
An anonymous official is quoted as aptly saying Afghanistan "is not a tribal society, but a mafia society.""You have to pay $10,000 in bribes to get a job as a district police chief," says General Aminullah Amarkhail, former head of security at Kabul airport, "and up to $150,000 to get a job as chief of police anywhere on the border because there you can make a lot of money."

He believes that what happens in Afghanistan should be compared to looting, rather than simple corruption.
The outcome of his campaign against smuggling, mostly of drugs, at Kabul airport explains why corruption is so difficult to eradicate. An army general transferred to the Interior Ministry, he was put in charge of security at Kabul airport in 2005 where he had soon arrested more than 100 heroin smugglers, most of them en route to Dubai.

"When I took over Kabul airport was a garbage dump," he recalls. "I had 320 policemen, though I had to fire some for co-operating with smugglers."He noticed that some travellers had "an extraordinary number of visas in their passports which they could not explain." Bribes of $1,000 per kilogram of heroin were offered to his staff if they would help the smugglers. He did not have any X-ray machines, but he was able to detect smugglers who had ingested drugs by their dry lips and the bottles of oil they always carried. He began to receive death threats.

One woman whom he stopped had eight bags of heroin with her: her overall contract was to carry 1,000 kilos. She threatened him when he arrested her. "I will have you sacked from your job because I am more powerful than you," she told him. "And I will get my heroin back as well."
She was as good as her word.
Two hours later, instructions came from the Interior Ministry to let her go and return her heroin.
The smuggler's other prediction also turned out to be true. General Aminullah was suddenly sacked and charged with a minor offence. A new official took over security at the airport and smugglers were no longer arrested.
General Aminullah's case became well known in Afghanistan and abroad, but this was not enough to get him reinstated, despite a court order to do so.
Recently he was made adviser on security to the minister of education, a job he says he was given purely to get him out of the way. He is still demanding his old job back."

Subject: RE: BS: Peace Prize to Crap Talker????
From: pdq
Date: 10 Oct 09 - 06:53 PM

(recent military action)

Total Cost: (US dollars)

Iraq                   $711 Billion (since MAR 2003)
Afghanistan       $219 Billion (since SEP 2001)

Subject: RE: BS: Peace Prize to Crap Talker????
From: SharonA
Date: 10 Oct 09 - 08:19 PM

In my opinion, Obama was given the prize for his "efforts" now because of fears that he will be assassinated (by terrorists or by some right-wing nut job) before his "efforts" bear the fruit that the Nobel Committee hopes they will.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace Prize to Crap Talker????
From: Bobert
Date: 10 Oct 09 - 08:59 PM

Crap talker???

Try WMDs, mushroom clouds, aluminum tubes, nuclear material from Niger, Iraq/9-11 on for size...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Peace Prize to Crap Talker????
From: GUEST,Bill D-- out of town
Date: 10 Oct 09 - 10:01 PM

Does "got a tiger by the tail" ring any bells. You CANNOT just pack up and leave Afghanistan suddenly. Obama is trying VERY hard to guess what that tiger will do when we let go of its tail.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace Prize to Crap Talker????
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 11 Oct 09 - 03:16 PM

Bill D- Very true.