> Perhaps the most profound issue surrounding my receipt of this prize is the fact that I am the Commander-in-Chief of the military of a nation in the midst of two wars. One of these wars is winding down. The other is a conflict that America did not seek; one in which we are joined by 42 other countries – including Norway – in an effort to defend ourselves and all nations from further attacks.
> Still, we are at war, and I’m responsible for the deployment of thousands of young Americans to battle in a distant land. Some will kill, and some will be killed.
And in his book "Promised Land":
> Nine days [after announcing troop deployment to Iraq at West Point], I flew to Oslo to receive the Nobel Peace Prize. The image of those young cadets weighed on me. Rather than ignore the tension between getting a peace prize and expanding a war, I decided to make it the centerpiece of my acceptance address. With the help of Ben Rhodes and Samantha Power, I wrote a first draft, drawing on the writings of thinkers like Reinhold Niebuhr and Gandhi to organize my argument: that war is both terrible and sometimes necessary; that reconciling these seemingly contradictory ideas requires the community of nations to evolve higher standards for both the justification and the conduct of war; and that avoidance of war requires a just peace, founded on a common commitment to political freedom, a respect for human rights, and concrete strategies to expand economic opportunity around the world. I finished writing the speech in the dead of night aboard Air Force One as Michelle slept in our cabin, my weary eyes drawn away from the page every so often by the sight of a spectral moon over the Atlantic.
Yeah yeah, maybe it's my fanboydom, maybe it's him trying to make himself look good in hindsight, but at least this guy was honest about what happened/was happening. Unlike Mr. "I solved 8 world wars, where's my peace prize or I'll invade Greenland!" (did I quote him right?), who probably does believe he solved those "wars"...
Let my little assistant help you out on this topic.
Below is a timeline cross-reference of Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize (2009) and U.S. wars / major military actions.
Summary: It is overwhelmingly likely (and effectively certain) that Obama knew he was overseeing active wars and new military escalations before he went to collect the Nobel Peace Prize.
As for Trump, I fear he is just getting started. His actions (and the repercussions on the nation and the world) are gonna get a lot worse, I'm afraid.
> Yes — it is overwhelmingly likely (and effectively certain) that Obama knew he was overseeing active wars and new military escalations before he went to collect the Nobel Peace Prize.
So your "assistant" supports my reply, he was fully aware of that and acknowledged this. And in the speech you didn't read, he went into how war came as naturally as the first man, and how some wars are necessary and "just".
Indeed Ukraine is at the moment shooting back at Russian conscripts...
All Obama had to do - to have some modicum of respect by the world (despite him doing wars, but world already is accustomed to US being involved in wars, meh) - was to reject the Nobel Peace Prize. But he failed.
And by doing the opposite, despite all his idealistic "humanitarian" speeches, he simply proved himself as a warmongering hypocrite to the world.
In that aspect, Trump did try desperately to play "the Big Brother, the peacemaker" role in conflicts across the world, in an obvious (childish) attempt to outdo Obama's (dubious) legacy, but he failed.
So he's dropped his mask, the velvet gloves are off, and it is every man (country) for himself (itself) as the King of the Hill decides which hill to stake his next flag on.
Oily toy has been seemingly grabbed, and now the King has set his eyes Northwards. And that bodes ill for those who question his will. Because a troublemaker child may smash or throw some things when he has a temper tantrum.
Your reply has proven my last sentence correct, and then some...
Today I was listening to a podcast where the host said his internal monologue when a commenter on the Internet upsets him with a dumb comment is "you know what, they're probably 12 years old.". I think I'll adapt that idea. Because who else gets told A and immediately argues "Let me tell you, I'm sure Not A is correct/would've been the better move!", twice. Maybe someone who again didn't bother to read the links, because of course he's smarter than that, considering he's already smarter than Obama's team!
And yet you didn't apologise for Obama not apologising for his wars, but you apologised for Obama shamelessly accepting Nobel Peace Prize after he did (and started new) wars.
Yes, you are smart indeed.
Here, have a cookie. You can call it the "Obama fan" cookie.
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/2009/obama/lecture/ :
> Perhaps the most profound issue surrounding my receipt of this prize is the fact that I am the Commander-in-Chief of the military of a nation in the midst of two wars. One of these wars is winding down. The other is a conflict that America did not seek; one in which we are joined by 42 other countries – including Norway – in an effort to defend ourselves and all nations from further attacks.
> Still, we are at war, and I’m responsible for the deployment of thousands of young Americans to battle in a distant land. Some will kill, and some will be killed.
And in his book "Promised Land":
> Nine days [after announcing troop deployment to Iraq at West Point], I flew to Oslo to receive the Nobel Peace Prize. The image of those young cadets weighed on me. Rather than ignore the tension between getting a peace prize and expanding a war, I decided to make it the centerpiece of my acceptance address. With the help of Ben Rhodes and Samantha Power, I wrote a first draft, drawing on the writings of thinkers like Reinhold Niebuhr and Gandhi to organize my argument: that war is both terrible and sometimes necessary; that reconciling these seemingly contradictory ideas requires the community of nations to evolve higher standards for both the justification and the conduct of war; and that avoidance of war requires a just peace, founded on a common commitment to political freedom, a respect for human rights, and concrete strategies to expand economic opportunity around the world. I finished writing the speech in the dead of night aboard Air Force One as Michelle slept in our cabin, my weary eyes drawn away from the page every so often by the sight of a spectral moon over the Atlantic.
Yeah yeah, maybe it's my fanboydom, maybe it's him trying to make himself look good in hindsight, but at least this guy was honest about what happened/was happening. Unlike Mr. "I solved 8 world wars, where's my peace prize or I'll invade Greenland!" (did I quote him right?), who probably does believe he solved those "wars"...