George Bush should have been given the Nobel Peace Prize, page 1

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 36 times

Topic started on 10-10-2009 @ 06:44 PM by StinkyFeet

George Bush is much more worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize than Obama has been to date. Let us look at his accomplishments.

1. He signifiganlty increased aid to the African continent.
2. He helped to rid the world of a huge number of terrorists.
3. He worked for peace between Israel and the Palestinians, well until they elected a bunch of terrorists in Hamas to be their leaders.
4. He worked to concentrate terrorist fighting into Afghan and Iraq, so the rest of the world was more safe from Terrorism. In fact, he kept our country safe from any major terrorist attack for 7 years and drove the numbers of attacks around the world down.
5. He rid the world of the evil dictator Sadaam Hussein.
6. He set the people in Afghanistan free from the hands of the Taliban and their restrictive and ridiculous laws that are harmful to women.

On the other hand, Obama is a newbie, so maybe he will live up to the title some day. We can keep our fingers crossed and hope.

[edit on 10-10-2009 by StinkyFeet]

reply posted on 10-10-2009 @ 06:53 PM by December_Rain

You are kidding right?

OH MY G-D!!

[edit on 10-10-2009 by December_Rain]

reply posted on 10-10-2009 @ 06:55 PM by tothetenthpower

reply to post by StinkyFeet

So basically you are saying since George has got more blood on his hands, he should get the prize?

No I disagree, let's see what George did at home shall we?

--Allowed the torture of so called "enemy combatants" in US institutions overseas.

--Spied on his own people, illegaly I might add, in order to "combat" domestic terrorism.

--Completely destroyed the economy by refusing to actually sit down and read the issues at hand and do anything but spend more money on the war.

--Dissolved the Iraqi army in the days following the invasion. This lead to millions of people without jobs to feed their families, who in turn joined the insurgency that he "quelled".

--Has the blood of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of civillians.

--Black Water Scandals

--Oil For Food Scandal

--Mission Accomplished Speech

Ok, so that last one was just a shot at him I will admit. But people who receive the prize should be receiving it for having done something positive, that didn't direcly cause the death of thousands of people and the dissolving of a constitution and the systematic destruction of foreign relations for corporate profit.

~Keeper

reply posted on 10-10-2009 @ 06:55 PM by StinkyFeet

reply to post by December_Rain

Nope not kidding. Just look at the list of major accomplishments toward peace that I gave.

reply posted on 10-10-2009 @ 06:56 PM by tothetenthpower

reply to post by StinkyFeet

Those aren't accomplishments. They are war mongering tactics.

How do you promote peace when you start two wars?

~Keeper

reply posted on 10-10-2009 @ 06:58 PM by StinkyFeet

reply to post by tothetenthpower

Well wouldn't you agree that going to war with a dictator and murderer like Hitler would be a move toward peace? That is much more for peace and justice than to let him indiscriminately kill millions of innocent jews.

reply posted on 10-10-2009 @ 06:59 PM by Dermo

reply posted on 10-10-2009 @ 07:00 PM by starwarsisreal

Wrong Bush is a Neocon who sponsored the illegal US invasion of Iraq and also doesn't about the lives of those lost in 911

reply posted on 10-10-2009 @ 07:01 PM by tothetenthpower

reply to post by StinkyFeet

Please don't use out of context arguments to make a point. Hitler was not Saddam Hussein, not even close, and to compare the two is really funny.

I will agree that Saddam was a problem, but let me ask you a question.

Where was George durring the genocide in Rwanda? Why did he not, "remove" the dictators there?

~Keeper

reply posted on 10-10-2009 @ 07:01 PM by December_Rain

Originally posted by StinkyFeet
reply to post by December_Rain

Nope not kidding. Just look at the list of major accomplishments toward peace that I gave.

I am sorry but I am at loss of words at your suggestion. It's amusingly annoying, irritating and pathetic to even put GWBush and the word Peace in one sentence.

Good thing you didn't give this suggestion to Noble Peace Award committee or someone would have had heart attack or something.

reply posted on 10-10-2009 @ 07:01 PM by Pr0t0

I sincerely hope you work for the US Government because this is either a joke or has dis info written all over it. I may have given Obama the (worthless) prize simply for NOT BEING BUSH!!!

1. He significantly increased aid to the African continent - After repeatedly refusing any reduction in deficit, media and public pressure gave way at the Edinburgh G8 summit late in his career.

2. He helped to rid the world of a huge number of terrorists - who? where? More recruits joined Al Quaeda because of Bush, not in spite of.

3. He worked for peace between Israel and the Palestinians, well until they elected a bunch of terrorists in Hamas to be their leaders - Nothing has been resolved here, and do you mean terrorist or democratically elected party? Oh thats right... if it's the wrong party that wins, it must have been rigged!

4. He worked to concentrate terrorist fighting into Afghan and Iraq, so the rest of the world was more safe from Terrorism. In fact, he kept our country safe from any major terrorist attack for 7 years and drove the numbers of attacks around the world down - Oil, Opium, Inside Job.

5. He rid the world of the evil dictator Sadaam Hussein - fair point, but all he did was finish daddy's job, which he promised to do before he was elected (with a bit of help from his bro, Jeb ).

6. He set the people in Afghanistan free from the hands of the Taliban and their restrictive and ridiculous laws that are harmful to women - again, Opium, oil and that's just Islam. Look at Saudi, they're worse to women there.

[edit on 10-10-2009 by Pr0t0]

reply posted on 10-10-2009 @ 07:01 PM by StinkyFeet

Sometimes making war with evil men to rid the world of them is more of an act of peace than doing nothing.

reply posted on 10-10-2009 @ 07:09 PM by cryingindian

reply posted on 10-10-2009 @ 07:09 PM by SmokeJaguar67

reply to post by StinkyFeet

In my opinion the only prize Mr Bush should receive are multiple convictions for war crimes at the Haig along with his war buddy Mr Tony Blair.

I can see that happening (hope) for Mr Blair's future at some point but I believe the US refuses the Haig to have jurisdiction over their citizens so Bush can carry on saving the fish I suppose with no fear of taking responsibility for what he did to humans.

[edit on 10-10-2009 by SmokeJaguar67]

reply posted on 10-10-2009 @ 07:13 PM by dizzylizzy

Imho no leader of a country should be given this award as they have self interest at heart and a huge ego.

reply posted on 10-10-2009 @ 07:14 PM by Resinveins

And then we can make Sarah Palin the new Poet Laureate too.. in keeping with your theme.

You were going for surreal... right?

reply posted on 10-10-2009 @ 07:23 PM by Icarus Rising

Words fail me. This one needs to be done in famous movie lines.

YouTube Link

There, that pretty much sums up my sentiment.

reply posted on 10-10-2009 @ 07:24 PM by StinkyFeet

reply to post by Resinveins

Now that would just be foolish to make Sarah Palin the "Poet Laureate"... she is not even a poet. And you accuse me of going for the surreal.

[edit on 10-10-2009 by StinkyFeet]

reply posted on 10-10-2009 @ 07:24 PM by PhoenixDemon

Ever since the Nobel Peace Prize was given to Yassar Arafat it has been a sham of an award. Bush has more right to the Nobel Peace Prize than Arafat ever had...

reply posted on 10-10-2009 @ 07:26 PM by manxman2