The Norwegian Storting: Nominate US Congressman Dr. Ron Paul for the Nobel Peace Prize

Paul's stance on war alone is enough to earn the respect of all US citizens, yet there are still those who do not like him, despite his unwavering messages over the years, a track record that places him in the elite among real politicians who care. He really is one of the greatest men of modern times, and it is too bad that he got royally screwed out of the GOP nomination. Yet those morons remain who will overlook Romney's glaring cheating in the face of defeat and vote for him anyway. God help us all.

Originally posted by Flavian
reply to post by Swills

 

If wrong, please correct me here. Ron Paul is certainly not a subject matter that i know much about. However, i am presuming he is anti abortion and anti gay marriage? (amongst other things). For my thinking, this would preclude him from entry on any shortlist for a Nobel Peace prize. If i am wrong on that though, then fair enough, by all means get him nominated.

His Foreign policy is a damn site better than many i have seen over the years!

This is really, really sad.
Its terrible you see, because we live most of our lives in front of television sets and we believe so much in groups of other people instead of ourselves, that we lose sight of the idea that just because we have personal beliefs, we wish to impose our beliefs on other people.
Ron Paul has a personal belief that he doesn't believe abortion is right. It doesn't mean he imposes that belief on other people. Abortion is a very touchy issue and he believes it is a state matter and something the federal government should have no say in. That way, if a woman believes her body is her own, then she can move to a state where abortion is legalized, and pro life women can move to a state where abortion is treated as a crime. It is a choice in a free nation, and it is in my opinion, the best we can do right now with the issue. LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE. He has also stated many times that his faith is very personal to him as well. He knows what it means to be an individual with liberties in this country, and sadly many do not. He believes that marriage is between you, your faith, and your creator, and the federal government should not be involved with matters of marriage period.
Glad I could clear that up for you.

Originally posted by gorgi
Mr. Paul is the opposite of peace. This guy wants to close the military bases which will leave the US and our allies vulnerable.
He wants to essentially kill the economy which will not lead to a peaceful situation here and everywhere else. If you think its bad now, Pauls ideas will make today seem like heaven.

I don't think a lot of people understand really how to gain peace for a country that imposes its will on other nations. The United States doesn't have a single foreign embassy on its soil, yet we have military bases all over the world. Force, and power, and our presence does not incite feelings of good will towards us. It incites suspicion at the least and hatred naturally.
Dr. Paul did not want to touch defense spending. He wanted to secure our border with mexico and canada and ensure that our own country was safe instead of the border between Iran and Israel, or afghanistan and pakistan. It is none of our business. If you look into the reasons behind our involvement in world wars 1 and 2, and understand them, then maybe you can gain some insight as to the real reasons why our government spends so much money. Then you will be furious because you are the one paying for violence and the eventaul collapse of your own country.

Obama, the EU, Ron Paul... Who next? 50 Cent?!

Talk about a once lucrative prize losing its integrity...

I love listening to Ron Paul. When he would talk about the banks, and the worthless dollar, and going back to the gold standard, that was my favorite. I could just hear the remotes clicking, as people's eyes glazed over, saying, "Wha...huh?"

Amazing free thinker, but no one wants to listen to him. He makes too much sense. And, it makes sense for him to have a Nobel Peace Prize.

Originally posted by Allenb83

Originally posted by gorgi
Mr. Paul is the opposite of peace. This guy wants to close the military bases which will leave the US and our allies vulnerable.
He wants to essentially kill the economy which will not lead to a peaceful situation here and everywhere else. If you think its bad now, Pauls ideas will make today seem like heaven.

I don't think a lot of people understand really how to gain peace for a country that imposes its will on other nations. The United States doesn't have a single foreign embassy on its soil, yet we have military bases all over the world. Force, and power, and our presence does not incite feelings of good will towards us. It incites suspicion at the least and hatred naturally.
Dr. Paul did not want to touch defense spending. He wanted to secure our border with mexico and canada and ensure that our own country was safe instead of the border between Iran and Israel, or afghanistan and pakistan. It is none of our business. If you look into the reasons behind our involvement in world wars 1 and 2, and understand them, then maybe you can gain some insight as to the real reasons why our government spends so much money. Then you will be furious because you are the one paying for violence and the eventaul collapse of your own country.

Isolationism, which is what Paul wants, is bad for the world. The US tried it and it failed. Other countries have tried i and it failed. If tried again, it will fail also. Paul is not ha wizard. He does not have magic powers to make isolationism work when it has always failed.
And no, the country is not going to collapse. I now many people here want ti to so it can fulfill some kind of fantasy but the US is a very strong nation.

reply to post by gorgi


gorgi, baby......what's up with that logic.....I disagree on the terms of ingrateful logic about the peace award.
I thought it made sense for a Texan to get the peace award....down there they have charlie wilson.....single-handedly ended the got tam cold war....ended russia for a short while....who else do they have that hails fr...oh....Stevie Ray Vaughn...say no more mate

reply to post by gorgi


I don't see Ron Paul as an isolationist at all! He wants to pull the military out of places where no good can come from being there. He understands the corruption in our government and realized along time ago that the only reason for continuing these wars is to ensure we have an enemy for our grand kids to fight!!

Does China have bases all over the world? No. Are other countries trying to invade them? No. All these people calling Ron Paul an isolationist should go back to history class and research the fall of Rome. History is in the process of repeating itself.

We just need to secure our borders and if attacked we respond with force, not occupation.

reply to post by Swills


Endelig!

Finally I can be happy about a Nobel peace prize nominee!

However, i am presuming he is anti abortion and anti gay marriage?

reply to post by Flavian


Paul is an OBGYN and has delivered over 2000 babies, he is totally pro-life but knows that in today's moral climate the practice could never be outlawed. He believes abortion should be handled at the state level. On a federal level he has been a staunch advocate of banning partial birth abortions. As far as gay marriage goes, he believes marriage is between a man and a woman but also believes the government should have nothing to do with marriage, and as a staunch supporter of civil liberties believes consenting adults can marry and be partnered with whomever they damn well please.

Hope that helps.

And yes, Ron totally deserves the Nobel Peace Prize.

Originally posted by Swills
reply to post by DarkKnight21

 

Scumbag Steve.... errr Obama

Exactly, but if Paul doesn't get awarded it will only help people to see through the BS. Sad thing though is there are a lot of Nobel prize winners who actually deserved what they got, then Obama got his and credibility went down the tube.....

Any word on Bradley Manning getting his prize as well? My guess, he's not gonna get one either.

edit on 10-10-2012 by Swills because: (no reason given)

Your opinion on whether Obama should or should not have received the award is surely for a different thread, isn't this about if Ron Paul should, and my answer would be why? Ron Paul has never been in a position where he has to make the ultimate decision over whether to engage conflict, so what would the award be for? I'm sure there are many politicians in many countries that have made their anti war stance quite clear, just as many make their anti abortion stance clear - should they get an award for that as well?

Originally posted by fourthmeal

Originally posted by mideast
Who do you think they missed to give the prize to?

IMO , George W Bush.

The most lovely.

Why, is it supposed to be a sarcastic prize or something?

yes

extreme sarcasm.

Will someone please explain to me exactly what he has done to deserve this award? ...and why I should even care?

Are you really going to put this guy in the same category as people who are risking life and limb to bring freedom to their nations? Desmond Tutu comes quickly to mind, or any number of south east Asian political dissidents.

Really?