Obama's Oslo Speech (1 Viewer)

[A High Way Man]

By your logic should we depose every corrupt regime?

Yes, not necessarily through armed conflict

Should we go to war in North Korea, Turkmenistan, Somalia, Chad, Uzbekistan and Eritrea,

They don't blatantly harbour terrorists... yet.

 

[Amogh]

Saying war has to exist is a pathetic non answer. I asked you what good has come it that makes it worth loosing hundred of thousands of lives? Would you care to answer that with something more specific than worn out platitudes?

lol but its true...war IS essential
are you suggesting that we allow these terrorists to proliferate?
as obama said, not everyone is receptive to negotiations

 

[moll.]

The war in Afghanistan was authorized by the UNSC ( un security council).

I think you mean the United Nations Space Command.
Duh.

 

[SeCKSiiMiNh]

lol but its true...war IS essential
are you suggesting that we allow these terrorists to proliferate?
as obama said, not everyone is receptive to negotiations

Yes I agree.

Hard decisions must be made. President Truman dropped the atomic bomb on hiroshima. Killed thousands to save millions.

 

[jennyfromdabloc]

lol but its true...war IS essential
are you suggesting that we allow these terrorists to proliferate?
as obama said, not everyone is receptive to negotiations

oh you actually believe it was about terrorism lol. Well maybe they should have invaded Saudi Arabia then.

More importantly thought, terrorists exists because the US fucks with people. More invasions will drive more angry young men to hate the US and to become terrorists.

 

[John McCain]

His appeal to gandhi and king is pretty retarded, offensive even, since gandhi at least would have been disgusted by and absolutely rejected the principles of his speech.

Everyone like to pay lip service to Gandhi, but no one treats his ideas with any moral seriousness, the revolutionary idea that you can and should face an armed aggressor with non-violence and your cause will prevail.

They don't blatantly harbour terrorists... yet.

Guilt by association.

lol but its true...war IS essential
are you suggesting that we allow these terrorists to proliferate?
as obama said, not everyone is receptive to negotiations

US imperial aggression is the primary cause of terrorist attacks on the West. If the US had been non-interventionist 9/11 wouldn't have happened.

 

[A High Way Man]

His appeal to gandhi and king is pretty retarded, offensive even, since gandhi at least would have been disgusted by and absolutely rejected the principles of his speech.

Everyone like to pay lip service to Gandhi, but no one treats his ideas with any moral seriousness, the revolutionary idea that you can and should face an armed aggressor with non-violence and your cause will prevail.


Guilt by association.


US imperial aggression is the primary cause of terrorist attacks on the West. If the US had been non-interventionist 9/11 wouldn't have happened.

Yes, it's true that America's isolationism in the period immediately prior to Dec 7, 1941 saved thousands of lives

 

[eldore44]

too many people with ill informed opinions in this thread.

 

[John McCain]

Yes, it's true that America's isolationism in the period immediately prior to Dec 7, 1941 saved thousands of lives

I'm not advocating ghandi's ideology. I don't understand it well enough to determine when violence is and isn't appropriate.

I just think the name dropping is dumb, and he's invoked by people who's morality he would have been opposed to in life.

As far as I understand, ghandi would advocate that the loss of life is worthwhile to break the perpetuation of violence, and fostering such a culture is the only way to bring peace in the long term.

 

[A High Way Man]

He's not name dropping. Read the speech. It's entirely appropriate to mention Dr. King and Mahatma Gandhi who were both (almost) Nobel Laureates in a Nobel acceptance speech.

In no way does Obama seek to hijack Gandhi or King's message, nor does he downplay the force they had on the world. The speech is simply his attempt at reconciling their messages of peace with the unbelievable pressures of being a commander in chief sworn to protect 300 million people.

 

[John McCain]

He's not name dropping. Read the speech. It's entirely appropriate to mention Dr. King and Mahatma Gandhi who were both (almost) Nobel Laureates in a Nobel acceptance speech.

In no way does Obama seek to hijack Gandhi or King's message, nor does he downplay the force they had on the world. The speech is simply his attempt at reconciling their messages of peace with the unbelievable pressures of being a commander in chief sworn to protect 300 million people.

His actions are opposed to their creed, it's disingenuous to pretend they can be reconciled.

He has previously stated
"You know, I think that it might be Gandhi, who is a real hero of mine,"

For a supposed hero he doesn't make any great effort to emulate him.

 

[Iron]

Yeah but Gandhi was faced with the British Empire, not militant Islam.
Didnt a militant Islam shoot Gandhi to death anyway? lel?

 

[SylviaB]

Yeah but Gandhi was faced with the British Empire, not militant Islam.
Didnt a militant Islam shoot Gandhi to death anyway? lel?

Stop fucking stereo typing you fucking jew. Not all Muslims kill people for fucks sake


lol

 

[Anderson101]

Yeah but Gandhi was faced with the British Empire, not militant Islam.
Didnt a militant Islam shoot Gandhi to death anyway? lel?

He was killed by his own fucking people

 

[spartan31234]

So were 99% of all genocides in the past 10 years

fuck

no the UNSC did not authorized them, they did nothing (at the very most) there is a big difference.

Besides Afghanistan was direct retaliation for 9-11

 

[Anderson101]

no the UNSC did not authorized them, they did nothing (at the very most) there is a big difference.

Besides Afghanistan was direct retaliation for 9-11

fuck u are a dumb fuck

 

[kaz1]

Yeah but Gandhi was faced with the British Empire, not militant Islam.
Didnt a militant Islam shoot Gandhi to death anyway? lel?

militant hindu

 

[A High Way Man]

Obama is a brilliant orator, with the world's finest speech writers at his disposal.

Sure he can say some rousing words, but its what he does that counts.

Don't be fooled by his slick facade. He is a monster, just like Bush, just like Clinton, just like ever president for the last few decades.

At least with Bush it was obvious how bad he was. Obama has fooled so many people who are desperately clinging to some hope the government can be a force for good.

What an anti-government zealot, how are you any different to the religious fundamentalists that you so heartily mock

 

[jennyfromdabloc]

no the UNSC did not authorized them, they did nothing (at the very most) there is a big difference.

Besides Afghanistan was direct retaliation for 9-11

Good idea. When you get attacked by terrorists from Saudi Arabi who were funded by Saudis and trained in Pakistan and the United States, its a good idea to invade Afghanistan.

Even if the terrorists were from Afghanistan, why does that make it okay to invade an entire country and kill thousands of civilians who had nothing to do with the attacks?

 

[jennyfromdabloc]

What an anti-government zealot, how are you any different to the religious fundamentalists that you so heartily mock

We can observe the government consistently doing harmful things.

God cannot be observed at all.

What is wrong with being adamant that violence is wrong? That's all I'm saying when I oppose the government, since the governments existence depends on violence and threats of violence.