I missed the speech on TV but just read it. Here’s the transcript:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/11/world/europe/11prexy.text.html?_r=1&pagewanted=print

It started out great. One of his best speeches ever. His justification for war was appropriate and needed. I think he probably even pissed off several in the audience. Of course there had to be the obligatory “I’m not Bush” paragraph. That IS of course the reason he was awarded the prize in the first place so he felt obliged and I’m sure he felt pleased to acknowledge it.

He even came close to quoting little ol’me when it comes to the definition of peace. I’m sure (and hoping) this news will crush marikod who took me to task earlier when I said it, LOL:

BHO 12/9/2009:
“For peace is not merely the absence of visible conflict. Only a just peace based on the inherent rights and dignity of every individual can truly be lasting.”

RWU 10/9/2009:
“Peace is not the absence of war. Peace is the presence of freedom and justice and the absence of evil”

http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion_boards/viewmsg.asp?MessageID=103577&boardID=39&page=

I had been hoping he would follow several pundit's suggestion and send a representation from the military to accept the prize, but apart from the few conciliatory phrases he did a very good job in person.

I suspect POTUS Obama as being just a tad bit more sincere in his profession of the definition of peace than you probably are.

Better be careful though: talking too loosely about justice opens the door to many demands.  Demands which i suspect you would not be the least bit willing to entertain, let alone to satisfy.  

So, tell us please, subterranean sage, where do you see injustice contributing to the absence of peace?  And better still, tell us those places, if any, where an absence of peace is not caused by injustice, or inequality, or any of the collective bad bahaviors of mankind organized into polities?  

-- Modified on 12/10/2009 7:32:06 PM

I was starting to think he was going to announce a new invasion by the end of the speech. Over and over his theme was "war is justiified in the name of peace."

      Except for the prohibition of torture, and the fact that he is a polished and articulate speaker, that could have been Bush talking.

      And it takes a lot of gall - or something - to say that the United States must set the "standard for conduct" in war on the same day that we learn that not only the CIA but also the Army and incredibly some of the Blackwater contractors are involved in the Predator Drone strikes.

      But I agree that ironically he did come pretty close to your definition of "peace" - excuse me, I'm feeling a little sick tonight.

well, here's something to make you even more ill -- that's one more NPP than Bibi will ever win.  The only way Bibi will ever get one is when the US finally brokers yet another deal to bail out Bibi's cosmically unimportant and  country.  

And all that talk about just war - was that an indirect nod to Goldstone?  and if so, an indirect criticism of guess who?  Perhaps POTUS Obama has an nasty rhetorical surprise lined up for your heroes.

So, what's the difference between a US drone strike and an Israeli drone strike?  You approve of the latter.  You could not be more transparent.

to acceptthe NPP on his behalf.

He could have said, among other things : "since me and jed1002 pretty much agree on the definition of peace, this one's  Nobel's for you, RWU!"

BTW, how much inherent right and dignity do the hapless Pallys have in your jaundiced eyes, either in isolation or in comparison to the blessed Israelis?

in all the "war for peace" talk or was it more that he was feeling guilty about the undeserved award and was trying to acknowledge or explain the present situation in which he finds himself.

So you found yourself throwing up in your mouth. . . just a little bit, eh? LOL

enemy fire - such as happened in the invasion of Hamas - are within the proper conduct of war as set by the Geneva Conventions, even if civilans are killed.

    Drone strikes to execute supposed bad guys where innocents in the drop zone are treated as collateral damage  - such as we do in Afghan and Pakistan - are what I condemn and rightly so as these are war crimes.

   When Israel has used drones for this purpose, I condemn it, although they claim they do not.

     As for my "transparency," you need to pay better attention. I have plenty of criticism of the way the Nation of israel has conducted its foreign policy - but I have equal distaste for posts on this Board that fail to distinguish between the Nation of Israel and "the Jews."

OF  COURSE HE WASNT SINCERE  RWU!!!!!

If Barrack Odrama can get a peace award, and give a war speech AT THE SAME TIME!!!

Then  peace MUST BE WAR, like all  those crazy stripped, ass, conspiracy theories, said would happen.. THIS IS WHY THEY SAY RESISTANCE IS FUTILE!!! If you ARE NOT a thinker, you may really think Barrack is PEACE, when he isnt..


RESIST  RESIST RESIST!!! They say our troops and wars  will ALL be re-named soon to ''peace keeping forces''...Hmmmm How peacefull is an ARMED peace keeping force?? I mean can you imagine someone coming up on you with some auto  mag riffle, and saying ''I come in peace'' ??

Obama ALWAYS makes me throw up in my mouth a little bit, usually before I PEE on myself to get that warm feeling of friendship..IM CONVINCED THIS IS WHY I LIKE HIS SPEECHES SOOOO MUCH!!!

-- Modified on 12/11/2009 3:35:59 AM

he made in the speech, and I have no basis to opine he was insincere in the sense of saying something he knew was untrue.

     This is not like Bush getting up in front of the American people
and saying "we don't torture," or Clinton saying "I did not have sex with that woman, Ms. Lewinski. Both men knew when they spoke that their statements were true as far as the common meaning of torture and sex are concerned, and both men would subsequently justify their statements by saying they meant "as we define It."

    So I do not see that Mr. Obama is doing anything like that. But he clearly did take the opportunity to use his Nobel War Prize speech to build the case for sending more troops to Afghanistan.

it's that gentle, fragile blosson marikod - who questions [rightly so] the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but will not question the bombing of Pallys in Gaza [yep, but it's not a double standard]- who claimed that he became sick.  I suspect that he was speaking figuratively.

I merely scoffed, and realizing whose post I was reading, i had no expectation of anything better.  Though you did come within viewing distance of a  substantive comment, rare accomplishment indeed for you, so all is not a loss.

While i always enjoy any turn of events which has the potential to culminate in an instance of projectile vomiting, there was no actual reverse peristalsis on my part to report.  Too bad, as that would probably been more rewarding than anything you had to offer.  LMAO!

his perverse insistence on "Recognition Plus," an official recognition that Israel is a Jewish state, will inevitably come back and bite him in his arrogant, posturing, pompous war criminal-lite  ass.

When BN makes such a demand, it's simple to understand how many will mistakenly think the Israeli polity and the Jewish people are coextensive and identical.  The great unwashed masses simply do not know enough to know better.

A small but active group of folks who care for neither Israel as a Jewish state nor the Jewish people as a religiou or cultural or ethnic group will defnitely make that identification, deliberately and with definite ill intent.

Be sure to thank Bibi and the rest of your self-deluded Israeli Likudist pals when those chickens come home to roost.

I've yet to meet an Israel supporter who claims to condemn Israel when israel acts wrongly, as you claim to do.  No surprise there ,as Israel is incapable of wrong acts or even wrong intentions.

Israeli and US drone strikes are fundamentally different –one is for execution purposes and the other for retaliation to enemy fire.

    Now, it is true that Israel does have a targeted assassination policy distinct from the use of drones and I do find that despicable. But, even so, by all accounts I’ve read, innocents are rarely killed when they take out a bad guy and Israelli intelligence is usually pretty accurate in identifying true bad guys.

     As to Mr. Netanyahu’s speech this summer when he proclaimed that the Palestinians must “recognize Israel as the state of the Jewish people,” that is old news. A couple of wacko members of the US Congress in 2006 attempted to insert this requirement in proposed bills but were shouted down.

   Mr. Olmert occasionally blustered about that as early as 2007. As far as I can tell, it is NOT official Israeli policy and it is certainly contrary to the formal positions taken by the present administration that Israel is willing to resume peace negotiations unconditionally.

    It's called "playing to the base" when the top guy uses rhetoric to inflame his audience. So of like what Mr. Obama did in his Nobel War Prize speech.


   Israel is in fact not a “Jewish state” under the law, and it makes no sense to add this as a precondition for peace.

"....one is for execution purposes and the other for retaliation to enemy fire."

cut the shit - they're both for execution purposes, don't deny the obvious.  Israel has probably terminated more guys with extreme predudice than the US ever will.

Hey, and when you do criticize Israel in THIS forum, please be sure to PM me; I want to be sure i don't miss it.

I'd expect this to happen around about February 32nd.

should by all mean continue to do so. I can’t help you with your psychological problems.


     As to your bizarre assumption that I oppose criticism of Israel – as opposed to anti- Semitic commentary – I would recommend that you take lessons in how to use the search engine.

      But, if you continue to believe that, the good news is that I can add you to the list of intellectually bereft posters who erroneously have concluded that I am anti-American bc I oppose invasion and torture, that I am a trial lawyer bc I oppose tort reform as a solution to reducing health care costs, that I am gay bc I support gay marriage, and that I fear guns bc I support gun control. Welcome to the club.

there's no obvious point to you, except that you're obviously full of shit.

whatever you may or may not be is A-OK with me; it's only your beliefs and your ideas which you express here which interest me. If I engaged in anti-semetic commentary, you'd have made a point, but I don't, so you don't.  Please feel free to find any anti-Semitic commentary I have posted.

Wait, wait, wait, let me take it back - I criticize Israel, therfore by definition I am an anti-Semite.

Your  jailhouse lawyering on behalf of Israel is the only thing that about you which interests me. Fess up, there is NO criticism of Israel which you will ever accept as either legitimate or motivated by anything other than anti-Semitism. The sooner you are honest aboutthat the sooner you will stop wasting my time.

Please feel free to oppose invasions launched by Israel.  Please feel free to oppose torture committed by Israel. Please feel free to criticize ever-changing double-standards and multiple-standards which are adjusted to benefit Israel's exegency du jour. And please feel free to oppose them in this forum. Until you do that here, in this forum, please feel free to STFU and stop pretending you are not a shill for Israel, when you so blatantly are exactly that.

Your views on tort reform, health care cost containment, gun control, gay marriage or any other esoterica about which you claim expertise does not interest me in the least.  There are others in this forum you can bore the shit out of re those topics if you so choose.  It's your confused and divided loyalties only which both interest and disgust me.

Do say hello to Dennis Ross when you visit him at the Blue & White Club.

Let me quote GaGa, painful as that act is : now go fuck yourself.

Perhaps you need to search your conscience and decide where your loyalties actually reside.  I'm afraid no search engine can help you with that.

      The question was whether I oppose criticism of Israel, not whether you make anti-Semitic comments when you criticize Israel. Merely bc I responded to some of your criticisms by explaining how you are wrong does not mean I consider the post anti-Semitic.

       I do not recall ever directly accusing you of making an anti-Semtic comment. The aliases that have done so are not me. The closest I can recall is when you made a post that seemed to have no purpose other than to be critical of being Jewish and I posted "you are beginning to sound like someone else who use to post on this Board."


  Rest assured that I can distinguish the two and, if you cross that line, I will tell you directly.

and if you HONESTLY thought that was AS, or similar to anything the other guy writes, them your creddibility takes a severe hit with me.

BUT, I was definitely out of line in the tone and [dis]temper of my comments, so please  accept my humblle apology for going a post, if not several posts, too far.

-- Modified on 12/15/2009 5:02:00 PM