Quote:
Originally Posted by SpacedOut  No, by my logic I would think someone should be awarded a nobel peace prize if they at least created more peace than killing. So far Obama has increased a shooting war, where real people are getting killed, and reduced nuclear stockpiles by an amount that wouldn't really make a difference anyway should a hypothetical war break out that neither Russia or the US wants at the moment. Anyone with half a brain can see that the overall effect of the Obama presidency as been more war. |
That's right. Reducing a nuclear stockpile by 1\3rd (which means that's 1\3rd less bombs to make there way into the hands of terrorist to become a lovely dirty bomb) doesnt mean anything. Clearly since Obama hasnt ended all wars he doesn't deserve any recognition for his work (BTW, name me on senator in the past ten years who has done as much for nuclear disamourment).
Also, I wasn't aware there has been "More war", as I dont think bringing the focus to the war that got sweeped under the carpet counts as "More war", it counts as finishing what we started. But hey, I am forgeting when we invaded Iran after there fraudulent elections.