Awkward: Pres. Obama Has Bombed Seven Countries Since Accepting Nobel Peace Prize

An editorial published yesterday on CNN pointed out the irony of how Barack Obama, the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize laureate, has bombed seven countries since receiving the award.

The King of Cognitive Dissonance

The seven countries are: Somalia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Iraq, and Syria. The airstrikes were carried out with both drones and manned aircraft.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: You know, over 1,400 people were gassed. Over 400 of them were children. This is not something we've fabricated, this is not something we are looking or using as an excuse for military action. As I said last night, I was elected to end wars, not start them. I've spent the last four and a half years doing everything I can to reduce our reliance on military power as a means of meeting our international obligations and protecting the American people.

Obama: "I Was Elected To End Wars, Not Start Them"

The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.

www.nobelprize.org...

Much to do about faux outrage of the Bush administration, and it was creating 'terrorists'.

And here we are.

7 countries.

Countless new terror groups have been created by the guy that was elected because he 'promised' to end it.

In other news:

Iraqi Intelligence: ISIS Plan to Attack US, Paris Subways "Imminent"

Funny how he isn't being held accountable for his actions.

Hell the nobel peace prize winner has done nothing towards peace.

Either by foreign policy or here at home.

The agenda is to keep people fighting with each other.

Be it terrorists, or right, and left.

Pick any issue.

Pick any topic it is about dividing, and conquering.

Pitting 'good' terrorists, against the bad.

Pitting 'good' republicans against the bad.

I wonder how the hell can get 'build' international cooperation abroad when he can't even build it here.

a reply to: neo96

No, YOU'RE wrong.

Now repeat after me:

a reply to: neo96

So we should allow 'ISIS' - 'ISIL'.

?

It's always baffled me how the president of the country that makes more war that anyone else on the globe can get a peace prize.

That's like giving an alcoholic an award for the most healthy lifestyle.

Atleast these "wars" are not a fudge up like Iraq or Afghanistan.... nobody can top that mess.. also considering.. all the current "war" is connected to those countries.

Obama can't even if he tried, it takes a republican war monger to do that.

Considering the casualty of THEN and NOW. Obama must be doing something good.

He is doing more than fine on "internationl relations", listen to network from those countries, not biased TV sources from here.

a reply to: boogeywoogey

'Let me be clear'.

Gm is alive and AQ is dead.

Er wait a second.

They just changed their names.

To ISIS or the 'new' enemy called Khorasan.

Then they will change their names again.

And again.

As long as foreign policy decisions are driven by politics.

It will never end.

It has nothing to do with 'allow'.

a reply to: neo96

Nobel Peace Prize is and has always been, a joke IMO.

Alfred Nobel(the guy who it was named after) was the inventor of dynamite for #'s sake.

Others must step up to get that price now if this is what it takes but really how mad this world has to be to get something like that from something like that huhh, maybe it was like hey obama i got other hand nobel price for ya and other hand accusations for war crimes, now lets make deals?

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: boogeywoogey

'Let me be clear'.

Gm is alive and AQ is dead.

Er wait a second.

They just changed their names.

To ISIS or the 'new' enemy called Khorasan.

Then they will change their names again.

And again.

As long as foreign policy decisions are driven by politics.

It will never end.

It has nothing to do with 'allow'.

Okay let me be clear.

If you think there is no danger from the middle east you're crazy.

If you believe the U.S. or any other country is creating some type of huge conspiracy you're crazy.

Simply put there are people who hate our way of life. Those people want to kill us.

It's simple.

Grow up.

a reply to: luciddream

Atleast these "wars" are not a fudge up like Iraq or Afghanistan.... nobody can top that mess.. also considering.. all the current "war" is connected to those countries.

Seriously ?

It's the same effing war.

Nothing was 'fudged'.

Not a damn thing.

I suggest reading the Iraq war resolution.

Iraq "continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability" and "actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability" posed a "threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region."

Terrorists did go after wmds in Syria, and Iraq.

Members of al-Qaeda, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq.

The current guy says AQ was decimated. They weren't they just changed their names and was nation building in Syria, and Iraq.

Building there very own 'safe' haven. Like the Taliban did in Afghanistan.

Iraq's "continu[ing] to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations," including anti-United States terrorist organizations.

ISIS originated in Iraq. Then moved to Syria. Then went back to Iraq.

The efforts by the Congress and the President to fight terrorists, and those who aided or harbored them

Neither Bush or Obama has been serious on this one because Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Qatar and other arab allies:

Aid them, and harbor them.

The authorization by the Constitution and the Congress for the President to fight anti-United States terrorism.

The above is a rather broad authorization to 'fight' terrorism.

en.wikipedia.org...

And let's not forget.

Both secretary's of state, and the VPOTUS ALL voted to go to war.

And they are/ were running this country for the last 6 years.

originally posted by: luciddream
Atleast these "wars" are not a fudge up like Iraq or Afghanistan.... nobody can top that mess.. also considering.. all the current "war" is connected to those countries.

Obama can't even if he tried, it takes a republican war monger to do that.

Considering the casualty of THEN and NOW. Obama must be doing something good.

He is doing more than fine on "internationl relations", listen to network from those countries, not biased TV sources from here.

Obama is Bush 2.0!

He is Democrat by title only, and just continues the wishes and wills of the military industrial complex just as his predecessors.

Shed your partisan blinders for once in your life and look at the similarities of the past 6 presidents! Those who believe there is any difference between the Republican and Democratic parties are fools. They all work for the those with the money to fund their elections, while pretending the our representing the "people"!

Here is an interesting article written by former Congressman Dennis Kucinich.

Just a tidbit from it.

The administration's response to the conjunction of this weekend's People's Climate March and the International Day of Peace?

1) Bomb Syria the following day, to wrest control of the oil from ISIS which gained its foothold directly in the region through the US, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey and Jordan funding and arming ISIS' predecessors in Syria.

2) Send the president to UN General Assembly, where he will inevitably give a rousing speech about climate and peace, while the destruction of the environment and the shattering of world peace is on full display 5,000 miles away.

Nothing better illustrates the bankruptcy of the Obama administration's foreign policy than funding groups that turn on the US again and again, a neo-con fueled cycle of profits for war makers and destruction of ever-shifting "enemies."

The fact can't be refuted: ISIS was born of Western intervention in Iraq and covert action in Syria.

This Frankenstein-like experiment of arming the alleged freedom-seeking Syrian opposition created the monster that roams the region. ISIS and the US have a curious relationship -- mortal enemies that, at the same time, benefit from some of the same events:


a) Ousting former Iraqi President Nouri al Maliki for his refusal to consent to the continued presence of U.S. troops in his country.



b) Regime change in Syria.



c) Arming the Kurds so they can separate from Iraq, a preliminary move to partitioning Iraq.


What a coincidence for war-profiteering neo-cons and the war industry, which has seen its stock rise since last week's congressional vote to fund the rapid expansion of war. We have met the enemy and he isn't only ISIS, he is us.

The Real Reason We Are Bombing Syria

a reply to: boogeywoogey

Enough with the red herrings.

The topic is not about 'terrorism doesn't exist'.

It's about a politician put in to power lying to end war.

Got a nobel peace prize for it.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: boogeywoogey

Enough with the red herrings.

The topic is not about 'terrorism doesn't exist'.

It's about a politician put in to power lying to end war.

Got a nobel peace prize for it.

Whatever.

A president needs to protect the country.

Things change.

a reply to: neo96

Good Post Here! Nice job! I agree that this guy is a joke, to international and domestic peace. Hell, he has been in one scandal after another, with NO punishments!!???
WTF Is that all about??!!!
When he got that award I had to laugh out loud!! I don't remember now what he had just done that was in no way awardable, but the award ceremony was laughable.

Politicians should be the ones duking it out for their warmongering attitudes. Even put em in a ring and box, or have them square off on main street, and draw! LOL!!! Why should hundreds, thousands of people go fight/kill each other for the politico's? I never understood war. "Our side won! But let's just forget about all the lives lost, and the ones surving can just be forgotten once they return home. We won't even help them find a job, or help their mental stress they endured in the gruesome fighting they just went through......"

Yah I know there are probably programs the are supposed to help the vets, but are they really helping? I know a couple vets who have been swept under the rug......

Sad indeed......

a reply to: neo96

Certainly he now qualifies for the title "War Monger", "Cowboy", "Torturer", "War Criminal", all the same names bandied about when Bush was president. Bush didn't even have a kill list, he didn't kill any US citizens without a trial violating the 4th amendment rights of a US citizen.

If anyone thinks there isn't a progressive, liberal, socialist, communist agenda (Pick a Label) ask yourself where are the war protesters? No one stands in front of the WH with their signs calling for an end to the fighting. What we have now is 4000 people protesting wall street involvement in climate change. Where is the call to try Obama for war crimes? He personally sentenced a US citizen to death without a trial. Torture and rendition continued under his administration.

Where are the cries from the left? Where is that old and retired WH reporter calling Bush the worst president ever? Why isn't Biden involved as an evil doer for his sons back door deals?

a reply to: sheepslayer247

It's always baffled me how the president of the country that makes more war that anyone else on the globe can get a peace prize.

GW didn't.

And the only difference between the two is one has a nobel peace prize, and the other doesn't.

a reply to: MarlinGrace

Where are the cries from the left?

They are busy manufacturing 'phony' enemies like 'Oh, god. Oh God! 'We all gonna die if we don't save the planet'.

They are busy manufacturing 'phony' wars like the 'war on women' .

They are busy manufacturing 'phony wars like the 'war on guns'.

They are doing everything they can to ignore the fact that Obama today sounds like GW.

I think Obama should have to give back the Nobel Peace Prize. Then, I think the Nobel Peace Prize should be laughed at and never taken seriously again.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: sheepslayer247

It's always baffled me how the president of the country that makes more war that anyone else on the globe can get a peace prize.

GW didn't.

And the only difference between the two is one has a nobel peace prize, and the other doesn't.

The only differences I see is that Bush started the wars, and Obama talked a good game about ending them. Obama also worked hard to create a "peaceful" persona within the international community.

Of course, it was all a sham.....but that could be the reason why Obama got the prize.

a reply to: sheepslayer247

The only differences I see is that Bush started the wars

No he didn't.



I guess conveniently ignore the Clinton administration.

I guess conveniently ignore the war votes.

And everything that came before the GW administration.

factreal.wordpress.com...

Attacks before 9-11.

First world trade center.

Uss Cole

Kobar towers

etc.