Bush nominated for nobel peaceprize

[lapslf]

I read this somewhere in a small newspaper. It said he was nominated by a member of the Norwegian parliament, because he got rid of Saddam Hussein with his war in Iraq.

I sincerely hope this is a cruel joke. Can anybody confirm this?

[Empanado]

At 2/3/04 08:54 AM, Veggiemeal wrote: I read this somewhere in a small newspaper. It said he was nominated by a member of the Norwegian parliament, because he got rid of Saddam Hussein with his war in Iraq.

I sincerely hope this is a cruel joke. Can anybody confirm this?

It's true, pal. But don't worry, i don't think he wins. Besides, it's not even "that" hard to postulate for that prize. There are hundreds of nominates as far as i know.
In fact, if he wins, i will repeteadly beat myself with an iron bar while singing a sad song in a pit of acid with a pineapple on each knee and performing a mambo dance. Word.

[darkphantom]

At 2/3/04 09:28 AM, Empanado wrote: In fact, if he wins, i will repeteadly beat myself with an iron bar while singing a sad song in a pit of acid with a pineapple on each knee and performing a mambo dance. Word.

I will hold you to that... this comes as no suprise to me... bush dose have a strange vocablulary and seems to have the power to create and alter words ie:

Free country = Any country without WMDs Dicatorship or otherwise

Misunderestimated = *shrugs* I dunno.

Drugs = In his mind the word is evil and has no medicanal value... hypercrite

[IWillSetYouFree]

dont make me fucking throw up!If he wins that will be the end to the world as we know it. Hes not a peacefull man,hes a Republican with a serious hard on for war and fuck anyone that gets in his way,they're not real americans.

[bumcheekcity]

At 2/3/04 09:28 AM, Empanado wrote: It's true, pal. But don't worry, i don't think he wins. Besides, it's not even "that" hard to postulate for that prize. There are hundreds of nominates as far as i know.

Yeah. The award wont go to bush. The world would go mad if it did.

[ChaosAllen]

What an irony though... being nominated for a peace prize for accomplishing something through a war...lol.

[GooieGreen]

wait, I remember being in a forum LIKE this... what happened... WHY!?

*so confused*

[EvilGovernmentAgents]

Why? Why? Why is there another thread just like this one? Why?

Oh ever why?

When was the last time that the Nobel Prize really given to anyone who DESERVED the thing anyways?

[Dagodevas]

Bush could never win the Nobel Peace Prize. How can anyone who starts a war even be nominated? It’s insane!

[bumcheekcity]

At 2/3/04 03:51 PM, EvilGovernmentAgent wrote: When was the last time that the Nobel Prize really given to anyone who DESERVED the thing anyways?

Mother Therasa? Did she not deserve it?

[IceWraith15]

You people hate George Bush for absolutely NO logical reason, if you're anti-iraq-war, you are what I would call a SADDAM LOVER, I wouldn't exactly recommend Bush for this award, but honestly, you people claiming you'll kill yourself if he wins need to chill out. If you are American, HE IS YOUR PRESIDENT. He did liberate Iraq, but lets also recognize the Congress who gave him permission, the soldiers who did the fighting, the generals who led the soldiers, and the taxpayers who funded the war.

[mrpopenfresh]

At 2/3/04 05:50 PM, bumcheekcity wrote:
Mother Therasa? Did she not deserve it?

Its debatable. Mother Theresa only cared if the people she was saving converted to christinanity, not if they lived or died. Granted she did help people out though.

[Dagodevas]

At 2/3/04 08:19 PM, IceWraith15 wrote: You people hate George Bush for absolutely NO logical reason

We have plenty of reasons for not liking Bush, such as a $520 BILLION DOLLAR DEFICIT!!!

if you're anti-iraq-war, you are what I would call a SADDAM LOVER...

Right, go back to watching you Fox News. Isn’t O’Reilly on?

If you are American, HE IS YOUR PRESIDENT.

But that doesn't mean I have to like him. I disagree with his politics. He is not some fearless leader ruling over the people with his Patriot Act and New-Speak (get yourself a cookie if you picked up on that one). As an American, I am entitled to my opinion and my right to express it and I say he sucks.

He did liberate Iraq,

But he didn't have to go to war to do that. That alone is not worth going to war over. War is expensive and costs losts of money, time, and lives.

...the taxpayers who funded the war.

[cries]

[ChaosAllen]

At 2/3/04 08:19 PM, IceWraith15 wrote: You people hate George Bush for absolutely NO logical reason, if you're anti-iraq-war, you are what I would call a SADDAM LOVER, I wouldn't exactly recommend Bush for this award, but honestly, you people claiming you'll kill yourself if he wins need to chill out. If you are American, HE IS YOUR PRESIDENT. He did liberate Iraq, but lets also recognize the Congress who gave him permission, the soldiers who did the fighting, the generals who led the soldiers, and the taxpayers who funded the war.

In all honesty, I don't have anything against the man. He just shouldn't win an award for peace is all I'm saying.

[DeathSimian]

Hmmm....

Osama bin Laden organizes an attack on New York... Results in 3,000 deaths.

George Bush organizes attack on Iraq... Results in 9,000 deaths.

From the way I see it, if we went by this, Osama bin Laden would be 3 times more eligable for the peace prize.

[MuiKat]

it would be the end of the world and a whole lotta chaos if he wins... it would suck...

[bumcheekcity]

At 2/4/04 02:21 AM, DeathSimian wrote: George Bush organizes attack on Iraq... Results in 9,000 deaths.

From the way I see it, if we went by this, Osama bin Laden would be 3 times more eligable for the peace prize.

Right, how does one nominate for the Nobel Peace Prize?

[MuiKat]

just give the money to me..... i'll make weed legal and everyone can be happy.

[Thanatopsis]

to all the people saying that they would kill themselves if bush got a nobel peace prize maybe you should reconcider who should be killed or as some would say assasinated.

[IceWraith15]

Sure Bush started a war, but it was a war against a man who murdered HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF INNOCENT PEOPLE. Saddam tortured hundreds of people to death, and you know how they did solitary confinement under Saddam? They would either BURY YOU ALIVE or stick you in a body drawer and leave you there for days with only about 2 hour a week outside. I would say that stopping that kind of thing from happening to a country justifies war. In fact, I would call this war JUSTICE.

War=Forcing a political opinion
What if that opinion was justified?

[bumcheekcity]

At 2/4/04 11:04 AM, IceWraith15 wrote: Sure Bush started a war, but it was a war against a man who murdered HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF INNOCENT PEOPLE.

Before which, America inposed sanctions, killing millions of innocent people. Who's the bad guy?

War=Forcing a political opinion
What if that opinion was justified?

How can you justify going into a country and imposing your views, just because YOU believe themn to be superior to Saddam's?

[Dagodevas]

At 2/4/04 11:04 AM, IceWraith15 wrote: War=Forcing a political opinion
What if that opinion was justified?

Justification is a matter of opinion. China may think they're justified in making Tibet a Communist nation, but you can't force equality on people through violence. Saddam should have been removed from power, but we shouldn't have to go to war over it.

[lapslf]

At 2/4/04 11:04 AM, IceWraith15 wrote: Sure Bush started a war, but it was a war against a man who murdered HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF INNOCENT PEOPLE. Saddam tortured hundreds of people to death, and you know how they did solitary confinement under Saddam? They would either BURY YOU ALIVE or stick you in a body drawer and leave you there for days with only about 2 hour a week outside. I would say that stopping that kind of thing from happening to a country justifies war. In fact, I would call this war JUSTICE.

A-hem, I think a lot of Iraqi's would prefer Saddam right now. And when we are talking about violation of human rights, I've got two words: Guantanamo Bay. I guess it's OK to remove Saddam, but this war was never because Bush felt so sorry for the Iraqi's. Over 9000 innocent people died because of this war that was according to you meant to "liberate" them, while they didn't even ask for that. You call that justice?

War=Forcing a political opinion
What if that opinion was justified?

Well in this case the opinion is absolutely not justified. The opinion here is: "You don't obey us and refuse to deliver us cheap oil so we attack you". Well, Justify this:

[GooieGreen]

At 2/3/04 08:19 PM, IceWraith15 wrote: You people hate George Bush for absolutely NO logical reason, if you're anti-iraq-war, you are what I would call a SADDAM LOVER

No, I like to be called an anti-preemptive-striker. Being against the war doesn't make you pro-Saddam, knub-nuts

If you are American, HE IS YOUR PRESIDENT.

Correction, he is the man that lives in the White House that the republican party SAYS is president. Screw the Electoral College, more people voted for Gore. I didn't vote in 2000, so he isn't the president that I picked. I ignore the White House at this point, anyway.

He did liberate Iraq, but lets also recognize the Congress who gave him permission, the soldiers who did the fighting, the generals who led the soldiers, and the taxpayers who funded the war.

He didn't liberate Iraq, the troops did, and it's not any better over there. It's more of a wasteland now, thanks to our troops, who are falling like flies over there. I support the troops, but not the war. So I don't want to hear another little punk telling me who I am or how I should be acting. I'm just as much as an american as you are. Heck, maybe even more because I don't let the government think for me.

[GooieGreen]

At 2/4/04 11:04 AM, IceWraith15 wrote: In fact, I would call this war JUSTICE.

If there was no other option, like WWII, then by all means, have a war! There were a few more actions that could have been taken instead of going in head first, guns blazing.

War=Forcing a political opinion
What if that opinion was justified?

What is monkies came flying out of my ass? Justified as a last resort, maybe. This was not the last resort.

[mentalis]

At 2/3/04 04:02 PM, Dagodevas wrote: Bush could never win the Nobel Peace Prize. How can anyone who starts a war even be nominated? It’s insane!

Stranger things have happened.

[Dagodevas]

At 2/4/04 02:40 PM, Veggiemeal wrote: Well, Justify this:

You're just as bad as he is for doing that.

[bumcheekcity]

At 2/4/04 12:49 PM, Dagodevas wrote: Saddam should have been removed from power, but we shouldn't have to go to war over it.

Playing DA here, how should Saddam have been removed from power?

[GooieGreen]

At 2/4/04 04:45 PM, bumcheekcity wrote:

At 2/4/04 12:49 PM, Dagodevas wrote: Saddam should have been removed from power, but we shouldn't have to go to war over it.

Playing DA here, how should Saddam have been removed from power?

We could have asked him really nicely...

I'm sure that he wouldn't have left without a fight. So to take him out of power, I guess what we did was the best way... since we've tried killing him for years... stupid body doubles...

[mrpopenfresh]

Just to point out the painfully obvious, I think its quite safe to say that most people would have supported, or at least tolerated a bit more this war in Iraq if the US said it was going there to take out Saddam, and not to find this steaming heap of bullshit known as WOMD. I know that if the US wouldv'e had as main objectif to get rid of Saddam and not find those alledged weapons, I'dve been a helluva lot more positive about this war, and im sure alot you would've been too.