alexey Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 Some video here: Full text is here: http://c-span.org/pdf/intl121009_obama.pdfNotable excerpts: We must begin by acknowledging the hard truth that we will not eradicate violent conflict in our lifetimes. There will be times when nations – acting individually or in concert – will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified. I make this statement mindful of what Martin Luther King said in this same ceremony years ago – “Violence never brings permanent peace. It solves no social problem: it merely creates new and more complicated ones.” As someone who stands here as a direct consequence of Dr. King’s life’s work, I am living testimony to the moral force of non-violence. I know there is nothing weak –nothing passive – nothing naïve – in the creed and lives of Gandhi and King. But as a head of state sworn to protect and defend my nation, I cannot be guided by their examples alone. I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people. For make no mistake: evil does exist in the world. A non-violent movement could not have halted Hitler’s armies. Negotiations cannot convince al Qaeda’s leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force is sometimes necessary is not a call to cynicism – it is a recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of reason. I raise this point because in many countries there is a deep ambivalence about military action today, no matter the cause. At times, this is joined by a reflexive suspicion of America, the world’s sole military superpower. Yet the world must remember that it was not simply international institutions – not just treaties and declarations – that brought stability to a post-World War II world. Whatever mistakes we have made, the plain fact is this: the United States of America has helped underwrite global security for more than six decades with the blood of our citizens and the strength of our arms. The service and sacrifice of our men and women in uniform has promoted peace and prosperity from Germany to Korea, and enabled democracy to take hold in places like the Balkans. We have borne this burden not because we seek to impose our will. We have done so out of enlightened self-interest – because we seek a better future for our children and grandchildren, and we believe that their lives will be better if other peoples’ children and grandchildren can live in freedom and prosperity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 LOL, according to his twisted logic, Bush should have won a Nobel peace prize before him! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duckus Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 Interesting. I have not had time to read the entire speech - so I don't want to comment on it too much. However, that little part above is nicely written and I like the point he is making. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 LOL, according to his twisted logic, Bush should have won a Nobel peace prize before him! That's a terribly cynical response to the segment posted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexey Posted December 10, 2009 Author Share Posted December 10, 2009 LOL, according to his twisted logic, Bush should have won a Nobel peace prize before him! LOL indeed. This post does not reflect the intelligence I know you posses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 That's a terribly cynical response to the segment posted. LOL indeed. This post does not reflect the intelligence I know you posses. IF you were to put a Bush speech on one page, and an Obama speech on the other page, have no attributions to either, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference (in regards to the war) SS is correct in that this is a very "Bushian" speech Even Jon Stewart has a clip of this http://rawstory.com/2009/12/stewart-obama-channelling_bush/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heisenberg Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 LOL, according to his twisted logic, Bush should have won a Nobel peace prize before him! :doh: Thank God you often make good posts in regards to the economy and a few other issues - otherwise you'd be in danger of becoming another 81artmonk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heisenberg Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 IF you were to put a Bush speech on one page, and an Obama speech on the other page, have no attributions to either, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference (in regards to the war)SS is correct in that this is a very "Bushian" speech Even Jon Stewart has a clip of this IMHO that's a big stretch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 I think it's partially the problem of having to give a Nobel Peace speech as both as sitting President and as a President who done nothing noteworthy (policywise) in terms of securing the peace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 IMHO that's a big stretch. Not at all. Look at the comparisons each makes Bring up WW2 and Hitler- check Talk about America maintaining global security since the end of WW2- check I love this quote from the President today "There will be times when nations -- acting individually or in concert -- will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified." Key words- individually and morally Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duckus Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 I think it's partially the problem of having to give a Nobel Peace speech as both as sitting President and as a President who done nothing noteworthy (policywise) in terms of securing the peace. He talks about that in first several paragraphs of his speech. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexey Posted December 10, 2009 Author Share Posted December 10, 2009 IF you were to put a Bush speech on one page, and an Obama speech on the other page, have no attributions to either, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference (in regards to the war)SS is correct in that this is a very "Bushian" speech Even Jon Stewart has a clip of this http://rawstory.com/2009/12/stewart-obama-channelling_bush/ Never thought I'd see a day when you trot out Jon Stewart to support your point Your point does not hold for a whole speech. You may find similarities between individual sentences, maybe some paragraphs, the general structure, things like that. You may also find similarities in decisions that they make, if you look at them from 30000 feet like SS. I suspect that you are fully aware of being dead wrong about this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 :doh:Thank God you often make good posts in regards to the economy and a few other issues - otherwise you'd be in danger of becoming another 81artmonk. Glad you like some of my posts, sorry you cant see reality regarding this one. Please delineate between this speach (the entire one) and most of Bush's regarding the wars in the middle east. How come Obama gets a Nobel for doing the same things Bush did? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoodBits Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 Not at all.Look at the comparisons each makes Bring up WW2 and Hitler- check Talk about America maintaining global security since the end of WW2- check I love this quote from the President today Key words- individually and morally I think you might be misunderestimating Obama's rhetorical skills. Sorry couldn't resist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 Not at all.Look at the comparisons each makes Bring up WW2 and Hitler- check Talk about America maintaining global security since the end of WW2- check I love this quote from the President today Key words- individually and morally spot on, man:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 Never thought I'd see a day when you trot out Jon Stewart to support your point Your point does not hold for a whole speech. You may find similarities between individual sentences, maybe some paragraphs, the general structure, things like that. I have to run right now. However later today I'll try and put an Obama war speech next to a Bush war speech and ask the class which one belongs to whom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjah Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 LOL, according to his twisted logic, Bush should have won a Nobel peace prize before him! Have you checked your home's carbon monoxide detectors lately? Something about your "logic" tells me you're in an oxygen-deprived state right now. How come Obama gets a Nobel for doing the same things Bush did? Oh, but I thought Obama hadn't done anything yet? Twist and spin, twist and spin... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 That's a terribly cynical response to the segment posted. Yes, cynical is warranted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 Have you checked your home's carbon monoxide detectors lately? Something about your "logic" tells me you're in an oxygen-deprived state right now. Oh, but I thought Obama hadn't done anything yet? Twist and spin, twist and spin... Ok, so whats the difference between them regarding foreign policy and war? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 Ok, so whats the difference between them regarding foreign policy and war? The letter of their party? :whoknows: Oh I know! One is fighting AQ, and the other wasn't. Hmm, wait, you mean AQ is no longer in Afghanistan and is chilling out in Pakistan? :whoknows: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexey Posted December 10, 2009 Author Share Posted December 10, 2009 Please delineate between this speach (the entire one) and most of Bush's regarding the wars in the middle east. However later today I'll try and put an Obama war speech next to a Bush war speech and ask the class which one belongs to whom. At least SHF is not trying to get others to do his legwork. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heisenberg Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 Glad you like some of my posts, sorry you cant see reality regarding this one.Please delineate between this speach (the entire one) and most of Bush's regarding the wars in the middle east. How come Obama gets a Nobel for doing the same things Bush did? First off, I never said Obama deserved the Nobel Peace Prize - in fact I'm in the camp that thinks he didn't really do anything worthy of receiving the award. However, if you listen to the whole speech there isn't much there that resembles a speech by GWB. Obama also didn't make the decision to invade Iraq when we were already attempting to accomplish the main objective in Afghanistan. In that regard at least - Obama has been playing the hand he was dealt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 At least SHF is not trying to get others to do his legwork. Jon Stewart does a fine job of that for me :hysterical: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 At least SHF is not trying to get others to do his legwork. I didnt ask anyone to do anything at all, no legwork needed. anyone with half a brain can see the similarities, anyone with a minimal degree of intellectual honesty would acknowledge it (at least a little, see Burgold's post). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 He talks about that in first several paragraphs of his speech. Yup, I think he's honest and genuine enough to be aware of it. He's said at least once that he thought he didn't deserve it, but hoped he could live up to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.