If he gets one, will he go away?
He can be awarded one posthum if he does the funniest thing for world peace
Does this scenario include a bunker and a Ruger?
Luckily the Norwegian! Noble comitee are not lining up
No one will stand up to him. They just get in line to Suck The Donald Cock.
Using the military on your own people should cinch the award.
I love the idea of giving Obama a second Nobel Peace prize, just to piss Trump off.
Or one for Michelle, to really yank his chain.
Nobel committee needs to write back and tell them all to fuck off and get real.
Sounds like an easy way to make their entire program irrelevant forever.
Pretty sure giving it to Kissinger did that long ago.
Also Obama
Yeah, being an adult is recognizing that Obama was a great President, but he did not deserve that Peace Prize.
Efforts? The peace prize is a participation trophy now? I thought they hated that shit lol. Fucking loser hypocrites.
Given that they gave it to Kissinger in the 70s, and then gave it to Obama before he actually did anything just for not being George W. Bush, the precedent would be that Nobels may be dispensed wherever politically expedient.
TBF not being George Bush is very peaceful, in comparison.
Not trying to defend Bush, but https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/stories/2017-01-17/obamas-covert-drone-war-in-numbers-ten-times-more-strikes-than-bush
That has a lot more to do with the degree of adoption of drones by the military than anything else. They were bleeding-edge technology in Bush’s time.
Anyway, the whole Obama/drone thing is nothing but lazy repetition of meaningless talking points.
That’s one isolated metric. This is probably better than sending an army.
It’s a dumb metric as well, seeing as warfare evolves and modern drones were mostly untested before Bush 2.0.
Bush did the beta testing, it worked. Obama continued their use. It’s like saying more people used iPhones in 2015 than in 2008.
How is that better. You do realize this is very sophisticated bombing. Would you rather have a guy run into your house or the house of your family or some super sonic mach 3 drone? What kind of contest is that anyway.
I’d rather have neither. I’m just saying some isolated metric doesn’t give the full picture.
I think it paints a strong picture if you think bombing/striking/whatever other countries is wrong.
That’s one isolated metric. This is probably better than sending an army.
Sounds like you were saying getting drone striked is probably better, but English is not my native language so you are probably right
If I had a gun to my head and was forced to choose whether a ground/army invasion is better than the drone strike, I would choose the latter.
However, I’d prefer neither happen.
You’ll end up pink mist either way, but a drone strike can be targeted more precisely, so it’s likely to cause far fewer innocent casualties.
Kissinger is easily the worst example to give the Peace Prize to. I think Anthony Bourdain wrote about Laos( correct me if I am wrong about the country) that you will wish to beat Kissinger with your bare hands after you have visited the place and see what he had done.
Satire died the day Kissinger was awarded the Peace Prize. Someone said famously as well. Even if Trump gets it, I will still argue that Kissinger remains the gold standard for being bad.
