Badmovies.org Forum

Conservative praise for Nobel speech 
President Barack Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize speech Thursday is drawing praise from some unlikely quarters – conservative Republicans – who likened Obama’s defense of “just wars” to the worldview of his predecessor, Republican George W. Bush.

It’s already being called the “Obama Doctrine” – a notion that foreign policy is a struggle of good and evil, that American exceptionalism has blunted the force of tyranny in the world, and that U.S. military can be a force for good and even harnessed to humanitarian ends.

“There will be times,” Obama said, “when nations – acting individually or in concert – will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified.”

The remarks drew immediate praise from a host of conservatives, including former GOP House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.

“I liked what he said," Palin told USA Today. "Of course, war is the last thing I believe any American wants to engage in, but it's necessary. We have to stop these terrorists."

Gingrich told The Takeaway, a national morning drive show from WNYC and Public Radio International, “He clearly understood that he had been given the prize prematurely, but he used it as an occasion to remind people, first of all, as he said: that there is evil in the world..." 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/30448 (http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/30448) 

“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,” Obama said. “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.” 

Does Palin ever say anything that ISN'T stupid?   :lookingup:

What part of that did you consider stupid?  That war should be a last resort, or that it is sometimes necessary to stop evil people from doing bad things.

I did not hear the whole speech, but if those excerpts are typical, then this conservative is also applauding.

You see, your summation of what she said is not stupid.  In other words, you'd do a far better job of giving the press quotes than Palin herself ever could.  

Even when she's saying something I agree with, she ALWAYS sounds like an idiot.  Further, I think it is clear that Obama was not referring to wars to stop terrorism (which is what I thought sounded stupid).  Obama himself has ended the "war" on terrorism, a rather ridiculous idea in the first place.

Just because Obama calls it by another name doesn't mean he's ended the "war on terror." He is sending an additional 30,000 troops to Afghanistan to finish it, and he is holding forces in Iraq for the moment.

My only issue with the phrase "war on terror" is that it is not specific enough.  We should call it the war on Islamic terrorists, for that is what it is.  And I hope to God we win it.

So far, the troop surge in Afghanistan is one of the few things Obama has done that I agree with.

I might add, since looking back I haven't stated it, that I agree with the meaning of Obama's speech.  I just think the entire concept of a war on terrorism is ludicrous - much like the war on drugs. 

Obama ended the use of the term (which is good), and has altered the way terrorism will be dealt with - making it less at the forefront of every foreign policy and armed forces decision we make, and more a matter of national and domestic security.  Good things.  I also agree with the Afghanistan surge, BTW.

I guess you and I aren't as far apart, ideologically, as I thought. 
  However, I still think it is sheer stupidity to treat these Al Qaeda/Taliban terrorists as common criminals when what they are doing is waging war against us.  I disagree with the whole concept of trying them in New York on criminal charges, with all the rights of U.S. citizens.  International law and U.S. judicial precedent all argue for military tribunals followed by swift execution.  What if they are allowed to walk by some looney left judge who wants to "make a statement" about the Bush administration? 

Palin likes something Obama said?!  MY GOD!  If Rush or Beck say say that as well, we will have officially entered the Twilight Zone!

Jokes aside, this is a surprisingly moment if I have ever seen one.

Of course they liked it. He sounds like a republican.  :teddyr:    And palin is an idiot. She is all for his speech because its war talk and she loves that. 

From what I gather, the evidence against the major figures is pretty overwhelming.  Along the lines of taped confessions, eyewitnesses, physical evidence, practically everything you can think of.  IIRC, several of them aren't even intending to fight the charges.

To be honest, I think it should depend on where and how they were captured as to whether they get a civilian trial or not.  If they're in America legally, they should get a civilian trial.  If they're captured by the armed forces in foreign nations, I think in general a military trial seems more fitting.  Just as long as they get one.  It just rubs me the wrong way when any country holds people without trial for essentially indefinite periods of time. 

Speaking of which, what's the deal with Noriega?  Don't feel bad for him (a death sentence would have been appropriate for him), but his prison sentence ended in 2007.  Kind of strange limbo he's in, apparently.