• NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Yeah in hindsight it was a silly award that felt like a “thanks for not being Bush and Cheney” prize.

    • DaMummy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      13 hours ago

      Now look into how many bombs were dropped under Bush/Chaney, and then how many were dropped under Obama. You’ll quickly understand what the Nobel Peace Prize was for.

        • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          13 hours ago

          You’re saying that there was no Afghan war for the first 10 months of Bush’s admin and no Iraq war for the first two I take it?

          Even with that factored in, from what I can tell the Bush admin dropped nearly double (100k for Obama vs 200k for Bush), although I’m not sure where they’re sourcing their information from.

          • TheAlbatross@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            11 hours ago

            It’s a weird argument, because he got the peace prize really early into his presidency; before he could have an impact to get America to drop 100k bombs vs 200k, but also dropping a hundred thousand bombs seems like a hundred thousand more bombs than one would have to drop to be called a paragon of peace…

            • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              10 hours ago

              Oh for sure, I just don’t think it makes sense to imply he was worse than the people that created the mess in the first place who also happened to drop more bombs.