/dev/null Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/11/09/...in5592551.shtml Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 No Peace Prize for you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...COJf4&pos=8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 Ok, you can have your Peace Prize back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 Ok, you can have your Peace Prize back. Amateur hour yet again. At least we can laugh now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 Amateur hour yet again. At least we can laugh now. It's not Obama's fault he got the Nobel Peace Prize...it's the committee's fault, for awarding it on exactly no basis to begin with. So if the administration decides that 40k more troops are needed in Afghanistan, even though it may be based on a questionable set of policy assumptions, they should make the decision without any consideration given to a bunch of fools in Stockholm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 It's not Obama's fault he got the Nobel Peace Prize...it's the committee's fault, for awarding it on exactly no basis to begin with. So if the administration decides that 40k more troops are needed in Afghanistan, even though it may be based on a questionable set of policy assumptions, they should make the decision without any consideration given to a bunch of fools in Stockholm. I think he was talking more about the "we're adding 40k troops" "no we're not" amateur hour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 I think he was talking more about the "we're adding 40k troops" "no we're not" amateur hour. Missed the second link somehow. Yes, that would be amateur hour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 Now that they're putting more troops on the ground, I'm curious as to whether they've decided what the actual mission in Afghanistan is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 So if the administration decides that 40k more troops are needed in Afghanistan, even though it may be based on a questionable set of policy assumptions, they should make the decision without any consideration given to a bunch of fools in Stockholm. Stockholm? Someone must have been studying geography in a US public school.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted November 11, 2009 Author Share Posted November 11, 2009 Stockholm? Someone must have been studying geography in a US public school.... You caught Tom in an error Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 So now it's a flip-flop when a media outlet says you're going to do something and you say no, you haven't decided yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 So now it's a flip-flop when a media outlet says you're going to do something and you say no, you haven't decided yet? So you're saying CBS is making **** up again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 So you're saying CBS is making **** up again? No, I'm saying posters here are making **** up again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted November 11, 2009 Author Share Posted November 11, 2009 No, I'm saying posters here are making **** up again. You caught me. I don't know how you did, but you caught me. I'm the one who put that story up on CBS website Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 You caught me. I don't know how you did, but you caught me.I'm the one who put that story up on CBS website I wasn't referring to you. I was referring to the "we're sending 40,000 troops, no we're not" posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 I wasn't referring to you. I was referring to the "we're sending 40,000 troops, no we're not" posts. Who said it was a flip flop? I'd put it more in the cluster!@#$ category. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 I wasn't referring to you. I was referring to the "we're sending 40,000 troops, no we're not" posts. Y'know, we're just busting nuts, but I think it's pretty fair to say that when CBS cites "informed sources" on a story this large, it's pretty safe to say it was yet another trial balloon to gauge how pissed Pelosi's lapdogs are going to get when they hear this. We both know this WH does a lot of trial balloon stuff, and I highly doubt CBS used some random "informed sources." Everyone knows you don't piss off the WH these days.. But again, no one really cares about the change in message. We were just busting balls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 But again, no one really cares about the change in message. We were just busting balls. As am I. It could be a trial balloon, sure. I would imagine, however, it was simply an instance where they really havent made up their mind yet, don't have all the options in, are leaning right now toward the 40,000 troops but havent made any decision, the reporter heard from some lower level person not directly in the room, and then printed it as fact, hoping to get "the scoop" if it would later turn out to be true, and unconcerned if they were dead wrong as the public would be onto the next story by then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Stockholm? Someone must have been studying geography in a US public school.... No. I was actually unaware that the Peace Prize was awarded in Oslo; I thought it was awarded in Stockholm like all the others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts