Thread: 'Putin’s Syria role deserving of Nobel Peace Prize' - RT

Dear members! Could you please stay on topic and avoid posting off-topic replies..

Deleted. L.

President Vladimir Putin totally does deserve the Nobel Peace Prize. It's not that difficult for some people to get one since they have lots of free time to promote peace. But Putin is the leader of the largest country on the planet and he still makes time to try and resolve serious issues peacefully. I also think that Barack Obama should lose his prize. He openly admitted that he was sending aid and weapons to terrorist-linked groups in Syria and that does not promote peace. And he tried to bomb Syria's legitimate leaders. Imo, the Nobel Peace Prize committee should be investigated for possible corruption. Their 2014 decision was seriously wonky.

Originally Posted by UhOhXplode

President Vladimir Putin totally does deserve the Nobel Peace Prize. It's not that difficult for some people to get one since they have lots of free time to promote peace. But Putin is the leader of the largest country on the planet and he still makes time to try and resolve serious issues peacefully. I also think that Barack Obama should lose his prize. He openly admitted that he was sending aid and weapons to terrorist-linked groups in Syria and that does not promote peace. And he tried to bomb Syria's legitimate leaders. Imo, the Nobel Peace Prize committee should be investigated for possible corruption. Their 2014 decision was seriously wonky.

The president idolized so much by certain people here has been sending weapons and military equipment to the Assad regime in Syria for years, and he doesn't intend to stop, and doesn't hide the fact he doesn't. How does that add up to peace, anywhere, any time?

FYI: Legitimate leaders do not command to shoot dead peaceful demonstrations.

Originally Posted by UhOhXplode

... I also think that Barack Obama should lose his prize. He openly admitted that he was sending aid and weapons to terrorist-linked groups in Syria and that does not promote peace. And he tried to bomb Syria's legitimate leaders. Imo, the Nobel Peace Prize committee should be investigated for possible corruption. Their 2014 decision was seriously wonky.

You are entitle to your opinion, but again the topic is not about Obama. I have to give you a warning.

Originally Posted by Eric C.

The president idolized so much by certain people here has been sending weapons and military equipment to the Assad regime in Syria for years, and he doesn't intend to stop, and doesn't hide the fact he doesn't. How does that add up to peace, anywhere, any time?

FYI: Legitimate leaders do not command to shoot dead peaceful demonstrations.

Please provide a source or sources. I wasn't aware that Assad ordered anyone to shoot peaceful demonstrators.
But that's not really the issue. President Vladimir Putin used diplomacy - not violence - to stop the bombing of Syria. That's a peaceful solution to a serious issue and things like that should be rewarded - even if Putin isn't expecting any rewards.
Any other Syria-related issues should be discussed in a new thread.

Originally Posted by Lampada

You are entitle to your opinion, but again the topic is not about Obama. I have to give you a warning.

Sorry. But I was only attempting to point out the discrepancy between the 2 decisions of the Peace Prize Committee because I still don't know why one President got the Prize and I don't understand why the other one didn't.

Originally Posted by UhOhXplode

Please provide a source or sources. I wasn't aware that Assad ordered anyone to shoot peaceful demonstrators.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeli...–April_2011)

Friday 18 March, named "Day of Dignity" by some protesters,[2] after Islamic Friday prayers, protests for freedom and democracy were held in four cities.[23]
In Daraa locals gathered peacefully and marched through the city, demanding release of the teenagers detained since 6 March and calling for democracy, greater freedom,[7] political freedom and an end to corruption.[24] An amateur video purportedly shows watercanons being used in Daraa to disperse demonstrators.[23] A resident told news agency Reuters that "thousands" of demonstrators chanted: "God, Syria, Freedom".[24] According to Western media, security forces opened fire killing four,[7] according to witnesses six[17] demonstrators, while hundreds were reported injured.[25] The Syrian government reacted by saying that "infiltrators had caused chaos and riots" in Daraa.[23]

23 March, in Daraa, security forces using tear gas and firearms stormed on thousand demonstrators near the Omari mosque (see also 22 March),[42][43][44] an Associated Press reporter heard semi-automatic gunfire.[43] At least 37 people were killed, according to a hospital communication.[45][46] Mobile phone connections to Daraa were cut, and checkpoints in town were manned by uniformed soldiers and plainclothes security agents with rifles.[43]


Friday 1 April, after Friday prayers,[65] thousands of protesters in several cities demonstrated themselves to be unsatisfied with, and unimpressed by, the vague promises of reform President Assad had made the previous day (see above).[69]
In Douma, a working-class[69] northern suburb[70] of Damascus, citizens gathered on the Municipality Square, hundreds according to Syrian officials, 2,000 according to witnesses who said they were chanting: "Freedom, freedom" when police opened fire on them.[70] At least eleven people were killed.[70][71] Officials however said, an armed group had taken to the rooftops and fired on both citizens and security forces.[70]
In Daraa, according to an eyewitness 5,000 people demonstrated, shouting: "We want freedom!"[72] Hundreds tried to march from Daraa to the nearby city of Al-Sanamayn when police fired on them, killing five marchers, reports say.[69]
In Homs, according to the state news agency, an armed group fired on citizens, killing one girl.[70]

etc. etc. etc.

Even though you can hardly find anything that would say Assad personally gave those orders, the thing is, he's the chairman of that whole country, and those security forces submit to him. After they committed all those shootings, the only right course of action would be to arrest and try them by the criminal code. But that was never done, leaving no doubt all they committed had been arranged on the highest governmental level.

Originally Posted by UhOhXplode

Imo, the Nobel Peace Prize committee should be investigated for possible corruption. Their 2014 decision was seriously wonky.

Um... just because of that?! Does the name "Yasser Arafat" ring a bell? Not to mention Henry Kissinger -- and less-famous names like Cordell Hull (who, as US Secretary of State, had opposed giving asylum to Jewish refugees in WW2, but was a tireless promoter of the UN).

Ten Controversial Winners of the Nobel Peace Prize

The list makes interesting reading -- and the winners were controversial for very different reasons

What else can Putin do but help and arm Syria. If we in the Philippines are considered pariahs to USA and the whole international community, I, as president, will also seek Putin's help. Putin is sensible. When other world leaders are acting strange, Putin acts as the psychiatric counsellor or spiritual adviser. "He has a heart, Mr. Cool"- Tailorofpanama. More power to Putin.

> Officials however said, an armed group had taken to the rooftops and fired on both citizens and security forces.

This is the key. Immidiately peacefull demonstration became chaos and revolution with firearms. As they were ready and needed trigger. "Evil dictator, killing it's own people" (tm). This is the key. This is how revolutions are made today.
Don't you see it? Nobody found so called "ukranian snipers".

Originally Posted by Eric C.

.... an armed group had taken to the rooftops and fired on both citizens and security forces ....

Thanks. Now I know who started the proxy revolution. I support Putin & Assad.

Originally Posted by Throbert McGee

Um... just because of that?! Does the name "Yasser Arafat" ring a bell? Not to mention Henry Kissinger -- and less-famous names like Cordell Hull (who, as US Secretary of State, had opposed giving asylum to Jewish refugees in WW2, but was a tireless promoter of the UN).

Ten Controversial Winners of the Nobel Peace Prize

The list makes interesting reading -- and the winners were controversial for very different reasons

I wasn't aware that the Nobel Peace Prize committee was that corrupt. That may be worse than FIFA.

Originally Posted by dinlot

What else can Putin do but help and arm Syria. If we in the Philippines are considered pariahs to USA and the whole international community, I, as president, will also seek Putin's help. Putin is sensible. When other world leaders are acting strange, Putin acts as the psychiatric counsellor or spiritual adviser. "He has a heart, Mr. Cool"- Tailorofpanama. More power to Putin.

The Republic of the Philippines is awesome. And Filipinos are NOT pariahs. I know - I was talking to Filipinos last year. Somebody just didn't like losing Clark Air Base and Subic Bay.

Originally Posted by Alex80

> Officials however said, an armed group had taken to the rooftops and fired on both citizens and security forces.

This is the key. Immidiately peacefull demonstration became chaos and revolution with firearms. As they were ready and needed trigger. "Evil dictator, killing it's own people" (tm). This is the key. This is how revolutions are made today.
Don't you see it? Nobody found so called "ukranian snipers".

I saw that. The more you know.....

Originally Posted by UhOhXplode

Thanks. Now I know who started the proxy revolution. I support Putin & Assad.

It's clear from the context that was Assad's officials, not civilized ones. Believing anything they say is like believing a robber who says it was someone else who robbed the bank, even though the cameras had caught him red handed. But I can't tell you how you use your freedom of choice - it's yours.

I support neither of the two, but that doesn't mean I support Obama, or someone else. I support common sense. I think power corrupts people, the more power they have the more corrupted they are, and the two you admire both seem to be going for unlimited power.

Putin knows his history, studied all angles and contours of Syrian history from the time of Assad's father. He knows that what confronts the younger Assad was what Putin encountered in Beslan and Chechnya. He emphatizes and sympathizes. Not an accomplice to whatever human rights violation Assad's troops and ISIS have committed.

I really think it's silly of RT to bang on about Putin deserving the Nobel Peace prize.
It's not really "the done thing" for a state media channel to do.

Secondly - I think everybody knows that only people who are doing the bidding of the West, or are nice symbols that appeal to the West get the Nobel prize. So it's completely pointless. However it gives fodder to those who like to say that RT is Putin's propaganda channel and similar accusations.

The only way Putin can get the Nobel Peace prize is to allow Russia can become a Western puppet state, and/or have its resources exploited by Western (read American) companies. I really can't remember but I am guessing that either Yeltsin or Gorbachev got the Nobel Peace prize....

This said - Russia and Putin has been right all along about Syria, and I think even a lot of the Russia-haters can't help but notice that.

I am not too sure whether it's such a good idea for Russia to get actively involved in the war in Syria (i.e. Russian bombing just started today).

Remember Afghanistan, huh, Russia? War against crazy islamic fundamentalists...? Afghanistan was bordering the USSR and the Afghan gov't asked for help.

What happens when Russians start coming home as invalids and Russians get captured and beheaded by ISIS?
This might possibly be a milestone though: to show that Russia is back in business as a major player in world politics. Russia needs to be very careful how it's handling this new state of affairs.

In Sweden, we have a sort of "national" debating forum, and in the "Russia" section there is normally 90% anti-Russia, anti-Putin posts, normally (due to media in Sweden being very anti-Russia).

However I noticed that the threads about Syria and Russia are now full of "Thanks Russia, go Putin", "Go Ivan, give these assholes what they deserve (i.e. ISIS)" and "Finally a superpower cleans up this snakepit". "I'm beginning to like Putin" and similar comments.

Don't know what to think about this view of things.
Hopefully this would lead the (mostly immature) people commenting to re-evaluate their biaised and erroneous view of Russia and Putin.

But they forget, or don't realise that Russia was against foreign meddling in Syria in the first place!
If the West had listened to Russia on this matter in the first place, there wouldn't even be a war there now! Assad would have stopped the protests and things would have remained as they were - i.e. stable and perfectly adequate by Middle Eastern standards.

This situation needs to be resolved NOW. I don't think anyone reading this realises the rate at which refugees are pouring into Western Europe from the Middle East right now.
Germany received 285,000 in just a month. Sweden, receives several thousand a day and several cities have turned into Middle Eastern ghettos.

The US did this to us, by starting the wars that are now generating refugees. Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria. In the extension also Somalia. These are the exact places the refugees come from. Every Western European country now has a large sub-culture of middle eastern and African muslims. We don't recognise our own countries anymore. These people mostly don't integrate and live on benefits for years, or forever.

If Russia is going to wager war in Syria, they better win it pretty darn quick so that the outflow of refugees stops. No endless Afghanistan type war. Win fast or leave it alone.
I am not convinced that Russia is doing the right thing about getting involved in Syria.

Originally Posted by Eric C.

It's clear from the context that was Assad's officials, not civilized ones. Believing anything they say is like believing a robber who says it was someone else who robbed the bank, even though the cameras had caught him red handed. But I can't tell you how you use your freedom of choice - it's yours.

I support neither of the two, but that doesn't mean I support Obama, or someone else. I support common sense. I think power corrupts people, the more power they have the more corrupted they are, and the two you admire both seem to be going for unlimited power.

Like I expected anything less? And no, it wasn't Ryan Fogle, in a cheap wig, trying to buy an FSB agent. Government coups are a more serious issue. So yeah, I would be seriously surprised if it wasn't "clear from the context".
Sometimes I wonder what else is "clear from the context". Mostly The Matrix was.

Anyway, this thread has taught me a lot about why some leaders win Nobel Peace Prizes and why some leaders don't. People who are not politically correct never get cards on Valentines Day. And sometimes the winners are the ones that don't get any cards.

Corrupt crooks taking up more power than they can and/or should handle will eventually be wiped out of the office, and dealt with just the way they deserve. That Syrian bastard should be praying God now he could just escape from the country so he wouldn't be found, but no - he goes further and further. Because those rabid animals lose every sense but the sense of power - even the sense of fear. They never stop on their own. But they're nicely stopped by the people they oppress - like the Libyan dictator was, for instance.

Originally Posted by Eric C.

Corrupt crooks taking up more power than they can and/or should handle will eventually be wiped out of the office, and dealt with just the way they deserve. That Syrian bastard should be praying God now he could just escape from the country so he wouldn't be found, but no - he goes further and further. Because those rabid animals lose every sense but the sense of power - even the sense of fear. They never stop on their own. But they're nicely stopped by the people they oppress - like the Libyan dictator was, for instance.

Wow! You sound like me when somebody messes with one of my friends. Then yeah, I am totally ready to fight! But I don't have any Syrian friends so nothing to fight about. I only fight for me and my friends so anything else is just a discussion.
But if Assad is so evil then why did 1/2 the population of Syria vote for him?
Bashar al-Assad wins re-election in Syria as uprising against him rages on | World news | The Guardian

Only 1/6 of our population voted for our president.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...election,_2012

The only thing I know that Assad did was that he tried to stop a color revolution. I wonder what would happen if a color revolution started in our country. I seriously doubt that our government would let them take over.
If he did anything worse than letting some traitors get shot, let me know. But it's still a Syrian problem, not ours. The only issue in Syria that affects us is the Jihadists and al-Nursa is fighting the government with the rebels.

We do realise the floodgates are wide open. This flow of refugees needs to be stanched at all costs. It is unsustainable and even though in the short term some may act all misty-eyed about "human rights" in the long run it will only lead to plummeting standards of living, segregation and bitter resentment from all parties.

Originally Posted by Lady Maria

We do realise the floodgates are wide open. This flow of refugees needs to be stanched at all costs. It is unsustainable and even though in the short term some may act all misty-eyed about "human rights" in the long run it will only lead to plummeting standards of living, segregation and bitter resentment from all parties.

Yup - Interestingly, RT is really the only English speaking TV that is reporting honestly about this at the moment.
I.e. the risks and costs for Europe, the fact that most of the refugees are men in their twenties, many of whom were already living in Lebanon and Turkey and actually didn't need to flee anything.

But they are also reporting compassionately about the fact that many of the refugees really are very vulnerable and handed a very unfair hand. It's understandable that they try to leave their godforsaken lands.. I appreciate that RT tries to show both sides and not just push an agenda.

In the meantime other English-speaking or Western European TV is showing cute kids (a tiny proportion of the refugees) and accusing everybody who doesn't support unlimited influx, of rasism.