|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
sirius black
Joined: 04 Jun 2010
|
 Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2012 5:36 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Quote: |
| You were addressing Rockerfeller's power. His power would have stopped the act. His power would have let the status quo of his companies remain. |
It was in his interests to pretend to be opposed but in the end profit and increase his influence through the breakup.
|
lol..yeah, I remember reading that in the history books. This is getting silly. You have the last word. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2012 6:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sirius black wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Quote: |
| You were addressing Rockerfeller's power. His power would have stopped the act. His power would have let the status quo of his companies remain. |
It was in his interests to pretend to be opposed but in the end profit and increase his influence through the breakup.
|
lol..yeah, I remember reading that in the history books. This is getting silly. You have the last word. |
Yeah, because what you read in the history books is always how things were, and if it's not in a history book it must not have happened.
you do realize that history books back when we were growing up had a version of the Gulf of Tonkin Incident completely different fromt he one we now know is the case, same with Suez Canal Crisis, Six Day War and Yom Kippur, Iranian Hostages, etc, right? You do understand the concept of 'deception' and 'behind closed doors', right?
If this was such a mortal blow to his monopoly, where is the record of him fighting tooth and nail and calling in every favor and putting out opposition candidates and strikes and all the other 19th century style stuff you'd see? Explain that one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2012 6:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sirius black wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Quote: |
| You were addressing Rockerfeller's power. His power would have stopped the act. His power would have let the status quo of his companies remain. |
It was in his interests to pretend to be opposed but in the end profit and increase his influence through the breakup.
|
lol..yeah, I remember reading that in the history books. This is getting silly. You have the last word. |
Just admit you don't know what you're talking about. It's okay. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 16, 2012 5:46 am Post subject: Re: Respect for the President |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Unposter wrote: |
So when he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, his critics spent more time discrediting the importance of the award than congratulating him for winning it. |
Barack Obama deserves precisely zero congratulations for "winning" the Nobel Peace Prize, and his receipt of it really did to some extent mandate the discrediting of its importance. I'm not saying there isn't something of a point to the article at large (though it's packaged in a combination of distasteful whining, exaggeration, and some degree of false accusation; plenty of people who want to "take their country back" want to take it back from financial-sector capture, for instance), but it's very hard to see anyone who thinks Barack Obama deserved congratulations for winning the Nobel Peace Prize as serious. |
I almost always agree with Fox, but in this case....
No.
When two 'people' interact, there are two points of view. In this case, we are dealing with Obama (1) and the Nobel Prize Committee (2).
It isn't as if Obama campaigned for the prize. He was given the prize. The focus is has been on the recipient, not on the group who awarded the prize. Obama had no influence on who the prize was given to.
Criticism of Obama for the Nobel has been used as an excuse to attack Obama. Any criticism should be directed at the committee.
The question should be: What was the prize committee trying to say?
It seems clear to me the Swedes were trying to 'push' Obama into a more peaceful foreign policy. They almost certainly made a mistake in their award. That is no excuse to use the award as an avenue of attack on a man who only accepted the award.
Probably more than any other country, the US represents the hopes of the world, insofar as it tries to find ways to live together in peace and freedom. We don't always do that. In recent times, we tried to find ways to live together where the old white male majority could continue to dominate. Thank you, Ronald Reagan.
Obama represents another attempt to move forward. Who knows if it will be a step up on the old vicious path? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
