Obama defends US wars as he accepts peace prize

Updated at bottom

Good on him. When Obama does something right, we gotta give him credit.

From AP:

OSLO (AP) - President Barack Obama entered the pantheon of Nobel Peace Prize winners with humble words Thursday, acknowledging his own few accomplishments while delivering a robust defense of war and promising to use the prestigious prize to "reach for the world that ought to be."

A wartime president honored for peace, Obama became the first sitting U.S. president in 90 years and the third ever to win the prize - some say prematurely. In this damp, chilly Nordic capital to pick it up, he and his wife, Michelle, whirled through a day filled with Nobel pomp and ceremony.

And yet Obama was staying here only about 24 hours and skipping the traditional second day of festivities. This miffed some in Norway but reflects a White House that sees little value in extra pictures of the president, (Pastorius comment: ROTFLMAO) his poll numbers dropping at home, taking an overseas victory lap while thousands of U.S. troops prepare to go off to war and millions of Americans remain jobless.

Just nine days after ordering 30,000 more U.S. troops into battle in Afghanistan, Obama delivered a Nobel acceptance speech that he saw as a treatise on war's use and prevention. He crafted much of the address himself and the scholarly remarks - at about 4,000 words - were nearly twice as long as his inaugural address.

In them, Obama refused to renounce war for his nation or under his leadership, saying defiantly that "I face the world as it is" and that he is obliged to protect and defend the United States.

"A nonviolent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies. Negotiations cannot convince al-Qaida's leaders to lay down their arms," Obama said. "To say that force is sometimes necessary is not a call to cynicism, it is a recognition of history."

The president laid out the circumstances where war is justified - in self-defense, to come to the aid of an invaded nation and on humanitarian grounds, such as when civilians are slaughtered by their own government or a civil war threatens to engulf an entire region.

"The belief that peace is desirable is rarely enough to achieve it," he said.

It took big balls to give this speech to the Nobel Committee, especially given the fact that he was being given the Peace Prize.

Couple the speech with the fact that he isn't playing the Nobel Committee reindeer games (the Nobel committee members were "miffed" at Obama for "skipping the traditional second day of festivities") and Obama must be admired for having stood his ground; a ground which, quite frankly, I did not believe he had staked out in the first place.

This speech will fly in the face of a large percentage of his ardent supporters. The speech, even more than the 30,000 extra troops he is sending to Afghanistan, sets Obama apart from the Leftists who have absconded with the power of the once noble Democratic Party.

I do not know how to fit this speech into the constellation of idiocy and malevolence which is the Obama Administration. One is left to wonder, what is this America he believes in fighting for? Is it America he is fighting for, or is it some other prize?

Given the "audacity" it took to make this speech to the Nobel community, one has to wonder if the war Obama is fighting is against himself. Certainly this speech is not going to make him many friends at the EU or the UN. This speech was almost a kind of Kamikaze raid on the Peace Movement.

Does this tell us Obama is brave, or is he self-destructive?

Update/Midnight Rider adds:

It's not illegal if the President does it.

Heard that before? 1973 or so, maybe?

Pastorius and I were just hashing this out. It would seem there is another explanation for this speech. Barack Obama, contrary to what many think, does not seek the destruction of the United States. He wants to see it changed (for the much worse). And he wants to rule the new United States. And rule is the correct word.

The hubris of the man is more unbelievable and undeniable with each passing day. He's already moving in that direction. The most recent and aggregious example is the EPA CO2 ruling. If Congress doesn't do what I want I will do it on my own, without them. And the developing Kevin Jennings debacle. SEIU silencing dissent.

His is an arrogance born of the notion that he is better than everyone else, smarter. And if you disagree with him it's because you just don't know better. He says what he wants to who he wants without regard because, after all, he is Barack Obama. The Chosen One. It's look down your nose snobbery of the highest order. After all, he IS the President.

But it is hubris. He may have the moxy to pull it off on camera, but when faced with making the decisions he knows he is clueless how to proceed.

And, in the end, it will be his undoing.

But, he cannot rule the United States if it no longer exists. If it is destroyed by terrorist nukes or falls into complete chaos because of other terrorist actions.

So I think we need to keep separate Obama's social agenda from his military one. He wants to recreate the U.S. as a Socialist nation, maybe even Marxist. BUT HE STILL WANTS TO BE THE ONE RUNNING IT. And thus he needs to still defend it as it exists now, or there won't be anything let to change and rule.

In the case of Afghanistan he waited, too long, to make a decison. And the pressure built for him to make one, any, one way or the other.And when he did he made the worst one possible. 30,000 additional troops. Because he knew we couldn't cut and run or the threat against us would grow.

He is criticized for commiting the bare minimum. He is criticized for commiting them without any clear plan for them. He is criticized for commiting them at all instead of a full draw down.

So the speech to The Nobels is as much Obama addressing and trying to preempt his critics as much as anything else.

Because, of course, he's absolutely right about his decision. After all, he IS The President.