Does Snowden deserve the Nobel Peace Prize? - Page 16
Forum Index > General Forum |
Xahhk
Canada540 Posts
| ||
Befree
694 Posts
I am troubled by the great naivety that I feel would be required to consider his actions heroic. Those on that side seem completely foolish to me. Ignorant, naive, whiny, narrow-minded, shortsighted, feeble-minded, paranoid, and self-righteous are all adjectives which I feel encapsulate how I feel about this side. Reading that poll and reading the replies disappoints me greatly. I honestly feel very frustrated with many of you. I believe your thought process to be terrible and your conclusions to be ridiculous. I think it is the anti-establishment for the sake of anti-establishment (I feel this is a fundamental aspect of your mind-set) which bothers me the most. I feel as if you make up for your ignorance and lack of solutions by constantly attacking and constantly complaining. I think it is very easy to just complain and to point out flaws in systems, and that this is taken advantage of and taken to an extreme often. I often find your complaints to be irreconcilable with reality. Imaginary, simplistic, unattainable worlds and systems which are used to refute our actual world and systems. To me this seems incredibly unproductive and is just a lazy method by which some person can make themselves feel as if they are smarter than others. But perhaps from your perspective, I'm just a gullible fool who was brainwashed to follow leadership and lash out at those who dispute the status quo. Of course I don't believe your perspective is at all correct, but I recognize its potential existence. Perhaps this seemed like an odd response, but I'm trying to work on expressing my feelings better than saying things like "you're a fucking idiot" or "fuck you" or "you don't know anything" or "I hate you." And instead I'm at least trying to give a more descriptive and useful explanation of my feelings so that you can see where my heads at, though I do realize that this probably does not make my message any less antagonistic or abrasive. To expand a little upon my viewpoints of this particular situation... I do not support Snowden's actions. I don't think they were at all an ideal method for fixing this perceived error. There exist other channels through which he could have done this which wouldn't have caused so much unnecessary controversy. I'm also bothered by his succeeding actions. Primarily his coming out interview. Preceding that interview, there was very little focus on the leaker aspect, and mostly all the media attention was on the actual issue of the NSA surveillance. Then he decides to give out his name and location? Why? Could he not foresee the complete shift in focus that would occur from the surveillance program to a sensationalized story of a man on the run from a government? What did he gain by coming out exactly? And then he continues this by making even more drama out of it. As well as his and Greenwald's claims of Snowden's vast knowledge of secrets. He supposedly knows so much and he puts himself at a risk of being captured by any rivals of his own country which he is supposedly trying to protect? Who is this helping? It just seems as if even if you were to somehow accept that it was great for him to do what he did in the first place, why does this figure who seems to be viewed as a martyr by some do all these things after? Everything seems completely focused on him. He just seems like a paranoid narcissist who without much thinking ahead decided he wanted to become some hero and reveal the dirty secrets of the U.S. government, but then afterwards he seems to think he can have all the praise and heroic status that comes with his martyring and "whistleblowing," but not suffer any punishments? Though I must say he is an absolutely marvelous symbol for the modern-day, smug generation of lazy, unthinking political dissidents. He just about perfectly exemplifies all the negative aspects which I feel characterize many of you out there. | ||
cLAN.Anax
United States2847 Posts
Svallfors also believes this will help the Peace Prize regain some of respect it lost after prematurely awarding Barack Obama the award in 2009. Bahahaha. The Nobel Prize reputation would only plummet farther. | ||
rezoacken
Canada2719 Posts
On July 17 2013 11:09 Shiori wrote: Oh I don't deny that some things would be lost: a stockpile of (mostly male) people of good physical fitness who have good discipline, know how to obey a command, and know lots about killing people; the feeling that my tax dollars fund, on some level, organized killing, which tends to incidentally include civilians; and (hopefully) the depressing tendency to label soldiers as uniquely heroic* (as if Afghanistan were Normandy Beach) when there are tonnes of doctors, surgeons, teachers, scientists, judges actually positively contributing to the well-being of people on a day-to-day basis who receive nominal to modest praise upon their death. *I don't deny that there are heroic soldiers, or that soldiers can do good things (both sides of my family have members who were at some point soldiers,and obviously I don't think they're bad people or anything less than good people). I'd say that the vast majority of soldiers are normal and good people, and that many of them have the best of intentions and truly love their country and/or their mission. I do deny that being in the military makes one a hero (regardless of death) in any automatic sense (the reason I state this is because the government renamed a major highway the "Highway of Heroes" since all fallen soldiers are escorted up it in funerary proceedings) and certainly not simply because they were killed doing something as a member of the armed forces. Dying for a cause shows resolve, but to be a hero, to me, means doing something noble or good in addition to being incredible/difficult. In that respect, I consider a firefighter who rushes to save someone from a burning building on the verge of collapse, despite indications of poisonous gas, to be far more worthy of the title of "hero" than a hypothetical soldier who was tragically shot during a firefight with insurgents in a random street. The latter is certainly very sad and definitely something to be mourned, but I think heroism is about deeds, not about tragedy. The firefighter is a hero whether he dies of poisoning or not; the soldier is venerated for death simply because the military is viewed by some as some literal, pure element of a nation more so than anyone else. I understand the tendency to venerate the dead is very human and tends to concentrate around service professions that involve some kind of risk (police etc.). That's fine with me, but it seems to only be soldiers that are elevated so high in death, and that only soldiers are considered heroic not only by rgw people close to them, but also by people they've never met, and even by the government itself in such a systematic way that I feel is unmatched. The real sadness to me when it comes to military operations overseas is that most soldiers are probably in it thinking they will make good, protect their country or some crap. This whole farce as to what really happens during and after a war, what it achieves, and who profit from it, makes me sick. (At least when it comes to the last 2). | ||
kmillz
United States1548 Posts
On July 17 2013 13:45 cLAN.Anax wrote: He deserves a prison cell. Snowden signed up knowing he'd have to keep silent about the sensitive secrets he would be entrusted with. How is this not treasonous sabotage? He deserves punishment, not recognition. Bahahaha. The Nobel Prize reputation would only plummet farther. That's impossible after our President got it. | ||
FluffyBinLaden
United States527 Posts
On July 17 2013 13:45 cLAN.Anax wrote: He deserves a prison cell. Snowden signed up knowing he'd have to keep silent about the sensitive secrets he would be entrusted with. How is this not treasonous sabotage? He deserves punishment, not recognition. Bahahaha. The Nobel Prize reputation would only plummet farther. He didn't know the secrets he learned would violate the law of the land. The Constitution still legally supersedes all. | ||
hansonslee
United States2026 Posts
| ||
Loanshark
China3094 Posts
On July 17 2013 13:36 Befree wrote: He just seems like a paranoid narcissist who without much thinking ahead decided he wanted to become some hero and reveal the dirty secrets of the U.S. government, but then afterwards he seems to think he can have all the praise and heroic status that comes with his martyring and "whistleblowing," but not suffer any punishments? Though I must say he is an absolutely marvelous symbol for the modern-day, smug generation of lazy, unthinking political dissidents. He just about perfectly exemplifies all the negative aspects which I feel characterize many of you out there. My thoughts exactly. | ||
giesecke
Germany361 Posts
i personally think, it is good that he made that thing public, but it is not an act that deserves this prize (or what this prize should mean). but since the commitee for this prize is stupid he probably has a good shot at winning it. | ||
0x64
Finland4419 Posts
| ||
hfglgg
Germany5372 Posts
On July 17 2013 13:45 cLAN.Anax wrote: He deserves a prison cell. Snowden signed up knowing he'd have to keep silent about the sensitive secrets he would be entrusted with. How is this not treasonous sabotage? He deserves punishment, not recognition. i dont understand this viewpoint. is this something shoot-the-messanger like? because how i see it, snowden revealed a lot of undemocratic behaviour and holes in the state of law in the us. i mean, you got secret courts who can do whatever the fuck they want and no one can control them. but i guess some people are just fine as long as they can wave the american flag and shout USA USA USA. | ||
sluggaslamoo
Australia4494 Posts
On July 17 2013 13:45 cLAN.Anax wrote: He deserves a prison cell. Snowden signed up knowing he'd have to keep silent about the sensitive secrets he would be entrusted with. How is this not treasonous sabotage? He deserves punishment, not recognition. Bahahaha. The Nobel Prize reputation would only plummet farther. He didn't sign up thinking the sensitive secrets were harming his own nation's people. | ||
Moochlol
United States456 Posts
On July 17 2013 13:36 Befree wrote: Granting the assumption of significance and meaning to the Nobel Peace Prize (questionable assumption), no, I absolutely do not think Edward Snowden deserves the Nobel Peace Prize. I find it impossible to even begin to imagine by what criterion he could be considered. I am troubled by the great naivety that I feel would be required to consider his actions heroic. Those on that side seem completely foolish to me. Ignorant, naive, whiny, narrow-minded, shortsighted, feeble-minded, paranoid, and self-righteous are all adjectives which I feel encapsulate how I feel about this side. Reading that poll and reading the replies disappoints me greatly. I honestly feel very frustrated with many of you. I believe your thought process to be terrible and your conclusions to be ridiculous. I think it is the anti-establishment for the sake of anti-establishment (I feel this is a fundamental aspect of your mind-set) which bothers me the most. I feel as if you make up for your ignorance and lack of solutions by constantly attacking and constantly complaining. I think it is very easy to just complain and to point out flaws in systems, and that this is taken advantage of and taken to an extreme often. I often find your complaints to be irreconcilable with reality. Imaginary, simplistic, unattainable worlds and systems which are used to refute our actual world and systems. To me this seems incredibly unproductive and is just a lazy method by which some person can make themselves feel as if they are smarter than others. But perhaps from your perspective, I'm just a gullible fool who was brainwashed to follow leadership and lash out at those who dispute the status quo. Of course I don't believe your perspective is at all correct, but I recognize its potential existence. Perhaps this seemed like an odd response, but I'm trying to work on expressing my feelings better than saying things like "you're a fucking idiot" or "fuck you" or "you don't know anything" or "I hate you." And instead I'm at least trying to give a more descriptive and useful explanation of my feelings so that you can see where my heads at, though I do realize that this probably does not make my message any less antagonistic or abrasive. To expand a little upon my viewpoints of this particular situation... I do not support Snowden's actions. I don't think they were at all an ideal method for fixing this perceived error. There exist other channels through which he could have done this which wouldn't have caused so much unnecessary controversy. I'm also bothered by his succeeding actions. Primarily his coming out interview. Preceding that interview, there was very little focus on the leaker aspect, and mostly all the media attention was on the actual issue of the NSA surveillance. Then he decides to give out his name and location? Why? Could he not foresee the complete shift in focus that would occur from the surveillance program to a sensationalized story of a man on the run from a government? What did he gain by coming out exactly? And then he continues this by making even more drama out of it. As well as his and Greenwald's claims of Snowden's vast knowledge of secrets. He supposedly knows so much and he puts himself at a risk of being captured by any rivals of his own country which he is supposedly trying to protect? Who is this helping? It just seems as if even if you were to somehow accept that it was great for him to do what he did in the first place, why does this figure who seems to be viewed as a martyr by some do all these things after? Everything seems completely focused on him. He just seems like a paranoid narcissist who without much thinking ahead decided he wanted to become some hero and reveal the dirty secrets of the U.S. government, but then afterwards he seems to think he can have all the praise and heroic status that comes with his martyring and "whistleblowing," but not suffer any punishments? Though I must say he is an absolutely marvelous symbol for the modern-day, smug generation of lazy, unthinking political dissidents. He just about perfectly exemplifies all the negative aspects which I feel characterize many of you out there. The Nobel peace prize....is a joke. Obama got one for what exactly? Bombing brown people in foreign countries? The man is literally responsible for killing children. Do I think Snowden deserves the peace prize? No I don't, but only for the reason that the nobel peace price is meaningless. However bringing this to the forefront of mainstream media (even though all they focus on is the man and not the issues) is a very good thing for the global awareness of the outrageous war on terror. How can you call Snowden lazy, smug and unthinking. The guy took a risk to bring this information to us. And I thank him for that. You seem like a blind follower of authority, a pro government mentality. You offer no suggestions on where or how he could have disclosed this information, and how could you? You have no idea, just like the rest of us. You are just as ignorant as anyone else. Talk about smug. Your post is disgusting. Anti establishment for the sake of anti establishment is obviously not the best way to think about the world. Finding conspiracy in every little thing in life, is a very paranoid way of living. That being said, if you think the government spying on anyone and anything under the guise of "the war on terror" is a national policy that is good for the united states, then you sir have some serious issues. And I would call you just as naive as the people you are trying to put down. The world is not as you see it, and it is not how I see it. It is hidden for a reason, this reason is unknown to most. But we can take the looking glass out every now and then because of leaks of this nature. In the end could the guy of handled it better? Maybe. But at this point who cares, its out and the world is better off because of it. The guy has done a service to the entire world by disclosing such information. For you to make such sweeping generalizations shows you are every bit as ignorant as everyone else, and at least the people who are skeptical for the sake of it at least are on the side of the people. Go get a job at the NSA i'm sure you would fit right in. Edit, By the way, where has faith in establishment got us so far? Greed spiraled out of control, people in power trading in suffering, standing on the skulls of the people below them. Huge banks destroying economies purely for profit. Shadow governments pulling strings behind the scenes, denying access to any and all information, for the sake of so called security, shitting on the constitutions as if they didn't even exist. Am I anti government? No I am not. However I am pro regulation, and the deregulation of said systems, ONLY benefit the ones who would exploit it for personal gain. Which is why they were deregulated in the first place, the ones in power choose to lobby for these bills to pass so they can make huge sweeping profits off the backs of society. The real criminals are the ones you cannot see. If i had my way, I would wage a violent revolution to take our fucking country back, nay the world back from the insanely greedy and corrupt. And when is all said and done, create a one world government that is an open and a fully disclosed form of scientific democratic policy. Remove the politicians and replace them with engineers, scientists and logical authoritarians who use reason to discern what is best for humanity as a whole. The current state of economics is not economics in the slightest, it's damage control for ultra capitalism driven by pure greed. The sheer amount of money in politics only proves that greed cannot be let to spiral out of control, because people will always want more, want another house, another car another anything they can get their hands on. This is pure indoctrination by the ones that want you to consume the products they produce, its the result of commercials/media force feeding you your life. Telling you what to like, what to listen to, how much money you should make, and what you should do with it. What to believe and what to teach your children. This ultra materialism is the downfall of humans. This world is based on resources. Just like you cant make ultras on 1 base and expect to win a game, you cant rape the entire world and expect everything to just work out. Have some fucking responsibility for the toll you put on this world. When you post a shitty comment on youtube with your iphone, remember that device was built from the suffering of someone else. We are walking a very thin line. Evil prevails when good men do nothing. What Snowden has done is something. It's a start. PS. For those that think he should be imprisoned for what he did. Congratulations you have been fully indoctrinated by the ones that seek to control you. You gain +2 sheep points. Please form a line for the human processing center, where we will continue to lobotomize the rest of the brain you have, slap a suit and tie on ya then proceed to dump you in a meat grinder so we can feed you to the pigs. One of us... Oh and by the way, you can call me a communist or whatever ist or ism all you want, I expect the blind to utter the common attack words of the hive mind. | ||
LegalLord
United Kingdom13774 Posts
On July 17 2013 15:32 sluggaslamoo wrote: He didn't sign up thinking the sensitive secrets were harming his own nation's people. Whenever I agree to an oath of secrecy, I always know exactly what those sensitive secrets are and who they might harm. Also, I don't think that's true. A lot of information seems to suggest that he intended to leak from the very start. Either way, the only thing he deserves is a prison cell. | ||
Mataza
Germany5364 Posts
On July 17 2013 16:02 LegalLord wrote: Whenever I agree to an oath of secrecy, I always know exactly what those sensitive secrets are and who they might harm. Also, I don't think that's true. A lot of information seems to suggest that he intended to leak from the very start. Either way, the only thing he deserves is a prison cell. On July 17 2013 16:02 LegalLord wrote: Whenever I agree to an oath of secrecy, I always know exactly what those sensitive secrets are and who they might harm. This argument is stupid. Of course you don't know which secrets you are not allowed to tell when you agree to an oath of secrecy. You think they tell you the secrets first and then want you to agree to keep them secret? Either way police states are a bad thing. Doesn't matter how scared you are of dissidents in your country. Security always comes at the cost of freedom and the US have been increasing security and decreasing freedom at an alarming rate in the last decade. | ||
LegalLord
United Kingdom13774 Posts
On July 17 2013 16:27 Mataza wrote: This argument is stupid. Of course you don't know which secrets you are not allowed to tell when you agree to an oath of secrecy. You think they tell you the secrets first and then want you to agree to keep them secret? That's not how secrets work. You don't share them just because you don't agree with them. Don't like them? Too bad. Sharing them is and should be treated as a criminal offense. (Just to clarify, I'm not sure whether or not you got it, but that line you quoted was sarcasm) On July 17 2013 16:27 Mataza wrote: Either way police states are a bad thing. Doesn't matter how scared you are of dissidents in your country. Security always comes at the cost of freedom and the US have been increasing security and decreasing freedom at an alarming rate in the last decade. This is nothing new; every country with the power to do it has been doing this for decades. If you didn't know that, then you simply have not been keeping up with the politics of espionage. | ||
TigerKarl
1757 Posts
Really: no | ||
sVnteen
Germany2238 Posts
On July 17 2013 04:15 packrat386 wrote: Given that the US military doesn't have authority in the country its not the best comparison, but besides that, I think there is a big difference. There is a good argument to be made that the information that the NSA and our other intelligence agencies gather is worth the slight invasion of privacy. AS Plansix said somewhere earlier, you probably ought to be more worried about microsoft employees "monitoring" your skype calls than the NSA. so now spying on other countries that you are allied to is a "slight invasion of privacy"? i see... | ||
Varanice
United States1514 Posts
On July 17 2013 15:15 giesecke wrote: he doenst deserve it. i personally think, it is good that he made that thing public, but it is not an act that deserves this prize (or what this prize should mean). but since the commitee for this prize is stupid he probably has a good shot at winning it. You pretty much summed up everything I was about to say without walls of text, so instead I'll just quote you. | ||
Talin
Montenegro10532 Posts
On July 17 2013 11:13 Xahhk wrote: Obama got one for being Mr. Drone Mcgee. A McDonalds McGriddle prep cook deserves one at this point. I always felt like Obama was given it to make some bizarre "please be a nice guy that we want you to be" statement, without realizing that he only appears good compared to the kind of people he's running against. That worked out splendidly. Anyhow, the Nobel prize doesn't matter. Bringing more lexposure to Snowden and legitimacy for his actions does, though. I would like to see him win it, even though I'm aware there is no chance of that happening. | ||
| ||