tv [untitled] April 4, 2011 5:30pm-6:00pm EDT
by this whole scenario they were saying the wife of jorja was telling me how they were the entire family was absolutely shocked when he was arrested and more so when he was brought to the united states because they have been saying her husband has never had a u.s. visa he has never traveled to the united states and yet now he's standing trial here in new york and that is something that is very important point because it's not like the family's saying he's comply we don't want him tried at all if authorities feel it's important they're saying let's take him to russia were laid to rest he was arrested but why is this man in the united states they don't understand and neither do the defense team all right thanks for keeping up with all of this r.t. correspondent on a stuff here charkha and that is going to do it for now but for more on the stories we covered at r.t. dot com slash usa check out our youtube page youtube dot com slash r t america and christine for i will be back in our.
a low and welcome to cross talk and peter lavelle is us president barack obama still in the honorable recipient of the nobel peace prize to be fair he inherited two wars but assuming office but he is also a new war on his watch and that is libya should obama's peace prize be revoked and should politicians be barred from future consideration. can. you discuss the issues around barack obama's nobel peace prize i'm joined by bill snyder in washington he is a distinguished senior fellow and resident scholar at third way in london we have to take ali he is a writer and filmmaker and in knoxville we have john williams he is the editor and publisher of new millennium writings and another member of our cross talk team ill and hunger all right gentlemen this is crossed i mean you can jump in anytime you want bill schneider as i pointed out in the introduction barack obama inherited two
wars ok fair enough he didn't start them a lot of people criticize his escalation of the war in afghanistan and libya is truly his war i mean nobel peace prize and all those noble words and we'll go to the some of those words later in the program and being a war president they say it's it's very toxic it's not it's mates and i'm not a good mix and and either he should give it back or it should be revoked do you think. well the that has not been discussed in the united states and let me point out one thing his administration does not call libya a war it says it's a kinetic action it's a little time limited objective to try to commit to a save people's lives they do not think of this is a war in fact they don't even use the word regime change even though the president has said and objective is to get qaddafi out of power so they would not even acknowledge that this is a war ok if i go you in london is that a lot of newspeak i mean this is a war if you look what's going on on the ground it's
a war and i don't care if the american media doesn't want to call it out or the american white house it's a war and this is a man that was given a nobel peace prize. it is a war he was given the nobel peace prize where the nobel committee knew full well that in his election campaign he said he is going to escalate the war in afghanistan which is he has had more drone attacks on pakistan than even bush ordered in fact more drone attacks under obama bin in the eight previous years of the bush administration so they knew all that he was going to do this when big gave him the prize but they were so relieved to be relieved of bush that they were drooling at the mouth it's true at the sight of obama and ascension he couldn't wait to hand him the prize i mean could be favored he was slightly embarrassed but they don't go in for revoking these prizes they have wall zero in their mistakes and i don't think any nobel prize recipient is going to give it back ok don
williams and i go to you in knoxville i think you know to be fair to president obama i think a lot of his understanding american foreign policy republican or democrat america has a tendency to go to war and frequently but i thought i think a lot of his started do a bomber when go into dumb wars like bush went into dumb wars. iraq was completely unnecessary ok and i would argue and a lot of other people in the world a growing coalition of the willing i would call it is against this intervention outside intervention into libya when you think about the. well peter i think comparisons to iraq are odious. start with what's true and what's not president obama was forthright in telling american the world why we must intervene in libya might disagree with his decision but who can do that the evidence that he used to build the case to oppose the bloodbath it was everywhere before our eyes this is
not true of good in iraq eight years ago the comparison as i say is odious the reasons bush concocted for going to war didn't pass the sniff test bush and cheney told the world that iraqi leader saddam hussein had weapons of mass destruction that he was giving them to terrorists that we would be greeted as liberators they hated broadly that saddam was and on nine eleven and none of this was true now with my friends on the right one to believe bush and cheney are such things in good faith. they're welcome to that but still these were some of these lies manifestly bribery a man named curveball code named curveball just last and the recent few weeks has acknowledged that he lied. there was a lot of evidence that a man named al libi lied and probably ok but you know i'm not accusing i'm not accusing mr obama of line ok but i'm not yet anyway if i could have bill i mean if we still see you know if we see a u.n.
resolution about an embargo of arms to to the rebels and now we see the slippery slope oh now it's not called a war it's no intervention there's no talk of boots on the ground but there was no there was no talk of arming people as well and that is not clearly identified who these people are so i'm not calling the president of united states a liar not this president but there is this this tendency of slippery it's a slippery slope into a war a full out war and this is what i'm getting at and this is why i'm talking about the nobel peace prize if this is this is not an accidental war now at this point. no one will deny that there are a lot of risks in doing what the president is going we're getting involved in a civil war that's always dangerous and this could be a very slippery slope the president is certainly aware of that but he saw an opportunity to avert an impending humanitarian disaster within a day in libya there could have been
a slaughter which was promised by khadafi hundreds of thousands of people the resistance in that country he saw that the united states might have the ability to make a difference that other countries were willing to act and that was an opportunity he was unwilling to pass up despite the very real risks that you describe ok so let's continue with bill's logic so the americans want to look virtuous in all of this but there is a possibility there could be a lot of massacres down the road if this isn't managed well and there's nothing to indicate that it is being managed very well but because the international community is tripping itself into a civil war worth where it has no idea what the outcome is going to be. this is exactly right and i would say it to be perfectly frank peter in my opinion this is very little to do with civilian casualties or the fear of civilian casualties after all no one but no one from the west suggested imposing a no fly zone over gaza no one suggested imposing
a no fly zone when lebanon was invaded in fact a few years ago as sensually what we are witnessing is a western intervention in libya to try and take the initiative in the entire region back from the people on the ground and to build up the credibility of the west i mean only yesterday bill gates said that the despot in yemen who by the way is killing quite a few people every single day in that country should stay in power the saudis have been permitted to invade bahrain and are carrying out a wave of repression in their concrete this war in libya intervention in libya is part of the country offensive to wrest the initiative back and gadhafi who is not an intelligent leader to put it mildly played into the hands of the west by bombing is own people and sending his troops in instead of either negotiating or doing the
decent thing and quitting so he's played into the hands of the west they've taken advantage of that trying to get the initiative back and the results we don't know i think what is quite likely is that at the very least libya will now be partitioned like iraq was partitioned with a no fly zone after the first gulf war in the kurdish territories ascension became a u.s. protectorate this could happen in the lebanon and the consequences of that are unpredictable at the moment it might work but the more likely chances are that it will end up as that. john if i go back to you in knoxville. brings up a very good point is that there are other actors in the obama administration and it's very duplicitous well lot of people see a lot of double standards where the united states will stand up take a virtual stand protect civilians what civilians are still very unclear actually
and but it won't do it for other people in the region and i think that you know a lot of people outside of the united states would say the gazans really could have used a no fly zone when the israelis were committing atrocities against the gazan population their double standards it still smells of double standards doesn't it. make a good point and so does and i would only say that just because obama hasn't acted previously to prevent the slaughter of innocent folks doesn't necessarily mean he's not acting in good faith in this instance i wonder what. a friend would say if. we had seen a bloodbath in benghazi then then what would the criticism of obama be at that point i think he had to act i mean let's face it there is a wave sweeping the middle east and north africa and i think what's needed is a clear obama doctrine and i don't think it's something he should rush into establishing but he's got to tell it to those waters take
a good deep look and then dive into some because credit or blame will accrue to him no matter what happens ok bill it's interesting i think they're just i mean i don't think go ahead grade bill gray. i don't think the president really intended to promulgate an obama doctrine he didn't say this was a president this is a new principle for intervention what he said this was a specific case where we could intervene and make a difference and save lives you could start talking about syria which is after all killing its own people you could talk about gaza you could talk about a lot of places the president says we're talking about libya where we saw the opportunity to act and make a difference every other situation is different and many of them like syria are much more complicated so the president didn't seem to want to say this is a new obama doctrine of a topic of i got to you before we go to the break here i think there is a new doctor in here i think there is no obama doctrine coming into play and it's the same thing as the bush doctrine except for we really don't want to put troops on the ground ok and i'd like to point out to every one of the panel it will be
clinton says well we're not going to intervene into syria yet go ahead toddy. well i think there is no new doctrine we have had this line taking place since bill clinton was in office bush continued it and bush lied his way on iraq so blatantly that it put people off the united states for a long time obama is carrying on in the same way and trying to win public opinion back to the idea of western wars of intervention cloaked in humanitarian. logic i don't accept the fact that this is a war in good faith i think this is an opportunist war fought in order to give the western initiative in a part of the world where they had already lost it and i think all right it is. now for a short break we'll continue our discussion on obama's nobel prize day with r.t. . if you can.
you can you. feel. you want to. welcome back to crossfire i'm curious about for a minute we're talking about obama's nobel peace prize. ok. but first let's see what russians think about all of this. two years ago the newly elected american president barack obama was awarded the nobel peace prize for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples but now as the u.s. into the beings in libya many wonder if this awards will be taking away the russian
public opinion reserves and all citizens one thing to. do about libya so two percent of the respondents say liberal turmoil is exclusively domestic problem and foreign countries should not interfere and another. when the seven percent believe the international community should stop the civil war they are the ongoing conflict in libya has once again pressed the controversy awarding president obama the u.s. commander well the peace prize. ok gentlemen let's go back to the nobel prize here i'd like to listen to some of the words that barack obama gave the committee was he picked up his award in two thousand and nine with this new what he had to say. so i come here with a sense of the costs of armed conflict i face the world as it is and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the american people for make no mistake evil does exist in the world.
well if i go to you bill i've always called obama be the commander in speech mean you have to give him that italy speaks very well but has he changed is he painted the the award because there's always expediency i mean he is elected by a group of people there is something called even i admit the national interest he's going to act in the national interest as he understands it for his the people that voted for him ok and everything else is secondary ok so he ok you got the nobel prize well sorry i'm still going to be commander in chief i mean doesn't it just does it taint the award. look the award has already got a few things on long before barack obama you know we can talk with us here are a few are henry kissinger ok i mean that's what a lot of other people would say henry kissinger ok but still in this case sadly i mean i mean when the prize was given to obama americans were surprised and shocked what do you think about that don do you think you premature do you think the it was
do you think it has the same value now as it does back in two thousand and nine go ahead. yes yes i do because it has been tainted in the past and also let me just point out that obama inspired the world just by getting elected i know he's got a lot of detractors now especially not part of the country but he did inspire the world just getting elected prevented a person who was singing bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb iran and pointing to one hundred years of possible warfare in iraq point of fact is obama's put fewer boots on the ground than nearly any of our recent presidents now now he might you know that could change because there is a lot of turmoil in the world but i don't think you can fault him for acting in libya there's a cost in violence a cost in human lives to not acting and when you've got people marching with banners and people saying we want democracy i think you have to be cognizant of that and have a certain thing for those folks who can see heartbreak and horror fell from the
skies if we did not act ok time to find out she i mean we're giving the nobel peace prize we're sitting president it really hadn't done anything to that point i mean was it just like you pointed out this thing goodness he's not george bush and just hoping that it war is a preemptive war is coming out of washington would slow down or maybe come to an end i mean it was it was it a an award of hope because it certainly those hopes have been are in tatters right now i mean with. tomahawk missiles being fired and who knows what in libya today. i don't think it was an award of hope it was an award of wishful thinking and an award of sycophancy i mean if you look at the list of the nobel prize prize winners . you have had a lot of u.s. presidents some bilious the award has been pretty tainted i don't know whether you're aware of this peter but in one nine hundred thirty six someone suggested out old hitler for the peace prize this was of course not taken up but he was suggested might have to mount gandhi never was awarded the peace prize so it is
a pretty there's a there's a very interesting norwegian jury is frederick have from a who's written a book on the nobel peace prize and he says that the peace prize for truly from the beginning violated alfred nobel's instructions that nobel have said peace prize should only go to those people actively engaged in peace and it's been hijacked by retired norwegian politicians and a cold war academic from the past to hand it out at will and there was a lot of criticism in norway when obama got if and when others got it i mean kissinger is a case in point. and up and you'll notice other people have got it and gabrielle garcia marquez himself a prize winner of the nobel prize with known cricketer said it would be more accurate to call it the nobel war prize than this would give it to whoever they wanted whenever. vilifying george bush actually got two people go ahead george bush
got two people there about peace prize al gore when he defeated theoretically more votes in two thousand and brock obama i mean that was it was a real sense that there was so much relief and so much anger george bush that he gave it to two different people the one who really deserve the nobel peace prize who didn't get it i'm sure he is i doubt is bill clinton and he did make war you kosovo but that war was seen as a no other humanitarian intervention but clinton has probably done more for peace than any. president jimmy carter really carter you bring out jimmy carter. ok but i mean if i go into. places. i've done if i go do you ok go ahead go ahead to go ahead and i'm going to deserve the peace prize this guy impose sanctions maintain sanctions in iraq madeline albright his secretary of state defended the killing of a least a million iraqis because of sanctions saying it was unnecessary imposed
a no wallsten on iraq destroyed virtually everything so softening the concrete for bush and cheney to take away he deserved the peace prize give us a break ok don what about what about former politicians foreign policy look at jimmy carter because jimmy carter if i were a lot of people criticize him for some of his thoughts in spread his presidency but he i think it's fair to say that even his detractors while he was president say he's done good he's done the best job of a former president could ever do for peace and helping. just poor people in general all the way to recognizing different issues around the world but sometimes the media forgets or sometimes gives a certain view one that maybe is very. for american and western interests ok one thing about the middle east but is that the case maybe a former politician has done well because one of my thesis is that politicians probably shouldn't get it at all go ahead john. no i think there's a lot of value in giving them to former politicians that sets an example for for
others to leave office and can do good works even though their power base no longer exists in a political sense but let's you know so many people get this award though who have no power base whatever power base the people. or international opinion gives them i think of two thousand and four one kerry. my theory pardon my pronunciation but who started this amazing movement plant trees in kenya and transformed the tree and made life easier for especially for a woman who had together the firewood and is really helping transform the world into a greener place without the nobel who knows what not to become of her and her movement sure and baby this far judge who's human rights advocacy in iran for women and children was suppressed what might have become of her without the world's attention i think the nobel prize definitely serves i wonderful function in the world yes like anything else it's subject to abuse and i think the jury frankly is still out on obama his legacy is yet to be made but again there is
a cost of not acting ok how do you what do you think i mean i can reflect upon when he got the award and in looking at his presidency since then it still is indeed a nobel prize. peace prize is still very the discourse of western. international relations is still very kid recognizes that is the paradigm and i think a lot of people in the world see it if i you know be very blunt is kind of a white people's award when it comes to politics it is totally dominated by people who essentially defend western inclusive i mean look at the latest one ok surely to give it to the right people i agree sharing about these are case in point but this chinese guy they gave it to loucheux be in the last nobel peace prize it's quite astonishing because though he is in prison and he shouldn't be in prison let me make that very clear the chinese government are foolish for keeping him in. prison but his political beliefs are walked one one china should have been colonized for
three hundred years by a western power. in order for it to learn civilization the iraq war was justified kerry was wrong to criticize bush will be iraq war that of crime is down is justified but the vietnam and korean waltz war was against a tyler perry of islam and that is why good this is the guy who gets the nobel peace prize so you know it's obvious that the motive is ideological and the chief of the prize winners jacqueline x. norwegian politician said we wanted to teach china a lesson that's really sad exactly the opposite in it's very interesting i mean a lot of the thing a lot of people say that the day the chinese dissident did win the award irritated a lot of people but julian julian assigned irritates a lot of people too and but he's considered a villain by the united states a hero for so many other people empowering hero by the way and he's certainly not
a person that's creating war or promoting conflict. look the chinese this and it was an article in the peace prize because of his views on all these previous issues he was given his nobel peace prize because of his standing to pints of chinese authorities and it work i mean it created a lot of attention to that issue it wasn't because of things he's written in the past the nobel peace prize does best when it's clearly clearly an award for human rights activism but when he gets involved in political controversies on the left or on the right it's always going to be disputed ok dan i'm going to give you the last word on this do you think that obama now has it's incumbent upon him to make good on the his words of being a peace maker he still got a little time left in his first term. well i hope it's possible i hope it's possible i think the jury is out i think obama's legacy is yet to be made he's only been in office for two years a little over and they've been very distracting years that the whole world faced.
economic decline you know he's been distracted every which way and so i think we just have to kind of give him the benefit of the doubt all right gentlemen i'm going to jump in with run out of time let's give mr yvonne a the benefit of the doubt many thanks to my guest today in washington london and in knoxville and thanks to our viewers for watching us here are keith see you next time and remember cross talk rules.
IN COLLECTIONSRussia Today Television Archive Television Archive News Search Service
Uploaded by TV Archive on