He called Bush and Blair "fascist war criminals" and "killers of children", whose crimes were "worse than Saddam's".
http://www.boston.com/news/world/asia/articles/2007/02/05/bush_blair_in_dock_at_house_of_horrors_summit?mode=PF
He has also been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.
2007-02-06 17:00:33 · 12 answers · asked by Longhaired Freaky Person 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
In fact he contributed a lot to his country. But his country's relations did sour with Australia after he described PM John Howard as a facist.
PM howard just bunny hopes about the Middle East for no reason, making him look stupid.
I think that he deserves a nobel prize, considering his achievements. And yes, from its actions and people's fears, Bush's America is a facist nation. Not in a bad or evil way like the Nazis, but in a very stupid sense.
War doesn't bring peace, only justice can.
2007-02-06 17:13:30 · answer #1 · answered by Zabanya 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
He deserved it.
"Dr Mahathir deserved to be nominated for his untiring work in championing the causes of the people in developing countries.
"He is clearly qualified for the Nobel peace prize. He has not only become a leader in this country but also a leader of developing countries.
"He champions the true causes of the people. Malaysia's policies have helped a lot of Bosnians, Palestinians and the blacks in South Africa,"
"He is courageous to take a firm stand against war on humanity. Not many government leaders in the world will act like he does,"
2007-02-06 19:17:38 · answer #2 · answered by azayi1 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
What Bush is doing is reinstating a protracted-status custom interior the US wherein a former president does not criticize a sitting president. this is an argument of etiquette. regrettably, Jimmy Carter, our worst president, broke with custom to criticize GW Bush, with a view to advance into suitable lower back with the left wing. Bush is demonstrating that he has plenty extra classification and reverence for the workplace than Carter ever did.
2016-12-17 04:16:57 · answer #3 · answered by vogt 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yasser Arafat was also nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize... and he won.
He was still an antisemitic bastard, and he really had no business being mentioned in a sentence with the word "peace"... unless that sentence started with, "The greatest obstacle to Middle Eastern peace is..."
Oh, and no... I disagree with him. Blair's a great man, and Bush is just a lousy President. That doesn't make him a "fascist war criminal".
2007-02-06 17:08:48 · answer #4 · answered by Richardson '08 3 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Yes. Not entirely literally, but he is trying to be heard with a very solid accusation, which is what I agree with. Bush is only a puppet to the neocon movement to try to control the world (they're such idiots and have fallen flat on their faces) and Blair is just a spineless follower to whatever Bush does because he is afraid of the world's biggest and most pathetic bully.
2007-02-06 17:06:07 · answer #5 · answered by Julian A 2 · 3⤊ 2⤋
1) No. I don't agree.
2) Given the politics of the Nobel "Peace" prize committee, I'm not surprised at the nomination.
2007-02-06 17:04:25 · answer #6 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 3⤊ 5⤋
I hope that Rush Limbaugh wins the nobel peace prize.
2007-02-06 17:07:03 · answer #7 · answered by Milton's Fan 3 · 2⤊ 4⤋
So... I can nominate HIllary Clinton for Democratic Party choice for President, doesn't mean I'm a great person....
2007-02-06 17:04:23 · answer #8 · answered by Lt. Dan reborn 5 · 2⤊ 4⤋
Justice Scalia said it best when he said "our constitution means nothing when we solely listen to subjective and misinformed foreigners"
2007-02-06 17:54:43 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
He sure deserves it.
He a well educated statesman!
2007-02-06 17:05:56 · answer #10 · answered by WO LEE 4 · 3⤊ 4⤋