Barack Obama received the Nobel Peace Prize

In case you missed it, he supports our action in both wars, and in Afghanistan, just escalated it to the tune of 30k+ more soldiers.

But I do understand the thickness of those rose colored spectacles you wear prevent you from seeing such facts.
In case you missed it, all he said was that Obama inherited both wars from Bush. :lol:
 
Can someone sum up to me in twenty words or less what Obama did to deserve this honor?

It's more about what they hope he will do than anything that he has done. It's about encouragement.
 
It's all very well and good to say that Obama doesn't deserve the Nobel Prize, but who does? Morgan Tsvangirai? Zimbabwe is only a small corner of the world, and Thabo Mbeki had just as much to do with the creation of a largely unsuccessful deal there. Wei Jingsheng? If your judging the Prize by success instead of intentions, then surely he would not be deserved of the prize. And what peace has been achieved in the world in the last year? Nothing important that I can really think of. So we really do have to judge based on attempts to broker peace, rather than actual outcomes. And I think it's safe Barack Obama has been involved in more peace efforts than anyone else this year. Added to this the immense amount that him not being George W. Bush has done for America's image, and hence for world peace, and giving him the prize actually makes sense.
 
In case you missed it, all he said was that Obama inherited both wars from Bush. :lol:
You won, 1 internets.



I was about to go on and break down my sentence on how "Obama inherited the two wars" with a series of questions on how on earth it relates to "denying" that Obama is sending more troops into the Afghan War when I am already for that war.
 
A better title:

Barack Obama was presented the Nobel Peace Prize
 
It's all very well and good to say that Obama doesn't deserve the Nobel Prize, but who does?

Gandhi and Mandela. It is an offense to present such prize to undeserving people just because of the lack of candidates. Wouldn't it be better to just not give this prize to anyone if there is none deserving ?
Now I think that Obama's intentions and statements are deserving, but prizes are given for actions, not words. Speaking is too easy...
 
In case you missed it, he supports our action in both wars, and in Afghanistan, just escalated it to the tune of 30k+ more soldiers.

But I do understand the thickness of those rose colored spectacles you wear prevent you from seeing such facts.

I think few people (at least I hope!) have few remaining delusions that his administration will be substantially different from previous ones, even those most immediate.
 
In case you missed it, he supports our action in both wars, and in Afghanistan, just escalated it to the tune of 30k+ more soldiers.

But I do understand the thickness of those rose colored spectacles you wear prevent you from seeing such facts.

In the context of justified war he said this:
The Speech said:
The world rallied around America after the 9/11 attacks, and continues to support our efforts in Afghanistan, because of the horror of those senseless attacks and the recognized principle of self-defense. Likewise, the world recognized the need to confront Saddam Hussein when he invaded Kuwait -- a consensus that sent a clear message to all about the cost of aggression.
Seems he forgot to mention a certain war there.

Atleast I have been of the impression that he was against the Iraq war since he voted against it. That doesn't necessarily mean hes going to pull out ASAP though. You have to try to make the best out of the situation handed to you.

I am getting really disillusioned with all this Obama stuff, he might live up to the prize, he might screw up royally and prop up a failed system untill eventual collapse or chaos. I really don't care and don't know anymore.
 
I think few people (at least I hope!) have few remaining delusions that his administration will be substantially different from previous ones, even those most immediate.

That's because he was voted into power through the same democratic system. Really, did anyone logically expect a massive change in the way the USA's ruling elite functions? You have to change the system first if you want that (and I'm not sure if that's a beneficial thing to aim for)...
 
Gandhi and Mandela. It is an offense to present such prize to undeserving people just because of the lack of candidates. Wouldn't it be better to just not give this prize to anyone if there is none deserving ?

I didn't know Gandhi and Mandela were nominees this year.

Giving the prize to no-one serves no purpose other than spitting in the face of efforts to create peace. It isn't that Obama does not deserve recognition for his peace efforts, it is that Obama is no where near the calibre of some past winners. But we can't have a Gandhi or Mandela every year, can we?
 
And I think it's safe Barack Obama has been involved in more peace efforts than anyone else this year.

Really? I can't think of a single one where he has had an involvment of note.

BTW, they don't have to issue an award every year, and in fact they haven't issued one many times in the past.
 
Really? I can't think of a single one where he has had an involvment of note.

Iran. Israel-Palestine. Cuba. Conciliation with the Muslim world (the importance of which cannot be stressed enough). Improved relations around the world, including with China. Honduras. Improved climate change policy (which is a consideration in the Nobel Peace Prize). Willingness to negotiate with other nations like NK, and to have dialogue with nations like Venezuela. And then there's human rights things, which are surely a major consideration in the Nobel Peace Prize.

Now, what major peace initiatives or other significant policies making the world more safe and secure have been undertaken that haven't involved Obama in some way?

BTW, they don't have to issue an award every year, and in fact they haven't issued one many times in the past.

But it wouldn't make all that much sense to not issue the award in the year in which the world would seem to have become a much safer and more conciliatory place, which has been achieved simply through Bush leaving office. There has not been a single standout peace initiative this year, but the world has become more secure, largely through Obama's diplomacy, as opposed to the previous administrations.
 
Once again, I think they were voting "Not Bush" more than anything else.

And speaking of which, I think the conservatives are just irate that Reagan and GWB didn't get one as well. After all, the Nobel committee has a long and distinguished history of giving it to famous warmongers:

Theodore Roosevelt
George Catlett Marshall
Henry A. Kissinger
Lê Ðức Thọ (refused)
Mohamed Anwar Al-Sadat
Menachem Begin
Yitzhak Rabin
Shimon Peres

Which is quite fitting since Nobel was a well-known armaments manufacturer who invented dynamite...
 
Obama is good.

He just sold two wars to the Noble Peace Prize crowd.

Next up: Selling ice to Eskimos!

Were invading IRAN and POLAND ?
Dammm that facist communist Obama.
 
Gandhi and Mandela. It is an offense to present such prize to undeserving people just because of the lack of candidates. Wouldn't it be better to just not give this prize to anyone if there is none deserving ?
Now I think that Obama's intentions and statements are deserving, but prizes are given for actions, not words. Speaking is too easy...
I think those guys got the prize already
Your neutrality is astounding.
What, the Liberal propaganda, the Arab propaganda, the Conservative propaganda and the CCP propaganda?
to be fair though, the only news source in US more neutral than CNN is NPR, and Al Jazeera isn't as bad as is claimed by Fox
 
Just to prove all of this is phoney, I will personally befriend the heads of the committee and win an prize while being a middle class white American.
 
Top Bottom