Flashermac Posted October 9, 2009 Report Share Posted October 9, 2009 According to the Swedish newspapers "Aftonbladet" and "Expressen" it's not a joke. My guess is that the decision was based on the fact that he replaced a low life scum rather than what he actually accomplished. Comment: absurd decision on Obama makes a mockery of the Nobel peace prize The award of this year’s Nobel peace prize to President Obama will be met with widespread incredulity, consternation in many capitals and probably deep embarrassment by the President himself. Rarely has an award had such an obvious political and partisan intent. [color:red]It was clearly seen by the Norwegian Nobel committee as a way of expressing European gratitude for an end to the Bush Administration, approval for the election of America’s first black president and hope that Washington will honour its promise to re-engage with the world.[/color] Instead, the prize risks looking preposterous in its claims, patronising in its intentions and demeaning in its attempt to build up a man who has barely begun his period in office, let alone achieved any tangible outcome for peace. ... There is a further irony in offering a peace prize to a president whose principal preoccupation at the moment is when and how to expand the war in Afghanistan. The spectacle of Mr Obama mounting the podium in Oslo to accept a prize that once went to Nelson Mandela, Aung San Suu Kyi and Mother Theresa would be all the more absurd if it follows a White House decision to send up to 40,000 more US troops to Afghanistan. However just such a war may be deemed in Western eyes, Muslims would not be the only group to complain that peace is hardly compatible with an escalation in hostilities. ... The Times Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted October 9, 2009 Report Share Posted October 9, 2009 I've never paid much attention to the peace prize. I always assumed it was deserving. I lost respect for it when it was awarded to Jimmy Carter for what I perceived for his being an outspoken Bush critic. Some can claim it was his lifelong work for charity and fair elections but it was too much of a coincidence that he was awarded it after publicly criticizing Bush. Maybe that was not what the decision was based on but its still my held belief it was. I voted for Obama but I view the award as undeserving. Its a political decision and he is not deserving considering so many more worthy candidates. That said, I won't castigate Obama. He didn't lobby for it or look for it. If they awarded me the award, I'd say its not deserved but who would turn it down? It may end up doing more harm than good to Obama. I hope not. If any good comes out of it, I hope it gives him the capital to do some good. Its the Nobel committee NOT Obama that is deserving of enmity for politicizing the award. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALHOLK Posted October 9, 2009 Report Share Posted October 9, 2009 Its the Nobel committee NOT Obama that is deserving of enmity for politicizing the award. That's the Norwegian committee thank you so much. The Swedish committee awards the prize to those who actually deserve it, except maybe th literature prize. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kamui Posted October 9, 2009 Report Share Posted October 9, 2009 I voted for Obama but I view the award as undeserving. Its a political decision and he is not deserving considering so many more worthy candidates. Agreed, I had the impression that the Nobel price for peace is usually awarded to people with extraordinary achievements in regard to peace. Of course becoming the first black president (and doing this without coming from a powerful and rich family) is an extraordinary achievement, but he is still a president at war and he hasn't changed anything in the Middle East or in other critical regions of the earth. The award is at least 5-10 years too early. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh_Hoy Posted October 9, 2009 Report Share Posted October 9, 2009 I stopped paying attention when Yassar Arafat was awarded the prize. Like the Academy Awards, means nothing except maybe some bucks to the recipient. BTW, Obama was nominated only a couple of weeks after his inaguration, I have read. HH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckwoww Posted October 9, 2009 Report Share Posted October 9, 2009 Big surprise that Obama got it. He hasn't done much. But it is an award for peace. I guess the thinking is that it might make it harder for him to start any new wars. I don't think it will work. America needs war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangkoktraveler Posted October 9, 2009 Report Share Posted October 9, 2009 Why didn't GWB win the prize when he was in office? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckwoww Posted October 9, 2009 Report Share Posted October 9, 2009 Is that a serious question? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangkoktraveler Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 Rhertorical! Obama is almost the opposite of GWB (that is in belief system), so if some think it is terrible Obama gets the Nobel Peace Prize, then I guess they should be wondering why GWB didn't get one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckwoww Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 I guess it depends how people feel about Dubya’s wars. Were they necessary or not? A lot of people think he went to war for the heck of it. Obama has inherited those wars so he can go one way or the other. That’s what he has to decide now. My feeling is that the Pentagon and the Defence Industry are too big for any president to handle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.