Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize

[Peace, man]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8298580.stm

Well what do we think of that then?

To me, it seems to show the Nobel Peace Prize has taken a step down in standards since Obama has not achieved any results to merit it, only being rewarded for 'creating a new climate' or 'given people hope' without any actual substantial actions taken. America's approach to the Iraq, Afghanistan or Israel can hardly be said to have changed. It seems he's only won in not being George Bush, imho.

[Senethro]

haha what? standards falling recently? kissinger got a nobel.

kissinger

[Haunted]

It's a bit ridiculous. What has he done in his 9 months? Said a lot, not done a whole lot. I've said a lot of nice things where's my prize?

This is simply ammo for the wingnuts about Obama-worship. And they might be right.

[Delts]

He's done nothing to deserve it but I don't know of any other candidates who would have been better winners. I'm sure there are some out there, but I don't know of them.

[Spike]

Maybe this is an investment nobel prize? For all the good work he's going to continue to do? That is until he declares nuclear war on Iran of course...

[ojk6]

Probably deserves it just as much as David Trimble did...

[RedCelt69]

I read the title of the thread and assumed it was a spoof. Then I checked that it wasn't April 1st.

As if Obama doesn't have enough expectations to live up to already. I agree with those that have said that it has come far too soon into his presidency. Although, on the flip-side, it could act as a good incentive to live up to the award.

These made my jaw drop in a cartoonesque way. The sheer balls of these people saying these words:-

ALI AKABR JAVANFEKR, AIDE TO IRANIAN PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD
"We hope that this gives him the incentive to walk in the path of bringing justice to the world order.
We are not upset and we hope that by receiving this prize he will start taking practical steps to remove injustice in the world."

TALIBAN SPOKESMAN ZABIHULLAH MUJAHID
"We have seen no change in his strategy for peace. He has done nothing for peace in Afghanistan. He has not taken a single step for peace in Afghanistan or to make this country stable.
We condemn the award of the Noble Peace Prize for Obama. We condemn the institute's awarding him the peace prize. We condemn this year's peace prize as unjust."

[Super Jock]

Give me a Physics Nobel Prize! I'm in a lab right now, with solar cell stuff, therefore I'm in a position to end the worlds energy problems... if only a knew how. Not to worry though I'll think about it after I spend the money.

[Freaker]

Maybe I should jump to the Nobel Peace Price Committee's defence here.

For one, it is interesting how many a time a popular award is presented, the general population is certain to know better than those giving the award whether the honour is deserved or not. Every major award/price has criteria for selecting candidates attached to it. If you don't agree with the criteria, that is your very own problem. You could argue that by awarding the Nobel Peace Price to Barack Obama the value of the award is going downhill, but you cannot say that he did not "deserve" it - unless you argue based on the official criteria as outlined in the award selection committee rules, else you'd be defining your own criteria for awarding the price.

(apparently, the criteria left by Alfred Nobel read that the price should be awarded... "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses." I think Obama fits that description fairly well so far.)


Secondly, the Nobel Peace Price would be in really rather a sad state if it only honoured, past, completed successes. Big pat on the back for what people have done - yay. Rather, it also seeks to promote positive developments. It's not like the Red Cross went on holiday and celebrated what they've achieved after each of their three wins of the price - rather, they felt encouraged to continue their work, and reaffirmed in the value of what they were doing.

Apparently, the committee stated that Obama represented what the committee had stood for for the last 100+ years. In many issues, he's on the right way - disarmanment, multilaterial cooperation, international engagement. For the few areas where he isn't (possible military action against Iran), maybe this can win him over.


In any case, I believe this prize, if nothing else, puts the voice of many of the world's citizens into the message of an award - "You're on the right track for quite a few things - keep doing them, even if it may be tough." And yes, I honestly believe that the majority of the worlds' citizens believe Obama is on the right track with most international issues.

[RedCelt69]

Maybe I should jump to the Nobel Peace Price Committee's defence here.

I'd rather you jumped to your search-and-replace function, replacing all of those references to "price" with "prize".

Fuck it. I've been reminded that Mother Theresa won the Nobel Peace Prize. If she can win it...

[DACrowe]

Give me a Physics Nobel Prize! I'm in a lab right now, with solar cell stuff, therefore I'm in a position to end the worlds energy problems... if only a knew how. Not to worry though I'll think about it after I spend the money.

We could give you one only if you agree that you will from now really pull the finger out when it comes to making motivational speeches to the other physicists. Yes we can! Yes we can!

Don't think of it as a prize being given to Obama, think of it as being a negative prize being given to the previous administration. The Nobel Prize Committee is saying to all the Karl Roves, Dick Cheneys and Donald Rumsfelds (how come you never hear from him anymore? Just cause he was fired doesn't mean he dropped dead) 'we hate you SO much that all the next guy needs to do is show up, give us some indication that he has the right general intentions and he gets a prize'.

I'd mention the 'anything goes' precedent of Kissinger (war criminal) and Agnese Bojaxhiu (founder of a cult of suffering, friend of the Duvaliers and anti-abortion campaigner) but others have already done so. Perhaps I should just add to the gallery a list of other questionables added for their participation in particular initiatives but whose overall dedication to peace is dubious: Shimon Peres, Yasser Arafat, FW de Klerk. Tenzin Gyatso's prize is probably worth raising an eyebrow over too.

[Haunted]

Maybe I should jump to the Nobel Peace Price Committee's defence here.

For one, it is interesting how many a time a popular award is presented, the general population is certain to know better than those giving the award whether the honour is deserved or not.

The closing date for nominations was February 1st. That's only 12 days after he became president. Will you honestly argue that after 12 days as president he had done enough to earn the Nobel peace prize*.

*for this exercise please assume the peace prize is actually prestigious and not a farce, I know it's hard.

[RedCelt69]

The closing date for nominations was February 1st. That's only 12 days after he became president. Will you honestly argue that after 12 days as president he had done enough to earn the Nobel peace prize*.

I can imagine a scenario where someone might be nominated (amongst several others) in order that they might at least be in the running by the time the decision is made. There's quite a long period between the deadline for nominations and the actual selection process deciding on a winner.

Regardless, recent winners have cheapened the whole concept. It's a shame that the conditions are bound up in Nobel's will... otherwise, the rules might be changed in order to award it when someone has genuinely earned it. Rather than having to choose someone every year. Let's face it; some years, there are no worthy candidates.

[Freaker]

I'd rather you jumped to your search-and-replace function, replacing all of those references to "price" with "prize".

Ouch - my apologies, it was nearly 4am, and I was very drunk.

The closing date for nominations was February 1st. That's only 12 days after he became president. Will you honestly argue that after 12 days as president he had done enough to earn the Nobel peace prize*.

*for this exercise please assume the peace prize is actually prestigious and not a farce, I know it's hard.

No. But it's not after 12 days that the prize is awarded. In fact, it's not even after 12 days that nominations close - if you are a member of the Committee.

Once nominations are closed, candidates are short-listed, and then different groups research the different candidates. A decision is usually only made in September.

After 8 months of being president, which was when the Committee decided to award Obama the prize, I do believe he had done enough of what the Committee wanted to see to deserve the prize. As for honouring achievements vs progress, I refer to my drunken rambling above.

Rather than having to choose someone every year. Let's face it; some years, there are no worthy candidates.

Agreed. Although there have been several occasions in the past when no prize was awarded, there are none in very recent history. After Gandhi's death (Gandhi never won the prize), no peace prize was awarded because there was "no suitable living candidate."

[RedCelt69]

Agreed. Although there have been several occasions in the past when no prize was awarded, there are none in very recent history. After Gandhi's death (Gandhi never won the prize), no peace prize was awarded because there was "no suitable living candidate."

Well, yes... but what I had in mind was a process that was triggered only when someone had received a number of nominations rather than an annual process that sometimes (increasingly rarely) isn't awarded. Ghandi is an interesting case. I'm assuming that in his earlier career it was deemed too politically-charged (the British govt would have been outraged)... and following the events of partition, the slaughter that ensued would have made a peace prize unpalatable - even though partition was the last thing that Ghandi wanted. Perhaps it should have been awarded posthumously. He was certainly a damned-sight more deserving than Obama currently is.

<shrug>

As I suggested, my dwindling interest in the Nobel Peace Prize pretty much vanished after the Ghoul of Kolkatta was awarded it. "Suffering is divine". Smashing. Pain-killers might not be divine, but I'd prefer those to a bit of divinity on my death bed.

[KodakMoment]

Morgan Tsvangirai was one of the nominees... I'm not quite sure how he got pipped to the post.

[Delts]

One thing that a lot of people seem to forget is that it isn't just his work as president that Obama will have been judged on. There's nothing to say that it's only the work in the past year that the prize is awarded for, and as far as I know, Obama had done a lot of work against Nuclear Proliferation whilst he was a senator as well. He didn't just appear on the scene once he became president. I still don't think he was the ideal recipient though.