Obama wins the Nobel Peace Prize?

Started by Elayne, October 09, 2009, 02:34:34 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Elayne

Quote
(CNN) -- President Barack Obama said Friday that he was humbled by the decision of the Norwegian Nobel Committee to award him the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize.
President Obama, speaking Friday, said the award was "an affirmation of American leadership."

President Obama, speaking Friday, said the award was "an affirmation of American leadership."

"I am both surprised and deeply humbled," Obama said at the White House.

"I do not view it as a recognition of my own accomplishments. But rather as an affirmation of American leadership. ... I will accept this award as a call to action."

Obama said he did not feel he deserves "to be in the company" of past winners, but would continue to push a broad range of international objectives, including nuclear non-proliferation, a reversal of the global economic downturn, and a resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict.

He acknowledged the ongoing U.S. conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, noting that he is the "commander in chief of a country that is responsible for ending" one war and confronting a dangerous adversary in another.

"This award is not simply about my administration," he said. It "must be shared" with everyone who strives for "justice and dignity."

The Nobel Committee said it decided to honor Obama for his "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples."

The president had not been mentioned as among front-runners for the prize, and the roomful of reporters in Oslo, Norway, gasped when Thorbjorn Jagland, chairman of the Nobel committee, uttered Obama's name.

The Nobel committee recognized Obama's efforts to solve complex global problems including working toward a world free of nuclear weapons.

"Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future," the committee said.

Jagland said the decision was "unanimous" and came with ease.

He rejected the notion that Obama had been recognized prematurely for his efforts and said the committee wanted to promote the president just as it had Mikhail Gorbachev in 1990 in his efforts to open up the Soviet Union.

"His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population," it said.

The Nobel Peace Prize winner is chosen by a five-member committee of lawmakers elected by the Norwegian parliament. Specially appointed advisers weigh in.

More than a year before the prize is awarded, the Nobel committee seeks nominations from members of governments and international courts, heads of universities, academics and previous Nobel laureates. Self-nominations are not allowed. The nomination deadline is February. The committee makes its final vote in October. The winner is determined by a simple majority vote.

Obama will donate the roughly $1.4 million award to charity, a White House spokesman said Friday.

Some analysts have speculated that the prize could give Obama additional clout as he forms a strategy for the war in Afghanistan and attempts to engage Iran and North Korea. Another senior administration official told CNN he hopes the White House can "use it for the positive." Praise, skepticism greet Nobel announcement

The domestic political consequences are unclear. Supporters hope the prestige associated with the prize will strengthen the president's hand in the health care reform debate. A top Republican from George W. Bush's administration, however, argued that "this will backfire on them for a while" and asserted it was "a gift to the right."

Obama's recognition comes less than a year after he became the first African-American to win the White House. He is the fourth U.S. president to win the prestigious prize and the third sitting president to do so.

The award comes at a crucial time for Obama, who has initiated peace missions in key parts of the globe.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton starts a six-day trip to Europe and Russia on Friday. On the trip, the secretary will discuss the next steps on Iran and North Korea, and international efforts to have the two countries end their nuclear programs.

Mohamed ElBaradei, who won the 2005 peace prize for his efforts to prevent nuclear energy being used for military means, said Obama deserved to win for his efforts to bring Iran to the table for direct nuclear talks with the United States.

"I could not think of anybody who is more deserving," said ElBaradei, the chief of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

The last sitting U.S. president to win the peace prize was Woodrow Wilson in 1919. The other was Theodore Roosevelt in 1906. Jimmy Carter had been out of office for more than two decades when he won in 2002. Obama unique among presidential Nobel winners

This year's Peace Prize nominees included 172 people -- among them three Chinese dissidents, an Afghan activist and a controversial Colombian lawmaker -- and 33 organizations, the highest number of nominations ever.
"Writing is like prostitution. First you do it for love, and then for a few close friends, and then for money." -Moliere

Inkidu

If you're searching the lines for a point, well you've probably missed it; there was never anything there in the first place.

HairyHeretic

It's too early. I like the guy, and I hope he lives up to the promise he's shown, but the Nobel Prize should be awarded for what has been accomplished, not what someone hopes to accomplish. A few years from now he might be worthy of it, but not here and now.
Hairys Likes, Dislikes, Games n Stuff

Cattle die, kinsmen die
You too one day shall die
I know a thing that will never die
Fair fame of one who has earned it.

Zorak

Why not?  It's quite clear that the panel stipulated that the award was given, not for a particular success, but for "inspiring hope".  And if that's what they want to give the award for, then "inspire hope" he did, and he did so across the globe.  What we should be doing, is "hoping" a little ourselves, that the award will help some hard-liners open their ears a bit, and just listen instead of reacting with blinders on, and thorough emotionalism and hatred.

Good for you Mr. President - now - go out there and prove the naysayers wrong.  I wish you success, because your success benefits us all.

Jude

I don't think he deserves it yet, but I am still not against the fact that it was rewarded to him.  It's a nice outreach from the international community to our country.  Don't just look at it as an individual being awarded something; he's our president.  What does that say about America?

It's strange to see all of the "respect the office of the president" conservatives using this as a point to bash Obama.  I'm not saying that they had to shut up, but the Republican party made a point of putting out a statement.

Come on guys, where's your class?

Kotah

My personal thoughts:

Obama better get moving on fulfilling some of that hope he inspired.
Finally in a rage we scream at the top of our lungs into this lonely night, begging and pleading they stop sucking up dry.There as guilty as sin, still as they always do when faced with an angry mob: they wipe the blood from their mouths and calm us down with their words of milk and honey. So the play begins, we the once angry mob are now pacified and sit quietly entertained. But the curtain exists far from now becasue their lies have been spoken. My dear, have you forgotten what comes next? This is the part where we change the world.

RubySlippers

WTF? First they gave one to a known terrorist and head of the PLO and now this. Their standards are sure fraking slipping in some cases.

Inspiring Hope? When is that a category that makes any sense I mean I get literature, peace (Mandala at least earned that legitimately), medicine, economics and the like. But inspiring hope is way to silly to give such an award to. And many deserve that far more than he does people that put their asses on the line for others and can die and face other grave hardships. He is a pampered member of the US elite that has done nothing to deserve such an honor.

The only thing he did was get elected after that unpopular warmonger and liar Bush and people were relieved, for a man that is well a classic politician and not a very good one as I see it.

Why not give it to a Chinese dissident or someone that DID something meaningful that would be far more respectful of the weight these prizes are to carry.

Callie Del Noire

I'm sorry.. President Obama shouldn't get a Nobel for being elected. He's done some good things..and some bad things.. but he hasn't done anything to merit a Nobel. I mean.. President Carter got a prize for doing DECADES of work towards building peace.

That is a medal earned... sorry.. you don't give that prize for something as simple as being elected after one of the most noxious presidents in recent history.

Ryven

I think they gave it under the impression of the potential he could do which is not what the award is for.  He's a great guy, but I don't think he's done enough to warrant winning it.  Maybe check back after 4 years.

Moon and Star

I.. I... I thought this was a hoax when I first read it.

http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2009/press.html

The best way I can sum up their reasoning... the hope for change. :'(

Callie Del Noire

Quote from: Moon and Star on October 09, 2009, 04:08:35 PM
I.. I... I thought this was a hoax when I first read it.

http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2009/press.html

The best way I can sum up their reasoning... the hope for change. :'(


Sorry.. Hope for Change is what a LONG road like what Martin Luther King Jr. earned his for. You don't get it for what..10 months of office?

Ryven

I have to agree.  He has the potential to do a lot.  I think he was as surprised as everyone else though, but I don't think he could really turn it down.  Seems like a damned if you do and damned if you don't sort of situation.

Zorak

For what it's worth, he didn't go looking for the award.  He didn't even have a chance to comment, because his name was never listed as being "on the list" to receive one.  So how can you step on his toes for that?  As for the prize itself?  There's 1.4 MILLION dollars going to charity because of it, so I think there are a lot of winners here. 

Try to look at things in that light.

As for "delivering" on promises, remember, there's a CONGRESS that has to let things happen... and right now... it's getting in the way.

Ryven

I don't think anyone is directing their comments at him.  They're simply stating that they either agree or disagree that he deserved it.  He didn't have much say in it, so it would be pretty bad form to blame him.

Jude

Quote from: Ryven on October 09, 2009, 04:44:36 PM
I don't think anyone is directing their comments at him.  They're simply stating that they either agree or disagree that he deserved it.  He didn't have much say in it, so it would be pretty bad form to blame him.
It has become another angle by which to attack him though.

I expect this of private citizens and crazy commentators who don't like him, but the Republican Party?

The award is basically the Nobel people saying, "Hey, we think you deserve recognition," should this really be taken as an invitation for public figures to go "nuh uh?!"

Not that I'm saying it should be illegal or anything as such, freedom of speech, but I do think it's in poor taste.

Elayne

I happen to support Barack Obama.

However, he was nominated for the award on his 11th day in office and received it after 10 months in office.  Which to me means the award is the "You're not Bush award."

Let's look at some of the other recipients -

Theodore Roosevelt - Treaty ending the Russian/Japanese war, 1906.
Woodrow Wilson - Treaty ending WW1, creating the League of Nations, extending suffrage to women, 1919.
Dr. Martin Luther King - The civil rights movement.
Henry Kissinger and Le Duc Thuo - Ending the Vietnam War.
Norman Borlaug - Research doubling the world food supply, saving 1,000,000 (billion) lives from starvation.
Meechem Begen and Anwar Sadat - Treaty guaranteeing peace between Egypt and Israel.
Mother Theresa - Fighting poverty in India
Mikhail Gorbachev - Ending pereistroika
Nelson Mandela and Frederik De Klerk - Ending apartheid
Jimmy Carter - Spending 30 years working towards peace in the Middle East.
----

Now, I like Barack Obama.  But considering him to be up there with Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King, and Mother Theresa?  Come on now.  Even in terms of the other presidents, considering him up there with Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson? 

I hope that Barack Obama does eventually earn his award, but the fact of the matter is, he hasn't earned it yet and there's no real practical reason he should have it.  (Consider that in this year, we have Hua Jia who led a anti-communist revolt in China, Neda who died in pro-democracy revolt in Iran and Morgan Tsvangirai who finally ended the dictatorship of Mugabe in Zimbabwei.)

He's got a lot further to go before I started lauding him as a hero.
"Writing is like prostitution. First you do it for love, and then for a few close friends, and then for money." -Moliere

Moon and Star

Quote from: Callie Del Noire on October 09, 2009, 04:13:23 PM

Sorry.. Hope for Change is what a LONG road like what Martin Luther King Jr. earned his for. You don't get it for what..10 months of office?

That was meant to be a pun... and I didn't actually Google the phrase first. Generally the crying emoticon is meant to portray unhappiness. I disagree with this man being awarded the prize. Therefore unhappy. There was a reason hope for change was uncapitalized. If you remember that far back "hope" an "change" were pretty much his campaign platform.

But this is what I get for making a joke in this kind of thread.

Revolverman

Considering hes busy escalating wars, I'm confused where the peace comes in.

Callie Del Noire

Quote from: Revolverman on October 09, 2009, 05:37:03 PM
Considering hes busy escalating wars, I'm confused where the peace comes in.

Wouldn't say he's escalating. Right now it's very tricky to just pull out in day. Time Magazine (not exactly a conservative bastion) said if we pulled out of where we are deployed at right now that there was a fair chance of civil war in both Afganistan and Iraq..with the potention for tens of thousands innocent casualties.

Should we have gone? That's for history to decide. But the president has the tricky part now..he's got to do it in a way that leaves something stable and unexposed behind. That, if he pulls it off, is something that would anyone a Peace Prize.


Inkidu

Well if Obama gets it now it's for what? Adding a trillion (hyperbole) dollars in stimulating debt?

Wait 'til he actually does something? I mean if a person can win it on potential alone I think I should get one.
If you're searching the lines for a point, well you've probably missed it; there was never anything there in the first place.

Revolverman

Quote from: Callie Del Noire on October 09, 2009, 05:51:47 PM
Wouldn't say he's escalating. Right now it's very tricky to just pull out in day. Time Magazine (not exactly a conservative bastion) said if we pulled out of where we are deployed at right now that there was a fair chance of civil war in both Afganistan and Iraq..with the potention for tens of thousands innocent casualties.

Should we have gone? That's for history to decide. But the president has the tricky part now..he's got to do it in a way that leaves something stable and unexposed behind. That, if he pulls it off, is something that would anyone a Peace Prize.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't both Iraq and Afghanistan already in a civil war? Add the fact Obama is ordering more attacking into Pakistan, and it seems like he could pull in a 3rd nation into this mess. (one with nukes)

Callie Del Noire

Quote from: Revolverman on October 09, 2009, 06:02:01 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't both Iraq and Afghanistan already in a civil war? Add the fact Obama is ordering more attacking into Pakistan, and it seems like he could pull in a 3rd nation into this mess. (one with nukes)

Well Iran was relatively stable (with a large helping of atrocities and despotism) and the Taliban had a good chunk of their country sewn up. (They tended to shoot dissadents).

Of course if we had followed up with the second part of Charlie Wilson's plan for getting the Russians out of Afganistan (Roads, school, infastructure, government aimed towards stability..) we'd possibly avoided a lot of the last ten years period.

And the part of Pakistan he's attacking..well that's the part no one above the rank of border chief ever had control of.

Revolverman

Quote from: Callie Del Noire on October 09, 2009, 06:21:02 PM
Well Iran was relatively stable (with a large helping of atrocities and despotism) and the Taliban had a good chunk of their country sewn up. (They tended to shoot dissadents).

Of course if we had followed up with the second part of Charlie Wilson's plan for getting the Russians out of Afganistan (Roads, school, infastructure, government aimed towards stability..) we'd possibly avoided a lot of the last ten years period.

And the part of Pakistan he's attacking..well that's the part no one above the rank of border chief ever had control of.

He's still spreading instability around the world. Seems like the polar opposite of peace.

Vekseid

...I'm sure you do, Inkidu.

While I buy the idea of giving him political capital, it sortof... circumvents the point. Not that he hasn't achieved a great deal, but still.

Callie Del Noire

Quote from: Revolverman on October 09, 2009, 06:26:33 PM
He's still spreading instability around the world. Seems like the polar opposite of peace.

And what happens if we just  pull up stakes and leave the folks in the theater to their own devices? I doubt the governments would last months with Iran meddling in their affairs, the Taliban would jump on the bandwagon to get control of Afganistan (and Pakistan for that matter) again.

We (the US) pulled up stakes at the end of the first World War and washed our hands of affairs in Europe..well look how that turned out.

It would be nice to flick a switch and make everything good, but in the politically volatile world we live it.. it takes time and patience.

That is where the president will earn his nobel, if he can pull it off..and truthfully.. I wish him only the best on that.

Pulling up stakes and pulling a 'its not our problem' attitude.. won't do it.