It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
Wraith: Yasser Arafat won the nobel peace prize in 1994.
avatar
sg_anon: which was a good choice. so?
Obama essentially won for saying that the US (the most powerful country in the world) would respect the UN and international law. That's a pretty big deal for a lot of people outside the US.
It should also be pointed out that he is far from the first person to have won for "good intentions". The Peace Prize is often given as an attempt to encourage peaceful actions, so this is hardly out of step with previous awards.

"The US (the most powerful country in the world), not for long with Obama and his liberal cronies in charge. Giving up our national sovereignty to please the world is not in our country's best interest. His responsibility as president is the US first.
This nobel peace prize is a joke.
avatar
sg_anon: which was a good choice. so?
Obama essentially won for saying that the US (the most powerful country in the world) would respect the UN and international law. That's a pretty big deal for a lot of people outside the US.
It should also be pointed out that he is far from the first person to have won for "good intentions". The Peace Prize is often given as an attempt to encourage peaceful actions, so this is hardly out of step with previous awards.
avatar
Wraith: Ummm, are you thinking I'm against Obama receiving the prize? I don't disagree with it, I just don't care. Big difference. Arafat was also given his award jointly with other people, so I HIGHLY doubt he would ever had earned one had it not been for an accord.

He shared it with Yitzhak Rabin. They practically started the peace process together with an icnic hand-shake. THAT'S HUGE!!
At last, something to finally top Al Gore's Nobel Prize for the most "What the Christ" why award.
But he has promoted peace I am terrified of letting my neighbors see my guns now.
avatar
bssybeep: "The US (the most powerful country in the world), not for long with Obama and his liberal cronies in charge. Giving up our national sovereignty to please the world is not in our country's best interest. His responsibility as president is the US first.
This nobel peace prize is a joke.

But the rest of the world really appreciates it. :-)
avatar
bssybeep: The US (the most powerful country in the world), not for long with Obama and his liberal cronies in charge. Giving up our national sovereignty to please the world is not in our country's best interest. His responsibility as president is the US first.
This nobel peace prize is a joke.

The World has been treating the US as the village idiot ever since you elected George W. Bush twice. Now you had better get down on your knees and really start pleasing the world some, bitches.
avatar
sg_anon: which was a good choice. so?
Obama essentially won for saying that the US (the most powerful country in the world) would respect the UN and international law. That's a pretty big deal for a lot of people outside the US.
It should also be pointed out that he is far from the first person to have won for "good intentions". The Peace Prize is often given as an attempt to encourage peaceful actions, so this is hardly out of step with previous awards.
avatar
bssybeep: not for long with Obama and his liberal cronies in charge.

Aren't you a delightful little conservative.
Hey, it could have been worse.
They're basing this award on their hopes of what he could achieve... not what he has actually done, which doesn't make any sense at all.
When he ends the two wars and gets North Korea to open up, then he would deserve it, but otherwise there are other people who deserve it much more than he does.
This shit's ridiculous. And what idiot thought that it would be a good political move? But Obama didn't have anything to do with it, I've been hearing a little too much implied hating on him.
I read an interesting take on it, which said that effectively this award wasn't being given to Obama the person, it was being given to Obama the symbol, and by extension the 60ish million people who voted for him.
While it's true he hasn't achieved much (and frankly, what new president does in a few months, when they are being blocked by congress/senate). But it's what he represents.
Frankly he could achieve nothing in his time, and he'd still be a tremenously important figure in the history of the world, and in the evolution of equal rights.
So, basically, this award is for the american people for electing him.
or at least that's the take i read.
(PS/ I can't believe how much negativity and impatience there seems to be about him. Did people really expect he'd get into power. Click his fingers. Change everything??
Clearly they don't understand how the political system in the US works.
But if his supporters start turning on him because they're impatient, he's doomed. And then they'll get nothing.)
No matter what Obama will do, bad or not, he will get any prize just because his election had a huge impact in the world. The world is full of representatives with "good intentions" for humanity but none gets the spotlights like Barack "super" Obama. They don't stand a chance.
I would rather see an organization get the Nobel instead of one single person. That makes more sense. Like Al Gore in 2007 with the IPCC (United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), the UN in 2001 or "Medecins sans frontieres" (Doctors without borders) in 1999.