http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8298580.stm
Bit early in the day don't ya think?
Printable View
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8298580.stm
Bit early in the day don't ya think?
The Nobel Peace Prize became a joke long ago...
That joke isn't funny any more.
While I respect some of what he has done (and for a US president, that is high praise indeed), this is a ridiculous case of people being swept up in a moment. I would argue that if anything, this will undermine any of the good he is trying to do, and for his opponents in the US, this will be grist to their mill - "Obama buys Peace Prize".
The Nobel Peace Prize has generally just been about the Old World / First World / Western World telling the rest of the world how righteous it is and how it has contributed to the world being a better place and how good/god is on their side. There have been a lot of very worthy people win it, but all one sided. The idea that it contains some worth is devalued by this. I am hopeful that in the longer term, Obama may well be worthy of this, but he has not earned it yet. If an American President was scheduled to win it this year, surely Jimmy Carter was more due it. I am sure for many it will feel as though he has won it because of the facts that he is the first black president of the US and that he has failed to really screw up anything on an international front.
And the second part suggests that the person who should take credit for it is George...
<pedant>Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebeard
Carter won it in 2002
</pedant>
Does seem a bit premature alright. Their stated reasoning for it was:
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/eu...ize/index.htmlQuote:
Jagland said he hoped the prize would help Obama resolve the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Former Finnish President Martti Ahtisaari, last year's laureate, said it was clear the Nobel committee wanted to encourage Obama on the issues he has been discussing on the world stage.
"I see this as an important encouragement," Ahtisaari said.
The committee wanted to be "far more daring" than in recent times and make an impact on global politics, said Kristian Berg Harpviken, director of the International Peace Research Institute
Maybe in the long term it might be seen as a stroke of genius but it does seem odd that they're trying to cajole someone already as powerful and popular as Obama to play nice.
Jimmy Carter won in 2002; not sure where the rules (such as they are) stand on giving the same person the award in a few years.
Ridiculous on so many levels. Nobel'll turned in his grave, dislodging several sticks of dynamite in the process, blowing those idiots to smithereens.
Well, fingers crossed.
He should so nuke the crap out of Canada just to make them look silly.
I'd forgotten Carter had already won it. People talk of Bill Clinton striding the world like a collossus, (though bestride might be the better word to use), but the peanut farmer seems to actually be doing something more concrete any time I hear of him. With this in mind, it seemed that he was a clear choice to have been overlooked...
I take the point alright TCM (and Martti too - any relation to the Longford fan?), but surely the ideal behind the Nobel Peace Prize was it was to be a reward for what is done, not what is outlined, or simply acknowledged as needing doing. Granted he is not as inglorious a recipient as, say Henry Kissenger (speak softly and carry a big orange cannister), but surely he now must at least show his workings?
They are doing quite a good job of that on their own already, thankee very much.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr A
I'm not sure whether I mean Canada or the Nobel Peace Prize committee in the above, but I'll say it is whichever is funniest. You've got to give me that, I mean, the intention is there...
Jimmy Carter signed the checks that paid for the Timorese genocide.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebeard
Did someone move the Jokes thread?