President Barack Obama won the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize on Friday in a stunning decision designed to encourage his initiatives to reduce nuclear arms, ease tensions with the Muslim world and stress diplomacy and cooperation rather than unilateralism.
I just hope it doesn’t further distract him from what he needs to be concentrating on. Will he have to make another round of television late-night appearances?
The Nobel committee praised Obama's creation of "a new climate in international politics" and said he had returned multilateral diplomacy and institutions like the U.N. to the center of the world stage."You have to remember that the world has been in a pretty dangerous phase," Jagland said. "And anybody who can contribute to getting the world out of this situation deserves a Nobel Peace Prize."
Hey, am I not contributing to that? Do they have an Anti-Nobel Prize for W?
[J]ust a day after Obama hosted the Israeli and Palestinian leaders in New York, Israeli officials boasted that they had fended off U.S. pressure to halt settlement construction. Moderate Palestinians said they felt undermined by Obama's failure to back up his demand for a freeze.
Sore losers.
....but hey, do what you want....you will anyway.
My Facebook post on the subject:
ReplyDeleteI like him better than Bush, but...A NOBEL PRIZE for NOT ending one stupid Bush war and expanding another? For NOT prosecuting war criminals? For NOT bringing peace to the Middle East, the Sudan, or Somalia, or talk radio? Was the Nobel committee's reasoning that "He's not as bad as Kissinger, and we gave him one?"
hey bob. long time, no 'see'.
ReplyDeletemy only concern is that it might further blind him to the fact that he has not more seriously pursued ending the wars, not more stridently attempted to rein in israel, not reversed the bush attack on civil liberties, and, worse, make him think that's an okay course.
if you read the nobel committee's statement, it's pretty clear that they are trying to be encouraging of his stated philosophy. but, actions do speak louder than words, and he's pretty short on backing up what he's saying. as long as he doesn't take it as 'political capital' to continue with policies that are actually counter to peace and to expand the war in afghanistan (pakistan), it could be seen as a good thing - an encouragement to the american people to want to be and be led by peacemakers.
however, i don't really believe the american people are anything other than pocketbook watchers. i don't think obama won the election so much for his (false) promises as for the fact that americans' wallets were growing mighty thin, and then the banks went belly up, scaring the shit out of even those who still had some money in their wallets.
but, yes, kissinger?? kind of makes the prize a farce anyway, and i'd hate to see obama become more enamored of himself and casual about the serious issues to be dealt with than he already seems to be for a farce.
thanks for dropping by.