Ok, so i'm British & therefore some may say that i have no right to talk on this topic, or that i'm biased. But.... WTF?!
I can't see how it's possible for somebody to win the Nobel Peace Prize when they haven't really done anything yet. Yes, i agree & can see that Barack Obama is genuine in his aim to bring peace to troubled parts of the world. But, he hasn't done that yet. In fact he's barely touched the surface on this subject during his 11 months in office.
So far i've seen no real progress in bringing peace to the Middle East, or Afghanistan, have you? If anything, the problems in the Middle East have grown worse & the Israelis & Palestinians are further apart now than they were in November 2008.
You can't award a prize of this stature & standing on the promise of things to come. That just devalues what is, usually, a well respected prize. Yes, there have been some strange awards in the past & there will always be argumaents about the deserving nature of the recipients. But, for me at least, on this occasion the awarding committee have made a big mistake.
I truly hope that Barack Obama will one day be worthy of winning the Nobel Peace Prize. But, for me, that time is not now. Here's hoping that day will come.
Not being American does not disqualify one from commenting on an international award. Your opinion is quite valid, welcome, and sane.ReplyDelete
Your only mis-statement is saying that Obama has been in office 11 months. Not even! The election was 11 months ago, he was sworn in on January 20, 8-1/2 months ago! And the nominations for the Nobel prize were received in mid-February, when he'd only been President for three weeks!
High hopes are a wonderful thing, and I try to have them. But high hopes and "potential" should not be the basis for the Nobel prize.
It's been said before, but it bears repeating: WTF!?!?!
Thanks for the correction Ken. That just makes it worse doesn't it & i didn't know that about when the nominations are made!ReplyDelete
My "WTF" is even more appropriate than i thought!
Hi Andy, thanks for joining my Turing group.ReplyDelete
The Nobel Peace prize has always been different to the other Noble prizes in that it has always been a political tool to encourage peace efforts, not simply to indulge in a bit of back slapping once peace has been achieved.
It's awarded by a different (Norwegian) committee to the other (Swedish) prizes as a mark of its unique purpose.
If anyone had ever achieved world peace they'd have stopped handing it out years ago of course... ;)
Hi Dean. LOL at your last point. Very true though.ReplyDelete
I still feel the award is a little premature though.
Hopefully he will fully deserve it, in my eyes, in the future.
Maybe they gave it to him in a pre-emptive strike, hoping that it may make Obama think twice before invading Iran. Well, it wouldn't look good, would it?ReplyDelete
As he had only been in office for 3 weeks when he was considered, maybe they thought he had a peaceful childhood!:)
That's not a bad point Anthony.ReplyDelete
Maybe it is a way of trying to reign him in a little. If that were the case though, they should have awarded it to George Bush at the beginning of his term of office too.