http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8298580.stm
Obama wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize
US President Barack Obama has won the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize.
The Nobel Committee said he was awarded it for "his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and co-operation between peoples".
The committee highlighted Mr Obama's efforts to strengthen international bodies and promote nuclear disarmament.
There were a record 205 nominations for this year's prize. Zimbabwe's prime minister and a Chinese dissident had been among the favourites.
The laureate - chosen by a five-member committee - wins a gold medal, a diploma and 10m Swedish kronor ($1.4m).
"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 Norwegian committee said as the prize was announced.
"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."
So how will republicans, right wing, and fox news respond to this?
PHP
WTF!
How did this happen?
Did I miss something?
Did he solve Middle East/Afghanistan/Iraq/Darfur crises(es). Destroy 1,000,000 nuclear missiles.
I must have been asleep for the past year.
Offaly rejoices.
Must have been a very quiet year !
Hard to believe - I thought this was a wind up to begin with.
This is a bit of a joke to be honest, lets call a spade a spade here, he gets it for being the first black president. Bruce Forsyth will not he happy, it wasn't like this in his day.
He has only been president for 5 minutes and last time I looked they where increasing the troop numbers in Afganistan. Then again if Henry Kissenger can win the nobel peace prize then anyone can.
Bono was more deserving of a Nobel
Quote from: Gnevin on October 09, 2009, 10:35:55 AM
Bono was more deserving of a Nobel
When, in 1961?
Oh sorry, you mean his ego needs even more massaging?
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on October 09, 2009, 10:40:52 AM
Quote from: Gnevin on October 09, 2009, 10:35:55 AM
Bono was more deserving of a Nobel
When, in 1961?
Oh sorry, you mean his ego needs even more massaging?
I was been facetious .
Was Nelson McCausland not due to be given it, for his sterling work across the divide with his very good friends, the GAA ?
No, it was actually Mc Causland and Willie Frazer running as a double ticket, bad luck fella's
I'm dreading tyrones own's take on this, laden with emoticons and non-sequiturs. What's worse, his scorn will be totally justified. What the heck has Obama done to deserve it? The Nobel Prize committee are just picking Obama to stick it to Bush.
how can he win a peace prize and the US involved in 2 major wars at the minute
Quote from: tyronefan on October 09, 2009, 11:46:22 AM
how can he win a peace prize and the US involved in 2 major wars at the minute
Not only that, Obama is indulging the ambitions of people who want to start another war. As Green Greenwald noted recently (http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/09/21/iran/index.html), "No other country sits around debating, as a routine and permanent feature of its political discussions, whether this country or that one should be bombed next, or for how many more years conquered targets should be occupied".
If Trimble can waltz down Garvaghy Road & end up getting it, any ould eejit can get it too.
Obama probably threatened to nuke Oslo, if he didn't get it, so the Committee probably didn't have much choice.
I heard this on the news this morning and it felt like I was living in a parallel universe . He's the commander in chief of the American armed forces ffs, how did this happen? What a joke.
This is a strange decision, he was only in ofice two weeks before voting took place so how can they come to this decision?
This guy is more like a rock star than a President, he plays basketball, does chat shows and makes himself look like an everyman and although he has talked a good game on disarmament he has not had time to deliver on anything yet.
I hope he ends up worthy of this award but to me it is very premature and it smells, this is quite possibly the single most politically motivated Nobel prize ever handed out and that takes some doing.
There foxy, i fixed it for ye. ;)
Quote from: stew on October 09, 2009, 05:07:21 PM
This is a strange decision, he was only in ofice two weeks before voting took place so how can they come to this decision?
This guy is more like a rock star than a President, he plays basketball, does chat shows and makes himself look like an everyman and although he has talked a good game on disarmament he has not had time to deliver on anything yet.
I hope he ends up worthy of this award but to me it is very premature and it smells, this is quite possibly the single most politically motivated Bobel prize ever handed out and that takes some doing.
Good post, stew.
Quote from: playwiththewind1st on October 09, 2009, 12:12:54 PM
If Trimble can waltz down Garvaghy Road & end up getting it, any ould eejit can get it too.
Obama probably threatened to nuke Oslo, if he didn't get it, so the Committee probably didn't have much choice.
Poor auld Norway, what did they do? The bucko's in Helsinki would be pissing themselves
Quote from: stew on October 09, 2009, 05:07:21 PM
This is a strange decision, he was only in ofice two weeks before voting took place so how can they come to this decision?
This guy is more like a rock star than a President, he plays basketball, does chat shows and makes himself look like an everyman and although he has talked a good game on disarmament he has not had time to deliver on anything yet.
I hope he ends up worthy of this award but to me it is very premature and it smells, this is quite possibly the single most politically motivated Bobel prize ever handed out and that takes some doing.
Jees! he didn't win the Bobel as well ?... crazy ???
What a total joke. In one swoop the whole idea of a peace prize is destroyed, or is being black and elected in a rascist country enough to get you this accolade
Was it not destroyed when Billy Wright's adviser, David Trimble got it?
check back to 1996 when the world's great peace maker met the psycho ...
...."During the 1996 Drumcree stand-off Billy Wright had discussions with the Ulster Unionist Party leader and MP for Upper Bann, Mr David Trimble. The discussions were initiated by Mr Trimble and took place in the church hall at Drumcree..."
They'll be lighting bonfires in Moneygal tonight afte one of their own was finally awarded the nobel peace prize. He's got some Irish in him begorrah, maybe Albert reynolds campaigned secretly for him to win.
Fcukin incredible :o :o :o
I presume it's for being the first US Pres not to invade any Country in a year ending in a 9.
very disappointed- I thougt I had a good shot at it this year.
corrigan, williams, hume, trimble, any clown in the north that wants it gets the million dollars- joke.
the official commendation said "on behalf of the rest of the world, thank you for not being George Bush"
T.O. this is your cue....
I like Obama as far as US presidents go, but this was fckn stupid. How the hell did he get this prize, ha has done nothing but not be George W.Bush.
I'd be in favour of this, he has been one of the few beacons of hope throughout the crises of the past year, he's visionary and he's reached out to nations everywhere - it may turn out to be wrong, but hey, Trimble and Kissinger, they've got history!!
Quote from: heganboy on October 09, 2009, 09:01:00 PM
very disappointed- I thougt I had a good shot at it this year.
corrigan, williams, hume, trimble, any clown in the north that wants it gets the million dollars- joke.
the official commendation said "on behalf of the rest of the world, thank you for not being George Bush"
T.O. this is your cue....
Corrigan and Williams got it based on what they were doing at that time. The Peace people originated out of very tragic circumstances. I remember the day the children were killed and the subsequent tv interview.
Hume is no idiot. Light years from it. As for trimble, well we'll leave it at that.
Quote from: Bogball XV on October 10, 2009, 12:23:35 AM
I'd be in favour of this, he has been one of the few beacons of hope throughout the crises of the past year, he's visionary and he's reached out to nations everywhere - it may turn out to be wrong, but hey, Trimble and Kissinger, they've got history!!
It's the noblel peace prize not the not the nobel might doing something to peace in the near future prize
To quote "Sideshow Bob: Attempted murder? Now honestly, what is that? Do they give a Nobel prize for attempted chemistry? Do they?"
Well it appears they give them for of may attempt peace.
Quote from: Gnevin on October 10, 2009, 01:45:02 AM
Quote from: Bogball XV on October 10, 2009, 12:23:35 AM
I'd be in favour of this, he has been one of the few beacons of hope throughout the crises of the past year, he's visionary and he's reached out to nations everywhere - it may turn out to be wrong, but hey, Trimble and Kissinger, they've got history!!
It's the noblel peace prize not the not the nobel might doing something to peace in the near future prize
To quote "Sideshow Bob: Attempted murder? Now honestly, what is that? Do they give a Nobel prize for attempted chemistry? Do they?"
Well it appears they give them for of may attempt peace.
and who has done more for international relations in the past year?
Quote from: Bogball XV on October 10, 2009, 09:41:52 AM
Quote from: Gnevin on October 10, 2009, 01:45:02 AM
Quote from: Bogball XV on October 10, 2009, 12:23:35 AM
I'd be in favour of this, he has been one of the few beacons of hope throughout the crises of the past year, he's visionary and he's reached out to nations everywhere - it may turn out to be wrong, but hey, Trimble and Kissinger, they've got history!!
It's the noblel peace prize not the not the nobel might doing something to peace in the near future prize
To quote "Sideshow Bob: Attempted murder? Now honestly, what is that? Do they give a Nobel prize for attempted chemistry? Do they?"
Well it appears they give them for of may attempt peace.
and who has done more for international relations in the past year?
Care to list his achievements in bringing peace to the world. The world holds its collective breath...
Quote from: Bogball XV on October 10, 2009, 09:41:52 AM
Quote from: Gnevin on October 10, 2009, 01:45:02 AM
Quote from: Bogball XV on October 10, 2009, 12:23:35 AM
I'd be in favour of this, he has been one of the few beacons of hope throughout the crises of the past year, he's visionary and he's reached out to nations everywhere - it may turn out to be wrong, but hey, Trimble and Kissinger, they've got history!!
It's the noblel peace prize not the not the nobel might doing something to peace in the near future prize
To quote "Sideshow Bob: Attempted murder? Now honestly, what is that? Do they give a Nobel prize for attempted chemistry? Do they?"
Well it appears they give them for of may attempt peace.
and who has done more for international relations in the past year?
You are missing the point, he was in office leas than TWO WEEKS when they voted on this, how the hell can anyone deserve to win a prize of that stature three days short of a fortnight?
All i have seen from this guy thus far is talk in terms of bringing peace, he has done NOTHING to deserve this prize and to be honest this decision cheapens the Nobel prize.
Quote from: Bogball XV on October 10, 2009, 09:41:52 AM
Quote from: Gnevin on October 10, 2009, 01:45:02 AM
Quote from: Bogball XV on October 10, 2009, 12:23:35 AM
I'd be in favour of this, he has been one of the few beacons of hope throughout the crises of the past year, he's visionary and he's reached out to nations everywhere - it may turn out to be wrong, but hey, Trimble and Kissinger, they've got history!!
It's the noblel peace prize not the not the nobel might doing something to peace in the near future prize
To quote "Sideshow Bob: Attempted murder? Now honestly, what is that? Do they give a Nobel prize for attempted chemistry? Do they?"
Well it appears they give them for of may attempt peace.
and who has done more for international relations in the past year?
The UN peace keepers in Chad?
Quote from: heganboy on October 09, 2009, 09:01:00 PM
T.O. this is your cue....
T.O.'s head has probably exploded with the news.
Quote from: stew on October 10, 2009, 04:43:46 PM
Quote from: Bogball XV on October 10, 2009, 09:41:52 AM
Quote from: Gnevin on October 10, 2009, 01:45:02 AM
Quote from: Bogball XV on October 10, 2009, 12:23:35 AM
I'd be in favour of this, he has been one of the few beacons of hope throughout the crises of the past year, he's visionary and he's reached out to nations everywhere - it may turn out to be wrong, but hey, Trimble and Kissinger, they've got history!!
It's the noblel peace prize not the not the nobel might doing something to peace in the near future prize
To quote "Sideshow Bob: Attempted murder? Now honestly, what is that? Do they give a Nobel prize for attempted chemistry? Do they?"
Well it appears they give them for of may attempt peace.
and who has done more for international relations in the past year?
You are missing the point, he was in office leas than TWO WEEKS when they voted on this, how the hell can anyone deserve to win a prize of that stature three days short of a fortnight?
All i have seen from this guy thus far is talk in terms of bringing peace, he has done NOTHING to deserve this prize and to be honest this decision cheapens the Nobel prize.
Absolutely right, and Obama correctly looked fairly embarrassed about it. Far too early in the game for what should be such a landmark award.
Pop quiz: What do Bertha von Suttner, Henri La Fontaine, Ludwig Quidde, Norman Angell, Arthur Henderson, Eisaku Sato, Alva Myrdal and Joseph Rotblat have in common?
Answer: Barack Obama.
If you're drawing blanks on most of these names, don't be hard on yourself: They're just some of the worthies of yesteryear who were favored with a Nobel Peace Prize before disappearing into the footnotes of history.
On the other hand, if you're among those who think Mr. Obama's Nobel was misjudged and premature, not to say absurd, then you really know nothing about the values and thinking that have informed a century of prize giving. Far from being an aberrant choice, President Obama was the ideal one, Scandinavianally speaking.
The peace Nobel is a much misunderstood prize. With the exception of a few really grotesque picks (Le Duc Tho, Rigoberta Menchú, Yasser Arafat), a few inspired ones (Carl von Ossietzky, Norman Borlaug, Andrei Sakharov, Mother Teresa, Lech Walesa, Aung San Suu Kyi) and some worthy if obvious ones (Martin Luther King, Anwar Sadat and Menachem Begin, Mikhail Gorbachev, Nelson Mandela and F.W. de Klerk), most of the prize winners draw from the obscure ranks of the sorts of people the late Oriana Fallaci liked to call "the Goodists."
Who are the Goodists? They are the people who believe all conflict stems from avoidable misunderstanding. Who think that the world's evils spring from technologies, systems, complexes (as in "military-industrial") and everything else except from the hearts of men, where love abides. Who mistake wishes for possibilities. Who put a higher premium on their own moral intentions than on the efficacy of their actions. Who champion education as the solution, whatever the problem. Above all, the Goodists are the people who like to be seen to be good.
Columbia University President Nicholas Murray Butler, who won the Peace Prize in 1931, was a Goodist. In 1910 he wrote that "to suppose that men and women into whose intellectual and moral instruction and upbuilding have gone the glories of the world's philosophy and art and poetry and religion . . . are to fly at each others' throats to ravage, to kill, in the hope of somehow establishing thereby truth and right and justice is to suppose the universe to be stood upon its apex."
The First World War, which began four years later, rendered a less charitable judgment on the benefits of moral and intellectual instruction. Yet Butler later became a leading campaigner for the 1928 Kellogg-Briand Pact outlawing war as "an instrument of national policy." This monument to hope, which won U.S. Secretary of State Frank Kellogg a Nobel in 1929 (France's Aristide Briand had already won it in 1926 for the equally feckless Locarno Pact), was immediately ratified by dozens of countries, including Japan—which invaded Manchuria in 1931; and Italy—which invaded Abyssinia in 1935; and Germany—which invaded Poland in 1939.
Characteristically, the Nobel Committee awarded no Peace Prizes for most of the Second World War: not to Franklin Roosevelt for turning America into an arsenal for democracy; not to Winston Churchill for rallying Britain against the Nazi onslaught; not to Charles de Gaulle for keeping the flame of a free France alive; not to the U.S. Army Rangers for scaling the heights of Pointe du Hoc on a June morning in 1944; not to Douglas MacArthur for turning Japan into a country at peace with itself and its neighbors.
These were the soldiers and statesmen who did more than anyone else to assure the survival of freedom in the 20th century. Being Goodists, however, the Nobel Committee chose instead to lavish its honors on people like the wan New England pacifist Emily Greene Balch (in 1946), the tedious British disarmament obsessive Philip Noel-Baker (1959) and the Irish antinuclear campaigner and Lenin Prize Winner Seán MacBride (1974).
These names don't exactly spring to mind as having made a lasting and genuine contribution to world peace. Nor, one suspects, will history lavish its highest honors on Kofi Annan, Jimmy Carter, Wangari Maathai, Mohamed ElBaradei, Al Gore or Martti Ahtisaari, to name some of this decade's winners. They are merely the Frank Kelloggs and Seán MacBrides of the future.
Which brings us, at last, to this year's prize winner.
Typical of the laments about Mr. Obama's Nobel is that he's done nothing yet to deserve it. But what, really, did most of the other Goodists do before they won their prizes? Mr. Obama, at least, got himself elected president, the first man to do so on explicitly Goodist terms: hope, change, diplomacy, disarmament, internationalism. He is, so to speak, the son Alfred Nobel never had (minus the dynamite fortune), the best and most significant spokesman for everything the Peace Prize has stood for these 108 years.
So let there be no doubt that the Nobel Committee did well in choosing Mr. Obama. What this portends for the kind of peace and security that has been bequeathed to us by the exertions of such non-Nobelists as Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan is another question.
Write to bstephens@wsj.com
Printed in The Wall Street Journal, page A17