kallend 1,635 #76 October 9, 2009 Quote Quote Quote Can anyone, please, explain how Obama is more deserving than Tsvangirai? Anyone? Because the Nobel committee chose him. Well that explains it. Thank you for your in depth explanation. Indeed it does explain it.If you want more detail the Nobel Commitee already provided it for those who are TRULY interested and don't just want to rant: nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2009/press.html "The Norwegian Nobel committee has decided that the Nobel peace prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The committee has attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons. Obama has as president created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama's initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened. 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. 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. For 108 years, the Norwegian Nobel committee has sought to stimulate precisely that international policy and those attitudes for which Obama is now the world's leading spokesman. The committee endorses Obama's appeal that 'Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges'." Oslo, 9 October, 2009 ... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rickjump1 0 #77 October 9, 2009 QuoteQuoteCan anyone actually defend this complete load of horse shit? No, and I am Norwegian, and very very embarrassed on behalf of my country right now. It is Georgie boys fault, and now they want to give back for no oil contract in Iraq for Statoil (Stateoil) Obama gives hope for more industrial work in europe, and he is paid off well. I am trying to find the whole speech for the reason in English, but can not find. If you post the speech then you have something to argue about, and its the reasons why they gave it to him. It is like using condom on a HIV prostitute. You know you should´t do it, but........... What a f..... world we are living in? Its all about the potential to change himself from a Bush Lite into a bottle of champagne. I predict it will be of the cheap American variety that goes flat quickly.Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
timmyfitz 0 #78 October 9, 2009 Quote Quote Quote Quote Can anyone, please, explain how Obama is more deserving than Tsvangirai? Anyone? Because the Nobel committee chose him. Well that explains it. Thank you for your in depth explanation. Indeed it does explain it.If you want more detail the Nobel Commitee already provided it for those who are TRULY interested and don't just want to rant: nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2009/press.html I wasn't responding to the actual details of why he won, just your all to typical response "because they said so". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,635 #79 October 9, 2009 QuoteQuoteIt's a bad, bad day for people with ODS. I imagine ER rooms must be filling up as we speak. It's a bad, bad day for people that actually deserved the award. The only opinion that counts is that of the Nobel committee. Yours is irrelevant.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SimonBones 1 #80 October 9, 2009 Mr. Kallend, let's assume for a moment we were in a parallel universe and instead of a committee, in this particular case, you alone were the decider of who receives the award. Would you have chosen Obama as the recipient over the list of other nominees for the award? Why or why not?108 way head down world record!!! http://www.simonbones.com Hit me up on Facebook Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Misternatural 0 #81 October 9, 2009 Wait a minute, Think about this everyone...........he may have to now live up to the standards of what the peace prize entails, It may weigh on his future decision making processes. Granted an award comitee is not supposed to try to influence future behavior only recognize merits of the past, but I think they may be trying to push the envelope here...provided the recipient actually gives a crap about their reputation on such a large stage, it may have an effect. twisted logic but it might have a positive result.Beware of the collateralizing and monetization of your desires. D S #3.1415 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #82 October 9, 2009 Bush deserves a slap, a fucking big one f'sure but if this award is intended as one, it's inappropriate (at best). (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,635 #83 October 9, 2009 Quote Mr. Kallend, let's assume for a moment we were in a parallel universe and instead of a committee, in this particular case, you alone were the decider of who receives the award. Would you have chosen Obama as the recipient over the list of other nominees for the award? Why or why not? I haven't seen the list of nominees. In a parallel universe, the nominee list is going to be different anyway. Maybe Jesse Jackson is President of the USA... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Channman 2 #84 October 9, 2009 Quote Can anyone, please, explain how Obama is more deserving than Tsvangirai? Anyone? Well for starters it would help if everyone knew of Tsvangirai. Obama, I think received the award for political reasons more so than his efforts for peace. Maybe all one needs to do is TALK, to win a million dollar award. Is Obama required to split the reward with his Teleprompter. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SimonBones 1 #85 October 9, 2009 This website included a list of known nominees: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/who-were-the-nobel-nominees/article1312931/ Who would be your pick from this list of individuals and why? If you could choose from any person (or organization) in the world, regardless of whether or not they were nominated, who do you feel deserved a prize like this the most and why?108 way head down world record!!! http://www.simonbones.com Hit me up on Facebook Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,635 #86 October 9, 2009 QuoteThis website included a list of known nominees: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/who-were-the-nobel-nominees/article1312931/ Who would be your pick from this list of individuals and why? If you could choose from any person (or organization) in the world, regardless of whether or not they were nominated, who do you feel deserved a prize like this the most and why? "A doctor, a politician and a freedom fighter were believed to be among the candidates for the prestigious Peace Prize won by Barack Obama" Not hardly convincing.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,406 #87 October 9, 2009 > Maybe all one needs to do is TALK, to win a million dollar award. There are a great many people throughout history who have effected a lot of change for the good just by talking. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SimonBones 1 #88 October 9, 2009 Mr. Kallend, my question to you still stands: Who would be your pick from that list of individuals and why? If you could choose from any person (or organization) in the world, regardless of whether or not they were nominated, who do you feel deserved a prize like this the most and why?108 way head down world record!!! http://www.simonbones.com Hit me up on Facebook Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,129 #89 October 9, 2009 My understanding is that the Nobel committee does not release either the nominees or the nominators for 50 years. So anyone can claim to be a nominee or nominator. It might hold more water for some to so claim (I can believe that Betancourt was nominated) than others (I rather doubt that I was nominated). It might hold more water for some people to say they are among the nominators (I could see Desmond Tutu being a nominator) than others (would anyone believe I was a nominator ). But in the end, the only confirmation is who won, and then 50 years later when nominations are released (according to Wikipedia). And yeah, of course they get it wrong sometimes. So do the Oscars. Wendy P. There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
xtravrtsoul 0 #90 October 9, 2009 QuoteWait a minute, Think about this everyone...........he may have to now live up to the standards of what the peace prize entails, It may weigh on his future decision making processes. Granted an award comitee is not supposed to try to influence future behavior only recognize merits of the past, but I think they may be trying to push the envelope here...provided the recipient actually gives a crap about their reputation on such a large stage, it may have an effect. twisted logic but it might have a positive result. This has come at a time where Obama is to make the decision to put more troops in Afghanistan to excell the fight over there. This came at a time that will affect his decisions on the issue. I just watched his speech and what Stephenopolous had said about this surprise. They are stating it is at a time that could make a big difference and/or wrench in the decisions that are to be made in the near future with the fight in the middle east.You create life, life does not create you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #91 October 9, 2009 QuoteWait a minute, Think about this everyone...........he may have to now live up to the standards of what the peace prize entails, It may weigh on his future decision making processes. Granted an award comitee is not supposed to try to influence future behavior only recognize merits of the past, but I think they may be trying to push the envelope here...provided the recipient actually gives a crap about their reputation on such a large stage, it may have an effect. The prize isn't going to actually result in the US going nuclear free...EVER. Sarkozy has that right - we live in the real world. This whole thing feels like a makeup call for the IOC snub. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thanatos340 1 #92 October 9, 2009 QuoteDon’t know why he won, but lets see an American president wins a prestigious award………….I think that’s a good thing right? Because he did not "WIN" the award. He was Given the Award. There is a HUGE difference. He had not done anything of consequence to promote world peace at the time he was nominated (Or to date for that matter). Carter was a Liberal that was given the award. I cheered that because Carter earned the award by working had to bring peace to the middle-east. Obama has not yet earned this award but I do truly hope that someday he would deserve it. That day has not yet come. This discredits what was once one of the worlds highest Honors simply because it was given to someone that had not earned it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Misternatural 0 #93 October 9, 2009 Not defending nor discounting the situation....just throwing the possibility out there given what seems to be otherwise obvious absurdity. Seems logical to me.Beware of the collateralizing and monetization of your desires. D S #3.1415 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #94 October 9, 2009 Don't they realize conservative Americans are the only ones who 'get it' the rest are just wrong. Like 2% of the world correct, 98% wrong. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rickjump1 0 #95 October 9, 2009 QuoteQuoteWait a minute, Think about this everyone...........he may have to now live up to the standards of what the peace prize entails, It may weigh on his future decision making processes. Granted an award comitee is not supposed to try to influence future behavior only recognize merits of the past, but I think they may be trying to push the envelope here...provided the recipient actually gives a crap about their reputation on such a large stage, it may have an effect. The prize isn't going to actually result in the US going nuclear free...EVER. Sarkozy has that right - we live in the real world. This whole thing feels like a makeup call for the IOC snub. or an attempt to influence the White House on the eve of a confrontation with Iran.Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #96 October 9, 2009 QuoteIf Obama had actually enacted some (any) change in US foreign policy in comparison to the Bush presidency, I could see it as a possibility. Ya, he's had like 9 months, what's taking him so long? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #97 October 9, 2009 QuoteFair enough. I've got a long list of people who deserve it equally as much as Obama: me, you, Clint Eastwood, whoever came up with the design for these New Balance shoes I'm wearing, Chicken McNuggets, etc. I mean, what's the criteria for winning the Nobel Peace Prize nowadays? No, Clint Eastwood wants everyone off of his lawn, he can't be Nobel material. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #98 October 9, 2009 QuoteQuote This whole thing feels like a makeup call for the IOC snub. or an attempt to influence the White House on the eve of a confrontation with Iran. Hmm. The Nobel Peace Prize committee hoping to influence the commander in chief of the most powerful military force on the planet to avoid making war. (I hear the Pope sometimes does that kind of shit, too.) How fucked up is that?? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #99 October 9, 2009 Quote I was surprised. I thought it was a joke when I heard the NPT announcement early this morning ... the next thought that went through my head was "the Norwegians have jumped the shark." Poor strategic choice, imo. Further contributes to the perception -- whether real or largely a creation of those who want to knock him -- of a metaphoric pedestal from which he can fall ... or be pushed. Domestically, I suspect the impact will be marginal or slightly negative. It will provide further fodder for criticism by some. Internationally, it's less clear, imo. It's not unprecedented for the Nobel Peace Prize to be given to those who are pursuing its goals and who are in the position to do so. W/r/t the choice of Pres Obama, 'road to zero' (pushed forward by Kissinger, Schultz, Nunn, & Perry) is the one I suspect was recognized. /Marg I think the world is sick of teh US and this is their way of saying Obama is trying to create peace in the ME, so keep it up. It's kind of an award for what they want to come. As well, the rest of the world is shocked by one of the wealthiest countries in teh world denying coverage to millions of their own, yet lower taxes to teh rich at the cost of a horrible debt, the fact that Obama is trying to get HC to all Americans probably plays a quiet part, altho I think the Nobel is more forr international matters, not sure tho. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #100 October 9, 2009 QuoteThe only opinion that counts is that of the Nobel committee. Yours is irrelevant. Oh yeah? Well who died and put them in charge? huh? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
