Obama has won a Nobel
 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8298580.stm


Quote:
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".

There were a record 205 nominations for this year's prize.

The laureate - chosen by a five-member committee - wins a gold medal, a diploma and 10m Swedish kronor ($1.4m).

Congratulations to Obama! I was really surprised to hear this on the morning news today but I'm happy for him...it's quite the honor.

But I don't get it... why?

He got elected on a platform that included diplomacy-first foreign policy, nuclear disarmament, withdrawal from Iraq, and so on. And convincing a majority of the American people that going in that direction is difficult but doable, especially in this day and age.

And he is on the (slow) road to accomplishing his goals and that is, in part probably why he won.

He has attempted to change (with some success) many people's (and foreign leaders') opinions and attitudes about the US and in doing so, is starting to open doors where only hostility existed before.

People are free to disagree, it goes without saying.

The Committee's reason for why.

So, if I go around spouting off that I want change, peace, and nuclear disarmament, etc. without actually producing results can I win the Nobel Peace Prize too?

Wow! What a great honor. I didn't expect it so soon.

I wonder what he will do with the prize money.:D :p

I understand that he's been doing what he thinks is best along these lines (greater international cooperation, strategic pressure on North Korea, etc.). This award seems like it's all about intentions, though, and it appears to me that giving the award to the President is more about sending a message than rewarding him for any sort of extraordinary measures that he's put in place.

I don't know...I mean, it's great for the President to receive the award, but it seems a little premature to me.

For reals! lol. I just don't understand why he got it. Everything that was on his platform he really hasn't done. The Iraq stuff isn't gonna happen for a long while, I just had a handful of friends get sent back....so much for withdrawing.

Obama probably didn't have anything to do with this, so idk if you can really blame him, but I call some shenanigans on this. More attempts at brown nosing or something?

I wonder how much of it is the European Community "commending" the US, for lack of a better word, for electing the opposite of George W. Bush.

He has had very little success in anything related to peace. All he has done is continued the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. As people have said, all he's done is spout idealism...not done anything. We've had plenty of Presidents spout the same idealism.

I think the Committee believes this will give legitimacy to his Presidency and is trying to support it. However, I think this will only turn people further against him than they already are.

and that is exactly it.

I think people get the idea that the Nobel Prize is about what is already done rather than in all actuality it's about the concerted attempt at what you are trying to do.

It's not a reward, moreso a reminder to keep up the good works.

And no I don't think Obama had anything to do with this, and was probably just as shocked as everyone was when the announcement was made this morning.

Obama doesn't deserve a Nobel Prize.

I think that has a lot to do with it, and I think the President is benefitting from a reversal of the anti-Bush international backlash.

This is completely a "message award;" that doesn't necessarily make it different than past Nobel Prizes, but I think people should at least keep that point in mind.

But I think it's open to interpretation of whether that should actually be the case.

I'll admit that I have a rather limited understanding of the Nobel criteria for each of the categories. My limited understanding, though, is that in other categories (science and literature for example), the prize is given for someone who has either completed or substantially completed something. In the science categories, the individuals involved have either discovered something or substantially furthered the understanding of a concept.

In my opinion, the Peace Prize should be judged by similar criteria. I think that it's incredibly difficult to bring about the type of change worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize, but that's ok with me...it's an extraordinary award that should be given for extraordinary results.

Only if you're 1) coming behind a President who a lot of people didn't like; 2) claiming to rescue a now desperate world that wants "change;" and 3) the first Black President.

Definitely. Once again, Obama is being praised just for brushing his teeth in the morning.

@DS

Right, and the article basically says as much.

From the article: "It was because we would like to support what he is trying to achieve".

"It is a clear signal that we want to advocate the same as he has done," he said.


And regardless of what folks say (and sometimes you folks are just too much for me) Obama has taken huge strides in trying to reframe U. S. leadership on the global scale. He has offered the olive branch (in the form of renewed diplomatic attempts) to people and nations that no recent president has wanted to touch with a twenty-foot pole. It hasn't always worked, but it does demonstrate a desire to change the nature of U. S. foreign policy to a model that is more equitable and inclusive on a global scale. Many here would point to that desire as a weakness; many abroad, who are weary of the U. S. as global bully, see it as a strength.

ETA: It never ceases to amaze me how folk who don't run anything but their mouths try to second guess those who are in a position to make these awards. Why do you all get to say he doesn't deserve the award, when according to the judgement of the folks that vote for these prizes year-in and year-out, he does. Give me a break.