So What Does the Rest of the World Think about Obama's Peace Prize?

So What Does the Rest of the World Think about Obama's Peace Prize?

watchingamerica.com

The fact that Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize came as a surprise to many, including the U.S. president himself, since he has not accomplished any real achievement that would render him worthy of the prize, let alone the fact that he's only been in office for nine months. In other words, he is still in the process of feeling his way along a path laden with dangerous booby traps, on both a domestic and an international stage.

watchingamerica.com...

(visit the link for the full news article)

This isn't so much one story or article but a sampler of some of the comments from around the world about Mr. Obama's winning of the peace prize.

It was five am when the world got the message. The president of the United States, Barack Obama, had won the Nobel Peace Prize and it was, honestly, a big surprise. An American president winning the Nobel Peace Prize? Mark Halperin, from Time Magazine, said this morning, "It isn't quite as inexplicable as Marisa Tomei's Best Supporting Actress Oscar." Not so, guys!

Newspapers have been talking about his anti-nuclear and anti-armament policies. But what gave the prize to Obama was his support of multilateralism and diplomacy with no arrogance as opposed to the unilateralism that was a mark of the Bush administration. In other words, Obama won the Nobel Prize because he is not George W. Bush.

watchingamerica.com...

Is Barack Obama an extraordinary politician? The answer is yes, even after his US popularity ratings have taken a plunge and some weaknesses in style and substance have emerged. Has Obama done enough in 9 months to be declared a confirmed bringer of peace in parts of a violent world? No, and that is understandable, you can’t do that in 9 months. Is Obama’s job as US president necessarily to work for peace—that is, always avoid conflict, or always bring conflicts to an end—to the exclusion of all other national-strategic aims? The answer is no again, even though it might offend those whose undoubted good intentions come at the cost of understanding harsh realities. Questions two and three are just some of the many that indicate why the Nobel committee’s decision to award this year’s Peace Prize to Obama is distinctly odd. You get the distinct feeling that Obama got it because he is not George Bush and he came after George Bush. But are those good enough reasons to award a Nobel Peace Prize? Obama is a ruling politician, not a leader of a non-government peace movement, and ruling politicians should be judged by their work, not by the emotions engendered by their predecessor.

www.financialexpress.com...

The award of this year’s Nobel peace prize to President Obama will be met with widespread incredulity, consternation in many capitals and probably deep embarrassment by the President himself.
Rarely has an award had such an obvious political and partisan intent. It was clearly seen by the Norwegian Nobel committee as a way of expressing European gratitude for an end to the Bush Administration, approval for the election of America’s first black president and hope that Washington will honour its promise to re-engage with the world.
Instead, the prize risks looking preposterous in its claims, patronising in its intentions and demeaning in its attempt to build up a man who has barely begun his period in office, let alone achieved any tangible outcome for peace.
www.timesonline.co.uk...

Watching America has quite a few editorials about this at their website. All are very interesting and point out that not only the USA is confused about this award.

watchingamerica.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 11-10-2009 by grover]

One last quote:

A gasp went through both the Nobel Institute hall and the offices of Dagsavisen when Torbjørn Jagland said the words “Barack Obama.” The name was mentioned in speculation, but few had believed that the Nobel committee would award the prize to the still-fresh president of the United States.

There are certainly arguments for this award. He is undoubtedly the person who has, on a rhetorical level, done the most to create hope for peace and cooperation around the world this last year. Jagland mentioned in particular the vision of a world without nuclear weapons. Obama recently gathered the leaders of all the veto powers in the Security Council to adopt a resolution of a nuclear weapon-free world.

An important symbolic resolution. But just that — a symbol, not real policy. Ronald Reagan had the same vision, but did not receive a peace prize. Obama probably has bigger opportunities to cut the world’s nuclear arsenal than Reagan had. But still not one missile has been removed. Obama has decided not to build missile shields in the Czech Republic and Poland, but a shield will be deployed from ships, and later on the ground in Europe.

One possibility is that this award will remain standing as being forward-looking, like Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg said. But it will be interesting to see how the award will look when Obama makes decisions that may not look so good in relation to the will of Nobel. And there could be many:

- Like sending tens of thousands of troops to Afghanistan, which might happen within a few weeks.

- Like arriving at the climate summit in Copenhagen in December without American legislation to support him, and therefore getting a lot of the blame for the failure of the historic climate treaty the world needs. That is a very likely scenario.

- Like admitting that the prison camp at Guantanamo will not be closed January 1st like he promised on his second day as president. Obama’s advisers have already sounded the alarms about that one.

- Or like taking an even more reclusive role in the faltering work for peace between Israel and the Palestinians. That could happen quickly, too. Two weeks ago, Obama tried to pressure Israel into committing itself to stop building settlements. He failed completely. Netanyahu said no. And the prospects for a credible peace process in the Middle East are worse than they have been in a long time.

The Nobel Peace Prize can give Obama’s work more momentum. But one cannot deny that it will be more of a problem when facing domestic opposition and opinion.

This is without a doubt a very bold award. It could prove to be forward-looking. But it could also be difficult to defend in the months ahead.

watchingamerica.com...

Does he deserve it any less than Al Gore deserved his nobel prize?

Obama got his for having reasonable idea's about how the world should get along.

Al Gore got his for lying his ass off, and then earning tens of millions off theose lies.

I don't know about anyone else, but I know which I think is worse.

He doesnt deserve it.
He really aint done nothing for us yet.

reply to post by grover


I am confused since Obama has not, as promised, brought our boys home from either war and who do not know what peace is and many of them will die or be crippled in mind, spirit, and body before these two wars are over!

Sort of takes away some of the shine to the award and slightly lessens past recipients achievements who actually had done some good to the world to win this award.... IMHO that is.....

Truly I am an American living outside of the US and very confused.

Stars and Flags for asking the much needed question....

I believe it's embarrassing and casts a shadow on all the great people who have actually done something to earn the Nobel Peace Prize.

Obama has done nothing, his primary achievement was the default action of taking over from Bush.

And, what's more, I think Obama should have declined to accept it for the time being, with the attitude of working for it throughout his time in office.
He should have told them to get back to him in a few years, once he'd changed things and actually made a difference.

We all have good intentions, but such a prize should be awarded through actions rather than positive political rhetoric. Countless leaders all over the world make promises to change things and create lasting global peace. None have succeeded.
None have been issued such notable rewards for simply having "good intentions".

I can bet you all they will talk too is people all over the world who have obama vibrators. None of the comments will come from people who even think about what this prize means, and why its lost all meaning going to american president, when that country is blowing up weddings in pakistan.

The elite who rig this prize, do not care one bit about truths, so why should we care either.

I agree that this award is unwarranted...I don't say that he doesn't deserve it though.

I make the distinction because we do not know what he will do...he may very well come to deserving it but...

not yet.

I don't see what he's done to deserve it, or have i missed something?

2nd line

Tsom87

reply to post by grover


AKA the "Global Piss Prize"

The opinion around the water cooler at my work is WTF??

Last years winner was Martti Ahtisaari an ex President from Finland who is 72 years old and who accomplished a hell of a lot compared to Obama......

en.wikipedia.org...

From the nobel website.....
Martti Ahtisaari 2008 Nobel Prize Winner....
"for his important efforts, on several continents and over more than three decades, to resolve international conflicts"

Most people I've spoken to can't believe it and think it's wayyyyy to early in Obamas career to be getting this accolade.

I believe that they should rename the award the Nobel (Piece) Prize because to

me it looks like a bribe from the committee members that voted obama

in to carry on their agenda. Is this a way to receive a (piece) of the action on

things to come down the road? $1.4 million dollars is not a bad start to be

donated to a nonprofit leftist cause.


Peace is wonderful do not get me wrong, but when obama is dismantling our

nuclear arsenal that has been a deterrent for our enemies for years as to not

mess with the U.S. it becomes down right scary.


Yes I know many will say this nuclear arsenal we as a Nation possess did not

prevent what happened on 911. Ask yourself this how safe would you feel in

your country without nuclear weapons for protection?


Will obama since he has won this award lean more strongly for more gun

control and take your right to own a gun away from you in the name of

peace? Will your right to possess ammunition be taken away from you in the

name of peace?


Is this award a way to save face for obama since he stuck his neck out for

Chicago thinking the city had a chance to land the 2016 Olympics with his

pull, but did not win the honors?


So the next time an award is made lets say for Sports, Olympics and for

some type of Achievement in the classroom just hand out an award before

hand on the future possibilities of the persons accomplishments. What a

great idea everyone wins an award before they deserve it this is collective

socialism at it's best.

^Y^


[edit on 11-10-2009 by amari]

reply to post by budski

Obama got his for having reasonable idea's about how the world should get along.

Al Gore got his for lying his ass off, and then earning tens of millions off theose lies.

Do you see the irony,

Gore lied his ass off,

Obama made promises he knew he couldn't keep, AKA lies,

Well, to sum it up everyone here thought the same: "¡qué mundo generoso!" (what a generous world!). I think no one buys Obama's cr*p, at least here... we have seen our own share of 'good' politicians who end up doing absolutely nothing to change our country or end up ruining it for good.

Why is it some people on here are giving obama a chance to earn his honor? I thought that you have to actually do something great in order to recieve the noble prize? I dont want to rag on obama but he hasnt really done anything for the country.


Dont flame me for this but i honestly think he got the prize because he is the first black president. Other then that what has he really done to get the prize?

its all a load of bs

who is he and what has he done for the world? nothing

Originally posted by IceHappy
reply to post by grover

 

I am confused since Obama has not, as promised, brought our boys home from either war and who do not know what peace is and many of them will die or be crippled in mind, spirit, and body before these two wars are over!

Sort of takes away some of the shine to the award and slightly lessens past recipients achievements who actually had done some good to the world to win this award.... IMHO that is.....

Truly I am an American living outside of the US and very confused.

Stars and Flags for asking the much needed question....

Its just politics. Everyone lies to get into office.

Its a sign of the times in a way. One last finger to the world from TPTB.



[edit on 11-10-2009 by Copernicus]

The issue of why one might deserve a Nobel Peace Prize is separate from what the question of what the Nobel Peace Prize has become over the years.

I'm not prepared to debate whether a particular choice was good, bad, or appropriate because frankly, I'm not sure that I believe the reason the Nobel Prize is awarded is legit. It may have been at one time, it may be occasionally be, perhaps even frequently.

But I have become cynical about the award, for which I have to apologize to those who feel either Obama or Gore deserved the award. I can't share in your enthusiasm, first and foremost because the machinations of the deciders has rendered it suspect in my eyes.

Given that circumstance I value the world's opinions as just what they are; opinions.

IMO