He didn't earn it or deserve it in the first place. Situation in answer to your question is still the same.

Thread Defection? I think the word you want is deflection....


Anyways:

Let's examine this shall we?

1-The Current POTUS, was awarded the peace prize, before any of those incidents/deaths. What other President has earned it at all?

Here let me clue you in:

Theodore Roosevelt (1905) : SPANISH AMERICAN WAR, He was also part of the ROUGH RIDERS IN CUBA. He actually was given the Peace Prize(Russio-Japan war peace efforts.) After his hand were already bloodied. Of all the Presidents to Have the Peace Prize, he actually fired at and killed people in combat.

Woodrow Wilson (1919): WORLD WAR 1 He had full control of America's entry into World War I. Which would make him guilty of having been a 'killer' by the loose definition the OP would have you swallow. For his peace-making efforts, particularly his advocacy of the League of Nations, Wilson was awarded the 1919 Nobel Peace Prize.

Jimmy Carter, Jr. 2002 Nobel Peace Prize, the only U.S. President to have received the Peace Prize after leaving office. 1979–1981 Iran hostage crisis, the only real conflict he had a hand in or if you, will the blame of. (Personally, I think the only failure there was that he tried to keep the operation small....) I think you could safely say he was the least bloodied handed (thus far in the OP's definition) to get the Peace Prize.

Barack Obama (2009) Wasn't a soldier, he was inaugurated as president on January 20, 2009. In October 2009, Obama was named the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize laureate. He INHERITED Afghanistan and Iraq. So you cannot logically say his hands were bloodied because of them. The other bits you claim made him ineligible happened after his awarding of it. Thus negating the whole of that argument.

2- Past Presidents have had higher body counts over all, and some were if you open your eyes, guilty of being party to Genocidal actions on AMERICAN SOIL. Genocide, in the eradication of any one group or race/nationality. In this case the Indigenous American Peoples.

So let us call the kettle for what it is shall we?

It's nothing more than a blatant attack on the President for being the President and doing what had to be done, by someone in the other parties camp.

Do I like war, hell no. Do I think we should be in Afghanistan -still-, OH HELL NO. Job done, time to gt*out.
The fact we are EXITING IRAQ, this late in the game, is disgusting. We didn't have a valid reason to be there in the first place.

(An' if you want to know, yes, I feel Saddam should have been killed back in the first Gulf War. Even if you think it was just for oil, the stated goal of protecting our allies was valid and in this case, just. As a side note: I also served under Pres. Bush SR. in Operation: Just Cause. Which was just policing Noriega's arse. Though there were significant other reasons to have done it. Such as the fact Noriega's troops were terrorizing American nationals, and the odd CIA agent that had vital intelligence... who was a secondary objective in that 'Operation.' So no, I am not a deluded trooper who thinks wars are fought 'just for the stated public reasons.')

Evidence exists that Gaddaffi, Saddam and the others are guilty of crimes against humanity. Should Gaddiffi have had a trial? That's not our place to call, but that of those people of that land. Saddam was tried and found guilty by his own people. Al Quedia's leadership, earned what they got/will get.

President Obama's only fault is that he succeeded as a Democratic President, to get the bad guys.

Peace Prize, yeah, he's got it, the knuckle head senator doesn't.

What's sticking in the Republican craw is that even IF (and its a very big damned if at the moment,) they oust President Obama, his accomplishments will STILL have made a difference.

What the Republican's need to do is get off their duff and make a success for America that outshines anything President Obama has done by Nov 5, 2012. Which they can't do, because they are too busy fighting all around, (and fighting to get him out of office,) instead of focusing on doing something that WOULD OUT SHINE HIM to get him out of office.

Since they are too busy fighting the other party and being stupidly obstructionist in action (or if you will inaction) the House and Senate will likely become Democratic Majority along with a Democratic President.

Or did you not see that Congress is at 9% approval and that President Obama is 45% in one of the latest (HAHAHA) MSM poll???? (The hahah was directed at the MSM FYI.)

You want to claim the moral 'high ground' and say that President Obama is a warmonger and shouldn't have the peace prize? Get some real facts and evidence to show he wasn't worthy of getting it, at the time he received it.

Because HISTORY has shown that we have had Presidents with bloodier hands, than President Obama and President Carter who got the same prize.

The Facts Stand.
M.