Quantcast

Nobel Peace Prize: Is the Norwegian Nobel Committee's Award Meaningful?

Fef 2009/10/09 19:13:45
Change: The Nobel Peace Prize Loses Meaning
No Change: The Nobel Peace Prize Already Lost its Meaning
No Change: The Nobel Peace Prize Still Has Meaning
You!
Add Photos & Videos
President Barrack Obama has won the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize on Friday for his "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples." Congratulations to the president and America.

But the Norwegian Nobel Committee has shocked everyone by giving the award to the president after just 9 months in office. I question the value of the award and how this cheapens it. Whether or not President Obama will deserve the award for his future accomplishments we don't know -- but to award it for his past 9 months? President Barack Obama himself doesn't feel like he deserved the Nobel Peace Prize:
I do not view it as a recognition of my own accomplishments...To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who have been honored by this prize, men and women who’ve inspired me and inspired the entire world through their courageous pursuit of peace.


The Committee described a criteria in that probably every recent American president held -- "Dialog and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts," and a world free of nuclear arms.

This would apply to hawkish presidents like Ronald W Reagan, who did more to reduce nuclear arms than any president and wanted a world free of nukes -- but President Reagan did not win the award.

Instead, the list of honorees includes such unworthy people. The list includes:
* 1994 Yassir Arafat leader of terrorist organization PLO
1997 International Campaign to Ban Landmines despite landmines use as a defensive weapon to prevent war
* 2001 United Nations and Kofi Anan despite doing nothing to end or recognize the genocide in the Sudan
* 2002 President Jimmy Carter despite his anti-Semitic rhetoric and appeasing terrorist organizations
* 2005 Mohamed ElBaradei who has let Iran develop a nuclear weapons program
* 2007 Al Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change for Global Warming alarmism

The president does join a long list of deserving people, such as the Dali Lama, Mother Teresa, Menachem Begin, Mohamed Anwar Al-Sadat, Henry A. Kissinger and others. I hope the president lives up to the awards legacy and criteria -- but honoring him this early in his term weakens the award.
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • you betcha 2009/10/09 19:31:50
    No Change: The Nobel Peace Prize Already Lost its Meaning
    you betcha
    +14
    I posted this on another thread but it applies here even better:

    There recently was a death of a 98 year-old lady named Irena. During WWII, Irena, got permission to work in the Warsaw Ghetto, as a Plumbing/Sewer specialist. She had an 'ulterior motive' ... She KNEW what the Nazi's plans were for the Jews.

    Irena smuggled infants out in the bottom of the tool box she carried and she carried in the back of her truck a burlap sack, (for larger kids). She also had a dog in the back that she trained to bark when the Nazi soldiers let her in and out of the ghetto. The soldiers of course wanted nothing to do with the dog and the barking covered the kids/infants noises. During her time of doing this, she managed to smuggle out and save 2500 kids/infants. She was caught, and the Nazi's broke her legs, arms, and beat her severely.

    Irena kept a record of the names of the kids. After the war, she tried to locate any parents that may have survived it and reunited the family. Most had been gassed. Those kids she helped got placed into foster family homes or adopted.

    Last year Irena was up for the Nobel Peace Prize ... She was not selected. Al Gore won, for a slide show on Global Warming.


    "Nuff said, don't you think?

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • shellyd Raven 2009/10/12 20:04:29
    shellyd
    +2
    yeah ok...I'm done discussing with a brick wall. You're right the IOC is wrong...feel better now????
  • Torchmanner ~PWCM~JLA 2009/10/10 23:52:25
    No Change: The Nobel Peace Prize Already Lost its Meaning
    Torchmanner ~PWCM~JLA
    Look at what Gore got for his disinformation. Arafat and obaaaaama both muslims. Bush didn't get one for stopping any further terrorist attacks but obaaama gets one for bowing to the muslims. Something wrong with that picture.
  • SlikLizrd 2009/10/10 19:29:20
    None of the above
    SlikLizrd
    +1
    The awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to President Barack Obama for his "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples" serves as an emphatic condonement of his visions for America and it's place of leadership in the world.
    And yes, the Nobel Peace Prize is most certainly a "meaningful" award -- made even more meaningful when we consider that there are many names on the list of previous award-winners that have been champions of the cause of Peace -- including such luminaries as President Jimmy Carter, Desmond Tutu, and Nelson Mandela.
    It is quite interesting to note that the liberal Jimmy Carter won the Nobel Peace Prize, but the conservative Ronald Reagan failed to do so.
    Even more interesting is the fact that Barack Obama is the latest of liberal, Democrat American Presidents to receive the Nobel Peace Prize -- and that there were NO conservative Republicans on the list of former winners!!
    When we examine the list of former Nobel Peace Prize winners, It appears that it is the liberal viewpoint that is most often embraced by the peoples of the world -- and that the "bomb them all back to the stone age" policies put forth by the war-mongering conservatives are not as acceptable among the world's people as Rush Limbaugh, Ann C...

    The awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to President Barack Obama for his "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples" serves as an emphatic condonement of his visions for America and it's place of leadership in the world.
    And yes, the Nobel Peace Prize is most certainly a "meaningful" award -- made even more meaningful when we consider that there are many names on the list of previous award-winners that have been champions of the cause of Peace -- including such luminaries as President Jimmy Carter, Desmond Tutu, and Nelson Mandela.
    It is quite interesting to note that the liberal Jimmy Carter won the Nobel Peace Prize, but the conservative Ronald Reagan failed to do so.
    Even more interesting is the fact that Barack Obama is the latest of liberal, Democrat American Presidents to receive the Nobel Peace Prize -- and that there were NO conservative Republicans on the list of former winners!!
    When we examine the list of former Nobel Peace Prize winners, It appears that it is the liberal viewpoint that is most often embraced by the peoples of the world -- and that the "bomb them all back to the stone age" policies put forth by the war-mongering conservatives are not as acceptable among the world's people as Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck, and the rest of the right-wing extremists would have us believe.
    It becomes evident very quickly that the conservatives, Conservatives, religious fundamentalists, "birthers', gun nuts, and the rest of the Obama-haters have reached a new low (even for them!) -- by questioning the "meaningfulness" of the award itself !!
    Thank you, Nobel Prize Committee, for recognizing the efforts of President Obama with this prestigious award, and may your efforts to bring focus on the true leaders of the free world continue long into the future !!
    (more)
  • Terry ~... SlikLizrd 2009/10/11 01:54:08
    Terry ~Conservitive Warrior~
    +1
    So what did Arafat do to deserve The Nobel Peace Prize?
  • Fef SlikLizrd 2009/10/12 23:27:36
    Fef
    Maybe President Reagan didn't win the prize because the Norwegian Nobel Committee didn't like Reagan's politics. Reagan did more to remove nuclear weapons from this planet than anyone. He lead to the end of the Cold War without a nuclear Armageddon despite what most anti-Reagan people feared. Reagan earned peace through strength -- strong speeches (like "Tear down this Wall" and "Evil Empire") and not backing down to the enemy and strong action.
    strong speeches tear wall evil empire backing enemy strong action
  • roxie 2009/10/10 18:57:58
    No Change: The Nobel Peace Prize Still Has Meaning
    roxie
    Not all people are inflicted with tunnel vision like the spoiled, angry, bitter gop and their self destructive followers!
  • Fef roxie 2009/10/12 23:27:56
    Fef
    Angry? Bitter? Re-read your comment.
  • Billyk75 2009/10/10 15:13:32
    None of the above
    Billyk75
    Meaningful for socialism I guess.
  • Tonio31~E Pluribus Unum~ 2009/10/10 14:27:59
    No Change: The Nobel Peace Prize Still Has Meaning
    Tonio31~E Pluribus Unum~
    +1
    Just because you don't agree with it, doesn't mean it's now invalid.
  • Fef Tonio31... 2009/10/12 23:31:55
    Fef
    Yes it does! ;)

    Actually, I think it lost its meaning a long time ago. You should look at this not from a supporter of President Obama -- he didn't ask for the award or audition for it. Instead, look at it from an objective perspective -- what has the president done to deserve the nomination only weeks after his inauguration and 9 months into his first term.

    Yes, the president gave speeches. Yes, he wants to sit down and talk to the enemy without preconditions. Yes, he wants to rid the world of nuclear arms. But so what? What if that doesn't lead to peace? Would we remember Ghandi if he tried to oppose the Nazis with a starvation protest? Or would we laugh at him for his ignorance and they shot him and dumped him in a mass ditch?

    Ghandi and MLK jr used peaceful means because they opposed peaceful governments. This tactic won't work with Nazis, Communists and Jihadists.
  • Jen-Jen 2009/10/10 13:14:52
    None of the above
    Jen-Jen
    +1
    It still has meaning and I support their decision!


    meaning support decision
  • jacobsm... Jen-Jen 2009/10/11 02:33:08
  • Fef Jen-Jen 2009/10/12 23:34:16
    Fef
    Did you support their decision for giving it to Yasser Arafat? (Obviously, I don't equate President Obama with the terrorist from the PLO)
    support decision yasser arafat equate president obama terrorist plo
  • granny1944 2009/10/10 10:29:18
    None of the above
    granny1944
    They voted for a Black and they are white? He's maybe the 3rd.
  • Fef granny1944 2009/10/12 23:35:54
    Fef
    I don't understand. Did you imply a racist tinge on the Nobel Committee? Or that black people can't make peace?
  • NickName his Dudeness 2009/10/10 08:47:08
    None of the above
    NickName his Dudeness
    +1
    We can decide in another few years. I wonder if people said the same thing when they gave it to Mikhail Gorbachev before he managed to peacefully wind down the cold war.
  • Fef NickNam... 2009/10/12 23:36:38
    Fef
    +1
    I didn't know the Nobel Committee had psychic powers.
  • NickNam... Fef 2009/10/14 02:17:19
    NickName his Dudeness
    I have to admit Gorbachev was not the best example since the Berlin Wall had already fallen in 1989, although the Soviet Union still existed in 1990 when he received the prize. There were others who received the prize before their most major accomplishments as well however.

    This letter to the editor names a few other names that illustrate the point I am making:
    http://badgerherald.com/oped/...

    I think it is also worth pointing out that this isn't the first time that conservatives have railed about "socialists" or "communists" tainting the selection of nobel laureates:
    http://hnn.us/articles/118314...
  • morning40oz~mad as hell 2009/10/10 06:11:06 (edited)
    No Change: The Nobel Peace Prize Already Lost its Meaning
    morning40oz~mad as hell
    +1
    Actually, I think the Nobel Peace Prize is a disingenuous fraud and it has been pulling the wool over the masses' eyes for generations.



    Teddy Roosevelt was awarded the Nobel for his role in mediating an end to the Russo-Japanese War. I guess it was inconvenient to take into account his enthusiastic push for a war with Spain. Woodrow Wilson was awarded the Nobel for his part in establishing the League of Nations(now the UN). Again, no account was taken for his part in engaging in the controversial WWI. Now, we come to Jimmy Carter, who was awarded the Nobel for promoting "democracy" on an international level. Never mind that it was during his administration that the "Islamic Militant Network" (the forerunner of Osama bin Laden’s Al Qaeda) was created during his administration. Oh, and how about Al Gore. Need i say more? Now, we witness the award given on the basis of prospect and maybes.



    ADD--I forgot to mention the irony of there having been at least 258 conflicts SINCE the UN was founded to PREVENT war.
  • dmac 2009/10/10 04:53:27
    No Change: The Nobel Peace Prize Already Lost its Meaning
    dmac
    +1
    It has not been worth anything for a very long time. So many "very" worthy people in the world and they pick the likes of BO and Gore and Arafat and Carter and how many more scary people over the last 30 yrs.
    One thing I would like to know is how many of that committee are members of that bilateral group pushing for NWO and I believe are huge backers of BO. This country is slipping even faster than when Bush was Pres. and we are about to not have a real America as we have known her. So they give that now meaningless award to B O to help build our standing in the world. But It sounds like a few of the leaders have seen right through this scam.
  • bones 2009/10/10 04:31:21
    No Change: The Nobel Peace Prize Still Has Meaning
    bones
    +1
    They awarded this with long strings attached. The strings are that he continue to try and live up to all his campaign promises. What a thankless job! I think he will get 2-terms, ad let's see where the country and world are then to see if those strings have gotten any shorter!
  • Fef bones 2009/10/12 23:42:23
    Fef
    I didn't read about the strings attached in the Nobel Committee's speech. I thought they awarded it to him for his Hope to resolve issues diplomatically.

    Does President Obama have to give it back if he reneges on closing Gitmo? Or if he reneges on listening to his hand-picked generals on the ground for advice in Afghanistan who want more troops?
  • Ali ~ In My Heart I Trust ~ 2009/10/10 03:08:44
    None of the above
    Ali ~ In My Heart I Trust ~
    +3
    Awarding the Peace Prize to Obama shows how hungry the world is an intelligent, cooperative approach to international problems. This I understand very well - I have shared that hunger.
  • Fef Ali ~ I... 2009/10/12 23:43:49
    Fef
    Maybe nobody feeds you because Hope doesn't always lead to positive Change. Diplomacy doesn't work against Jihadists. Hope and speeches didn't stop Hiter.
    hope lead positive change diplomacy work jihadists hope speeches hiter
    hope lead positive change diplomacy work jihadists hope speeches hiter
  • Ali ~ I... Fef 2009/10/13 02:47:07
    Ali ~ In My Heart I Trust ~
    Fef, apparently you didn't read my post. Nowhere did I mention 'hope.' My words were "intelligent, cooperative approach to international problems."

    And....Godwin's law.
  • nobama 2009/10/10 02:56:49
    No Change: The Nobel Peace Prize Already Lost its Meaning
    nobama
    +2
    it became meaning less years ago
  • suz 2009/10/10 02:51:53
    Change: The Nobel Peace Prize Loses Meaning
    suz
  • lclon 2009/10/10 02:48:28
    No Change: The Nobel Peace Prize Still Has Meaning
    lclon
    +2
    This meaning issue came up just because President Obama won the prize. Anything good that is applied to or for him is criticized by his haters, regardless. This prize has been given out for years and as soon as Obama won it, a lot of negative ugly comments are spewed out on line about it. Also, I guess we can look at it this way: Anytime someone is doing something people notice and make noise. If Obama wasn't doing anything maybe it would be ignored and less noise.
  • Fef lclon 2009/10/12 23:44:41
    Fef
    I criticize the Nobel Committee for giving it -- not President Obama for winning it.
    I've criticized the award for years, going back to before Arafat won it.

    Whom do I hate?
  • Angel 2009/10/10 02:41:51
    Change: The Nobel Peace Prize Loses Meaning
    Angel
    +4
    I think I will just add obama over there under that list of honorees who are unworthy people...

    the deadline was Feb 1 for the committee ....obama has only been in office for two weeks....
  • jams 2009/10/10 02:40:24
    None of the above
    jams
    +3
    No matter what Europe wants, we will not be ruled by a king.
  • allan 2009/10/10 02:20:11
    No Change: The Nobel Peace Prize Already Lost its Meaning
    allan
    +3
    The Nobel peace prize is a purely political effort to provide liberal ideas to the international scene.
  • OLD CRACKER 2009/10/10 02:18:08
    No Change: The Nobel Peace Prize Already Lost its Meaning
    OLD CRACKER
    +1
    ARAFAT,GORE, CARTER, AND NOW OBAMA. A USELESS PIECE OF CRAP AWARDED TO ANYONE WHO HELP BRING AMERICA TO ITS KNEES. OBAMA IS JUST SOROS LAP DOG. HE SHOULD SEND HIM A THANK YOU CARD. FUBO.
  • Andy 2009/10/10 02:01:06
    No Change: The Nobel Peace Prize Still Has Meaning
    Andy
    +3
    THe Nobel Peace Prize will always be meaningful. It gives us an insight in to individuals who play a significant role towards bringing about a more sane world. . . .a world that is less governed by ideology and bias and more governed by our deeper human strait.
  • lostsoul 2009/10/10 01:40:41
    Change: The Nobel Peace Prize Loses Meaning
    lostsoul
    +1
    We've been internationally Punked!!!!
  • rebmama 2009/10/10 01:38:55
    No Change: The Nobel Peace Prize Already Lost its Meaning
    rebmama
    +1
    This just cinches it.
  • Angi 2009/10/10 01:31:08
    Change: The Nobel Peace Prize Loses Meaning
    Angi
    +3
    The Nobel Peace Prize should be for people who have been seeking Peace, or actively involved in bringing a peace, by peaceful means. Surely these people that do sacrifice everything to help their fellow man, should be honoured.
  • peterpammy 2009/10/10 01:24:23
    No Change: The Nobel Peace Prize Still Has Meaning
    peterpammy
    +6
    I believe the committee awarded this distinction to President Obama for EXACTLY as he said "the Nobel Peace Prize has not just been used to honor specific achievement; it's also been used as a means to give momentum to a set of causes."

    It is has become a sad moment in our country's history to observe the divide among the population. I continue to travel the world both for work and pleasure, I have always been proud to call myself an American, I have always looked forward to arriving home.

    Unfortunately in the recent months with the inferno of comments which come not only from the media, but from individuals who cross my path; I pause to reflect if my own countrymen would care for me if I lost my job, would care if I had no health insurance?

    My thinking returns to that which I once was proud to stand for: a country who said give me your tired and your poor, equality for all, and a land of opportunity.

    I welcome President Obama's energy, I welcome his determination to provide equality for all which includes health care, I welcome his desire to provide a stabilized world environment sadly lacking in the past years with a war that took so many lives both American and other.

    I pity those fellow countrymen who cannot find it in their heart and head to step outside the box and linear thinking.
  • Fef peterpammy 2009/10/10 01:42:13
    Fef
    +2
    I, like you, love America. And I don't blame President Obama for winning. He acted graciously in accepting with humility.

    I blame the Nobel Committee for nominating him within weeks of his inauguration and giving him the honor only 9 months into his first term.

    While I appreciate peoples' ideals and desires for peace through diplomacy, we shouldn't win awards for that. We should win awards for accomplishments. Or we would give the prize to Neville Chamberlain, who wanted peace with Adolf Hitler but sold his country out with a worthless signature from the fascist dictator.

    As to the divide in the country....I thought President Obama promised to unite the country...
  • lostsoul peterpammy 2009/10/10 01:46:26
    lostsoul
    +1
    >President Obama for EXACTLY as he said "the Nobel Peace Prize has not just >been used to honor specific achievement; it's also been used as a means to give >momentum to a set of causes."

    If this is the case..I think it is sad that he has to receive a medal and 1.4 million dollars to get momentum.......he should have had momentum to start with. They turned the Prize into a joke.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/04/16 07:37:48

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals