Happy Face 29 Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 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, October 9, 2009 http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/l...2009/press.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Fucking hell, what a joke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew 4292 Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 good for him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckyluke 1 Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 (edited) Erm, for what exactly?! Look out for The Guardian's jizz-splattered Obama centrefold tomorrow btw. Edited October 9, 2009 by luckyluke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Erm, for what exactly?! Not being Dubya presumably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 13915 Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 This will send the New World Order paranoid crew even more insane! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Erm, for what exactly?! Not being Dubya presumably. I think its a bit unfair to dismiss his presidency so far as just this. If the Republicans / neo-cons had continued in power, we'd have been at war with Iran by now. Its not as if Obama has just not got aggressive (as per Dubya) with countries like Iran, he has actively sought out new ways of interacting across borders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AgentAxeman 90 Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 This will send the New World Order paranoid crew even more insane! seriously tho, Why?? UnFrigginBelievable!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Erm, for what exactly?! Not being Dubya presumably. I think its a bit unfair to dismiss his presidency so far as just this. If the Republicans / neo-cons had continued in power, we'd have been at war with Iran by now. Its not as if Obama has just not got aggressive (as per Dubya) with countries like Iran, he has actively sought out new ways of interacting across borders. Fair enough, it was a bit tongue-in-cheek anyway. Seems extremely premature though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AgentAxeman 90 Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Erm, for what exactly?! Not being Dubya presumably. I think its a bit unfair to dismiss his presidency so far as just this. If the Republicans / neo-cons had continued in power, we'd have been at war with Iran by now. Its not as if Obama has just not got aggressive (as per Dubya) with countries like Iran, he has actively sought out new ways of interacting across borders. Fair enough, it was a bit tongue-in-cheek anyway. Seems extremely premature though. When's he gonna walk on water. or turn said water into wine?? as i said before UnFrigginBelievable!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 9281 Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Not sure if we'll really know what effect, simply having a conversation, has had on international relations for a long time. It is a little premature, but for all we, as laymen outside if the arena, can tell, he does deserve it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trophyshy 6481 Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 (edited) I appreciate he is doing some good diplomacy, and anti profiterolation stuff, but he is still killing people, in far away countries, so I am, a tad, puzzled. (extra commas just for Fish) Edited October 9, 2009 by trophyshy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snakehips 0 Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Trying to de-'nuclearise' the world ?? I thought he was just using that as a wake up call to the rest of the world in respect of Iran i.e. in six months time coming out with "Look, world, I really want to de-'nuclearise' the world because I'm Barak Obama, a really, really, nice guy yet Iran keeps pushing on with it's evil intentions. We are going to have to attack them now." Surely the award should have gone to Gordon Brown for 'asking my ministers about cancelling one of our new nuclear subs, to de-'nuclearise' the world' (despite the truth of the matter being one of finance, rather than being mr nice friendly guy as he tried to portray). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Not sure if we'll really know what effect, simply having a conversation, has had on international relations for a long time. It is a little premature, but for all we, as laymen outside if the arena, can tell, he does deserve it. It's normally awarded to people who've done something a bit more tangible. I doubt the Nobel committee have access to secret inter-governmental conversations in any case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonatine 10153 Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Probably want to get in quick in case someone does a Lee Harvey on him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted October 9, 2009 Author Share Posted October 9, 2009 Erm, for what exactly?! Not being Dubya presumably. I think its a bit unfair to dismiss his presidency so far as just this. If the Republicans / neo-cons had continued in power, we'd have been at war with Iran by now. Its not as if Obama has just not got aggressive (as per Dubya) with countries like Iran, he has actively sought out new ways of interacting across borders. That was the bare minimum expectation of what he would do anyway. He's gone back on several campaign promises on reversing Bush policy and in general continues to perpetuate every one of his mistakes. Seems strange to me he was supposed to be considering all the options for Afghanistan The president, another senior administration official said, "has embarked on a very, very serious review of all options." But withdrawl wasn't deemed to be one of them. ‘I don’t think we have the option to leave. That’s quite clear,’ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 If you think about it though, the world is a safer place now, so his influence on peace has been about as great as any one man could have had since January. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 9281 Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Not sure if we'll really know what effect, simply having a conversation, has had on international relations for a long time. It is a little premature, but for all we, as laymen outside if the arena, can tell, he does deserve it. It's normally awarded to people who've done something a bit more tangible. I doubt the Nobel committee have access to secret inter-governmental conversations in any case. Oh I don't doubt that. I'm just saying perhaps it will transpire that he deserves it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted October 9, 2009 Author Share Posted October 9, 2009 Not sure if we'll really know what effect, simply having a conversation, has had on international relations for a long time. It is a little premature, but for all we, as laymen outside if the arena, can tell, he does deserve it. Don't put yourself down Fish. The debate isn't above you. Credit where it's due. His talking to Iran has had a positive effect and is more than I'd have expected of Bush. But as I said, I'd have expected that much of ANYONE. Diplomacy should alwaysd be the first option. It was only Sherrif Bush who followed his gut and ordeered shock and awe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snakehips 0 Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 If you think about it though, the world is a safer place now, so his influence on peace has been about as great as any one man could have had since January. Which is exactly what Alex said i.e. He's not Dubya. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Not sure if we'll really know what effect, simply having a conversation, has had on international relations for a long time. It is a little premature, but for all we, as laymen outside if the arena, can tell, he does deserve it. It's normally awarded to people who've done something a bit more tangible. I doubt the Nobel committee have access to secret inter-governmental conversations in any case. Oh I don't doubt that. I'm just saying perhaps it will transpire that he deserves it? I agree, I just think it's premature like I said. Chez has a point too I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AgentAxeman 90 Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 If you think about it though, the world is a safer place now, so his influence on peace has been about as great as any one man could have had since January. Chez, he was in power for a total of 2 weeks before the closing date of nominations. wtf did he achieve in that time?? very thinly vieled attack on Bush imo!! oh, and we wont mention the extra 40000 troops thats about to be deployed, shall we?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 If you think about it though, the world is a safer place now, so his influence on peace has been about as great as any one man could have had since January. Chez, he was in power for a total of 2 weeks before the closing date of nominations. wtf did he achieve in that time?? very thinly vieled attack on Bush imo!! oh, and we wont mention the extra 40000 troops thats about to be deployed, shall we?? That's something I hadn't considered. Ironically he's probably earnt the award for his pre-election rhetoric as opposed to his actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted October 9, 2009 Author Share Posted October 9, 2009 Not sure if we'll really know what effect, simply having a conversation, has had on international relations for a long time. It is a little premature, but for all we, as laymen outside if the arena, can tell, he does deserve it. It's normally awarded to people who've done something a bit more tangible. I doubt the Nobel committee have access to secret inter-governmental conversations in any case. Oh I don't doubt that. I'm just saying perhaps it will transpire that he deserves it? I agree, I just think it's premature like I said. Chez has a point too I suppose. I think they do tend to try and shape history rather than reflect it like. Yasser Arafat, Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres got one each 15 years back didn't they. They gave Kissinger one during Vietnam too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AgentAxeman 90 Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 If you think about it though, the world is a safer place now, so his influence on peace has been about as great as any one man could have had since January. Chez, he was in power for a total of 2 weeks before the closing date of nominations. wtf did he achieve in that time?? very thinly vieled attack on Bush imo!! oh, and we wont mention the extra 40000 troops thats about to be deployed, shall we?? That's something I hadn't considered. Ironically he's probably earnt the award for his pre-election rhetoric as opposed to his actions. pre election rhetoric?? thats about as reliable as............. well, something VERY unreliable. in fact, i do believe he's gone back on a few pledges already. Tom had a bit of a laugh earlier about the new world order theory. i reckon i may have to re-study the evidence just in case!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now