The Iceman of the North Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 I've been questioning some of the awards these past years, but Barack Obama? What were they thinking? He's been in office less than a year, and haven't really achieved anything yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galactus Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Well, what do you expect? They're norwegians :PBut seriously. No. Bad idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalker Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 I've been questionin some of the awards these past years, but Barack Obama? What were they thinking? He's been in office less than a year, and haven't really achieved anything yet.Yes, there has been a slide towards rewarding people for things they hope they will be doing the future.I can understand the thinking, but feel it diminishes the prize. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Warlock of Qarth Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Then again, after people like Henry Kissinger and Yasser Arafar got one, the Nobel Peace prize kind of lost it's cachet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kuroishi Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Wow, that came out of nowhere.I guess that it's a bet on the future for the committee. As for Obama, that should serve him well on the diplomatic stage, adding weight to any task he would undertake.I kind of see where the committee is going with this, giving the prize to him in the hope that he will grow into it, using the prestige it will give him ; but that's still a huge surprise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik of Hazelfield Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 I get the impression that he hasn't really achieved anything yet. He talks pretty, but the results have yet to come. And that's no wonder since he has been president for less than a year.Very, very surprising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalThor Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Had I been attendance I'd have gasped just like the reporters did.I like the guy and all but I don't feel he's done much to merit this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolf Maid Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 This was just stunning. I like Obama, I think he has done so much but I feel this is really too early for him to win. I suppose this is for encouragement but still. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Yeah, count me in as another big "What the fuck?" at this news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MinDonner Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Um, what? I guess the bar must have reeeeally been lowered under Bush, if all you have to do, to qualify, is be a US president who isn't a warmongering cretin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edda van Heefmstra Ruston Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 I like Obama, and I hope that he'll do something worth of the Prize*, but now? Really? Really?* Well, I'd like to think that most people would, but if that were the case the Prize wouldn't really be necessary anymore, would it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mashiara Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 I get the impression that he hasn't really achieved anything yet. He talks pretty, but the results have yet to come. And that's no wonder since he has been president for less than a year.Very, very surprising.Count me in with those who were really, really surprised. I like the guy but he hasn't actually accomplished much yet since he hasn't been president that long, it's kind of ridiculous to give him the Nobel Peace prize. I feel this is going to boost some people's negative ideas about Obama, since he hasn't done anything to deserve this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Um, what? I guess the bar must have reeeeally been lowered under Bush, if all you have to do, to qualify, is be a US president who isn't a warmongering cretin.I don't think we realised how low the bar had been lowered till not doing anything about the Iran thing felt like a move of tremendous political acumen instead of just common sense.He hasn't started a war yet, which I guess is good enough. It's been a long 8 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paddy Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 And now I'm thinking about the collective apoplexy that all those Conservatives who cheered and applauded Chicago losing the Olympics are going to have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ran Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Here's the NY Times article providing some of the reasoning for the selection. It's basically starry-eyed optimism -- it's not about his accomplishments but the fact that he's returned to multilateral diplomacy and negotiation; i.e., he's not George Bush. I suppose after 8 years of that particular reign, it's easy to come off looking very good in international diplomacy circles.I think it's too soon. He should have gotten through his first term at least. Changing the climate for cooperation in nine months is great and all, but at the end of the day, it actually has to lead to positive results. For all we know, the bubble of international cooperation will burst in the next three months and we'll be right back where we started. I don't think that will happen, I think he's the real deal when it comes to international diplomacy, but he's only just gotten started. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antonius Pius Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 I didn't exactly see it coming either. It's like a Nobel prize for good intentions.Better Obama than Bono though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerold Hightower Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 It hasn't been widely advertised but the Bush administration actually played nice in their second term. Bush fired most of the neocons and did a u-turn in his foreign policy after his re-election but the public doesn't seem to have noticed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ran Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 They played nicer. I don't know as one could say they played nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antonius Pius Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 It hasn't been widely advertised but the Bush administration actually played nice in their second term. Bush fired most of the neocons and did a u-turn in his foreign policy after his re-election but the public doesn't seem to have noticed.It was noticed, but he only scrambled back from the biggest clusterfucks when it was already way too late. You don't get props for abandoning a sinking ship, it's common sense that you do. And he offended way too many people with his simplistic good-or-evil talk and Cheneys constant fear-mongering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mormont Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Yeah, this is pretty stupid. I don't know what the committee were thinking. It will not do Obama any good as it carries no credibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.