Decline and fall of the Nobel Peace Prize

[Freeman Dyson]

He also recently gave the Dali Lama the finger to not upset China. Innocent people are being killed by his airstrikes in Pakistan. Gitmo is still open. Afghanistan and Iraq are still cooking... WTF?!

 

[alxm]

The Peace prize has always been 'activist' in nature, really. It was a pretty controversial thing back when it was created!

It was also ol' Alfred's original intent, really - awarding the person who'd done the most in the past year (and personally I would actually consider the election of Obama one of the single most significant victories for peace, disarmament, multilateralism and diplomacy in the last 12 months). .

The idea was always to be supporting and not only rewarding. (Which is why they don't give them to dead folks, for instance) So from that perspective, I have no issues with it. As Obama has defined and outlined his foreign policy so far, I think it's worthy of support. He's even revitalized 'classic' peace issues like nuclear disarmament that'd been dormant for quite some time.

And as others have said, even if it turned out to be a mistake, it's not likely to be their biggest mistake.

(Also, I don't buy that it could ever really devalue any of the other prizes really. As I said, it was controversial from the start, and everyone has an opinion on it. People don't generally have an opinion on the Science prizes.)

 

[Freeman Dyson]

The Peace prize has always been 'activist' in nature, really. It was a pretty controversial thing back when it was created!

It was also ol' Alfred's original intent, really - awarding the person who'd done the most in the past year (and personally I would actually consider the election of Obama one of the single most significant victories for peace, disarmament, multilateralism and diplomacy in the last 12 months). .

The idea was always to be supporting and not only rewarding. (Which is why they don't give them to dead folks, for instance) So from that perspective, I have no issues with it. As Obama has defined and outlined his foreign policy so far, I think it's worthy of support. He's even revitalized 'classic' peace issues like nuclear disarmament that'd been dormant for quite some time.

And as others have said, even if it turned out to be a mistake, it's not likely to be their biggest mistake.

(Also, I don't buy that it could ever really devalue any of the other prizes really. As I said, it was controversial from the start, and everyone has an opinion on it. People don't generally have an opinion on the Science prizes.)

Really? What has Obama done? How has the world gotten more peaceful? Give me something tangible. Talk is cheap.

 

[Dragonfall]

He also recently gave the Dali Lama the finger

Good. I would have done the same thing.

 

[Freeman Dyson]

Good. I would have done the same thing.

And why is that?

 

[Dragonfall]

I love how Fox News is reporting it.

 

[Pattonias]

I think this was a good decision. The peace prize is usually given to people who are working to solve problems peacefully. They don't wait until such problems are solved. If it is clear that a page has been turned and a new process has been started then that's enough to award the peace price.

E.g., the IPCC and Al Gore got the peace price as soon as they became the authority on climate change that the World had recognized. We yet have to see if the World will indeed cut CO2 levels, but if that doesn't happen, no one can blame the IPCC.

In case of Obama, given what he has done so far, if nothing were to come of his plans then that would be most likely be due to the negative forces that he is confronting right now. By waiting to award the Nobel Prize, one would encourage these negative forces. By awarding the Prize now, you put them on the spot.

That is just the problem, you don't give anyone an award to put them on the spot. How much more on the spot do you have to be than being elected President of the United States. You don't give someone a preemptive award to spurn them to earn it.

If he spent the term really trying his best to make a difference with his power and position then perhaps we can look back and say here is the recognition for you accomplishments as a human being. We don't say "you have the power to make change so here is your award for having that power."

This will make the Nobel Peace Prize an even bigger joke... It is already ridiculed on a regular basis, but what thread of respect it once held is being thrown away.

I can just see it now... And the Oscar goes to Extra 246 (Subway Guy) for recognition of his ambition as a new actor...

 

[Count Iblis]

The people who oppose Obama are put on the spot.

 

[Dragonfall]

And why is that?

I'm going to assume that you're into the Dalai Lama because Steven Segal and Harrison Ford are into him, so I'll let you do your own research on what the Dalai Lama really stands for.

 

[alxm]

Really? What has Obama done? How has the world gotten more peaceful? Give me something tangible.

Begun the process of withdrawing from Iraq, of shutting down Gitmo, shutting down the CIA not-so-'secret' prisons, banned torture. (human rights does fall in with the Peace prize). To begin with.

Second: Go back and read my post again, slowly. My whole point was that they intend to show support for his stated aims and goals by giving him the prize, not reward him for things he's already accomplished.

Talk is cheap.

Diplomacy is talk, and it doesn't come cheap. And it's a lot better than the alternative.

 

[Freeman Dyson]

I'm going to assume that you're into the Dalai Lama because Steven Segal and Harrison Ford are into him, so I'll let you do your own research on what the Dalai Lama really stands for.

What does he really stand for? Stop dodging.

 

[Pattonias]

The people who oppose Obama are put on the spot.

What do you mean?

 

[alxm]

This will make the Nobel Peace Prize an even bigger joke... It is already ridiculed on a regular basis, but what thread of respect it once held is being thrown away.

The naysayers were saying that already when the prize was created. So if they committee hadn't actually done a good job overall, they wouldn't have any respect to throw out.

And no matter how you want to look at it, it's still hands-down the most prestigious award of its kind, anywhere. People mention a few prizes they think were bad out of over 100? That's nothing compared to all the absolutely outstanding people who've received it. From Albert Schweitzer to Martin Luther King to Nelson Mandela to the Dalai Lama.

Oh and American conservatives were naturally complaining when the 'communist' MLK got it as well. How controversial was that in hindsight?

I'm not saying Obama is necessarily MLK, but I am saying the Nobel committee has a pretty dang good track-record really, compared to most pundits and talking heads.

 

[Cyrus]

Obama won a Nobel prize...lolz... For doing what?

 

[Pattonias]

The naysayers were saying that already when the prize was created. So if they committee hadn't actually done a good job overall, they wouldn't have any respect to throw out.

And no matter how you want to look at it, it's still hands-down the most prestigious award of its kind, anywhere. People mention a few prizes they think were bad out of over 100? That's nothing compared to all the absolutely outstanding people who've received it. From Albert Schweitzer to Martin Luther King to Nelson Mandela to the Dalai Lama.

Oh and American conservatives were naturally complaining when the 'communist' MLK got it as well. How controversial was that in hindsight?

I'm not saying Obama is necessarily MLK, but I am saying the Nobel committee has a pretty dang good track-record really, compared to most pundits and talking heads.

Don't get me wrong the problem I have with the award is that I think it is the most prestigious award of its kind. I actually have a great deal of respect for the NBPP, but I don't think it should be used as political leverage. Giving away the Nobel Peace prize with an implied stipulation that well you now have to live up to this is ridiculous.

People are wondering how this is going to affect his deployment of troops to Afghanistan. As a soldier I can tell you that it should have no affect whatsoever. That will not be the case, now people can try and weigh his decision against whether or not it coincides with his preemptive award. I can tell you that stalling on the decision to weigh it politically is going to hurt us. He either needs to take us out or put us in. Then be prepared to deal with the consequences of either decision.

I think he should respectfully decline the reward. He can always be eligible when he is finished.

 

[Mattara]

I find it hilarious that the peace prize is giving to someone who is actively involved in at least a handful of wars at this very moment (war in afghanistan, war in iraq, war on terrorism, war on drugs, war on poverty).

 

[Hans de Vries]

World reacts to Obama peace prize

NATO SECRETARY GENERAL ANDERS FOGH RASMUSSEN

I warmly congratulate President Obama on winning the Nobel Peace Prize.
President Obamahas made extraordinary efforts to strengthen international
diplomacy and co-operation between peoples. He has also demonstrated his
strong commitment to help build peace and defend fundamental human rights,
including through the atlantic alliance. This honour is well deserved.FRENCH PRESIDENT NICOLAS SARKOZY

It confirms, finally, America's return to the hearts of the people of the world...
you can count on my resolute support and that of France.SOUHAYR BELHASSEN, PRESIDENT OF INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

Awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to Obama is a way of encouraging him to not
renege on the universal principles that he has championed. We would have
preferred a human rights defender like Oleg Orlov from Memorial in Russia or
Natalia Estemirova [human rights activist murdered in Chechnya].ALI AKABR JAVANFEKR, AIDE TO IRANIAN PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD

We hope that this gives him the incentive to walk in the path of bringing justice
to the world order.We are not upset and we hope that by receiving this prize he
will start taking practical steps to remove injustice in the world.SIAMAK HIRAI, SPOKESMAN FOR AFGHAN PRESIDENT HAMID KARZAI

We congratulate Obama for winning the Nobel. His hard work and his new vision on
global relations, his will and efforts for creating friendly and good relations at global
level and global peace make him the appropriate recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize.MIKHAIL GORBACHEV, FORMER SOVIET LEADER AND NOBEL PRIZE WINNER

I am happy. What Obama did during his presidency is a big signal, he gave hope. In
these hard times, people who are capable of taking responsibility, who have a vision,
commitment and political will should be supported.JAN OBERG, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE TRANSNATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR PEACE AND FUTURE RESEARCH

I am concerned at the drift of the prize that is invariably going to politicians who have
been, or who are still, involved in warfare. Obama has not left Iraq, he has stepped it
up in Afghanistan. It is somewhat paradoxical to give it to a president who presides
over the largest military arsenal in world history.MOHAMED ELBARADEI, HEAD OF THE INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY

There is nobody today in my view who is more deserving of that peace prize than
Barack Obama. In less than a year he brought a radical change in the way we look
at ourselves, in the way we look at our world. He is restoring the basic core values
that every one of us should live by - dialogue, respect, democracy, due process,
human rights, a security system that does not depend on nuclear weapons. His
dedication to these values rekindles hope that, finally, we could have a world at
peace with itself.ANGELA MERKEL, GERMAN CHANCELLOR

I would like to congratulate President Obama on the award of the Nobel Peace Prize.
In a short time he has established a new tone, creating a willingness for dialogue
and I think we all should support him to make peace in this world possible. There is
a lot do but a window of opportunity has been opened. His advocacy of a world free
of nuclear arms is an aim we all need to make real in the next few years. Again,
congratulations on this award and it is certainly an incentive for the American
president - but also for us all - to help achieve this aim.YUKIO HATOYAMA, JAPANESE PRIME MINISTER

I am really pleased. I want to congratulate him from my heart. I've seen the world
changing since President Obama took office. It was outstanding when he made the
speech in Prague calling for a nuclear-free world.KHALED AL-BATSH, AN ISLAMIC JIHAD LEADER

Obama's winning the peace prize shows these prizes are political, not governed by
the principles of credibility, values and morals. Why should Obama be given a peace
prize while his country owns the largest nuclear arsenal on Earth and his soldiers
continue to shed innocent blood in Iraq and Afghanistan?TALIBAN SPOKESMAN ZABIHULLAH MUJAHID

We have seen no change in his strategy for peace. He has done nothing for peace
in Afghanistan. He has not taken a single step for peace in Afghanistan or to make
this country stable. We condemn the award of the Noble Peace Prize for Obama.
We condemn the institute's awarding him the peace prize. We condemn this year's
peace prize as unjust.http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8298802.stm

 

[noblegas]

Wow , talk radio is going to have a field day with this story. I agree with astronuc, I think he was awarded the nobel peace prize way too early , there needs to be more time to see how his foreign policy strategies play out in the middle east and elsewhere. On top of that, we still have troops in Iraq and we are injecting troops in aghanistan and we are in the process of thinking about invading iran if they don't stopped expanding there nuclear technology . How is that a form of peace? Nobody should qualify for a nobel peace prize until they actually get two or more countries to stop warring with each other and therefore should not be given out on a yearly basis. Nobody should be awarded the nobel peace prize for only saying that they will end nuclear proliferation ; There has been talk in the past for ending nuclear proliferation but has actually never been carried out. Ceasing nuclear proliferation to me means all countries with nuclear weapons, eradicating and ejecting themselves from the nuclear weapons and I do envision the United States ridden itself of all that expensive sophisticated nuclear weapons that have probably amounted to 500 billion dollars over the last 50 or so years(http://www.brookings.edu/projects/archive/nucweapons/50.aspx ).

 

[Equate]

"Barack Obama was nominated for the award in February 2009, just two weeks into his presidency. The voting occurred in June, just four months into the Obama era."

Source? Somehow I can't believe that according to this:

http://nobelprize.org/nomination/peace/process.html

 

[cristo]

I think this was a good decision. The peace prize is usually given to people who are working to solve problems peacefully. They don't wait until such problems are solved. If it is clear that a page has been turned and a new process has been started then that's enough to award the peace price.

So basically Obama won the nobel peace prize simply because he isn't Bush?

 

[humanino]

...

Thanks for posting informed, relevant comments.

President Obama said he was "both surprised and deeply humbled" by the award.

"Let me be clear, I do not view it as a recognition of my own accomplishments, but rather as an affirmation of American leadership on behalf of aspirations held by people in all nations," the president said.

"To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who've been honored by this prize - men and women who've inspired me and inspired the entire world through their courageous pursuit of peace.

"But I also know that this prize reflects the kind of world that those men and women and all Americans want to build, a world that gives life to the promise of our founding documents."

 

[Count Iblis]

So basically Obama won the nobel peace prize simply because he isn't Bush?

For having demonstrated to be competent at not being Bush. He is not a polarizing figure and he is willing to compromize. So, if he fails then it is not likely his fault. Had Obama not been the president but instead McCain or Hillary, this would likely not ben the case, despite them being also different from Bush.

Take e.g. the dispute with Iran. The US under Obama is willing to consider any possible solution in which Iran can be verified not to produce nuclear weapons. It is likely that under McCain or Hillary, the US would simply have demanded that Iran complies with UNSC resolutions and if Iran continues to refuse to suspend their enrichment program, they would have concluded that: "Diplomacy has failed".

If Obama's policies were to fail, it would be difficult to put the blame on him. Awarding the prize to him at this time, now that he has demonstrated to be flexible to the maximum extent, pre-emtively puts the blame on any possible failures on his opponents, which is reasonable.

 

[Count Iblis]

NATO SECRETARY GENERAL ANDERS FOGH RASMUSSEN

I warmly congratulate President Obama on winning the Nobel Peace Prize.
President Obamahas made extraordinary efforts to strengthen international
diplomacy and co-operation between peoples. He has also demonstrated his
strong commitment to help build peace and defend fundamental human rights,
including through the atlantic alliance. This honour is well deserved.


FRENCH PRESIDENT NICOLAS SARKOZY

It confirms, finally, America's return to the hearts of the people of the world...
you can count on my resolute support and that of France.


SOUHAYR BELHASSEN, PRESIDENT OF INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

Awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to Obama is a way of encouraging him to not
renege on the universal principles that he has championed. We would have
preferred a human rights defender like Oleg Orlov from Memorial in Russia or
Natalia Estemirova [human rights activist murdered in Chechnya].


ALI AKABR JAVANFEKR, AIDE TO IRANIAN PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD

We hope that this gives him the incentive to walk in the path of bringing justice
to the world order.We are not upset and we hope that by receiving this prize he
will start taking practical steps to remove injustice in the world.


SIAMAK HIRAI, SPOKESMAN FOR AFGHAN PRESIDENT HAMID KARZAI

We congratulate Obama for winning the Nobel. His hard work and his new vision on
global relations, his will and efforts for creating friendly and good relations at global
level and global peace make him the appropriate recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize.


MIKHAIL GORBACHEV, FORMER SOVIET LEADER AND NOBEL PRIZE WINNER

I am happy. What Obama did during his presidency is a big signal, he gave hope. In
these hard times, people who are capable of taking responsibility, who have a vision,
commitment and political will should be supported.


JAN OBERG, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE TRANSNATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR PEACE AND FUTURE RESEARCH

I am concerned at the drift of the prize that is invariably going to politicians who have
been, or who are still, involved in warfare. Obama has not left Iraq, he has stepped it
up in Afghanistan. It is somewhat paradoxical to give it to a president who presides
over the largest military arsenal in world history.


MOHAMED ELBARADEI, HEAD OF THE INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY

There is nobody today in my view who is more deserving of that peace prize than
Barack Obama. In less than a year he brought a radical change in the way we look
at ourselves, in the way we look at our world. He is restoring the basic core values
that every one of us should live by - dialogue, respect, democracy, due process,
human rights, a security system that does not depend on nuclear weapons. His
dedication to these values rekindles hope that, finally, we could have a world at
peace with itself.


ANGELA MERKEL, GERMAN CHANCELLOR

I would like to congratulate President Obama on the award of the Nobel Peace Prize.
In a short time he has established a new tone, creating a willingness for dialogue
and I think we all should support him to make peace in this world possible. There is
a lot do but a window of opportunity has been opened. His advocacy of a world free
of nuclear arms is an aim we all need to make real in the next few years. Again,
congratulations on this award and it is certainly an incentive for the American
president - but also for us all - to help achieve this aim.


YUKIO HATOYAMA, JAPANESE PRIME MINISTER

I am really pleased. I want to congratulate him from my heart. I've seen the world
changing since President Obama took office. It was outstanding when he made the
speech in Prague calling for a nuclear-free world.


KHALED AL-BATSH, AN ISLAMIC JIHAD LEADER

Obama's winning the peace prize shows these prizes are political, not governed by
the principles of credibility, values and morals. Why should Obama be given a peace
prize while his country owns the largest nuclear arsenal on Earth and his soldiers
continue to shed innocent blood in Iraq and Afghanistan?


TALIBAN SPOKESMAN ZABIHULLAH MUJAHID

We have seen no change in his strategy for peace. He has done nothing for peace
in Afghanistan. He has not taken a single step for peace in Afghanistan or to make
this country stable. We condemn the award of the Noble Peace Prize for Obama.
We condemn the institute's awarding him the peace prize. We condemn this year's
peace prize as unjust.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8298802.stm

Yoiu forgot to include the reaction of Michael Steele, the chairman of the Republican National Committee.

 

[Monique]

I wonder what he will do with the money, he apparently is not convinced as well that he has earned it.

 

[noblegas]

For having demonstrated to be competent at not being Bush. He is not a polarizing figure and he is willing to compromize. So, if he fails then it is not likely his fault. Had Obama not been the president but instead McCain or Hillary, this would likely not ben the case, despite them being also different from Bush.

How is he not a polarizing figure? Most republicans have voted against his policies and legislative proposals. That seems very polarizing to me. He has demonstrated to be competent in terms of being able to put a sentence together correctly , not in terms of his actually getting things done. He has not yet proposed any legislation to teared down the patriot act, We don't know if his health plan reforms and his stimulus package will actually helped americans, too early to tell.

Take e.g. the dispute with Iran. The US under Obama is willing to consider any possible solution in which Iran can be verified not to produce nuclear weapons.

Seems like the Obama administation wants to imposed an ultimatum rather than compromise with Iran , since they don't want iran to possesses any nuclear weapons(http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090925/ap_on_go_pr_wh/g20_summit_obama_iran ).

If Obama's policies were to fail, it would be difficult to put the blame on him. Awarding the prize to him at this time, now that he has demonstrated to be flexible to the maximum extent, pre-emtively puts the blame on any possible failures on his opponents, which is reasonable.

Who are we to blame if obama's policies were to fail if not the obama administration ? Did we not blame the Bush adminstration(rightfully so) for his failed policies in Iraq and blame his adminstation for completely on the fourth amendment?

 

[Count Iblis]

How is he not a polarizing figure? Most republicans have voted against his policies and legislative proposals. That seems very polarizing to me. He has demonstrated to be competent in terms of being able to put a sentence together correctly , not in terms of his actually getting things done. He has not yet proposed any legislation to teared down the patriot act, We don't know if his health plan reforms and his stimulus package will actually helped americans, too early to tell.

Obama has taken into account criticism from Republicans. That the Republicans have decided to oppose Obama for the sake of opposing him, is their decision. A few days ago some Republicans have warned about being too obstructive to health care reform.

Seems like the Obama administation wants to imposed an ultimatum rather than compromise with Iran , since they don't want iran to possesses any nuclear weapons(http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090925/ap_on_go_pr_wh/g20_summit_obama_iran ).

Yes, but now on reasonable grounds. I.e. Iran has to show that they are not persuing nuclear weapons and they can propose how they want to proceed on that matter. The US is now not dictating to Iran what they can or cannot do as far as civilian nuclear energy is concerned. The old Bush policy: "Iran must stop to enrich uranium, or else.." is no longer the US policy.

Who are we to blame if obama's policies were to fail if not the obama administration ? Did we not blame the Bush adminstration(rightfully so) for his failed policies in Iraq and blame his adminstation for completely on the fourth amendment?

If Blix had found evidence that Saddam had stockples of WMD and that Saddam was unwilling to disarm, and he had asked the UNSC to consider the military option, then no one would have blamed Bush for starting the Iraq war. Of course, things could have gone wrong later on in that war, but there would have been no fingerpointing at Bush at the start of the war.

 

[Pattonias]

For having demonstrated to be competent at not being Bush. He is not a polarizing figure and he is willing to compromize. So, if he fails then it is not likely his fault. Had Obama not been the president but instead McCain or Hillary, this would likely not ben the case, despite them being also different from Bush.

I think that we are walking on dangerous ground if we say that his success is his doing, but his failure is due to someone else. One thing you have to remember about the American government is that everything gets blamed on the President... Everything

We can't forget the several hundred elected officials who are actually responsible for the policies being made. The people in both(all) the political parties.

This double standard is evident with congress today. Congress messes up and it gets blamed on the President and the same people who voted on the problem get re-elected, while the President takes the heat.

(On a lighter note, I feel sorry for Obama as he is going to look like Abraham Lincoln when he leaves office. All that stress is going to make him lose like 30 pounds. Bush aged like 20 years.)

 

[arildno]

I think this is the Nobel prize award with the least backing in the Norwegian people that I have ever seen.
In the Dagbladet poll, out of 65000+ respondents, 55% are against this decision:
http://stem.start.no/result.php?id=8685

 

[G01]

So basically Obama won the nobel peace prize simply because he isn't Bush?

It's like winning the Nobel Prize in Physics because your not a "quantum mechanics tells us we can control things with our minds" crackpot...

 

[leroyjenkens]

If it was up to Americans, he would've probably won several different Nobel Prizes. So it could have been worse.
Remember when he wrote that excuse from class note for that little girl because she was attending one of his speeches? There you go, that's a literature Nobel Prize.

 

[Pattonias]

Remember when he wrote that excuse from class note for that little girl because she was attending one of his speeches?

All politics aside I hadn't heard about that. Thats pretty cool.


--------------------------------------------------------------
I think for the most part the Americans will feel the same way most everyone else will.
There will always be exception though.

 

[edward]

It's like winning the Nobel Prize in Physics because your not a "quantum mechanics tells us we can control things with our minds" crackpot...

A friend of mine commented that it is like winning the prize for attempted chemistry.

On the serious side eight years of fear mongering had the world a bit upset with the USA. To paraphrase a lot of media accounts, the prize was awarded for being the Anti-Bush.

 

[noblegas]

Obama has taken into account criticism from Republicans. That the Republicans have decided to oppose Obama for the sake of opposing him, is their decision. A few days ago some Republicans have warned about being too obstructive to health care reform.

Why can't you see the partisan bias on both sides? Why can't there be democrats voting with him on all issues for the sake of supporting him? Most people are satisfied with their health insurance plans and don't want big changes in healthcare..( http://www.gallup.com/poll/102934/majority-americans-satisfied-their-own-healthcare.aspx)

Yes, but now on reasonable grounds. I.e. Iran has to show that they are not persuing nuclear weapons and they can propose how they want to proceed on that matter. The US is now not dictating to Iran what they can or cannot do as far as civilian nuclear energy is concerned. The old Bush policy: "Iran must stop to enrich uranium, or else.." is no longer the US policy.

Why should Iran have to show they are not persuing nuclear weapons? It is not our job to tell other countries how to run their nuclear program, especially a country such as the US who currently possesses the largest stockpile of nuclear weapons in the world. Why are we allow to have nuclear weapons but not Iran. And if iran decides to go ahead with their nuclear weapons program, then do we have a right to invade iran? I don't think so.

"Iran must stop to enrich uranium, or else.." is no longer a US policy

I don't think soo.

... PITTSBURGH – Backed by other world powers, President Barack Obama declared Friday that Iran is speeding down a path to confrontation and demanded that Tehran quickly "come clean" on all nuclear efforts and open a newly revealed secret site for close international inspection. He said he would not rule out military action if the Iranians refuse. ...

source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090925/ap_on_go_pr_wh/g20_summit_obama_iran

 

[Pengwuino]

On the serious side eight years of fear mongering had the world a bit upset with the USA. To paraphrase a lot of media accounts, the prize was awarded for being the Anti-Bush.

Why didn't they just give the award to the city of San Francisco then.

The general consensus seems to be that he was awarded the prize for not being Bush and saying he's going to do a lot of stuff. Hilary must be pretty pissed at the moment. She just lost out on a nobel prize.

 

[Pattonias]

Why should Iran have to show they are not persuing nuclear weapons? It is not our job to tell other countries how to run their nuclear program, especially a country such as the US who currently possesses the largest stockpile of nuclear weapons in the world. Why are we allow to have nuclear weapons but not Iran. And if iran decides to go ahead with their nuclear weapons program, then do we have a right to invade iran? I don't think so.



I don't think soo. source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090925/ap_on_go_pr_wh/g20_summit_obama_iran

Apart from the obvious hypocrisy of anyone having nuclear weapons, we don't have terrorist organizations within our government who's idea of fighting a war is strapping a bomb to one of your own men and blowing him up in a crowded civilian area. I think we are worried about who will end up with the weapons once they are being produced. The only reason the Cold War stayed cold is due to mutually assured destruction... What happens when one person doesn't care if they are killed?

Unfortunately this is getting off topic. I'll refrain from arguing any more on this point in this thread.