8 ms·

With actual war criminals winning peace prizes I do wonder what is the point of it. The value of an award is in the company it puts you in, now it looks like th

by paggle 7y ago

With actual war criminals winning peace prizes I do wonder what is the point of it. The value of an award is in the company it puts you in, now it looks like the peace Nobel is just worth its dollar value and its value on the TED circuit.

hos234 7y ago
Well humans are human. Mistakes happen and as long as they aren't increasing over time, it's all cool. Awards don't just exist to award the individual. In polarizing times, where the instinct is to create more conflict as a path to resolving conflict, what many of the Peace Prize winners have done, is to remind everyone that alternate non-obvious paths exist.
_Microft 7y ago
Do you talk about war criminals being awarded the Nobel peace prize or about Nobel peace prize laureates turning into war criminals? This is an important difference in my opinion. Since you seem to follow this more closely than I do, would you mind giving an example?
- pram 7y ago
  Aung San Suu Kyi is probably the most recent example with a very dubious legacy.
- dragonwriter 7y ago
  > Do you talk about war criminals being awarded the Nobel peace prize or about Nobel peace prize laureates turning into war criminals? For the former, Henry Kissinger. There are examples of the latter, as well.
  - thundergolfer 7y ago
    Holy hell, Kissinger won the Nobel Peace Prize?! I'm was familiar enough with him to know he's disgustingly immoral, and never imagined people back then would have been stupid enough to give him that award. With 2 members of the committee resigning in protest, it seems not everyone with power to award it was so morally corrupt.
  - croisillon 7y ago
    Gorbatschow sent tanks on civilians in Vilnius just one month after being awarded the Peace Nobel
- stenl 7y ago
  Obama pursued policies that arguably (https://www.amnestyusa.org/the-obama-bush-doctrine/ https://www.amnestyusa.org/the-obama-bush-doctrine/) amount to war crimes, and refused to allow the obvious war crimes of the preceding administration to be investigated. He got a Nobel peace prize essentially for being less terrible on that front than his predecessor, George W Bush.
  - moneybadger 7y ago
    > But does the drone program amount to a war crime as Marc Thiessen suggests? That is a complicated question to answer. Unlike the use of torture, there are circumstances in international law and under the laws of war in which the use of lethal force can be lawful. Much depends on where, how and with what intent such force is used. We do not, as yet, have sufficient evidence to make a determination regarding the legality of the US drones program. It has been conducted in secret and in places where it is very difficult to mount an effective investigation. Also there was a 1,200+ page Senate investigation into the use of torture by the previous administration.
    - JackFr 7y ago
      It’s not more complicated. The same flawed intelligence apparatus which provided the lists of people to capture and interrogate during the Bush administration also compiled Obama’s kill list. Neither method really provides any useful intelligence. The difference is victims of torture can go on ‘60 Minutes’, victims of targeted drone strikes can’t.
- ekianjo 7y ago
  Obama certainly did not deserve his Peace prize by the time he was elected and continued violence in the Middle East, started new wars (such as Libya) and expanded the (secret) drone strikes.
  - dnautics 7y ago
    Well to be fair he did most of those things after winning the Nobel.
    - ekianjo 7y ago
      Which makes it even worse.
dm3730 7y ago
Gandhi famously didn't win but it was later discovered that he exhibited pedophile-type behavior as well as horrifically racist beliefs against Africans as well as possibly Dravidians (South Indians).
- ekianjo 7y ago
  If you are looking for any figure that is pure like snow and more saint than Saints, then nobody can reasonably win any kind of Award ever - you can find faults with absolutely every single one person in the Universe.
  - dm3730 7y ago
    well, people do portray Gandhi and Mother Teresa as saints whereas the reality turned out that both of them were horrible individuals.
    - yesenadam 7y ago
      What basis do you have for saying that Gandhi was a 'horrible individual'? And I take it from the way you said that, that you see yourself as a far finer human being, is that right? (Maybe that second question is an improper one, but it does seem raised by how and what you wrote.)
      - dm3730 7y ago
        > What basis do you have for saying that Gandhi was a 'horrible individual' I'm surprised this is not more well known. https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/ezj3km/gandhi-was-a-racist-who-forced-young-girls-to-sleep-in-bed-with-him https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/ezj3km/gandhi-was-a-racis... > you see yourself as a far finer human being, is that right Yes. I do as I believe most people are better than Gandhi, simply by virtue of not abusing children the way Gandhi did, and numerous other crimes that he committed.
- dang 7y ago
  Would you please stop posting unsubstantive comments and/or flamebait to HN? You've been doing it a lot, unfortunately, and it is not what this site is for. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Tomte 7y ago
The value in awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to warmongers is — and the awarding committee is very conscious of it — that it has enough cachet to actually motivate warmongers to stop warmonging and go for the prize (and a relatively well-off, safe and calm retirement). It may not be fair, but the people who don't die because of that effect won't complain.
- bathtub365 7y ago
  Do you have any examples of this happening?
  - Tomte 7y ago
    There are multiple instances of violent people who stopped being violent and got the prize. Arafat is one example. Whether the prize played a role in their decision is something only they can say (and then you might not believe them). So I find this question useless, because it cannot be answered. The mechanism I sketched is generally plausible, though.
    - dnautics 7y ago
      There are also instances of relatively peaceful people who got the prize and became warmongers, e.g. a certain president of the us, who sent 500 drone strikes into Libya in a single year after winning the prize (among other military adventures)
      - Tomte 7y ago
        How does that relate to the question in this sub thread? Do you actually propose that they did violent things because they got the prize?
        benjohnson 7y ago
        The prize may have given them political cover that let their violence go on longer

by paggle 7y ago

hos234 7y ago

Well humans are human. Mistakes happen and as long as they aren't increasing over time, it's all cool. Awards don't just exist to award the individual. In polarizing times, where the instinct is to create more conflict as a path to resolving conflict, what many of the Peace Prize winners have done, is to remind everyone that alternate non-obvious paths exist.

_Microft 7y ago

Do you talk about war criminals being awarded the Nobel peace prize or about Nobel peace prize laureates turning into war criminals? This is an important difference in my opinion. Since you seem to follow this more closely than I do, would you mind giving an example?

pram 7y ago
Aung San Suu Kyi is probably the most recent example with a very dubious legacy.
dragonwriter 7y ago
> Do you talk about war criminals being awarded the Nobel peace prize or about Nobel peace prize laureates turning into war criminals? For the former, Henry Kissinger. There are examples of the latter, as well.
- thundergolfer 7y ago
  Holy hell, Kissinger won the Nobel Peace Prize?! I'm was familiar enough with him to know he's disgustingly immoral, and never imagined people back then would have been stupid enough to give him that award. With 2 members of the committee resigning in protest, it seems not everyone with power to award it was so morally corrupt.
- croisillon 7y ago
  Gorbatschow sent tanks on civilians in Vilnius just one month after being awarded the Peace Nobel
stenl 7y ago
Obama pursued policies that arguably (https://www.amnestyusa.org/the-obama-bush-doctrine/ https://www.amnestyusa.org/the-obama-bush-doctrine/) amount to war crimes, and refused to allow the obvious war crimes of the preceding administration to be investigated. He got a Nobel peace prize essentially for being less terrible on that front than his predecessor, George W Bush.
- moneybadger 7y ago
  > But does the drone program amount to a war crime as Marc Thiessen suggests? That is a complicated question to answer. Unlike the use of torture, there are circumstances in international law and under the laws of war in which the use of lethal force can be lawful. Much depends on where, how and with what intent such force is used. We do not, as yet, have sufficient evidence to make a determination regarding the legality of the US drones program. It has been conducted in secret and in places where it is very difficult to mount an effective investigation. Also there was a 1,200+ page Senate investigation into the use of torture by the previous administration.
  - JackFr 7y ago
    It’s not more complicated. The same flawed intelligence apparatus which provided the lists of people to capture and interrogate during the Bush administration also compiled Obama’s kill list. Neither method really provides any useful intelligence. The difference is victims of torture can go on ‘60 Minutes’, victims of targeted drone strikes can’t.
ekianjo 7y ago
Obama certainly did not deserve his Peace prize by the time he was elected and continued violence in the Middle East, started new wars (such as Libya) and expanded the (secret) drone strikes.
- dnautics 7y ago
  Well to be fair he did most of those things after winning the Nobel.
  - ekianjo 7y ago
    Which makes it even worse.

dm3730 7y ago

Gandhi famously didn't win but it was later discovered that he exhibited pedophile-type behavior as well as horrifically racist beliefs against Africans as well as possibly Dravidians (South Indians).

ekianjo 7y ago
If you are looking for any figure that is pure like snow and more saint than Saints, then nobody can reasonably win any kind of Award ever - you can find faults with absolutely every single one person in the Universe.
- dm3730 7y ago
  well, people do portray Gandhi and Mother Teresa as saints whereas the reality turned out that both of them were horrible individuals.
  - yesenadam 7y ago
    What basis do you have for saying that Gandhi was a 'horrible individual'? And I take it from the way you said that, that you see yourself as a far finer human being, is that right? (Maybe that second question is an improper one, but it does seem raised by how and what you wrote.)
    - dm3730 7y ago
      > What basis do you have for saying that Gandhi was a 'horrible individual' I'm surprised this is not more well known. https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/ezj3km/gandhi-was-a-racist-who-forced-young-girls-to-sleep-in-bed-with-him https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/ezj3km/gandhi-was-a-racis... > you see yourself as a far finer human being, is that right Yes. I do as I believe most people are better than Gandhi, simply by virtue of not abusing children the way Gandhi did, and numerous other crimes that he committed.
dang 7y ago
Would you please stop posting unsubstantive comments and/or flamebait to HN? You've been doing it a lot, unfortunately, and it is not what this site is for. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Tomte 7y ago

The value in awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to warmongers is — and the awarding committee is very conscious of it — that it has enough cachet to actually motivate warmongers to stop warmonging and go for the prize (and a relatively well-off, safe and calm retirement). It may not be fair, but the people who don't die because of that effect won't complain.

bathtub365 7y ago
Do you have any examples of this happening?
- Tomte 7y ago
  There are multiple instances of violent people who stopped being violent and got the prize. Arafat is one example. Whether the prize played a role in their decision is something only they can say (and then you might not believe them). So I find this question useless, because it cannot be answered. The mechanism I sketched is generally plausible, though.
  - dnautics 7y ago
    There are also instances of relatively peaceful people who got the prize and became warmongers, e.g. a certain president of the us, who sent 500 drone strikes into Libya in a single year after winning the prize (among other military adventures)
    - Tomte 7y ago
      How does that relate to the question in this sub thread? Do you actually propose that they did violent things because they got the prize?
      - benjohnson 7y ago
        The prize may have given them political cover that let their violence go on longer