5 ms·

I don't think he can hear you over his Nobel Peace Prize.

by illyism 13y ago

Drakim 13y ago
As a Norwegian I am not very happy about that one. We messed up big time. It was silly enough to give the Nobel Peace Prize to somebody who hadn't really done anything worthwhile yet (but showed promise), but then to have that person act in such an extreme opposite to what the prize is supposed to stand for is just unreal.
- SkyMarshal 13y ago
  I was under the impression it was given to Obama for being the first non-white male president of the US, something many consider Nobel-worthy in and of itself. That said, he could have done a better job living up to it.
  - gahahaha 13y ago
    The reasons cited by the committee was his "promotion of nuclear nonproliferation" and reaching out to the Muslim world. That being said - a few drone strikes is a lot more peaceful than starting two big wars like his predecessor did. Personally, i think we should never underestimate how petty people in power can be: I think the committee handing out the prize were like star-struck teenage girls and wanted to meet Obama.
    - greedo 13y ago
      A few drone strikes? An optional war in Libya. Continuing a failed war in Afghanistan. Continuing to operate Gitmo. Continuing and expanding the spying on US citizens and others. If anything, Obama has expanded warfare to anyplace in the world that can't stop drones. Peaceful isn't an adjective that should be used in conjunction with this President.
      - gahahaha 13y ago
        > A few drone strikes? Surely it is possible to imagine more of them. > An optional war in Libya. With a UN mandate, almost completely fought by the Europeans. > Continuing a failed war in Afghanistan. However what he is doing is quite different from starting a war in Afghanistan. Here you might have a point. > Continuing to operate Gitmo. Congress did that. > Continuing and expanding the spying on US citizens and others. This is terrible. > If anything, Obama has expanded warfare to anyplace in the world that can't stop drones. Peaceful isn't an adjective that should be used in conjunction with this President. Relatively peaceful compared to W. That is what I said, and I think it is accurate.
        indrax 13y ago
        >Congress did that. He's not a political incompetent. He could take the teeth out of it, unless congress is the commander in chief now.
      - guelo 13y ago
        Arming rebels and thus escalating the Syrian civil war.
    - SkyMarshal 13y ago
      >The reasons cited by the committee was his "promotion of nuclear nonproliferation" and reaching out to the Muslim world. That may have been the stated reason, but I doubt it was the real reason. Would a white male president have received the Nobel for that? Doubt it. I think many people interpreted it as being awarded to Obama for having busted the glass ceiling, even if the Nobel committee went with a more pedestrian official explanation.
  - newnewnew 13y ago
    A person's skin color is not an accomplishment (unless you're the first person to add chloroplasts to his skin)
- bwilli123 13y ago
  It would be interesting to hear if the Nobel Committee members had revised their thoughts in light of subsequent events
- netcan 13y ago
  I'd have expected that after the Rabin-Arafat pre-emptive prizes, they would have learned. I suppose they at least "held & promoted peace congresses" even if they did ultimately fail.
- eli 13y ago
  It's a silly thing to begin with. I think many people didn't realize that the Nobel Prize for physics is completely different beast from the Peace Prize. For what it's worth, I suspect Obama would have declined the prize if it were possible to do so. It came at a really inconvenient time.
  - bambax 13y ago
    > I suspect Obama would have declined the prize if it were possible to do so It's possible to decline the Nobel Peace Prize. For instance, when the prize was jointly awarded to Henri Kissinger (Kissinger) and Le Duc Tho, Le Duc Tho declined to claim his prize and the associated rewards, because he didn't want to share a prize with Kissinger.
    - eli 13y ago
      I meant possible politically.
      - bambax 13y ago
        Not to nitpick infinitely on this question, but not only was it possible politically for Obama to refuse the Nobel Prize, it would have been the Constitutional thing to do http://blog.heritage.org/2009/12/10/does-obama%E2%80%99s-nobel-peace-prize-acceptance-violate-the-constitution/ http://blog.heritage.org/2009/12/10/does-obama%E2%80%99s-nob...
        eli 13y ago
        I guess we can agree to disagree, but IMHO refusing the Nobel Peace Prize would have made an inconvenient award into a MUCH BIGGER inconvenient international scandal. It would have been politically disastrous on a number of levels. It certainly would not have made the issue go away.
- sk00byd00 13y ago
  It happened with Kissinger before. If one were cynical, one might assume that the closed Norwegian Nobel Peace Prize committee, entirely different to the Swedish Nobel Prize committee (started by Alfred Nobel), may have been used as a PR mechanism by outside parties for quite some time.
  - hga 13y ago
    You don't think the Peace Prize he got for "helping to establish a ceasefire and U.S. withdrawal from Vietnam" (Wikipedia) wasn't earned? For those of us who are hawks, it was followed by a 150,000 man armored invasion of South Vietnam, employing more tanks than used in any WWII battle. Which the South crushed with the help of US ammo and air support, only 40,000 managed to make it back home sans their equipment. That worked the 2nd time they tried it due to Watergate denying the South ammo, which I don't believe he had anything to do with. But no matter how grim the outcome in Southeast Asia, including the Cambodian genocide, outfitting the North with three complete armored armies (the first was used up piecemeal) was critical in bankrupting the USSR and the peaceful end of the Cold War, which otherwise could have ended in even more megadeaths. And I think he gets some credit for keeping us alive when the Democrats turned dovish after one of their's was no longer in the Oval Office.
    - pessimizer 13y ago
      Peace through victory? Maybe they should have a separate Nobel Peace Through Victory prize that you get for killing the most civilians that year in order to create a lasting peace. At least I'd know where to aim my spit. The mixed-up nature of the current prize is for the birds.
      - hga 13y ago
        Teddy Roosevelt's 1906 one ratified the Japan defeats of Russia. No awards during WWI except to the International Red Cross (ICRC). 1927: Ferdinand Buisson, France, Ludwig Quidde, Germany: "[For] contributions to Franco-German popular reconciliation" Well, at least they tried.... Same for WWII; the ICRC did fully earn their prizes to my knowledge. While he didn't get an award for it, George Marshall was the USArmy Chief of Staff, top dog in uniform along with Admiral Ernest King. It was rather delayed, but Begin and Sadat's 1978 prize ratified Israel's 1967 Six-Day War victory. Excepting perhaps Norman Borlaug (Green Revolution), Lech Wałęsa (key role in the peaceful end of the Cold War), and Gorbachev (ditto, not that that was his intent), I don't think any of the awardees, or possibly all of them combined, did as much for "peace" (saving lives) as Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin did in ending WWII (Stalin of course gets a big asterisk because he was instrumental in starting it, and didn't join the other side until a figurative gun was at his head (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Barbarossa http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Barbarossa) ). E.g. the "Greater East-Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere" was killing an estimated quarter million people a month when we terminated with extreme prejudice Imperial Japan 68 years ago this week.
dictum 13y ago
It is the same prize once awarded to Kissinger, after all: "Political satire became obsolete when Henry Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize." https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Tom_Lehrer https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Tom_Lehrer
- hga 13y ago
  See my reply here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6191737 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6191737 In short, the Vietnam ceasefire and American withdrawal wasn't a small thing, it's not his fault it eventually ended badly, and it bankrupted the USSR.

I don't think he can hear you over his Nobel Peace Prize.

by illyism 13y ago

I don't think he can hear you over his Nobel Peace Prize.

As a Norwegian I am not very happy about that one. We messed up big time. It was silly enough to give the Nobel Peace Prize to somebody who hadn't really done anything worthwhile yet (but showed promise), but then to have that person act in such an extreme opposite to what the prize is supposed to stand for is just unreal.

SkyMarshal 13y ago
I was under the impression it was given to Obama for being the first non-white male president of the US, something many consider Nobel-worthy in and of itself. That said, he could have done a better job living up to it.
- gahahaha 13y ago
  The reasons cited by the committee was his "promotion of nuclear nonproliferation" and reaching out to the Muslim world. That being said - a few drone strikes is a lot more peaceful than starting two big wars like his predecessor did. Personally, i think we should never underestimate how petty people in power can be: I think the committee handing out the prize were like star-struck teenage girls and wanted to meet Obama.
  - greedo 13y ago
    A few drone strikes? An optional war in Libya. Continuing a failed war in Afghanistan. Continuing to operate Gitmo. Continuing and expanding the spying on US citizens and others. If anything, Obama has expanded warfare to anyplace in the world that can't stop drones. Peaceful isn't an adjective that should be used in conjunction with this President.
    - gahahaha 13y ago
      > A few drone strikes? Surely it is possible to imagine more of them. > An optional war in Libya. With a UN mandate, almost completely fought by the Europeans. > Continuing a failed war in Afghanistan. However what he is doing is quite different from starting a war in Afghanistan. Here you might have a point. > Continuing to operate Gitmo. Congress did that. > Continuing and expanding the spying on US citizens and others. This is terrible. > If anything, Obama has expanded warfare to anyplace in the world that can't stop drones. Peaceful isn't an adjective that should be used in conjunction with this President. Relatively peaceful compared to W. That is what I said, and I think it is accurate.
      - indrax 13y ago
        >Congress did that. He's not a political incompetent. He could take the teeth out of it, unless congress is the commander in chief now.
    - guelo 13y ago
      Arming rebels and thus escalating the Syrian civil war.
  - SkyMarshal 13y ago
    >The reasons cited by the committee was his "promotion of nuclear nonproliferation" and reaching out to the Muslim world. That may have been the stated reason, but I doubt it was the real reason. Would a white male president have received the Nobel for that? Doubt it. I think many people interpreted it as being awarded to Obama for having busted the glass ceiling, even if the Nobel committee went with a more pedestrian official explanation.
- newnewnew 13y ago
  A person's skin color is not an accomplishment (unless you're the first person to add chloroplasts to his skin)
bwilli123 13y ago
It would be interesting to hear if the Nobel Committee members had revised their thoughts in light of subsequent events
netcan 13y ago
I'd have expected that after the Rabin-Arafat pre-emptive prizes, they would have learned. I suppose they at least "held & promoted peace congresses" even if they did ultimately fail.
eli 13y ago
It's a silly thing to begin with. I think many people didn't realize that the Nobel Prize for physics is completely different beast from the Peace Prize. For what it's worth, I suspect Obama would have declined the prize if it were possible to do so. It came at a really inconvenient time.
- bambax 13y ago
  > I suspect Obama would have declined the prize if it were possible to do so It's possible to decline the Nobel Peace Prize. For instance, when the prize was jointly awarded to Henri Kissinger (Kissinger) and Le Duc Tho, Le Duc Tho declined to claim his prize and the associated rewards, because he didn't want to share a prize with Kissinger.
  - eli 13y ago
    I meant possible politically.
    - bambax 13y ago
      Not to nitpick infinitely on this question, but not only was it possible politically for Obama to refuse the Nobel Prize, it would have been the Constitutional thing to do http://blog.heritage.org/2009/12/10/does-obama%E2%80%99s-nobel-peace-prize-acceptance-violate-the-constitution/ http://blog.heritage.org/2009/12/10/does-obama%E2%80%99s-nob...
      - eli 13y ago
        I guess we can agree to disagree, but IMHO refusing the Nobel Peace Prize would have made an inconvenient award into a MUCH BIGGER inconvenient international scandal. It would have been politically disastrous on a number of levels. It certainly would not have made the issue go away.
sk00byd00 13y ago
It happened with Kissinger before. If one were cynical, one might assume that the closed Norwegian Nobel Peace Prize committee, entirely different to the Swedish Nobel Prize committee (started by Alfred Nobel), may have been used as a PR mechanism by outside parties for quite some time.
- hga 13y ago
  You don't think the Peace Prize he got for "helping to establish a ceasefire and U.S. withdrawal from Vietnam" (Wikipedia) wasn't earned? For those of us who are hawks, it was followed by a 150,000 man armored invasion of South Vietnam, employing more tanks than used in any WWII battle. Which the South crushed with the help of US ammo and air support, only 40,000 managed to make it back home sans their equipment. That worked the 2nd time they tried it due to Watergate denying the South ammo, which I don't believe he had anything to do with. But no matter how grim the outcome in Southeast Asia, including the Cambodian genocide, outfitting the North with three complete armored armies (the first was used up piecemeal) was critical in bankrupting the USSR and the peaceful end of the Cold War, which otherwise could have ended in even more megadeaths. And I think he gets some credit for keeping us alive when the Democrats turned dovish after one of their's was no longer in the Oval Office.
  - pessimizer 13y ago
    Peace through victory? Maybe they should have a separate Nobel Peace Through Victory prize that you get for killing the most civilians that year in order to create a lasting peace. At least I'd know where to aim my spit. The mixed-up nature of the current prize is for the birds.
    - hga 13y ago
      Teddy Roosevelt's 1906 one ratified the Japan defeats of Russia. No awards during WWI except to the International Red Cross (ICRC). 1927: Ferdinand Buisson, France, Ludwig Quidde, Germany: "[For] contributions to Franco-German popular reconciliation" Well, at least they tried.... Same for WWII; the ICRC did fully earn their prizes to my knowledge. While he didn't get an award for it, George Marshall was the USArmy Chief of Staff, top dog in uniform along with Admiral Ernest King. It was rather delayed, but Begin and Sadat's 1978 prize ratified Israel's 1967 Six-Day War victory. Excepting perhaps Norman Borlaug (Green Revolution), Lech Wałęsa (key role in the peaceful end of the Cold War), and Gorbachev (ditto, not that that was his intent), I don't think any of the awardees, or possibly all of them combined, did as much for "peace" (saving lives) as Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin did in ending WWII (Stalin of course gets a big asterisk because he was instrumental in starting it, and didn't join the other side until a figurative gun was at his head (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Barbarossa http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Barbarossa) ). E.g. the "Greater East-Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere" was killing an estimated quarter million people a month when we terminated with extreme prejudice Imperial Japan 68 years ago this week.

dictum 13y ago

It is the same prize once awarded to Kissinger, after all: "Political satire became obsolete when Henry Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize." https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Tom_Lehrer https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Tom_Lehrer

hga 13y ago
See my reply here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6191737 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6191737 In short, the Vietnam ceasefire and American withdrawal wasn't a small thing, it's not his fault it eventually ended badly, and it bankrupted the USSR.