Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2009/10/0 9/us/politics/politics-us-nobel-peace-ob ama.html?_r=1

It seems he is being praised for his diplomatic efforts since coming to office. Here's a question: how do you see it? Do you have a problem with the fact that there's a monetary prize associated with winning (1.4 million dollars)? Do you think peace weakens America's stance in the global system? Do you think Obama is merely kow-towing to other officials?

I think awarding him the prize is a bit over the top, though I do like seeing his efforts recognized in a positive light, especially from the international community.

Hopefully this will make him get his ass in gear and realize that he can start fulfilling his promises now and kicking some ass like he promised to and we all hoped he would.

I can't wait to see how Glenn Beck spins this.

I'm a little surprised, but not overly. Since I've moved to europe I've noticed that people over here fucking love Obama. Its his own country that people think he is the devil. But then again, America has always had difficulty linking up with a global mentality.

who didn't see this coming? this was predicted the day he was elected. The Nobel foundation is about as left as they come. They've done worse though. I lost all respect for the Nobel foundation the day they gave the prize to Yasser Arafat (i mean seriously) of course, Al Gore once got the peace prize for being a global warming scaremonger. so I've got pretty much no respect for them anymore.

"Hey guys, who haven't we given a peace prize to yet?"

"Obama! OBAMA!"

"Yeah, sure, whatever" *click* *click*

It's a shame they don't treat the peace prize with as much care and respect as they treat the other nobel prizes.

I mean its great that he's starting to do something, but you generally don't hand out prizes until after the contestants have turned in their entries or done their work. :/

I voted for the guy and I don't get it.

At 10/9/09 05:37 AM, awkward-silence wrote: I can't wait to see how Glenn Beck spins this.

Discredit the Nobel. It isn't that hard, I mean, Kissinger won it.

I am currently nominating Mr. Bush for the next Nobel Prize. Without his lousy inner and foreign politics, Obama wouldn't probably be the president and the world wouldn't be heading towards peace, harmony and unity, as it is now. Don't you see, it was part of the plan and Mr. Bush sacrificed himself and played the bad cop :D

At 10/9/09 08:30 AM, SiJaf wrote: I am currently nominating Mr. Bush for the next Nobel Prize.

Actually, he WAS nominated (along with the british prime minister, I believe) for fighting "terrorism".

This is stupid. Sure, I think he has the potential of achieving something worthy of Nobel peace prize. I know that nuclear disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation are on the top of his agenda. But why can't they just wait until his results are actually showing? Was there really no one else promoting peace this year?

By the way, the worst Nobel Peace Prize laureate ever was not Yasser Arafat or Henry Kissinger. The worst one by far was Mother Teresa.

At 10/9/09 08:41 AM, AapoJoki wrote: By the way, the worst Nobel Peace Prize laureate ever was not Yasser Arafat or Henry Kissinger. The worst one by far was Mother Teresa.

Just curious to know your line of thinking on that one. :/

At 10/9/09 08:47 AM, gumOnShoe wrote:

At 10/9/09 08:41 AM, AapoJoki wrote: By the way, the worst Nobel Peace Prize laureate ever was not Yasser Arafat or Henry Kissinger. The worst one by far was Mother Teresa.

Just curious to know your line of thinking on that one. :/

Sarcasm, most likely.

If not, maybe Mother Teresa had Mossad and/or Republican connections.

Well... if this doesn't convince you of the political nature of the Nobel committee, then I don't know what will.

Of course, I am sure that no one is more shocked over this revelation than the other people who were nominated for the price. Let's take a look... oh, Nikolas Sarkozy was nominated, as well as 200 other people. I bet they're shocked this morning. :-\

At 10/9/09 10:08 AM, Proteas wrote: Of course, I am sure that no one is more shocked over this revelation than the other people who were nominated for the price. Let's take a look... oh, Nikolas Sarkozy was nominated, as well as 200 other people. I bet they're shocked this morning. :-\

Funny thing is that if any one of them protested, which they wouldn't, then they'd be causing strife. Too even acknowledge that the system is bad is likely to "disqualify" anyone who wants the award.

At 10/9/09 10:36 AM, gumOnShoe wrote:

At 10/9/09 10:08 AM, Proteas wrote: Of course, I am sure that no one is more shocked over this revelation than the other people who were nominated for the price. Let's take a look... oh, Nikolas Sarkozy was nominated, as well as 200 other people. I bet they're shocked this morning. :-\

Funny thing is that if any one of them protested, which they wouldn't, then they'd be causing strife. Too even acknowledge that the system is bad is likely to "disqualify" anyone who wants the award.

Really? REALLY? How much of a piece of crap is this?!? This sucks more than al gore with his global warming ideas getting the nobel peace prize. Before you know it we're going to turn the constitution, roll it, and have the worlds most expensive cigar with it. Next we'll elect the Arnold Swarzenblahblah as president because hey, he'll be the worlds first non-american born citizen! Then, I can imagine the next part being a lil like this movie...

Lol. "There was widespread surprise at the committee's decision. While world leaders were largely supportive of the award, thousands of people have contacted the BBC with more sceptical views.

Of thousands of comments received by the BBC, an estimated 75% expressed surprise at the award. Some said awarding the prize to Mr Obama was plain wrong, others that the decision had come too soon, before he had made any concrete foreign policy achievement."

If 75% of the BBC's audience was negative then I wonder what kind of responses FOX news got.

I didn't know him beforehand, but Hu Jia would have been my pick. Actually someone who is currently in prison for fighting for human rights and who could use some extra encouragement, rather than someone whose main achievement so far is a lot of glitter and glamour.

At 10/9/09 11:23 AM, HahaISuckMoreThanYou wrote: Really? REALLY? How much of a piece of crap is this?!? This sucks more than al gore with his global warming ideas getting the nobel peace prize. Before you know it we're going to turn the constitution, roll it, and have the worlds most expensive cigar with it. Next we'll elect the Arnold Swarzenblahblah as president because hey, he'll be the worlds first non-american born citizen! Then, I can imagine the next part being a lil like this movie...

Ummm... what?

No, I really did try to understand that, but I couldn't and as it was in response to me I feel compelled to ask how my idea is related to whatever it was you wrote there.

At 10/9/09 11:37 AM, gumOnShoe wrote: Ummm... what?

No, I really did try to understand that, but I couldn't and as it was in response to me I feel compelled to ask how my idea is related to whatever it was you wrote there.

Absolutely nothing, ment it to be about first post. Your post I agreed with and have no added comment and apologize for making you think that by quotting you :P.

Either all of the candidates must've been really shit in this round, or the value of the Nobel Peace Prize is the same as the value of my diarrhea ... hell probably even my diarrhea is more valuable as consuming it is safer.

WTF!

They give Obama a Nobel Peace Prize for his "efforts" but they still haven't given shit to Edhi?

Are you fucking kidding me?

What about Warren Buffet?!

Seriously...fuck all of the guys who decide this shit...

If At 10/9/09 10:08 AM, Proteas wrote:

Well... if this doesn't convince you of the political nature of the Nobel committee, then I don't know what will.

"I do not view it as a recognition of my own accomplishments, but rather as an affirmation of American leadership," Obama said from the White House Rose Garden.

Good thing he tacked on that first half...

I think Ed Rollins said it best...

"I think at this point, the thing I'm curious about is, this is a storybook made-for-TV story. A young senator basically gets elected president after a very short period of time. Nine months into his administration, when the world is still at war - he's sitting down at a war council today - he gets the Nobel Peace Prize. I mean, if you presented that as a made-for-TV, you probably would get the script rejected."

But whatever...I guess I can't find myself in a mood to reward Obama after he failed to bring Israel/Palestine to a beer summit- I mean peace talks.

Hell, the man didn't even get Israel to stop settlement expansion...but whatever, maybe it has less to do with a backbone and more to do with the fact that its just "politics" and words...now that he's elected, Obama has changed his tone on the Armenian Genocide...

Hmmm, I was thinking, maybe they gave him a peace prize for not causing any trouble. I mean, aside from cutting back in several areas like the missile defense shield and whatnot, he hasn't done much to relieve stress other than not being bush. Maybe they gave him the prize for successfully not fucking up the world further... otherwise, I don't get it.

The reason he was given award was for his "efforts" in promoting nuclear disarmament in the Middle East. What the committee didn't take into consideration was the fact that the Middle East doesn't think he's any different then Bush as far as foreign policy, and they're right as fuck. See?

At 10/9/09 12:56 PM, MercatorMap wrote:

At 10/9/09 12:51 PM, michelinman wrote: The reason he was given award was for his "efforts" in promoting nuclear disarmament in the Middle East. What the committee didn't take into consideration was the fact that the Middle East doesn't think he's any different then Bush as far as foreign policy, and they're right as fuck. See?

Because it's feasible to drastically change the mission/objective of over 100,000 US military personnel in a matter of months without having serious logistical/morale/administrative issues.

Kind of like him separating himself from Bush by claiming he'd withdraw us from Iraq to fight the "responsible" war in Afghanistan, only to keep the same agreed-to timetable for Withdraw that Bush had with the Iraqi Government.

Yeah, so different.

At 10/9/09 12:56 PM, MercatorMap wrote:

At 10/9/09 12:51 PM, michelinman wrote: The reason he was given award was for his "efforts" in promoting nuclear disarmament in the Middle East. What the committee didn't take into consideration was the fact that the Middle East doesn't think he's any different then Bush as far as foreign policy, and they're right as fuck. See?

Because it's feasible to drastically change the mission/objective of over 100,000 US military personnel in a matter of months without having serious logistical/morale/administrative issues.

Quoted for truth. Seriously, I don't like obama at all, but it is not possible at all to withdraw all troops at once, though I don't agree with Obamas policy. I think we should either send the appropriate amount of troops that's recommended or tell those soldiers that the war is over and begin a gradual withdrawel of troops. Please ffs I hope obama doesn't continue the war, but in half-ass mode because it's only going to prolong the war, cause more casualties, and ultimately it will be all for naught.

I'm happy for him.

It's a bit over the top, but he will live up to it.

I'm not talking about Iraq/Afghanistan at all. He didn't win the prize because of his policies towards them. He won it for his work for nuclear disarmament in the Middle East, obviously meaning Iran. Iran sees him as a different face on the same system, and why the fuck wouldn't they. It's blatantly obvious that Obama isn't being reasonable towards them any more than Bush was. The difference is that the 4 page news story on CNN's front page is about a video that Obama sent Iran talking about how he wants to work with Iran to settle this cold war of sorts, so obviously Obama is busting his ass to work with Iran. What you DON'T see is the little two paragraph story buried in the archives where Iran says that Obama isn't following his word and is no different then any of the other assholes that have become president. THAT'S what I have a problem with.

At 10/9/09 05:37 AM, awkward-silence wrote: I'm a little surprised, but not overly. Since I've moved to europe I've noticed that people over here fucking love Obama. Its his own country that people think he is the devil. But then again, America has always had difficulty linking up with a global mentality.

Globalism is a bad thing if you weren't aware.

At 10/9/09 02:44 PM, drDAK wrote: I'm happy for him.

It's a bit over the top, but he will live up to it.

Even despite the fact that he hasn't lived up to anything else?

THe dudes being rewarded for his fucking rhetoric during his campaign. That is just plain fucked up. Its awarding the prize based on what he *Says* he's going to do, so apparently sugar coated words are enough for a Nobel Prize now...

Gores winning was at least feasible, regardless of what you think about him or what he's done he's at least *done* something recognisable. Obama had to have been nominated within 2 weeks of his coming to power and in those two weeks he achieved nothing worthy of the peace prize.

Congratulations Nobel Committee you just lost any semblance of credibility you had.

he was in the office for less than a month when he was nominated, and I dont see how he did so much in that three weeks as to get a nobel peace prize, when many others have been doing things for a longer time period, and have yet recieved any rewards