I think it is great. It will be very interesting to see what follows.

I just saw this. I am going to have to read about it first before I know what I want to say. It certainly is a great honor.

I just logged in on my computer & I saw that on my home page. I think it's great for him & even greater for America. I'm thrilled.

I'm a great fan of President Obama, but I think this is pre-mature if warranted at all.  So far he's been a nice guy and has given a lot of great speeches, but he hasn't produced any concrete results.

In my mind, to award the Nobel Peace Prize on the basis of good intentions cheapens the award.

I'm not sure yet, I need to learn more.

I agree with RudiXeno. Obama has only promised peace but has not achieved anything yet. Yet. I don't thing you should give someone a reward before they do anything. 

i do not think this is appropriate. he is pretty new at his job, and is getting more media time than past presedents, simply because of his race, which while he was campaigning was mixed and then the instant he was elected was black, i am afraid his motives for peace are not in the best interests of the US. i am afraid that he may be trying to get the world to join together so that it is easier for everyone to be controlled by a few. we need to be aware of all that this administration is really up to. dig deeper than the fluff that is on the major networks that clearly have a democratic agenda. i am not prejudiced, nor do i have political preference, but i don't like the way our economy, or our security is headed. this man was barley heard of till he started campainging for president, and certainly has not had enough time to do what it takes to earn this prize

I think it's reflective of his momentum and the new image he has presented of this country, which for years has seemed entrenched to outsiders. 

I think it also has something to do with the fact that he told the world's leaders recently to take the initiative, not to wait around for America to fix the world's problems. It might have been taken as a sign that America wants to shrink its world influence, which many would welcome.

I also think it might partially be a subtle showing of solidarity against Iran and to North Korea and others, albeit it in a convoluted way.

Did he earn it? Don't know yet. We'll see. 

Bottom line is, it's an honor and he should accept it but realize that nothing has changed.   

Obama has acheived an incredible thing by truly risking his life and becoming President ot he United States against incredible odds and circumstances.  His attempts at bringing people together have been inspiring and also remarkable.  He has been under vicious attack from many factions for many reasons and getting this award at this particular time also sends a wonderful positive message throughout the world.

Bravo.

Ironically, i just posted a question about the Nobel Peace Prize. In that case, I'll answer by stating that it doesn't make sense to me that Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize. My reason is not political, but logical. Why would a peace prize be given to a president who is committed to the War in Afghanistan?

Note-I am an Obama supporter which is why I think that it shouldn't be made into a political matter.

Ditto, except the "fan of obama" part... haha.  Anyway, I used to respect this prize, thinking that people who won it must have done GREAT GREAT things over years of hard work and effort.  I don't know everyone on the list, but I see names like Mother Theresa and Martin Luther King Jr and I think of the wonderful efforts they made and how they dedicated their life to these efforts.

The first question that came to my mind was "What did he do?  Did I miss some grand awesome amazing act of peace?"

What's that phase... "The road to hell is paved with good intentions"... that about sums it up for me.

The committee said it attached "special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons," saying he had "created a new climate in international politics."

I am not sure what the criteria is for winning the prize, but I think that creating a new climate, getting Russia to agree with us (and others in the world) about middle eastern nukes are great accomplishments. Just improving the world view of America is a great accomplishment after the previous 8 administration.

Is there some criteria that requires that you create peace to win the prize?

RudiXeno said…

President Obama has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.  What are your thoughts?

---

I am interested in hearing how the rest of the world feels about this selection, but I am not convinced that he deserves a Nobal Peace Prize already.  Are we giving out awards for effort now?  Like "every kid gets a trophy for trying", even if we finish last place?

The general clause in Nobel's will says that the prizes should be given to those who "in the preceding year have conferred the greatest benefit on mankind." With regard to the Peace Prize, Nobel defined this as having "done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies, and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses." The most difficult stipulation to live up to has undoubtedly been "in the preceding year." This is now understood to indicate the most recent contributions in the various cultural fields to which the will refers. Where the Peace Prize is concerned, the wording has been seen as opening up opportunities to engage in processes which have not yet reached a conclusion, but where there has been clear evidence of progress. The Prize, in other words, is not only for past achievement, although that is the most important criterion. The committee also takes the possible positive effects of its choices into account. Among the reasons for adding this as a criterion is the obvious point that Nobel wanted the Prize to have political effects.

Assuming that the Committee followed this thought process then it makes sense to have given it to Obama. Who else has done anything to move the ball foward this year for peace?

Rudi

Yes,  the prize has been given out in the past for "effort" and as a symbol of future success. It can be granted as a show of good will for a show of good will. There isn't any criteria that says that you must have achieved peace in order to qualify for the peace prize.

Some winners of the peace prize have actually been involved in the creation of the conflict that they then later worked to solve, so it seems that actually having achieved peace is not necessarily a goal.

I think the President's attempts to reach out to the Muslim world from the west, to re-engage in diplomatic discussions with countries where we have not done so in the recent past, and for not escalating hostilities through out the world were seen as enough of a reason to award this prize to Obama.

It is a nice honor, but more concrete proof of achieving peace should be a prerequisite for the prize. Of course, past winners have received the prize based solely on effort, so we can't make a criticism only toward Obama. The criticism would need to be directed toward those who establish the criteria for winning the prize.  

I agree with Tara Lee - it's not like it's a Superbowl ring being handed out at the beginning of the season. It's a recognition of a willingness to try in earnest to bring countries together. 

All I know for sure is that AM radio is going to systematically rip this to shreds. The man can do no right in their eyes, even when it's nothing he's done. I lean towards the right and I disagree with Obama on a lot of key points but I feel no need to dissect every word that comes out of his mouth in order to inflict political damage.

I'll have it on FM for a week or so. 

TaraLee said…

The general clause in Nobel's will says that the prizes should be given to those who "in the preceding year have conferred the greatest benefit on mankind." With regard to the Peace Prize, Nobel defined this as having "done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies, and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses." The most difficult stipulation to live up to has undoubtedly been "in the preceding year." This is now understood to indicate the most recent contributions in the various cultural fields to which the will refers. Where the Peace Prize is concerned, the wording has been seen as opening up opportunities to engage in processes which have not yet reached a conclusion, but where there has been clear evidence of progress. The Prize, in other words, is not only for past achievement, although that is the most important criterion. The committee also takes the possible positive effects of its choices into account. Among the reasons for adding this as a criterion is the obvious point that Nobel wanted the Prize to have political effects.

Assuming that the Committee followed this thought process then it makes sense to have given it to Obama. Who else has done anything to move the ball foward this year for peace?

---

All of these are good points, and great research Tara!  can someone win it more than once?  Because I would sure like to see Obama succeed in some of the lofty goals he has set for himself and this nation.

Oh, geez. Here we go with the conspiracies and "he got the Nobel Peace Prize because he's black" routine.

What's next? That Obama is the Antichrist?

RudiXeno said…

President Obama has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.  What are your thoughts?

---

Personally, I think the Nobel Peace Prize award wasn't so much given for anything the President has done, but more of a criticism of the previous Administration's policies. 

Let's face it.  President George W. Bush's policies did not help improve relations with the rest of the world, particularly Europe (which Donald Rumsfeld dismissed as "Old Europe") and Islamic countries.

Does the President deserve it? In my view, perhaps not.  But considering that one of the other candidates was Piedad Cordoba, a leftist Colombian senator who is a Hugo Chavez ally, better him than her.

I'm proud and honored that the world is looking towards the future and has honored someone who embodies the same vision.  The world watched closely as we elected our first Black president and from my personal experience, [I'm bi-racial and husband's from England] it was a rare occasion that so many people, nations, etc, came together globally to support the USA.  Our good friend Paul who lives abroad called us the night after the election and said, "I'm so proud of the citizens of the USA!"   I'm not naive to think any President can single handily do any of the things they promise during their campaign,  however, President Obama's confidence in the American people gives me the motivation to do MY part to ensure my granddaughter's world is a better place!  In conclusion, Congratulations to our Commander in Chief on winning the Nobel Peace Prize 2009!  Of course as always, this is just my opinion . . .

Bryan-Carey said…

It is a nice honor, but more concrete proof of achieving peace should be a prerequisite for the prize. Of course, past winners have received the prize based solely on effort, so we can't make a criticism only toward Obama. The criticism would need to be directed toward those who establish the criteria for winning the prize.  

 

This legislative body is extremely left-of-center and the tendency is to vote toward the liberal/left of center candidates which are nominated.  There's very little objectivity in this category; it would have taken nothing short of a miracle for a sitting Republican President to get it.

---

Thing to remember about the Nobel Peace Prize is that it is, like it or not, it's definitely the only politically-motivated Nobel award and it's awarded by the Norwegian parliament.

I think his winning it is an absolute farce and my opinion of Nobel Prizes in general has certainly changed.  Giving the Peace Prize to a president who was nominated after only 11 days in office (nomination deadline is Feb 1st) and who has yet to truly accomplish anything is a joke in my opinion. 

and I would have the exact same opinion if McCain was president and won it. 

oops double post

A board decides how to award the prize based on specific rules and  guidelines.  Look over past and present award winners.  Yes, giving Obama an award for his works in progress is a leap... exactly the kind of STATEMENT that means something because it is an act of faith, an act of grace, and is controversial and will get people talking and thinking about it.

Again, Bravo.  I think it's an absolutely wonderful thing that has happened.   He was elected on a campaign of change and hope and promise.  He's given great speeches and has chosen people to advise him and be on his cabinet that  in many cases have huge ideological differences with him.  He isn't surrounding himself with yes man and patsies and he isn't allowing a Cheney to pull his strings either.   He's a superb leader, acting like a broker to bring people together, not just contentious political parties, but nations and leaders around the world.  Everything is stacked against him.  He has had nothing but an uphill battle and he's been under intense scrutiny and he stays on message and on course to bring people together, to get people to sit down with each other, to listen to people and viewpoints he does not agree with, to allow people to hold protests and rallies that previous administrations would have shut down and interfered with because they are in opposition of him and now he will be under even more intense scrutiny.

Bravo.

ChrisJarmick said…

Obama has acheived an incredible thing by truly risking his life and becoming President ot he United States against incredible odds and circumstances.  His attempts at bringing people together have been inspiring and also remarkable.  He has been under vicious attack from many factions for many reasons and getting this award at this particular time also sends a wonderful positive message throughout the world.

Bravo.

---

In a word, DITTO!

ChrisJarmick said…

He's a superb leader

---

I disagree.  He bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia.  He tried to tell Egypt that the US is a major Muslim nation.  He hasn't accomplished ANYTHING at this point aside from making life easier for terrorists and getting everyone fired up about their health insurance. 

I disagree with his socialist ideas about health care.  I freely admit that.  But if he had actually done something phenomenal to promote world peace, I would also freely admit and recognize that.  I think it really degrades The Nobel Prize to supposedly award it simply based on someone's "potential" or "intent".  I may go to the gym for 8 hours a day and buy the latest fashions, but that intent doesn't mean that I will ever be a supermodel. 

I think it was premature. While I sincerely hope to see many of Obama's visions become reality, I just don't feel the award was merited just yet. 

No conspiracy theory. Just an opinion. He brings hope. I want to see concrete evidence that we're really changing and that the hope he brings in theory will become, at least in part, a reality. Then the award would mean so much more, in my humble opinion.

I do think our politics will play into this a bit. Sure some Democrats think it's weird;) but in general I'm betting that those of us who love Obama and think he will save the world think this is fantastic. It is a reflection on Bush but also it is a reflection of how the world sees us. We aren't hated as much as we were. When I was in Paris that was what people said to me over and over again. The world likes Obama and for that reason he deserves the Nobel Peace Prize. I think it is more a statement of the state of our world than of what he has concretely done.

Kudos to Mr. Obama for winning the Noble Prize for Peace.  President Obama, like it or not, has almost single-handedly reverse the immense ill-will brought about by the incredibly inept and unilateral Bus Administration.  Americans aboard can once again hold their heads high and proudly proclaim their citizenship.  Mr. Obama has changed the tone of international discourse from one of rancor and profound mistrust of American motives to one of hope for a future led by America, but in partnership with the rest of the world's (sane) nations. 

I know there are those that feel as though the United States should lead the world, but not be a part of it, but such a stance is far too insular, devoid of intellectual reflection, and a respect for history for the welfare and long-term viability of the nation.   With President Obama's leadership the U.S. can, and hopefully will, usher in a new era of peace wherein the U.N. starts to live up to it charter and stated principles.   Well done Mr. Obama and well met!