Praise and skepticism greet Obama Nobel award Fri Oct 9, 2009 8:01am EDT
LONDON (Reuters) - A surprised world greeted the award of the Nobel Peace Prize to U.S. President Barack Obama with a mixture of praise and skepticism on Friday. In its announcement, the Norwegian Nobel Committee hailed Obama's "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples."
Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg referred to Obama's work for peace and disarmament, saying: "This is a surprising, an exciting prize. It remains to be seen if he will succeed with reconciliation, peace and nuclear disarmament."
Afghanistan's Taliban mocked the award, saying it was absurd to give it to Obama when he had ordered 21,000 extra troops to Afghanistan this year.
"The Nobel prize for peace? Obama should have won the 'Nobel Prize for escalating violence and killing civilians'," Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid told Reuters by telephone from an undisclosed location.
Mohamed ElBaradei, director-general of the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency -- awarded the prize in 2005 -- said: "I cannot think of anyone today more deserving of this honor. In less than a year in office, he has transformed the way we look at ourselves and the world we live in and rekindled hope for a world at peace with itself."
European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said in a statement: "The award of the prize to President Obama, leader of the most significant military power in the world, at the beginning of his mandate, is a reflection of the hopes he has raised globally with his vision of a world without nuclear weapons."
In the Middle East, chief Palestinian peace negotiator Saeb Erekat said the award could be a good omen for peace in the region.
"We hope that he will be able to achieve peace in the Middle East and achieve Israeli withdrawal to 1967 borders and establish an independent Palestinian state on 1967 borders, with Jerusalem as its capital," he told Reuters
Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak told army radio he believed the award would enhance Obama's ability "to contribute to establishing regional peace in the Middle East and a settlement between us and the Palestinians that will bring security, prosperity and growth to all the peoples of the region."
The Islamist movement Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip and opposes a peace treaty with Israel, was more skeptical.
"Unless real and deep-rooted change is made in American policy toward recognizing the rights of the Palestinian people I would think such a prize would be useless," Ismail Haniyeh, Hamas prime minister in the Gaza Strip, told reporters after Friday prayers.
REAL CHANGE
Saleh al-Mutlaq, a senior Iraqi Sunni Muslim lawmaker, told Reuters: "I think he deserves this prize. Obama succeeded to make a real change in the policy of the United States -- a change from a policy that was exporting evil to the world to a policy exporting peace and stability to the world."
In Indonesia, Masdar Mas'udi, deputy head of Indonesia's largest Muslim organization Nahdatul Ulama, said: "I think it's a good thing. I think it's appropriate because he is the only American president who has reached out to us in peace. On the issues of race, religion, skin color, he has an open attitude."
In Pakistan, Liaqat Baluch, a senior leader of the Jamaat-e-Islami, a conservative religious party, said: "It's a joke. How embarrassing for those who awarded it to him because he's done nothing for peace. What change has he brought in Iraq, the Middle East or Afghanistan?"
South Africa's Archbishop Desmond Tutu, awarded the prize himself in 1984, hailed the award as "a magnificent endorsement for the first African American president in history."
Two other former recipients, Mikhail Gorbachev and Wangari Maathai, were among the first to offer their congratulations.
Gorbachev, the former Soviet leader awarded the prize in 1990, was quoted by Itar-Tass news agency as saying: "In these hard times people who are capable of taking responsibility, who have a vision, commitment and political will should be supported."
Maathai, a Kenyan environmentalist who won in 2004, referred to Obama's mixed heritage of a Kenyan father and American mother, called it "another very encouraging event for Africa."
From Obama's ancestral village of Kogelo in western Kenya his uncle Said Obama told Reuters: "It is humbling for us as a family and we share in Barack's honor. We congratulate him."
Zimbabwean Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangarai, who had been among the favorites to win this year, said Obama was an extraordinary example.
"I wish to congratulate President Obama. I think he is a deserving candidate," he told Reuters during a visit to Spain.
(Writing by Andrew Dobbie; Editing by Angus MacSwan)
Re:Praise and skepticism greet Obama Nobel award
« Reply #1 on: 2009-10-09 12:17:42 »
[letheomaniac] I'm. Fucking. Staggered. Apparently one gets a Peace Prize for looting the public treasury for the benefit of a handful of obscenely wealthy people. I certainly can't think of anything else he's managed to achieve in his time in the Oval Office. Peace has been a little thin on the ground of late (thanks in no small part to Mr. Obama himself), but I'm pretty sure there must have been at least one other person on the shortlist that isn't a war criminal. Just sayin'.
Re:Praise and skepticism greet Obama Nobel award
« Reply #2 on: 2009-10-09 12:51:34 »
A glimpse at our increasingly aptly named "dismal failure" thread puts the horror of the Cheney-Bush years into their true perspective. That the hagiofied Obama appears a suitable recipient for a peace prize despite the fact that he has managed to "own" Guantanamo; Bagram; assorted "rendition" programs; the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan; the thoroughly illegal attacks on Pakistan; the ongoing destabilization of Sudan; has facilitated apartheid Israel's ongoing transgressions of International law and evasion of consequences for their genocidal ethnic cleansing programs; expanded the "war on drugs"; the handover of American healthcare to the insurance and drug companies; and accelerated the conversion of the US into a police state with the greatest percentage of its population of any country incarcerated in prison conditions worse than Guantanamo, should lead us to acknowledge the reality that he has been awarded a Nobel prize merely for not being as inarticulate and discombobulated as Bush - which means that he is receiving it as a representative of most of mankind - and leave it at that.
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
Re:Praise and skepticism greet Obama Nobel award
« Reply #3 on: 2009-10-09 13:53:10 »
[letheomaniac] A less succinct version of Hermit's excellent summation.
Source: Counterpunch Author: Dave Lindorff Dated: 9/10/09
The WTF Prize
Make War, Call It Peace
It’s not as much of a travesty as when Henry Kissinger, a war criminal of the first order who was an architect of the latter stages of the Indochina War, and was personally responsible for the slaughter of well over a million innocent people, won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1973, while that war was still raging, but the awarding of the latest Nobel Peace Prize to President Barack Obama is travesty enough.
We’re talking about a man whose practically first act upon taking office early this year was to escalate the ugly and pointless war in Afghanistan with the addition of some 20,000 troops, and who, even as the Nobel committee was discussing his award, was meeting with his military and political advisors to consider expanding that war even further, both in Afghanistan and across the border into Pakistan.
The Nobel Committee claimed that during Obama’s short period as president, the US “is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened."
Well, certainly when compared to the prior presidency of George W. Bush, that statement is correct, but that’s not saying much. After all, under President Obama, Guantanamo’s terrorist prison is still in operation and is holding people whom even the government admits are guilty of nothing. Under President Obama, the US has also blocked the Goldstone Report which condemns Israel of war crimes in its recent assault on Gaza. And under Obama, the US military in Afghanistan has continued to slaughter disproportionate numbers of civilians through its wanton use of aerial bombardment, pilotless Predator drones, and antipersonnel weaponry.
President Obama may have, as the Nobel Committee states, put forward a vision of nuclear disarmament, but his administration at the same time continues to refuse to sign the international anti-landmine treaty (putting America in the wretched company of just Russia, India and China). And under Obama, the US continues its role as not only the leading producer and exporter of arms, but also as the major initiator of wars in the world. Under Obama the US continues to outspend the rest of the world’s nations combined on its military. And don’t forget, Obama, like President Bush before him, continues to threaten to attack Iran, over that nation’s alleged nuclear weapons program—a program the very existence of which remains highly debatable.
As for climate change policy, President Obama in practice has taken a largely hands-off approach to getting Congress to act, not using his considerable political clout to force action on climate change legislation. It is now conceded that the US will go to the international climate conference in December with no bill passed to limit or reduce the nation’s CO2 emissions. Nor is the Obama administration likely to push for any significant program of CO2 reductions in the future.
Nominations for this year’s Nobel Peace Prize closed on Feb. 1, less than two weeks after Obama took the oath of office as President, but the Nobel Committee in Norway had a good nine months since then to observe this president’s actions—and his lack of actions—on the key issues weighing on the decision. In the end, committee members were bamboozled by this president’s rhetoric of hope just as were the American people during the election campaign. As the committee wrote in announcing its decision: "Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future."
If Nobel Peace prizes are being awarded to people who are simply giving the world hope, surely the judges could have found any number of worthy speechifiers. Hell, even the dictatorial leaders of China and North Korea can make flowery speeches about peace and human dignity. More to the point, the committee had under consideration at least two far more deserving nominees for the award who were actually acting at great personal risk to further peace and human rights: Chinese freedom-fighter Hu Jia and Afghani women’s rights advocate Simi Samar. It is an insult to the memory of former award winners like the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jody Williams, Nelson Mandela, Aung San Suu Kyi the Dalai Lama, Lech Walesa, and others who put their lives and careers on the line to struggle for peace and human dignity to give this award to a man who has accomplished so little, and who, in fact, in his short time in office, has managed to expand one war, to block the international condemnation of the brutality of another, and who has done nothing to reverse his own country’s leading role as a promoter of war and international violence.
Henry Kissinger hung his blood-drenched Nobel Peace Award on his office wall on Wall Street and continued to make obscene sums of money off human suffering in his dotage. One can only hope (ah, that intoxicating word!) that President Obama will take his award seriously, and will use his new status as official man of peace to halt America’s campaign of violence in Afghanistan, calling a regional peace conference to settle that conflict instead of simply expanding the war, that he will announce a major cut in American military spending and a halt to arms exports, that he will sign the landmine treaty and voluntarily end the production and use of antipersonnel weapons of all kinds, and that he will finally have the US join the International Criminal Court of Justice.
Re:Praise and skepticism greet Obama Nobel award
« Reply #4 on: 2009-10-09 21:49:15 »
Obama has made progress. I think Obama's addressing and reaching out to the Iranian public helped give Ahmedinajad political headaches in their last election. As a result Iran is working better with Russians and thus indirectly with us on the nuclear issues. I don't think its necessarily worthy of a Nobel Peace prize, but its not nothing. If we had elected McCain, Ahmedinajad would have probably had a clear mandate in his election. In fact with that idiotic "Bomb bomb bomb . . bomb bomb Iran" ditty that McCain sang, it would have been easier than running against Bush, which he's already been very successful at thus far. -Mo
PS. I'd also add that Obama accepts the best of climatic science on global warming and is willing to accordingly champion legislation. Bush didn't just burn the foreign community on this issue, he also burned the US public. Prior to his prevailing in the 2000 election mess, he told the American public that he would affirm the Kyoto agreement and he seemed to understand however vaguely that this followed the science.
That was back in the day that many of us still believed that at least a few people in the GOP still understood the meaning (let alone the application) of science. I know that 9/11 obviously distracted everyone in the US on those kind of issues, but I'm sure that the international community still remembers our pre-trauma understanding. So perhaps the Nobel Peace prize folk were just trying to remind the US public about that, and Obama has made that possible as well. I know it can seem like a small thing to acknowledge science that way, but to someone outside the US, perhaps they weren't entirely sure about the American public until Obama fulfilled the example post-election.
Re:Praise and skepticism greet Obama Nobel award
« Reply #5 on: 2009-10-09 22:55:53 »
[MoEnzyme] Obama has made progress.
[Hermit] Could you please be more specific? He runs a sub-four-minute-mile? Calculates Mersenne primes in his head? Leaps burning Bushes without breaking stride? Can fart the American anthem in E flat major? He doesn't seem to have reduced expenditure on, commitment to or deaths of Americans or their victims in war, or reduced the threat of war, or even begun to decrease arms proliferation. Which are how I would have imagined a rational person might measure progress towards peace.
[MoEnzyme] I think Obama's addressing and reaching out to the Iranian public helped give Ahmedinajad political headaches in their last election.
[Hermit] In the past year, the US has pumped more than $400 Million in discretionary funds into destabilizing Iran and a further $75 million into political efforts against the Iranian government. While this has unarguably "helped give Ahmedinajad political headaches" and resulted in almost as many election irregularities as happen in Florida or Ohio (though not as bad as the recent farce in Afghanistan), how this has "helped" the USA is an open question. Perhaps MoEnzyme will attempt to address it.
[MoEnzyme] As a result Iran is working better with Russians and thus indirectly with us on the nuclear issues.
[Hermit] I do not see the connection here. The problem is not Iran, which is in compliance with its NPT obligations, nor Russia which won't support action against Iran without much bigger bribes than we can currently afford - and the USA's lienholder's, the Chinese hold the casting vote and a great deal of interest in securing more future fossil fuel supplies from Iran, the problem is with two of the five countries most blatantly in violation of the NPT, the USA and Israel, and their willingness to breach the Grand Charter of the UN and threaten Iran with attack while Iran remains indubitably in full compliance with the treaty. Perhaps MoEnzyme will attempt to elucidate what he perceives as "the nuclear issues"; other than American and Israeli hysteria
[MoEnzyme] I don't think its necessarily worthy of a Nobel Peace prize, but its not nothing.
[Hermit] What is "its"?
[MoEnzyme] If we had elected McCain, Ahmedinajad would have probably had a clear mandate in his election. In fact with that idiotic "Bomb bomb bomb . . bomb bomb Iran" ditty that McCain sang, it would have been easier than running against Bush, which he's already been very successful at thus far. -Mo
[Hermit] Ahmedinajad went into the elections predicted to win over 70% of the plebiscite, and after all the hysteria, and the classic, but failed, "color revolution," still came out with a much clearer mandate than Obama managed. And what is wrong with that?
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
Praise and skepticism greet Obama Nobel award Fri Oct 9, 2009 8:01am EDT
LONDON (Reuters) - A surprised world greeted the award of the Nobel Peace Prize to U.S. President Barack Obama with a mixture of praise and skepticism on Friday. In its announcement, the Norwegian Nobel Committee hailed Obama's "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples."
Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg referred to Obama's work for peace and disarmament, saying: "This is a surprising, an exciting prize. It remains to be seen if he will succeed with reconciliation, peace and nuclear disarmament."
Afghanistan's Taliban mocked the award, saying it was absurd to give it to Obama when he had ordered 21,000 extra troops to Afghanistan this year.
"The Nobel prize for peace? Obama should have won the 'Nobel Prize for escalating violence and killing civilians'," Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid told Reuters by telephone from an undisclosed location.
Mohamed ElBaradei, director-general of the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency -- awarded the prize in 2005 -- said: "I cannot think of anyone today more deserving of this honor. In less than a year in office, he has transformed the way we look at ourselves and the world we live in and rekindled hope for a world at peace with itself."
European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said in a statement: "The award of the prize to President Obama, leader of the most significant military power in the world, at the beginning of his mandate, is a reflection of the hopes he has raised globally with his vision of a world without nuclear weapons."
In the Middle East, chief Palestinian peace negotiator Saeb Erekat said the award could be a good omen for peace in the region.
"We hope that he will be able to achieve peace in the Middle East and achieve Israeli withdrawal to 1967 borders and establish an independent Palestinian state on 1967 borders, with Jerusalem as its capital," he told Reuters
Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak told army radio he believed the award would enhance Obama's ability "to contribute to establishing regional peace in the Middle East and a settlement between us and the Palestinians that will bring security, prosperity and growth to all the peoples of the region."
The Islamist movement Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip and opposes a peace treaty with Israel, was more skeptical.
"Unless real and deep-rooted change is made in American policy toward recognizing the rights of the Palestinian people I would think such a prize would be useless," Ismail Haniyeh, Hamas prime minister in the Gaza Strip, told reporters after Friday prayers.
REAL CHANGE
Saleh al-Mutlaq, a senior Iraqi Sunni Muslim lawmaker, told Reuters: "I think he deserves this prize. Obama succeeded to make a real change in the policy of the United States -- a change from a policy that was exporting evil to the world to a policy exporting peace and stability to the world."
In Indonesia, Masdar Mas'udi, deputy head of Indonesia's largest Muslim organization Nahdatul Ulama, said: "I think it's a good thing. I think it's appropriate because he is the only American president who has reached out to us in peace. On the issues of race, religion, skin color, he has an open attitude."
In Pakistan, Liaqat Baluch, a senior leader of the Jamaat-e-Islami, a conservative religious party, said: "It's a joke. How embarrassing for those who awarded it to him because he's done nothing for peace. What change has he brought in Iraq, the Middle East or Afghanistan?"
South Africa's Archbishop Desmond Tutu, awarded the prize himself in 1984, hailed the award as "a magnificent endorsement for the first African American president in history."
Two other former recipients, Mikhail Gorbachev and Wangari Maathai, were among the first to offer their congratulations.
Gorbachev, the former Soviet leader awarded the prize in 1990, was quoted by Itar-Tass news agency as saying: "In these hard times people who are capable of taking responsibility, who have a vision, commitment and political will should be supported."
Maathai, a Kenyan environmentalist who won in 2004, referred to Obama's mixed heritage of a Kenyan father and American mother, called it "another very encouraging event for Africa."
From Obama's ancestral village of Kogelo in western Kenya his uncle Said Obama told Reuters: "It is humbling for us as a family and we share in Barack's honor. We congratulate him."
Zimbabwean Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangarai, who had been among the favorites to win this year, said Obama was an extraordinary example.
"I wish to congratulate President Obama. I think he is a deserving candidate," he told Reuters during a visit to Spain.
(Writing by Andrew Dobbie; Editing by Angus MacSwan)
Re:Praise and skepticism greet Obama Nobel award
« Reply #7 on: 2009-10-10 12:49:57 »
The release of Methyl Hydrates in the Arctic, and CO2 from the defrosting tundra suggests we may already have entered a zone of irreversible positive feedback, but if we are not already, the reality is that if we burn more than about 1/4 of the remaining fossil fuels (or putting it another way, if we release more than around one Pg more of CO2 (one trillion tonnes)) then runaway thermal excursions (defined as change greater than 9C in under one century) become inevitable. Against that, if we reduce our use of fossil fuel by much without putting alternatives that currently do not exist in place, people will start dying en mass a little earlier than if we destroy the planetary environment first. I see no signs in the US or China that these realities are being addressed in any meaningful way.
The only realistic (as in can possibly be achieved with current technology sufficiently soon to prevent catastrophe) hope for an alternative to fossil fuels - which can also be used to provide reversible Arctic shading - is space solar. To introduce it on a time-scale before the great die-off due either to reductions in use of fossil fuel, or due to climate change, means that we should already be working on emergency programs to deliver significant payloads to space at minimal cost using nuclear power along with programs to build and test suitable manufacturing and power delivery systems. I don't see any sign that any of this is happening or even being considered. Given what I think may be about to happen to the economy, I don't think it will be possible at all without massive Chinese involvement.
Based on his history since taking office, Obama will make nice speeches about climate - and then approach it in a "bipartisan way" so as not to cause insurmountable opposition to his other priorities - which means no effective change from the Bush approach. Which is going to fuck us even more effectively than Bush ever did, even if it is utterly unintentional and no matter how pure and well meaning Obama's intentions. Which is of course the politician's epitaph.
For this I do not think a peace prize is a suitable response, but I will reserve final judgement till after the Climate Summit.
PS Mermaid, it is quite possible and in fact desirable to reply to a thread without quoting the entirety when you are not actually addressing the entirety, or indeed, addressing what has already been said at all... Just click the "Reply" button at the top or bottom of the page.
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
The release of Methyl Hydrates in the Arctic, and CO2 from the defrosting tundra suggests we may already have entered a zone of irreversible positive feedback, but if we are not already, the reality is that if we burn more than about 1/4 of the remaining fossil fuels (or putting it another way, if we release more than around one Pg more of CO2 (one trillion tonnes)) then runaway thermal excursions (defined as change greater than 9C in under one century) become inevitable. Against that, if we reduce our use of fossil fuel by much without putting alternatives that currently do not exist in place, people will start dying en mass a little earlier than if we destroy the planetary environment first. I see no signs in the US or China that these realities are being addressed in any meaningful way.
The only realistic (as in can possibly be achieved with current technology sufficiently soon to prevent catastrophe) hope for an alternative to fossil fuels - which can also be used to provide reversible Arctic shading - is space solar. To introduce it on a time-scale before the great die-off due either to reductions in use of fossil fuel, or due to climate change, means that we should already be working on emergency programs to deliver significant payloads to space at minimal cost using nuclear power along with programs to build and test suitable manufacturing and power delivery systems. I don't see any sign that any of this is happening or even being considered. Given what I think may be about to happen to the economy, I don't think it will be possible at all without massive Chinese involvement.
Based on his history since taking office, Obama will make nice speeches about climate - and then approach it in a "bipartisan way" so as not to cause insurmountable opposition to his other priorities - which means no effective change from the Bush approach. Which is going to fuck us even more effectively than Bush ever did, even if it is utterly unintentional and no matter how pure and well meaning Obama's intentions. Which is of course the politician's epitaph.
For this I do not think a peace prize is a suitable response, but I will reserve final judgement till after the Climate Summit.
PS Mermaid, it is quite possible and in fact desirable to reply to a thread without quoting the entirety when you are not actually addressing the entirety, or indeed, addressing what has already been said at all... Just click the "Reply" button at the top or bottom of the page.
Re:Praise and skepticism greet Obama Nobel award
« Reply #9 on: 2009-10-10 16:33:47 »
I think the nomination was made in February. I would assume that they could have changed their mind up to the moment of announcement. (sure I bet their by-laws might say something else, but if they really cared, or if Obama suddenly turned out to be a pedophile, they could have changed their minds and any good by-laws provide at least the possibility of such escape clauses.)
Praise and skepticism greet Obama Nobel award Fri Oct 9, 2009 8:01am EDT
LONDON (Reuters) - A surprised world greeted the award of the Nobel Peace Prize to U.S. President Barack Obama with a mixture of praise and skepticism on Friday. In its announcement, the Norwegian Nobel Committee hailed Obama's "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples."
Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg referred to Obama's work for peace and disarmament, saying: "This is a surprising, an exciting prize. It remains to be seen if he will succeed with reconciliation, peace and nuclear disarmament."
Afghanistan's Taliban mocked the award, saying it was absurd to give it to Obama when he had ordered 21,000 extra troops to Afghanistan this year.
"The Nobel prize for peace? Obama should have won the 'Nobel Prize for escalating violence and killing civilians'," Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid told Reuters by telephone from an undisclosed location.
Mohamed ElBaradei, director-general of the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency -- awarded the prize in 2005 -- said: "I cannot think of anyone today more deserving of this honor. In less than a year in office, he has transformed the way we look at ourselves and the world we live in and rekindled hope for a world at peace with itself."
European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said in a statement: "The award of the prize to President Obama, leader of the most significant military power in the world, at the beginning of his mandate, is a reflection of the hopes he has raised globally with his vision of a world without nuclear weapons."
In the Middle East, chief Palestinian peace negotiator Saeb Erekat said the award could be a good omen for peace in the region.
"We hope that he will be able to achieve peace in the Middle East and achieve Israeli withdrawal to 1967 borders and establish an independent Palestinian state on 1967 borders, with Jerusalem as its capital," he told Reuters
Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak told army radio he believed the award would enhance Obama's ability "to contribute to establishing regional peace in the Middle East and a settlement between us and the Palestinians that will bring security, prosperity and growth to all the peoples of the region."
The Islamist movement Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip and opposes a peace treaty with Israel, was more skeptical.
"Unless real and deep-rooted change is made in American policy toward recognizing the rights of the Palestinian people I would think such a prize would be useless," Ismail Haniyeh, Hamas prime minister in the Gaza Strip, told reporters after Friday prayers.
REAL CHANGE
Saleh al-Mutlaq, a senior Iraqi Sunni Muslim lawmaker, told Reuters: "I think he deserves this prize. Obama succeeded to make a real change in the policy of the United States -- a change from a policy that was exporting evil to the world to a policy exporting peace and stability to the world."
In Indonesia, Masdar Mas'udi, deputy head of Indonesia's largest Muslim organization Nahdatul Ulama, said: "I think it's a good thing. I think it's appropriate because he is the only American president who has reached out to us in peace. On the issues of race, religion, skin color, he has an open attitude."
In Pakistan, Liaqat Baluch, a senior leader of the Jamaat-e-Islami, a conservative religious party, said: "It's a joke. How embarrassing for those who awarded it to him because he's done nothing for peace. What change has he brought in Iraq, the Middle East or Afghanistan?"
South Africa's Archbishop Desmond Tutu, awarded the prize himself in 1984, hailed the award as "a magnificent endorsement for the first African American president in history."
Two other former recipients, Mikhail Gorbachev and Wangari Maathai, were among the first to offer their congratulations.
Gorbachev, the former Soviet leader awarded the prize in 1990, was quoted by Itar-Tass news agency as saying: "In these hard times people who are capable of taking responsibility, who have a vision, commitment and political will should be supported."
Maathai, a Kenyan environmentalist who won in 2004, referred to Obama's mixed heritage of a Kenyan father and American mother, called it "another very encouraging event for Africa."
From Obama's ancestral village of Kogelo in western Kenya his uncle Said Obama told Reuters: "It is humbling for us as a family and we share in Barack's honor. We congratulate him."
Zimbabwean Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangarai, who had been among the favorites to win this year, said Obama was an extraordinary example.
"I wish to congratulate President Obama. I think he is a deserving candidate," he told Reuters during a visit to Spain.
(Writing by Andrew Dobbie; Editing by Angus MacSwan)
Re:Praise and skepticism greet Obama Nobel award
« Reply #10 on: 2009-10-11 01:22:45 »
Sometimes reading you guys go after Obama, reminds me of the right wing talking heads . . . Obama can do no good, Obama isn't turning water into wine fast enough, Obama is exactly like GWB, etc. etc. Well that last one is more specific to the CoV, because the right wingers still like GWB. And at least we don't seem to claim he's really Kenyan or a secret Muslim. I digress.
Anyway the man didn't campaign for the Nobel peace prize. I think his reaction was as much surprised as most other people's. I think he's doing a good job of taking it in stride. Here are a couple of short Youtuber reactions which more or less mirror my sentiments.
ps - I would also add that Obama has now visited more foreign countries in his first year as president than any previous US president. 16, and its just October. Personally I think shooting a missle into the moon sealed the deal, but that's just my odd opinion.
Re:Praise and skepticism greet Obama Nobel award
« Reply #11 on: 2009-10-11 02:27:31 »
[MoEnzyme] Sometimes reading you guys go after Obama, reminds me of the right wing talking heads . . . Obama can do no good, Obama isn't turning water into wine fast enough, Obama is exactly like GWB, etc. etc. Well that last one is more specific to the CoV, because the right wingers still like GWB. And at least we don't seem to claim he's really Kenyan or a secret Muslim. I digress.
[Hermit] Nobody here is saying that "Obama is exactly like Bush." For one thing he has a functioning brain, and for another he makes very pretty speeches which are a pleasure to listen to. Unfortunately, that seems to be the end of the story as far as positive news is concerned. What those here, at least those here who read International news and analysis, rather than watching American entertainment sources, are saying, is that America under Obama is still doing many of the objectionable things that America did under Bush. To the people of America, to the people of Afghanistan, to the people of Iraq, to the people of the Sudan. Under Obama, America has opened new campaigns against the people of Pakistan, and sunk to new depths of depravity in protecting Israel from fall-out from their brutal collective punishment of the Palestinians of Gaza - blatantly illegal behaviour against which the ever so articulate Obama has not said one solitary word. Meanwhile we see that the catch-all laws, regulations and excesses of government and prosecutors continue under Obama, with the blessings of the House and probably the Courts, just as they did under Bush. Highlighting the fact that while the puppets might be new and brightly shining, the puppeteers remain the same, and so the only substantial difference visible between today and under Bush, is that under Bush, the Democrats protested. Under Obama, they stand mute, offer special pleadings or attempt to facilitate this mockery of freedom and the flagrantly undemocratic government by the elite and for the elite that so characterises the USA today.
[MoEnzyme] Anyway the man didn't campaign for the Nobel peace prize. I think his reaction was as much surprised as most other people's. I think he's doing a good job of taking it in stride. Here are a couple of short Youtuber reactions which more or less mirror my sentiments.
[Hermit] The Internet is too slow and time to precious to watch video. You might try to describe your sentiments.
[Hermit] My thoughts on attempting to visualise Obama "doing a good job of taking it in stride" were that it is probably easier to accept a peace prize and a million dollars than to lose a house because we are too busy paying bankers to deal with what has happened to home owners, to see people in pain because of a failed health system, to see family jailed for victimless drug crimes, to be tortured by one of America's allies in Obama's "essential" war on the Pushtun, for ordinary Iranian's to have to listen to American politicians continuously threaten illegal attacks and unconscionable sanctions, to have one's possessions or family destroyed by an American bomb dropped by an RPV or Israeli F16, or even for a thinking person to try to deal with Obama's administration using the might and majesty of its office to pressurise the world and even the victims to avoid taking action against such monstrosities as wounds caused by American Phosphor shells fired at schools or hospitals in violation of all the rules of war.
[Hermit] Surely the only thing left to "take in stride" is the glaring hypocrisy of the award, or does Democratic exceptionalism cover even this?
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
Re:Praise and skepticism greet Obama Nobel award
« Reply #12 on: 2009-10-11 03:13:45 »
[Hermit] My thoughts on attempting to visualise Obama "doing a good job of taking it in stride" were that it is probably easier to accept a peace prize and a million dollars . . .
[Mo] He's giving it to charity.
I grant that he hasn't yet transformed the universe or anything like that. That will probably take a few years. In any case, as Lucifer explained, the singularity uh, rather AGI will be here in about 10-15 years if we can avoid nuking ourselves in the meantime. As for the war in Afghanistan, since 9/11 he's always been in favor of action in that part of the world with a focus on Al Qeda - long before he was even in the US Senate. I certainly can understand your criticism of this, but it can't come as a surprise to anyone.
It was the Iraq war that he has always opposed. Of course we are still there, but I can't imagine Obama's goals as being anything short of successful disengagement from that quagmire.
[Hermit] . . . the only substantial visible difference between today and under Bush, is that under Bush, the Democrats protested. Under Obama, they stand mute, offer special pleadings or attempt to facilitate this mockery of freedom and the flagrantly undemocratic government by the elite and for the elite that so characterises the USA today.
[Mo] I don't know about you, but I've seen LOTS of articles and blogs critical of Obama from the left . . . that he's selling out healthcare for one or two GOP votes, that he hasn't delivered on promises of transparency, that he's not prosecuting war criminals, that he isn't performing miracles yet, etc.
While you are busy not watching videos, here's a more humorous one to not watch. Thermostat Agreeable, my favorite talking sock thinks Obama got the Peace prize because he shot a missle into the moon. Top THAT North Koreans!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1s0maGV8TE
Re:Praise and skepticism greet Obama Nobel award
« Reply #13 on: 2009-10-11 11:44:59 »
i am happy for obama's nobel if only because there is now a chance that it will deter him from bombing iran.
if he still has any free will that is...he could prove that he is a decent man afterall. the way i see it, the nobel peace prize was awarded to him for his future contributions to world peace.
Re:Praise and skepticism greet Obama Nobel award
« Reply #14 on: 2009-10-11 14:15:27 »
[Hermit 11] My thoughts on attempting to visualise Obama "doing a good job of taking it in stride" were that it is probably easier to accept a peace prize and a million dollars . . .
[Mo 12] He's giving it to charity.
[Hermit 14] And this made it more or less difficult to "take it in stride"?
[Mo 12] I grant that he hasn't yet transformed the universe or anything like that. That will probably take a few years.
[Hermit 14] Go back and study Zeno's paradox which indubitably applies. Unless Obama takes a first step, he never will take the last and while if he tries, he may succeed; his current lack of directed effort guarantees failure. I currently see no intent or desire to "transform the Universe", and more significantly, even if he has the intent, I see neither the requisite capability nor even the capacity. Indeed,as repeatedly observed and sometimes even acknowledged by yourself, Obama's administration has repeatedly confirmed and exceeded the Bush administration's excesses (Think secrecy, detention, signing statements, the magical persistence of rendition, prisons and wars, the usurpation of Congress' right to declare war, etc).
[Mo 12] In any case, as Lucifer explained, the singularity uh, rather AGI will be here in about 10-15 years if we can avoid nuking ourselves in the meantime.
[Hermit 14] I note from Lucifer's response that this is conditional on Moore's law and does not differ substantially from my August, 2003 wiki article, Spirothetes and Humans and in particular the supporting analysis (which is of $500 PCs which would follow specialized superscale intelligence engines), PC Based Spirothete Projections. Unfortunately, due to the factors I touched on in reply 7 above, and particularly global water shortages due to the ongoing global salination and even elimination of aquifers and the consequences for man, the timing is such that I think that the planned resource wars, which I think will be biological as well as nuclear, will almost certainly destroy the requisite civilisation before AGI occurs.
[Mo 12] As for the war in Afghanistan <snip>...</snip> was the Iraq war that he has always opposed.
[Hermit 13] Anyone who fails to grasp that as Benjamin Franklin said, "There never was a good war or bad peace" has missed a critical life lesson. The fact that he said this on September 11, 1773, predating the WTC attacks by 228 years should have allowed the message to sink in. As you remind us, the Democrats were just as guilty as the Republicans of forgetting this - and Obama, and others, clearly are still guilty of imagining that some wars are good, "essential," or at least, "necessary."
[Hermit 13] Returning to the topic, I wouldn't regard this as a qualification to receive a Nobel peace prize any more than I would regard the incineration of books to be a qualification for a Nobel prize in literature.
[Hermit 11] . . . the only substantial difference visible between today and under Bush, is that under Bush, the Democrats protested. Under Obama, they stand mute, offer special pleadings or attempt to facilitate this mockery of freedom and the flagrantly undemocratic government by the elite and for the elite that so characterises the USA today.
[Mo 12] I don't know about you, but I've seen LOTS of articles and blogs critical of Obama from the left . . .
[Hermit 14] I too have seen many examples of criticism from the media which, all myth aside, tends to be highly centrist (which in the USA means very much right of center) and from the blogosphere which is effectively powerless, but can you point to any examples of such criticism from the once vocal (albeit spineless) leadership of the Democratic party? I cannot.
[Mo 12] that he's selling out healthcare for one or two GOP votes, that he hasn't delivered on promises of transparency, that he's not prosecuting war criminals, that he isn't performing miracles yet, etc.
[Hermit 14] The enumerated hyperbolic litotes is an effective rhetorical device isn't it? That is why I rather like it using it myself, which explains why I recognise it so easily, but I do at least try to make my enthymemes sustainable by avoiding blatant fallacies, even if they are not necessarily unarguable. Note that while nobody really expects miracles, that Obama did promise transparency while the prosecution of war criminals is an unavoidable obligation if one wishes to pretend to any kind of ethical legitimacy, in itself a prerequisite to avoid the perception of hypocrisy if you intend to engage in hectoring those you perceive as opponents or inferiors for what you perceive as their failures to adhere to your standards. Something at which Obama appears to excel - and which might also not be seen as a requisite to eligibility for a Nobel or any other kind of peace prize.
[Hermit 14] As well nominate Bush for a peace prize for having left the office as nominate Obama for being enthusiastic about fighting only wars he considers good.
The War of 14-18 By Georges Brassens, in French. Translated by Michael Flanders. Transcription courtesy of The Flanders and Swann Web Site
War has had it's apologians, Ever since history began, From the times of the Greeks and Trojans, when they sang of arms and the man, But if you asked me to name the best, Sir, I'd tell you the one I mean, Head and shoulders above the rest, Sir, was the War of 14-18, Head and shoulders above the rest, Sir, stands the War of 14-18.
There were the wars against all those Louis, There were Caesar's wars in Gaul, The was Britain's war in Suez, which wasn't a war at all, There was the war of the Spanish succession, Many other wars in between, But they none of them made an impression like the war of 14-18, They didn't make the same inpression as the war of 14-18.
The war of American independence, That was enjoyable, by and large, Watching England's free descendants busy defeating German garge, But the Boer war was a poor war, And I'm still inclined to lean, Though Sir, it possibly isn't your war like the war of 14-18, Though, it probably isn't your war, Sir, the war of 14-18.
There are certainly plenty of wars to choose from, you pick whichever one you please, Like the one we've had all the news from liberating the Vietnamese, Or those wars for God and country, be it Korean or Philippine, Sir, if you'll pardon my affrontry, give me the war of 14-18, If you'll pardon my affrontry, Sir, the war of 14-18,
Every war has it's own attraction from total war to border rage, Call it rebellion, police action, War of containment or crusade, I don't underrate the late war we see so often on the screen, But that wasn't the really great war like the war of 14-18, No, the late war wasn't the great war like the war of 14-18.
No doubt Mars, among his chattels, has got some really splendid war, Full of bigger and bloodier battles that we've ever seen before, But until that time comes, Sir, when that greater war comes on the scene, The one that I on the whole prefer, Sir, is the war of 14-18, Yes, the one that I still prefer, Sir, is the war of 14-18.
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
Author
Logged
Apparently one gets a Peace Prize for looting the public treasury for the benefit of a handful of obscenely wealthy people. I certainly can't think of anything else he's managed to achieve in his time in the Oval Office. Peace has been a little thin on the ground of late (thanks in no small part to Mr. Obama himself), but I'm pretty sure there must have been at least one other person on the shortlist that isn't a war criminal. Just sayin'.
