No doubt it can be seen as extending a "hug" to the world, along with his speech in Egpy, and deserves paying attention to. However, as you say, we need to see where it leads before the actual awarding. Pres Obama may very well lead us to the greatest peace ever known, but, he also may lead us down a very dangerous path (which despite his current stance, could lead him in surprising directions) and we may have a total unknown conclusion of his Presidency. Everyone's happy about the promises, but, let's see some example where it leads.Plissken wrote:I have to say that I'm not sure Obama's deserving of the NPP as of yet, and he himself said as much in his acceptance.
However, doesn't reversing a policy of Preemptive Warfare for the last remaining Superpower in the world qualify as a pretty good start?
What the f*ck? (Does Obama Deserve Peace Prize?)
So W. would've gotten the nobel instead of Gore, if he'd only... oh wait, W. didn't start any pre-emptive wars, only unpopular ones. Saddam broke the peace treaty quite a few times, and Afghanistan sheltered Obama after 9/11.Plissken wrote:I have to say that I'm not sure Obama's deserving of the NPP as of yet, and he himself said as much in his acceptance.
However, doesn't reversing a policy of Preemptive Warfare for the last remaining Superpower in the world qualify as a pretty good start?
"Humanity indisputably progresses, but neither uniformly nor everywhere"--Regine Pernoud
You work while you can, because who knows how long you can. Even if it's exhausting work for less pay. All it takes is the 'benevolence' of an incompetant politician or bureaucrat to leave you without work to do and no paycheck to collect. --Tjol
You work while you can, because who knows how long you can. Even if it's exhausting work for less pay. All it takes is the 'benevolence' of an incompetant politician or bureaucrat to leave you without work to do and no paycheck to collect. --Tjol
-
finn
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 4349
- Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2004 5:03 am
- Location: Maintaining an unsociable distance....
Not the Government (subjective) but government (general) which I think I did distinguish to avoid exactly that comment!sindatur wrote:Ah...so...the Gov't is consulted about who should be nominated? Then it totally makes sense. I'd imagine that during the Pres. GWB years, where he had a Republican majority in Congress would've also gotten him nominated. Again, not saying the Nomination(s) was earned, but it makes sense there would be a nomination in the current political structure.finn wrote:If you care to read back Cail, the procedure for nominations has been posted. Specifically the Nobel Asseembly invite persons who are prominent in their fields to nominate candidates. Included in this are persons from politics and government (general). The nominees are confidential and remain so, so that none can say "hey look at me I was nominee". However, since nominations are directed so, it is reasonable to assume that it is highly likely that every sitting president is nominated every year along with similar nominations for other world leaders.
I'd be willing to bet Bush would have been nominated for at least some of those 8 years (certainly not the last couple); his spin machine was no more or less diligent than Obama's. Call BS all you like but I've said it is highly likely and since the nominees are kept secret there is no way to reference that, but you don't have to see the flames to figure there's a good chance the smoke is from a fire!
Oh and comparisons to positions ie, Arafat is a bit like throwing stones in a greenhouse, as some that have the same position as your good self would include some very unsavoury characters!
See above (bolded).Cail wrote:My point is, you don't know. My point is, I don't know. You're assertion that everyone is nominated is unproven (as the nominees are kept secret for 50 years. I'll be 91 in 50 years, and probably drooling on myself, so the evidence will be lost on me at that point, but I find it very hard to believe that Bush was nominated all 8 years (everyone, right?).
This was a rsponse to RR and whilst only a "theory", the point he raised was also addressed by a number of other posts.
Guys there are some 3000 people invited to nominate, Professors, Senators, Statesmen, Doctors, Bishops etc.
nobelprize.org/nomination/peace/nominators.html
At any given time there are not that many people who can have an effect on the state of the world with a view to making a more peaceful and harmonious place. Hope is a big part of that too; you might be at peace but threats of war or terrorism or invasion also destroy peace even as hope can help deliver it.
The liklihood is always there that a President of the US has a leading role to play in the peace of the world, few people have the power to make or break peace as those who hold this position. It is therefore always likely that they be nominated, there may be exceptions; I think Bush for some years (certainly not all) and Nixon may have fallen short on a couple too. But think it through and my theory is not particularly wild!
Just been alerted to this..................
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1801773.stm
Check out Bush's nomination here!!!!
"Winston, if you were my husband I'd give you poison" ................ "Madam, if you were my wife I would drink it!"
"Terrorism is war by the poor, and war is terrorism by the rich"
"A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well."
"The opposite of pro-life isn't pro-death. Y'know?"
"What if the Hokey Cokey really is what its all about?"
"Terrorism is war by the poor, and war is terrorism by the rich"
"A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well."
"The opposite of pro-life isn't pro-death. Y'know?"
"What if the Hokey Cokey really is what its all about?"
You've got a hard sell on that actually being a policy, but it sounds like you're suggesting that because Obama didn't invade another country in his first 12 days in office, he's deserving of the NPP.Plissken wrote:However, doesn't reversing a policy of Preemptive Warfare for the last remaining Superpower in the world qualify as a pretty good start?
"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." - PJ O'Rourke
_____________
"Men and women range themselves into three classes or orders of intelligence; you can tell the lowest class by their habit of always talking about persons; the next by the fact that their habit is always to converse about things; the highest by their preference for the discussion of ideas." - Charles Stewart
_____________
"I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." - James Madison
_____________
_____________
"Men and women range themselves into three classes or orders of intelligence; you can tell the lowest class by their habit of always talking about persons; the next by the fact that their habit is always to converse about things; the highest by their preference for the discussion of ideas." - Charles Stewart
_____________
"I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." - James Madison
_____________
No, I think plissken is saying he's reversed the policy, but you're right, since he hasn't had a chance to prove he's reversed it, we're back to "not yet".
--Andy
"Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur."
Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.
I believe in the One who says there is life after this.
Now tell me how much more open can my mind be?
"Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur."
Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.
I believe in the One who says there is life after this.
Now tell me how much more open can my mind be?
Was there an actual policy? He's (I'm assuming) referring to the invasion of Iraq, which is one example of this alleged policy. And it's questionable whether or not it was actually a "preemptive" strike.
"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." - PJ O'Rourke
_____________
"Men and women range themselves into three classes or orders of intelligence; you can tell the lowest class by their habit of always talking about persons; the next by the fact that their habit is always to converse about things; the highest by their preference for the discussion of ideas." - Charles Stewart
_____________
"I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." - James Madison
_____________
_____________
"Men and women range themselves into three classes or orders of intelligence; you can tell the lowest class by their habit of always talking about persons; the next by the fact that their habit is always to converse about things; the highest by their preference for the discussion of ideas." - Charles Stewart
_____________
"I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." - James Madison
_____________
I don't know. In either case, whatever he meant, Obama hasn't proven he's not a preemptive striker.
Course, if he's not, and we're attacked, then we can be pissed that he wasn't...
Course, if he's not, and we're attacked, then we can be pissed that he wasn't...
--Andy
"Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur."
Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.
I believe in the One who says there is life after this.
Now tell me how much more open can my mind be?
"Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur."
Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.
I believe in the One who says there is life after this.
Now tell me how much more open can my mind be?
That would be......(wait for it...).....Ironic.Cybrweez wrote:I don't know. In either case, whatever he meant, Obama hasn't proven he's not a preemptive striker.
Course, if he's not, and we're attacked, then we can be pissed that he wasn't...
"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." - PJ O'Rourke
_____________
"Men and women range themselves into three classes or orders of intelligence; you can tell the lowest class by their habit of always talking about persons; the next by the fact that their habit is always to converse about things; the highest by their preference for the discussion of ideas." - Charles Stewart
_____________
"I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." - James Madison
_____________
_____________
"Men and women range themselves into three classes or orders of intelligence; you can tell the lowest class by their habit of always talking about persons; the next by the fact that their habit is always to converse about things; the highest by their preference for the discussion of ideas." - Charles Stewart
_____________
"I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." - James Madison
_____________
Hey, yesterday was Irony day. Today is Harvey Milk Day. (actually, not sure which day it is, but just read about it)
--Andy
"Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur."
Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.
I believe in the One who says there is life after this.
Now tell me how much more open can my mind be?
"Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur."
Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.
I believe in the One who says there is life after this.
Now tell me how much more open can my mind be?
-
Zarathustra
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 19641
- Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 12:23 am
Was Saddam under preemptive sanctions? Was he in violation of preemptive UN Resolutions?Cail wrote:And it's questionable whether or not it was actually a "preemptive" strike.
So if Iran develops a nuke--or gets within months of developing a nuke--Obama isn't going to order any strikes on that site? I thought I read that he hadn't taken bombing off the table, to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear missile. Sounds like a preemptive strike to me.Plissken wrote: However, doesn't reversing a policy of Preemptive Warfare for the last remaining Superpower in the world qualify as a pretty good start?
A quick Google search gave this:
It's 5 years old, however. Has Obama changed his mind again?On September 24, Barack Obama -- the Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate from Illinois, and a shoo-in favorite -- suggested �surgical missile strikes� on Iran may become necessary. �[L]aunching some missile strikes into Iran is not the optimal position for us to be in� given the ongoing war in Iraq, Obama told the Chicago Tribune.
�On the other hand, having a radical Muslim theocracy in possession of nuclear weapons is worse,� he said. Obama went on to argue that military strikes on Pakistan should not be ruled out if �violent Islamic extremists� were to �take over.�
Ah, here we go. From the Huffington Post:
linkBacked by other world powers, President Barack Obama declared Friday that Iran is speeding down a path to confrontation and demanded that Tehran quickly "come clean" on all nuclear efforts and open a newly revealed secret site for close international inspection. He said he would not rule out military action if the Iranians refuse.
No, he certainly hasn't ruled out preemptive warfare.
Joe Biden … putting the Dem in dementia since (at least) 2020.
Good work malik, guess that rules that option out. No anti-preemption here. In fact, some might say, sounds like Bush, the guy everyone hated and who made the world suffer.
--Andy
"Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur."
Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.
I believe in the One who says there is life after this.
Now tell me how much more open can my mind be?
"Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur."
Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.
I believe in the One who says there is life after this.
Now tell me how much more open can my mind be?
Long article here
Friday’s award decision landed as a bombshell in Norway. The announcement brought a surprised gasp from the media that was crammed into the Nobel Institute building and Twitter exploded with acerbic comments from members of Storting, pundits, and reporters.
“Obama? Come on!,” was a comment from Torbjørn Røe Isaksen who is a member of the Storting. “Hu Jia was judged and came in short. He is in jail and is less glamorous of course.”
Most of the comments ridiculed Jagland and suggested the real motivation, his need to make a big splash and get access to an important man.
“The Nobel show needed a superstar this year. The prize went to the biggest star of them all. What great way to promote Norway!” said Kristine Meklenborg Salvesen. She is a research fellow at the University of Oslo and a former reporter.
Author Ida Jackson quipped that the Prize should be renamed “the-prize-you-get-if-you-are-a-politician-Jagland wants-to-dine-with.”
Anders Giæver , the New York City-based correspondent for the largest newspaper in Norway, said he was speechless, but happy that he did not take the bet that Gerhard Helskog had offered him the night before.
Experts commenting in national media were somewhat kinder, but floored by Jagland’s audacity.
“One wonders if the Nobel Committee wanted to achieve the status provided by giving the Prize to the sitting American president,” said Nils Buthenschøn, president of the Human Rights Institute.
"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." - PJ O'Rourke
_____________
"Men and women range themselves into three classes or orders of intelligence; you can tell the lowest class by their habit of always talking about persons; the next by the fact that their habit is always to converse about things; the highest by their preference for the discussion of ideas." - Charles Stewart
_____________
"I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." - James Madison
_____________
_____________
"Men and women range themselves into three classes or orders of intelligence; you can tell the lowest class by their habit of always talking about persons; the next by the fact that their habit is always to converse about things; the highest by their preference for the discussion of ideas." - Charles Stewart
_____________
"I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." - James Madison
_____________
-
Cagliostro
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 9360
- Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 10:39 pm
- Location: Colorado
I'm having trouble finding much news about Clinton's visit to Russia. It seems tho that Russia didn't budge much, from CNN:
I figured it was relevant to the argument that reversing the missile shield in Eastern Europe improved relations w/Russia, and was a reason for NPP. Is it improved relations or just making Russia happy?The town-hall meeting followed sessions Tuesday with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and Russia Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov that yielded no breakthroughs on arms control, Afghanistan or possible sanctions against Iran as it pursues a controversial nuclear program.
--Andy
"Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur."
Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.
I believe in the One who says there is life after this.
Now tell me how much more open can my mind be?
"Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur."
Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.
I believe in the One who says there is life after this.
Now tell me how much more open can my mind be?
-
Avatar
- Immanentizing The Eschaton
- Posts: 61765
- Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
- Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
- Has thanked: 15 times
- Been thanked: 22 times
It's not like they actually do much participating, is it? 
Anyway, to get back on topic:
Anyway, to get back on topic:
--ANobel Jury Members Objected
Oslo - Three of the five members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee had objections to the Nobel Peace Prize being awarded to US President Barack Obama, the Norwegian tabloid Verdens Gang (VG) reported on Thursday.
"VG has spoken to a number of sources who confirmed the impression that a majority of the Nobel committee, at first, had not decided to give the peace prize to Barack Obama," the newspaper said.
In a surprise move last Friday, the Nobel committee attributed the Nobel Peace Prize to Obama less than nine months after he had taken office.
The committee, appointed by the Norwegian parliament, honoured Obama for "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples".
"The committee was unanimous," its influential secretary Geir Lundestad told AFP on Friday.
But Inger-Marie Ytterhorn, who represented the right-wing populist Progress Party on the committee, led the way in objecting to the choice of Obama because she questioned his ability to keep his promises, the newspaper said.
It also said the representative of the Conservative Party, Kaci Kullmann Five, and Aagot Valle, the representative of the Socialist Left, had objections.
The choice for Obama was however strongly supported by committee chairperson Thorbjoern Jagland and Sissel Roenbeck, both representatives of the Labour Party.
The members of the committee represent their parties but do not sit in Norway's parliament.
"Each year, we start with many candidates and many different points of view and agree as the discussions move along. This year was no exception," Lundestad commented on Thursday.
The newspaper quotes Ytterhorn and Five as saying they both supported the committee's final decision.
Obama himself said he was "surprised" and "deeply humbled" by the prize.
-
Earthfriend
- <i>Haruchai</i>
- Posts: 569
- Joined: Tue May 13, 2003 2:32 pm
- Location: The Hills of Andelain
-
Avatar
- Immanentizing The Eschaton
- Posts: 61765
- Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
- Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
- Has thanked: 15 times
- Been thanked: 22 times
Don't worry about it. 
We rarely take that kind of thing seriously here...our topics go all over the place, just like real time conversations. And I'm often responsible for it.
As for your post...
Does that mean no nation should enter into agreements with other nations? Clearly the agreements aren't binding in any meaningful sense, so why bother?
As for the other two para's, well said. To a large extent, I think I agree with you.
I've always said the US has to decide...either they're a "moral" force, in which case they should be active everywhere that people's safety and "freedom" are threatened, or they're a slefish/nationalistic one who acts in it's own interests only.
I'm fine with either one, really I am. I just wish they would be honest about it.
--A
We rarely take that kind of thing seriously here...our topics go all over the place, just like real time conversations. And I'm often responsible for it. As for your post...
Does that mean no nation should enter into agreements with other nations? Clearly the agreements aren't binding in any meaningful sense, so why bother?
As for the other two para's, well said. To a large extent, I think I agree with you.
I've always said the US has to decide...either they're a "moral" force, in which case they should be active everywhere that people's safety and "freedom" are threatened, or they're a slefish/nationalistic one who acts in it's own interests only.
I'm fine with either one, really I am. I just wish they would be honest about it.
--A
-
High Lord Tolkien
- Excommunicated Member of THOOLAH
- Posts: 7384
- Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 2:40 am
- Location: Cape Cod, Mass
- Been thanked: 3 times
- Contact:
Earthfriend wrote:wow, 11 pages of this in, how long? Six days or something, yeah?
Fascinating.
What's your point?
https://thoolah.blogspot.com/
[Defeated by a gizmo from Batman's utility belt]
Joker: I swear by all that's funny never to be taken in by that unconstitutional device again!
[Defeated by a gizmo from Batman's utility belt]
Joker: I swear by all that's funny never to be taken in by that unconstitutional device again!
-
stonemaybe
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 4836
- Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 9:37 am
- Location: Wallowing in the Zider Zee
I'm with Earthfriend on this: it IS fascinating. Frustrating tooHigh Lord Tolkien wrote:Earthfriend wrote:wow, 11 pages of this in, how long? Six days or something, yeah?
Fascinating.
What's your point?
This thread is like a concentrated distillation of the 'Tank (not sure if it's making whiskey or napalm though!)
Aglithophile and conniptionist and spectacular moonbow beholder 16Jul11
(:/>
(:/>