Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize

1. 82

   Don Wposted 15 years ago

   I wasn't entirely serious. The comparison was tongue in cheek. The idea there might be a scientist out there who’s upset about who got the prize for chemistry because he thinks mapping ribosomes is less significant than say research on energy transfer reactions in mesoscopic materials just appealed to my sense of humour
   
   Despite that admission, I’m still surprised more people don't see the significance of what the President has said and done. Don't get me wrong, I don't think Obama is perfect. I certainly don't think he is a "messiah" as one person said, but I can see the significance of what he is doing.
   
   I haven't read the whole thread so I don't know if these points have been raised, but the actions of Obama before and during his Presidency shows his dedication to the goal of nuclear disarmament. In 2004 after touring former Soviet states, Senator Obama and Senator Lugar co-sponsored a bill to update the Nunn-Lugar non proliferation program. The Lugar-Obama Act became law in 2007, making important expansions to that program. Then (less than a year into his Presidency) President Obama drafts a U.N. resolution on non proliferation and disarmament, and gets that resolution passed unanimously by the U.N. security council (15 countries) in what U.N. President Ban Ki Moon described as an “historic moment”. That's very significant by the standards of international politics.
   
   Also, I think it’s untrue that words are not important. Words are often the prerequisite to certain actions. They open doors. They enable some actions to happen. I believe what President Obama has said on the international stage in the last 9 months has done more to benefit international relations than the actions carried out during most of the previous administration. Not just on the subject of non-proliferation, but on international matters generally. I think the importance of what he has said is being under estimated.
   
   In recognising the President’s efforts, I think the Nobel committee are being more pro-active with the prize on this occasion, to actively encourage efforts made by Obama because of the significance of what he’s trying to do. In their own words “The Committee attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons”. 
   
   It’s essentially an endorsement of the President’s stance on disarmament and an encouragement to other world leaders to follow suit. Personally I agree with the committee. I think what they’ve done is unexpected but warranted, given the magnitude of the impact Obama’s efforts could have on the planet and the committee's clear desire to encourage the leaders of the world to support those efforts.
   
   To those who think the President's efforts are naive or trivial, what better way to demonstrate the seriousness and importance of those efforts than the awarding of such an illustrious prize? The committee is being pro-active here. It's actively engaging in politics and far from denegrating, I think such a move enobles the prize.
   
   I can see why others don't, but I  think it’s wholly appropriate for the peace prize to be awarded in a way that endorses and encourages efforts to move forward in an area as fundamentally important to the planet as nuclear disarmament. Well done to the committe for such a gutsy move and bravo Mr. president!

   replyreport
2. 71

   waynetposted 15 years ago

   "Is it cos he is black" said Ali G!

   replyreport