It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by XXXN3O
Do you think we are going to see peace in the middle east?
Originally posted by Ethereal Gargoyle
reply to post by LadySkadi
The Nobel prize never was about money.... especially not the Peace award.
And I suspect he can afford it.
It's also a good "investment" for the future, in terms of public image and percieved credibility... and I see it's already paying off!
As I said, I have nothing against him, I like him alright.
But awarding him this prize *now* is just ridiculous.
www.guardian.co.uk...
There was what President Obama likes to call a teachable moment last week, when the International Olympic Committee rejected Chicago's bid to be host of the 2016 summer games.
"Cheers erupted" at the headquarters of the conservative Weekly Standard, according to a blogpost by a member of the magazine's staff, with the headline "Obama loses! Obama loses!". Rush Limbaugh declared himself "gleeful". "World Rejects Obama," gloated the Drudge Report. And so on.
So what did we learn from this moment? For one thing, we learned that the modern conservative movement, which dominates the modern Republican party, has the emotional maturity of a bratty 13-year-old. But more important, the episode illustrated an essential truth about the state of American politics: At this point, the guiding principle of one of our nation's two great political parties is spite, pure and simple. If Republicans think something might be good for the president, they're against it whether or not it's good for America.
www.globalpost.com...
the committee said that he was the person to contribute the most to peace in the last year — a key criteria of Alfred Nobel’s will — by putting emphasis on multilateral diplomacy, rather than unilateral military action.
"It was unavoidable to give the prize to the man who has improved the international climate and emphasized negotiations and dialogue,” Jagland told GlobalPost.
His colleague on the committee, secretary Geir Lundestad, concurred, saying that Obama had achieved a lot already.
“We want to emphasize that he has already brought significant changes,” Lundestad told GlobalPost, citing Obama’s focus on multilateral institutions, dialogue and negotiations, arms control and nuclear disarmament, as well as the environment. “All these things have already taken place and this already has had a very significant impact on international relations.”
He added: “We do of course hope that there will be many concrete changes over the years, but when a president makes all these changes on these ideals, which are the ideals the Norwegian Nobel Committee has had for 100 years, we felt it was right to strengthen him as much as we can in this further struggle for these ideals.”
An era in which people vote on the basis of something so ephemeral as hope (!?)
Originally posted by Ethereal Gargoyle
reply to post by LadySkadi
There was no "crack".... It's true, isn't it? People obviously perceive his giving the money away (the Peace award recipients usually do this, BTW, I don't remember anyone ever kept it) as a PR point for him - so it *is* paying off.
(The part about "Satan" and the "anti-Christ" I do not understand. I don't think I've ever used these expressions on this board, I rarely use them in real life, and I would have a hard time linking them to Barack Obama.... )
Originally posted by grover
I think it unwarranted as well HOWEVER I find the negativity and hatred directed towards him about it ugly and worth pointing out also.
Originally posted by FredMcWoozy
CNN is actually saying obama deserves the nobel peace prize and they have now created a fake battle to say
Originally posted by grover
reply to post by antonia
I think it unwarranted as well HOWEVER I find the negativity and hatred directed towards him about it ugly and worth pointing out also.