Soon you can see the video on demand of the announcement, and get the answer as to why he got it.

So far, the committee are quoted: "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples".

Also, I see a lot of reference to "his vision of and work towards a world without nuclear weapons".

And from my own perspective, regarding the comments about the ongoing wars - well, he didn't start those wars. That was the former guy.

Best/T

Edited October 9, 200916 yr by stormstereo

Soon you can see the video on demand of the announcement, and get the answer as to why he got it.

So far, the committee are quoted: "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples"

Also, I see a lot of reference to "his vision of and work towards a world without nuclear weapons".

And from my own perspective, regarding the comments about the ongoing war - well, he didn't start those wars. That was the former guy.

Best/T

I think you may find they both serve the same masters. Left and right wings belong to the same bird and continue to fly in the same direction.

Soon you can see the video on demand of the announcement, and get the answer as to why he got it.

So far, the committee are quoted: "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples"

Also, I see a lot of reference to "his vision of and work towards a world without nuclear weapons".

And from my own perspective, regarding the comments about the ongoing war - well, he didn't start those wars. That was the former guy.

Best/T

I think you may find they both serve the same masters. Left and right wings belong to the same bird and continue to fly in the same direction.

In short: You are correct my friend!

I am an American and to me this is downright silly. Was the Thai Doctor who thinks Thailand is too far from the icecaps to be affected by their melting on the committee?

It does seem a tad ....premature.

Go Obama!

I had to do a quick search just to make sure this wasn't a joke.

Increasing the war in Afghanistan and bombing Pakistan is peace now? Not to mention swapping many of the troops that were deployed in Iraq with private mercenaries.

Amazing.

same reaction here.

Sieg & Peace Howdy. Kalifornia Über Alles, 21st Century.

I am an American and to me this is downright silly. Was the Thai Doctor who thinks Thailand is too far from the icecaps to be affected by their melting on the committee?

I think he's working on the new nuclear power plant

Bit surprised by this as well, but it's not as if President Obama nominated himself... Alternatively, if nominated former President Bush could have just as easily won (for being the main factor in losing the election;)

In all seriousness though, here's hoping Israel and Palestine 'may' take notice that the Nobel committee apparently placed their votes not for accomplishments, but for hopes...

Personally I share that hope (no matter how bleak). The alternatives are continuation of smear & fear both at home and abroad. Most 'reasonable' people have had enough of this well-worn tactic over the past several years (which finally proved a lose-lose after previous lose/wins designed by the architect Mr Rove).

Here's hoping (for a change;)

Edited October 9, 200916 yr by baht&sold

War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.

George Orwell

Change you can believe in

Edited October 9, 200916 yr by rabcbroon

It seems the nobel peace nomination deadline was Feb 1.

Hmmm so won it after only few days in office?

What a travesty.

I give it about even odds that Obama will end up bringing about civil war in America by the end of 2010.

Indo-Siam

Somewhere in Kenya, a village is missing its idiot .........

What a travesty.

I give it about even odds that Obama will end up bringing about civil war in America by the end of 2010.

Indo-Siam

Somewhere in Kenya, a village is missing its idiot .........

Dont you mean civil peace

I give it about even odds that Obama will end up bringing about civil war in America by the end of 2010.

Alright. Now Obama winning the peace prize is the second craziest thing I've read tonite.

What a travesty.

I give it about even odds that Obama will end up bringing about civil war in America by the end of 2010.

Indo-Siam

Somewhere in Kenya, a village is missing its idiot .........

oooeeeeoooo.

I thought the full moon was over?

Tea drinker?

classy sig. btw

Is this the same or a different Obama that bowed down to the Chinese and refused to meet with the Dalai Lama.

I guess Nobel Peace Prizes and Human Rights Abuses are totally unrelated.

better award him now - the perception about 'achievements' may change - to the disadvantage of peace

On proposal of the Dalai Lama ?

Obama in America for Peace Frau Mueller in Germany for Literature.The gentlemen of the committee are getting on.

It seems the nobel peace nomination deadline was Feb 1.

Hmmm so won it after only few days in office?

Are you kidding me? You have a link showing this? If its true then this really is a joke....

Well there were several reports over the week that they are short of candidates. This is the easy solution and saves Obama some face after he lost the olympics.

"The Nobel committee received a record 205 nominations for this year's prize though it was not immediately apparent who nominated Obama." AP.

The Prize has a checkered history, It went to a lot of deseerving recipients. Gandhi deserved it and didn't get it, It went to a US President who gained fame in the War of 1898 (Teddy R); a VP who was in WW 1;Al Gore; a 5-star general (Marshall), various former Jewish and Arab terrorists; etc, The Red Cross, several UN agencies; some great peace groups; etc,

The winners, please:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nobel...Prize_laureates

Congratulations to my President: Sir, go make peace.

Are you kidding me? You have a link showing this? If its true then this really is a joke....

The stunning choice made Obama the third sitting U.S. president to win the Nobel Peace Prize and shocked Nobel observers because Obama took office less than two weeks before the Feb. 1 nomination deadline. Obama's name had been mentioned in speculation before the award but many Nobel watchers believed it was too early to award the president.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091009/ap_on_.../eu_nobel_peace

Soon you can see the video on demand of the announcement, and get the answer as to why he got it.

So far, the committee are quoted: "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples".

Also, I see a lot of reference to "his vision of and work towards a world without nuclear weapons".

And from my own perspective, regarding the comments about the ongoing wars - well, he didn't start those wars. That was the former guy.

Best/T

Mr. Nixon did not either start the Vietnam War. That was some former guy too, Mr. Kennedy.

I'm sure Obama was just as surprised as the rest of us. This has to be for his efforts to reverse the USA's "go it alone" attitude, for which he does deserve some credit. He has opened up dialogue on a number of fronts where the previous administration had refused, preferring a unilateral approach. I doubt he would have gotten it if the previous president (Chaney) wasn't such a constitution shedding, warmongering tyrant. I'm not an "Obamanaut", but I did vote for him, and I was very happy the day Bush and co. were out, and I remain optimistic as to what he can achieve, but the Republicans are doing quite well at stopping him at the moment.

Qoute from the Nobel committee" "His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population," That, to me, is in direct reference to the lack of said values and attitiudes by the previous U.S. administration.

A little disappointing that Bush, Chaney, Rumsfield, Wolfawitz weren't held accountable for all the illegal actions and suffering they have caused by manufacturing an illegal war. I was hoping to see some subpoena's after the election. That would have been deserving of a prize! Oh well.

Edited October 9, 200916 yr by Scubabuddha

What a complete crock. What's the selection criteria? Not starting a war in your first 9 months in office?

A blow to the credibility of the Nobel Peace Prize IMHO.

I like Obama, but I'm trying to figure out what he did to deserve this. Sounds almost as if the Nobel committee is a bit starstruck.

I'm somewhat of a fan, but just don't get this.

Soon you can see the video on demand of the announcement, and get the answer as to why he got it.

So far, the committee are quoted: "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples".

Also, I see a lot of reference to "his vision of and work towards a world without nuclear weapons".

And from my own perspective, regarding the comments about the ongoing wars - well, he didn't start those wars. That was the former guy.

Best/T

Mr. Nixon did not either start the Vietnam War. That was some former guy too, Mr. Kennedy.

A significant technical point I'm not gonna spend a lot of time on--JFK opposed initiating a theater war in Vietnam, preferring a far lesser support role of sending 1,000 US military advisors to S Vietnam. Prez Johnson sent the first combat units per se to Vietnam. Kennedy didn't need an act of Congress to send advisors; Johnson's comittment was of such a scale--500,000 troops--he needed the approval of the Senate (and got it). Kennedy was right and Kennedy also was assassinated, clearing the way for Johnson.

Soon you can see the video on demand of the announcement, and get the answer as to why he got it.

So far, the committee are quoted: "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples".

Also, I see a lot of reference to "his vision of and work towards a world without nuclear weapons".

And from my own perspective, regarding the comments about the ongoing wars - well, he didn't start those wars. That was the former guy.

Best/T

Mr. Nixon did not either start the Vietnam War. That was some former guy too, Mr. Kennedy.

A significant technical point I'm not gonna spend a lot of time on--JFK opposed initiating a theater war in Vietnam, preferring a far lesser support role of sending 1,000 US military advisors to S Vietnam. Prez Johnson sent the first combat units per se to Vietnam. Kennedy didn't need an act of Congress to send advisors; Johnson's comittment was of such a scale--500,000 troops--he needed the approval of the Senate (and got it). Kennedy was right and Kennedy also was assassinated, clearing the way for Johnson.

IMHO Mr. Johnson belonged to the same Party as Mr. Kennedy and Mr. Obama.

Soon you can see the video on demand of the announcement, and get the answer as to why he got it.

So far, the committee are quoted: "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples".

Also, I see a lot of reference to "his vision of and work towards a world without nuclear weapons".

And from my own perspective, regarding the comments about the ongoing wars - well, he didn't start those wars. That was the former guy.

Best/T

Ditto.

They are getting out of Iran in a measured fashion.

And add that allowing the Taliban to retake Afganistan,

aggressively disseminate the worlds greatest stock of opium,

and get close to taking over Pakistan and it's nuclear arsenal

would in no way be furthering the route to a more peaceful world.

Well basically if Henry Kissinger can win a Noble Peace Prize......