"The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.
The Committee has attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons."
I'm happy for him, and I'm glad to be rid of Bush too, but isn't that a little premature ?
Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela and Gorbachev made sense at the time, but plenty of these nobel prizes seem to be very politically motivated and not because of actual achievement.
For instance, Al Gore won the prize, as did Yassar Arafat.
MLK gets imprisoned, shot at, fire bombed and beaten. Encourages millions to stand with him at non violent civil disobedience actions. Millions do so DESPITE the fact that they will be imprisoned and beaten.
Nelson Mandela . . . yeah . . . ditto. Oh, did I mention 27 years in a notorious prison for 'enemies of the state'.
Gorbachev. OK, when was the last time American school children practiced what to do in case of nuclear attack? Anyone remember 'civil defense fallout shelters'? I didn't think so.
Obama . . . WTF?!?!?!
Diplomacy between peoples . . . WTF!?!?! Did Israel and Iran give up their nukes and I missed it? Did the Palestinians stop slaughtering Israelis and vice-versa?
Alright, alright, those are too much. How about something simpler? Can I go to Cuba, drink rum, and lay on a beach just because, without having a US government Customs Agent detain me on my return?
Just a few comments (this whole thread is contrary to YCNews policies).
> Nelson Mandela . . . yeah . . . ditto. Oh, did I mention 27 years in a notorious prison for 'enemies of the state'.
Nelson Mandela was convicted of trying to overthrow the state by armed means and sabotage. It was not due to non-violent protests and even if the cause was right, armed insurrection is never right. And if he succeeded in overthrowing the state it would have been a mess at that time.
Mandela was the head of Umkhonto we Sizwe (the armed wing of the ANC). While he does not bear personal responsibility (since he was in prison) Umkhonto we Sizwe did quite a few despicable things during the struggle.
Also, Robben Island (where Mandela spent the majority of his time) isn’t that notorious. Many prisoners of the struggle era were kept there and many of them obtained degrees while in prison (from UNISA). I would much rather be incarcerated in Robben Island than today’s Pollsmoor prison.
Whatever the argument, he still deserved a prize (as did FW de Klerk) for the negotiated settlement that brought about the first multi-racial elections.
You didn't answer my questions. Specifically, was the violent resistance justified in WWII?
It is easy for someone to be a pacifist when they don't worry about violence on a daily basis because the most powerful military in the world protects them.
"If the choice is between cowardice and violence, I advice violence" - Gandhi
Hard to believe, the guy didn't do nothing yet , he has no achievements just successful talk show appearance, I am afraid that the fact he is pushing U.S. to the edge had a big weight in that decision.
The Committee has attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons."
I'm happy for him, and I'm glad to be rid of Bush too, but isn't that a little premature ?
Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela and Gorbachev made sense at the time, but plenty of these nobel prizes seem to be very politically motivated and not because of actual achievement.
For instance, Al Gore won the prize, as did Yassar Arafat.