I think awarding the prize to Obama was a poor decision. He's done a lot to improve America's international standing and make the country seem like a halfway credible moral authority on international issues, but on the other hand after the abysmal Bush rule anyone would have looked good in comparison.
Clearly, his current achievements/actions - whilst encouraging - in no way merit any prestigious peace prize. However, that's not why it was awarded. Unfortunately, while I can see the logic of the award I don't think it's been fully thought through.
At the end of the day, noone who matters is going to be impressed. It's going to do nothing to help Obama negotiate with terrorists or anti-establishment states like North Korea. On the contrary, it will probably make the role harder; there's even more pressure on him to succeed, and if anything i think that in the eyes of his detractors the endorsement adds to his aura of publicity and PR rather than the pragmatism which gets deals done.
At the end of the day, the Nobel prize is highly politicized and often overlooks less famous but arguably more deserving people in favour of controversial, big name decisions. After all, with Nobel long dead in the ground what would be the point of the Nobel prizes if noone talked about them?
Perhaps they've outsmarted us all. Perhaps their only intention is to get more people thinking, and talking, more about world peace. They've certainly managed that.
Penguin said:
As far as words going much further than action, I think this is a$s-backwards IMO. Actions speak FAR more words than any words will ever. Period.
Noone is disagreeing with you. I don't know where you've pulled that line from, but it wasn't from anyone posting in this thread and it certainly wasn't from the Nobel committee.
Obama didn't get the award because his words are more important than other people's actions, but because the committee wanted to show their support and encouragement for the direction he is taking.
One more year and majority of the U.S.' problems should be fixed.. according to Obama.
I'd love to see a quote for that, as frankly I'm surprised anyone would even suggest he'd made such a ludicrous claim.
Point: He's just a public speaker who used a card to get into office.
Oh? What 'card' was that then?
Lafin said:
...but it isn't uncommon, apparently, for the Nobel committee to hand this award out for "future" good.
I can't think of any examples (I can't even think of nominees who fall under that category, never mind winners), and I seem to recall the Committee going out of their way to explain the reasons for their unique decision to do so this time. In fact, that's the whole point - it isn't common, which is why the decision was such a surprise.
