Analysis: Obama won, but for what?
Friday, 9 October 2009

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/analysis-obama-won-but-for-what-1800213.html

Peace and best wishes.

Xi

On Oct 9, 9:44 pm, xi <[email protected]> wrote:
> My comment:
>
> I guess, most people around the globe got shocked today. I too. Obama
> Nobel peace prize??? why???. I have read several electronic surveys in
> Europe. Among left oriented people above 50% think that  "Obama does
> not deserve that prize". Among conservatives close to 100% agree.
>
> We all, Europeans, Chinese, probably most Latinamericans, Asians,
> Africans, etc. compare Obama with our politicians. We say, Obama did
> not not do more than our president, premier or whatever. In fact, he
> has done less. He is just a newcomer to a world where politicians use
> diplomacy, not wars. Therefore Obama is promises to behave as the rest
> of the world does since many years ago. Then, why he deserves a prize
> and not the rest?
>
> Worse, many people wrote that if we compare Obama with people in NGO
> or individually who has been fighting for peace along years this
> reward looks like an insult.
>
> After any award, we use to ask ourselves does the winner deserve that
> reward? But, probably that is not the right question in this case. I
> think that since some years ago, the Norwegian committee asks to
> themselves "how can we better use our prize to push peace?". Now, this
> reward looks different.
>
> Obama does NOT DESERVE the Nobel Peace Prize, obvious. But Obama NEEDS
> this prize more than any other politician.
>
> Let me put an example. Obama has delayed his decission about
> Afghanistan. More troops?, less troops?, withdrawal? fresh war in
> Pakistan?
>
> In my opinion, the committee took a serious risk. If Obama decides
> more troops in Afghanistan or in Iraq, if he extends war to Pakistan,
> etc. If US troops are in Afghanistan or Iraq in four years, the Nobel
> Peace prize will be seen as a farce, even result of bribary rather
> than justice.
>
> I want to believe that Obama has not delayed his decission about
> Afghanistan just to ensure his Nobel prize. Since this reward, for my
> opinion about him, what he finally does about troops in Afghanistan is
> crucial. If he does not reduces (at least) the amount of troops, he
> will be even worse for peace than Bush. He would be a dishonest
> president that betrayed his country and his troops delaying a
> decission to receive a personal reward. At least, Bush did not hide
> his intentions.
>
> I think (or I want to think) that Obama WANTS to reduce troops. Even,
> he WANTS to bring all troops home. We all (or most) know that in USA
> the president has a voice but the military apparatus has much more
> power. This Nobel Peace prize reinforces him in USA, domestic public
> opinion, in order to make such decission and many others to come.
>
> He, Obama told that he receives this prize as a call for action. Let
> us hope it is true and hereinafter Obama behaves as any other
> president around the world. I would give him the Nobel Prize if he
> makes USA to behave as any other peaceful nation. If that is the
> result, thanks Nobel Peace Prize committeee, you made a great service
> to the humankind.
>
> Peace and best wishes.
>
> Xi
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"World-thread" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/world-thread?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to