Quote from Ricter:
Well, if you're attacking just one person's arguments, you don't really need to be an expert to know the difference between "their" and "they're". Am I being trivial?
No, you're being mentally deficient. The difference between grammatical errors and mixing up countries might not be so clear to someone with your
world view though.
Quote from a_person:
Hey, destroyer, aren't you Norwegian? You're the laughing stock of the planet today and quite deservedly so. There is virtually no newspaper or media outlet anywhere in the world regardless of its political leanings that would not acknowledge that Obama has done absolutely nothing yet to earn the award. The choice is far more pathetic than Arafat was 15 years ago. At least Arafat had a lifetime of accomplishments...
The five members of the Nobel Peace Prize Committee are not the entire Norwegian population. Aside from yourself, who's laughing at us?
Arafat got the prize because he denounced terrorism and went into peaceful negotiations, which would have brought peace if Israel had stopped expanding their settlements on stolen land. The leaving terrorism for peace negotiations part, is similar to what Nelson Mandela did.
I would not actually put it past them. Norway has been extremely hostile to Israel lately, that five Norwegian politicians give Obama this totally undeserved award for his perceived animosity toward Israel would not surprise me a bit.
Criticizing the brutal conducts of the Israeli government is not the same as being "extremely hostile to Israel". In fact, it's the other way around; ever since Scandinavian politicians in general started to open their eyes to Israels apartheid-like treatment of people under their occupation, Israel has been overreacting completely to every word out of Scandinavia. It's like their trying to silence us by guilt and fear. Hasn't worked so far, and I bet you're hating it!
But let's be fair and see it for what it is. The prize was not awarded based on the will of the people (in fact the entire world is shocked and in disbelief), or the world's opinion, it was based on the views of five Norwegian politicians elected by ultra-leftist, socialist Norwegian parliament. Who cares? Besides they shot themselves in the foot by completely cheapening the award.
Wrong. Of the 169 members of parliament, about 82 (very close to half) belong to the right. It's the sitting government that's left-leaning (mostly Labour Party, with support from the small socialist party and center party (which is right to Labour Party)), not the parliament.
The prize has got very little or nothing to do with Israel. Alfred Nobel, in his own words, said the award should be given "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses."
Although the entire world expects to see results that will completely trivialize his present accomplishments, let's take a look at what Obama actually has done:
* Reached out to the Muslim world and completely changed their view on the USA. Obviously not Taliban or Al Qaida, but they aren't the target of this policy either. USA went from being a despised nation to the most admired nation on the planet:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20091005/lf_nm_life/us_usa_status
* Restarted the relationship with Russia and removed the plans for a rocket shield which would almost certainly throw the US and Russia back into a cold war-like state.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/1009/p06s13-woeu.html
* Initiated efforts to rid the world of nuclear weapons. Although it's highly ambitious, and might not give results within the first few decades, the fact that the leader of the free world and the president of the only super power is doing it, will most probably have some impact.
Aside from this, he has also stopped Israel from attacking Iran (though Bush also did this), which would most certainly carry with it a brutal war, while at the same time staying on top of their nuclear program AND engaging aggressively in diplomatic negotiations that are already giving fruits:
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/09/26/UPI-NewsTrack-TopNews/UPI-42961253998800/
Then there's the climate, talks with North Korea, etc. All in all, everything he's doing is still work in progress. And yet, if he dies today, he will be the person who has done most for peace the past year.
So giving him the prize was not wrong. If it where up to me, I would not have given him the prize this year, simply because he is a president and an award like this is doomed to bring a barrage of controversy that might* ultimately hurt him rather than strengthen him, but Nobel would definitely approve.
*The prize might also strengthen him and rally support for his causes, as soon as the controversies settle. Time will tell.