Why has Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize?

Now, allow me to make myself very clear: I have no love or hate for Obama. He's a politician for me, and that's it. Overall, his administration has done no serious wrongs as of yet, but I also don't feel it's done any significant good either. You can argue back and forth as long as you want but so far he's only done what he has needed to do. You could argue that's a good thing, but to me to do good you need to go up and beyond, hard considering his situation, but I'm not lowering my standards based on that.

I would like someone to give me a valid reason for him to have won this award. Has he brought unity to some part of the world and I've just not heard of it? Have the Bosnians and Serbs thrown down their weapons because of his rhetoric? Did he stop some genocide in Africa? Am I the only person wondering about this here?

Don't post if you just going to criticize his spending or whatever the hell. This is a discussion that is suppose to be about meeting the criteria for the Prize. Which if you'd like to know is: "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."

Note to John, if you feel this should go in the Obama thread you can move it, but I feel this is a completely different issue.

I posted this in the other thread, but I'll post it here as well: the committee often gives it during a peace process, as incentive/inspiration for the individual in question to continue their work. He's in the middle of a peace process in regards to nuclear abolition, climate change, closing Guanatanamo and ending the Iraq War/ending institutional reasons for violent extremism in the Middle East.

He won WHAT?
*Goes to Wikipedia and confirms*
Well bloody hell, that was out of the blue. I must admit that although I admire his ideals, I agree that he hasn't really accomplished anything significant yet. Though I suppose it's possible that he had very little competition this year.

*Is still shocked*

If Obama had actually ended America's wars, and done some serious attempts at healing the broken ties with multiple nations and the US, then he might deserve the Nobel Peace Prize... but as of now, he has done absolutely nothing worthy of such an award. This really makes me lose all the respect I had for the Nobel Peace Prize...

i am certainly pleased that he won, but I do think it's a bit premature. although if you look at what he's done: lessened tensions between America and Russia, his efforts improve America's image in the middle east, insistence that we use diplomacy over unilateralism, efforts towards nuclear disarmament, as well as some of the ground he's gained with Iran over their nuclear program, He is off to a good start but he does need to do more before a Nobel prize is fully warranted.

Has he actually done anything to move Peace forward? If anything his very election has divided America even further.

Originally Posted by Lord Zero

Has he actually done anything to move Peace forward? If anything his very election has divided America even further.

that's not his fault, we just can't ever be happy about anything.

Originally Posted by Tyras

that's not his fault, we just can't ever be happy about anything.

True but if you haven't done anything but your very existence has made things worse then you can hardly be given a peace prize

Originally Posted by Lord Zero

Has he actually done anything to move Peace forward? If anything his very election has divided America even further.

Exactly.

Before he took office he said all troops would be out of Iraq in six months... well it's been much longer than that now, and there are no immediate plans to end the war, and there are actually MORE troops that have been sent to Afghanistan.

He is closing down Guantanamo, so I'll give him credit for that, but that alone is not Nobel Peace Prize worthy.

I can think of several people who ran for president last year who would already have ended America's wars and closed down military bases on foreign soil had they been elected.

Originally Posted by vondur

Exactly.

Before he took office he said all troops would be out of Iraq in six months... well it's been much longer than that now, and there are no immediate plans to end the war, and there are actually MORE troops that have been sent to Afghanistan.

Firstly he's set a date which is next year to remove the troops, secondly the effort in Afghanistan isn't what people have disagreed with.

I can think of several people who ran for president last year who would already have ended America's wars and closed down military bases on foreign soil had they been elected.

I'm assuming McCain isn't one of them given part of his campaign was extending the war in Iraq.

Originally Posted by DrZaius1

I posted this in the other thread, but I'll post it here as well: the committee often gives it during a peace process, as incentive/inspiration for the individual in question to continue their work. He's in the middle of a peace process in regards to nuclear abolition, climate change, closing Guanatanamo and ending the Iraq War/ending institutional reasons for violent extremism in the Middle East.

Yes, all of that is nice and all, but how much of it did he do two weeks into office, when the nomination for the award was due?

Originally Posted by Tyras

i am certainly pleased that he won, but I do think it's a bit premature. although if you look at what he's done: lessened tensions between America and Russia, his efforts improve America's image in the middle east, insistence that we use diplomacy over unilateralism, efforts towards nuclear disarmament, as well as some of the ground he's gained with Iran over their nuclear program, He is off to a good start but he does need to do more before a Nobel prize is fully warranted.

There hasn't really been that much tension specifically between the USA and Russia, you can't say that he's improved America's image in the Middle East because you've not been there, the use of diplomacy is something civilized nations have been doing for many years and I'm glad America has come to utilize it, but I don't honestly think he's been handed the opportunity for some sort of armed conflict, and if I remember what's happened with Iran it's something along the lines of what is happened in People's Republic of Korea.

He's not Bush. He should get something for that.

Also, Biden should get a Nobel Prize for not being Palin.

Disclaimer: I did not think of this. I copypasta'd from another forum.

I support Obama, but I still think this is unneeded. Maybe after he does something, but not right now.

Note that I'm not disappointed in Obama. It takes more than ten months to make a significant difference. If it had been around the last year and a half of his campaign and he hand';t done anything, then I'd be disappointed.

Originally Posted by Dr Zaius

the committee often gives it during a peace process, as incentive/inspiration for the individual in question to continue their work. He's in the middle of a peace process in regards to nuclear abolition, climate change, closing Guanatanamo and ending the Iraq War/ending institutional reasons for violent extremism in the Middle East.

While it's not his fault, I don't think he should get it already. Maybe in three years, but definitely not now.

I think the prize should have gone to Morgan Tsvangurai of Zimbabwe, but I'm not super upset that Obama won. Ithink it is premature and they should have waited. Obama has gotten the ball rolling on a lot of things when it comes to world peace-
softening rhetoric against nations that don't share America's interests (Most notably Iran), doing a LOT of work on the nuclear non-proliferation agenda, encouraging dialog and common ground over clashing ideals and zero-sum worldviews, etc etc... but all these things are in their early stages, and if they end up going awry, it will make this award seem very foolish.

Originally Posted by Lord Zero

If anything his very election has divided America even further.

That's not his fault. That's the fault of the dogmatic American conservative movement.

Originally Posted by Avalanchemike

Yes, all of that is nice and all, but how much of it did he do two weeks into office, when the nomination for the award was due?

The nominees were due then. That's not when he the judging took place.

It's ridiculous, really.

But then, the Nobel Peace Prize has been pretty ridiculous for a while now. Al Gore? I mean, yes, global warming is a huge issue, but it has nothing to do with peace. Same with quite a few other choices.

It's even better in that all nominations had to be submitted by roughly two weeks into Obama's presidency, and that only action taken up to that point count for consideration.

What, exactly, did Obama do in his first two weeks that made him worthy to receive the peace prize?

As I stated in my last post, judging is not done at the same time that the nominations were submitted. It's been eight months since the nominations.

Originally Posted by John

It's ridiculous, really.

But then, the Nobel Peace Prize has been pretty ridiculous for a while now. Al Gore? I mean, yes, global warming is a huge issue, but it has nothing to do with peace. Same with quite a few other choices.

I would argue that global warming DOES play a role in peace. if we no longer needed foreign oil to subsist in America, we wouldn't have to give money to countries that harbor or sponsor terrorism. We would eliminate one political game and be able to focus on other areas where peace can be promoted. and global warming is very dangerous to world peace because it will cause water shortages, more natural disasters (leading to chaos and fighting over relief aid), and a host of other things.
Although I don't want to go too far off topic.

and Dr. Zaius, even the fact that Obama was NOMINATED is odd, since all he did before that was runa good campaign, make some nice promises, write a couple books and be a first-term senator. not exactly grand onthe world stage. Just his nomination is enought o raise an eyebrow.
By the way- I hadn't even hear he was nominated.

Originally Posted by Margar

and Dr. Zaius, even the fact that Obama was NOMINATED is odd, since all he did before that was runa good campaign, make some nice promises, write a couple books and be a first-term senator. not exactly grand onthe world stage. Just his nomination is enought o raise an eyebrow.

Nice promises amount to a lot when you become the President of the country with the most international clout.