Thread: Loaded question survey

What's so scary about that?

I suspect brewbuck was being ironic. But regardless, to answer your question, where to start?...

That's putting the credibility of the whole institution in the hands of the laureate. They follow through and the institution gains credibility. They don't and it loses big time. Of course, to anyone more attentive the institution would lose credibility either way, simply because of the fact they were being political instead of analytical, which is what they should be.

The whole notion of the prizes is lost and forever destroys the institution purposes. "For past achievements" is no longer the context. Instead what's at stake is whatever internal political agenda the institution has at the time and how permeable it becomes to outside influences. And given that it would so blatantly advertise its political orientation, by definition it becomes influenced. Good way to destroy the Nobel peace prize and drag into the mud the whole institution and with it the other Committees (which at least so far, with one or another exception, have garnered the respect of the world community).

Finally, the fact an awarding institution thought, intended to, and actively acted towards, having a direct influence in the political agenda of a sovereign state is devilish.

IMO it is a well-thought out plan by the nobel peace prize committee to make the US think twice before waging another war. The fact that Obama has charisma all over the world, made it easier for the committee to justify their decision. In other words, this year nobel peace prize is kind of like an investment, a risky investment .

We can only speculate at what made the Norwegian Committee award it to Obama. Just recently I was reading that this year the number of nominees was a record breaking ~250. I have to confess, despite what I said, with those numbers it's hard to believe there has not have been some kind of political motivation.

What I don't think is that Obama charisma made things easier. He's right now much more popular here in Europe than he will ever hope to be in the USA for the rest of his life. And yet the award is being strongly criticized here too.

As for war... Obama is actively engaged in a war. And he will be actively engaged in any other war he sees fit to protect his country. One thing that we Europeans seems to forget -- and the Norwegian Committee it seems -- is that Obama is the president of the Americans. Not our president (as much as many like me would like in this stale, unimaginative and vegetive continent). And he has shown all the signs he will not think twice to protect American interests abroad above any other interest. This is not a president for Peace, as his position and objectives in Afghanistan made very clear. There's so many hot spots around American interests in the world right now that the thought this was done to have him avoid initiating another war is not just risky. It is foolishly stupid.

I'm thinking, Oh I don't know... Iran rings a bell?