Bin Laden Gets Peace Prize In 2010
October 9th 2009 16:41
As everyone now knows, President Barack Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize “for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.
Obama has as President created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts.” (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, post-gazette.com, “The 2009 Nobel Peace Prize citation,” AP, 10/9/09).
The award to President Obama was supposedly given by the left-leaning Norwegian parliament to encourage the President to continue negotiating disputes, involving the other nations of the world in U.S. diplomacy through the United Nations, and reduce nuclear proliferation. It was also seen as a slap in the face of his predecessor, President George W. Bush, who, unlike President Obama during his Middle East speaking tour earlier this year, had a shoe of displeasure thrown at him (I wonder if they use Dr. Scholl’s Odor Destroyers over there?). Lastly, it is probably an attempt to influence the President’s troop decision for Afghanistan as well as an attempt to influence U.S. foreign policy; the thinking is that the Left can probably turn the President’s head left in his decisions with this award.
This award to the President comes as a complete surprise to everyone, including, I’m sure, him. He has only been in office a little more than eight months. While it looks like his, Congress’ and China’s actions may have prevented a second Great Depression, we are still at the bottom of a terrible recession. The situation hasn’t changed much in Iraq, and he is at war with his own generals over what to do in Afghanistan, with time running out for a decision, any decision; the Taliban have announced that they are not an international threat (just a threat to their own countrymen), and there are some who want to pull out and leave Afghanistan to the Taliban. Others, including McChrystal, want more troops to weaken the Taliban, protect the population and prevent al Qaeda from regaining a strong hold in Afghanistan again.
The situation hasn’t changed in North Korea; in fact, it’s actually gotten worse, with North Korea pulling out of six-nation talks and turning on their nuclear enrichment program, launching ICBM’s (they claim it was an attempted, maybe successful, satellite launch), and capturing and subsequent turning over to Bill Clinton of two news women (they were lucky to get home safely).
How has President Obama improved the situation in Iran? Since Mr. Obama became POTUS, so has Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Iran (or it may have been given to him). The POTUS exposed a secret Iranian nuclear enrichment facility, and this supposedly got the Iranians to agree to send their uranium to Russia for enrichment so the level of enrichment could be controlled. How do we know that all of the uranium that will be sent to Russia will represent all of the Iranian uranium, and how do we know the Iranians won’t try to weaponize it after it returns from Russia?
How has the situation improved in Latin America? When President Obama met with Summit of the Americas members earlier this year, he was forced into a photo op with Hugo Chavez, the President of Venezuela. Chavez promptly shoved a copy of the book “The Open Veins of Latin America” in Mr. Obama’s hand, as if to say, “Read this, you have a lot to learn.”
How do you compare Barack Obama’s contribution to world peace to Nelson Mandela’s? All Mandela did, when he was released from prison, was lead a peaceful revolution in South Africa, forgiving but not forgetting the actions of the whites towards the blacks, and promoting harmony in moving his country forward, in spite of what he endured.
If you are going to award The Nobel Peace Prize (which is arguably the most prestigious award) to encourage future actions for world peace, why not give it to Osama bin Laden in the hope that he will give up this jihad nonsense and adopt the peaceful tenants of Islam. Wouldn’t that be more productive?
What about giving the award to Kim Jong-Il, the President of North Korea to encourage him to drop his bellicose rantings, sit down in six-nation negotiations, and end his nuclear program, and maybe the Korean War. Maybe the award will even encourage him to feed his populace. Wouldn’t that be more productive?
Why not give the award to General Than Shwe of Myanmar, head of the military dictatorship of generals who seized control of the country in 1962, and who have imprisoned (under house arrest since 1989) Mrs. Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, the leader of the opposition. She, coincidently, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991. Wouldn’t giving the prize to General Shwe have more potential to do good, if the aim of the left wing Norwegian parliament is to encourage future good on behalf of the world’s people, than giving it to Barack Obama?
I could continue, but my point is that Barack Obama, as good as his intentions are, has not suffered for world peace and brotherhood like past recipients have. His tenure as President has been short, and while showing some promise, he hasn’t accomplished anything. If the Norwegian parliament is going to use the Nobel Peace Prize as a tool to promote its view of what the world should be like, then use it to encourage change and give it to individuals who truly have the potential to make a difference. Otherwise, giving it to the Obama’s of the world just cheapens it.
Obama has as President created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts.” (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, post-gazette.com, “The 2009 Nobel Peace Prize citation,” AP, 10/9/09).
The award to President Obama was supposedly given by the left-leaning Norwegian parliament to encourage the President to continue negotiating disputes, involving the other nations of the world in U.S. diplomacy through the United Nations, and reduce nuclear proliferation. It was also seen as a slap in the face of his predecessor, President George W. Bush, who, unlike President Obama during his Middle East speaking tour earlier this year, had a shoe of displeasure thrown at him (I wonder if they use Dr. Scholl’s Odor Destroyers over there?). Lastly, it is probably an attempt to influence the President’s troop decision for Afghanistan as well as an attempt to influence U.S. foreign policy; the thinking is that the Left can probably turn the President’s head left in his decisions with this award.
This award to the President comes as a complete surprise to everyone, including, I’m sure, him. He has only been in office a little more than eight months. While it looks like his, Congress’ and China’s actions may have prevented a second Great Depression, we are still at the bottom of a terrible recession. The situation hasn’t changed much in Iraq, and he is at war with his own generals over what to do in Afghanistan, with time running out for a decision, any decision; the Taliban have announced that they are not an international threat (just a threat to their own countrymen), and there are some who want to pull out and leave Afghanistan to the Taliban. Others, including McChrystal, want more troops to weaken the Taliban, protect the population and prevent al Qaeda from regaining a strong hold in Afghanistan again.
The situation hasn’t changed in North Korea; in fact, it’s actually gotten worse, with North Korea pulling out of six-nation talks and turning on their nuclear enrichment program, launching ICBM’s (they claim it was an attempted, maybe successful, satellite launch), and capturing and subsequent turning over to Bill Clinton of two news women (they were lucky to get home safely).
How has President Obama improved the situation in Iran? Since Mr. Obama became POTUS, so has Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Iran (or it may have been given to him). The POTUS exposed a secret Iranian nuclear enrichment facility, and this supposedly got the Iranians to agree to send their uranium to Russia for enrichment so the level of enrichment could be controlled. How do we know that all of the uranium that will be sent to Russia will represent all of the Iranian uranium, and how do we know the Iranians won’t try to weaponize it after it returns from Russia?
How has the situation improved in Latin America? When President Obama met with Summit of the Americas members earlier this year, he was forced into a photo op with Hugo Chavez, the President of Venezuela. Chavez promptly shoved a copy of the book “The Open Veins of Latin America” in Mr. Obama’s hand, as if to say, “Read this, you have a lot to learn.”
How do you compare Barack Obama’s contribution to world peace to Nelson Mandela’s? All Mandela did, when he was released from prison, was lead a peaceful revolution in South Africa, forgiving but not forgetting the actions of the whites towards the blacks, and promoting harmony in moving his country forward, in spite of what he endured.
If you are going to award The Nobel Peace Prize (which is arguably the most prestigious award) to encourage future actions for world peace, why not give it to Osama bin Laden in the hope that he will give up this jihad nonsense and adopt the peaceful tenants of Islam. Wouldn’t that be more productive?
What about giving the award to Kim Jong-Il, the President of North Korea to encourage him to drop his bellicose rantings, sit down in six-nation negotiations, and end his nuclear program, and maybe the Korean War. Maybe the award will even encourage him to feed his populace. Wouldn’t that be more productive?
Why not give the award to General Than Shwe of Myanmar, head of the military dictatorship of generals who seized control of the country in 1962, and who have imprisoned (under house arrest since 1989) Mrs. Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, the leader of the opposition. She, coincidently, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991. Wouldn’t giving the prize to General Shwe have more potential to do good, if the aim of the left wing Norwegian parliament is to encourage future good on behalf of the world’s people, than giving it to Barack Obama?
I could continue, but my point is that Barack Obama, as good as his intentions are, has not suffered for world peace and brotherhood like past recipients have. His tenure as President has been short, and while showing some promise, he hasn’t accomplished anything. If the Norwegian parliament is going to use the Nobel Peace Prize as a tool to promote its view of what the world should be like, then use it to encourage change and give it to individuals who truly have the potential to make a difference. Otherwise, giving it to the Obama’s of the world just cheapens it.
| 23 |
| Vote |
Subscribe to this blog
