It's not about what is happening in America. I know you guys are traditionally quite inward-looking, but really.
Foriegn policy and diplomacy only mean anything to most folk if it's on their nightly news. Most of the rest of the world sees things a bit differently. They couldn't care less if the Chinese own your ass as long as whatever wars you are at present pursuing have some end in sight, and aren't going to be immediately replaced with new ones.
He's a non-belligerent US president. The first for 8 years. No wonder the rest of the world loves him. He's less liable to invade somewhere at the drop of a hat or at the whispered suggestion of a VP.
I should clarify: he's a non-belligerent US president inasmuch as he is prepared to use diplomacy before ultimatums, which is a novel way of conducting US foreign policy
Hey look at that stereotype paintbrush, descending over Americans and painting us all!
We don't KNOW that he's a non-belligerent U.S. president. He SAYS he is, but he's only been in office for 9 months. We have no idea what he's going to do in the next 3 years (and beyond if he gets reelected). Expecting that someone might do great things isn't a good reason for giving someone an award that's generally given to people who have already done great things to promote peace worldwide.
The rest of the world may love him, but does that mean he deserves a Nobel Peace Prize?
True. And that small number of Swedish people have omitted such luminaries as Ghandi (according to some, rather dodgy with young women) and Steve Biko (who was described as a terrorist by the South African apartheit Authorities). Both those statements I feel to be calumnies. Ghandi may well have been above reproach, and Biko is easily classifiable as a freedom fighter.
And it has been given to Arafat, Kissinger and Rabin. But overall the list is pretty strong if somewhat worthy and, in its early days, Scadawegian/Eurocentric orientated.
Kissinger was given it specifically for the '73 Paris ceasefire agreement for Vietnam. Of his war crimes it makes no mention. Arafat, Peres, and Rabin for making some attempt to unravel the gordian knot of the Middle-East.
Obama gets it for re-instituting diplomacy ahead of the normal way of doing things. it's an international award made without any reference to the US's internal situation, or even US general opinion.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
telemann.livejournal.com) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
politicartoons2009-10-09 10:20 am
no subject
Foriegn policy and diplomacy only mean anything to most folk if it's on their nightly news. Most of the rest of the world sees things a bit differently. They couldn't care less if the Chinese own your ass as long as whatever wars you are at present pursuing have some end in sight, and aren't going to be immediately replaced with new ones.
He's a non-belligerent US president. The first for 8 years. No wonder the rest of the world loves him. He's less liable to invade somewhere at the drop of a hat or at the whispered suggestion of a VP.
Peace....well hopefully, eventually.
And still ye wonder why....dear gods.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
We don't KNOW that he's a non-belligerent U.S. president. He SAYS he is, but he's only been in office for 9 months. We have no idea what he's going to do in the next 3 years (and beyond if he gets reelected). Expecting that someone might do great things isn't a good reason for giving someone an award that's generally given to people who have already done great things to promote peace worldwide.
The rest of the world may love him, but does that mean he deserves a Nobel Peace Prize?
no subject
They're doing the voting. They decide.
no subject
Besides, last time I checked, the U.S. was a part of the world (even if a small contingent of our residents wish that were not true).
no subject
And it has been given to Arafat, Kissinger and Rabin. But overall the list is pretty strong if somewhat worthy and, in its early days, Scadawegian/Eurocentric orientated.
Kissinger was given it specifically for the '73 Paris ceasefire agreement for Vietnam. Of his war crimes it makes no mention. Arafat, Peres, and Rabin for making some attempt to unravel the gordian knot of the Middle-East.
Obama gets it for re-instituting diplomacy ahead of the normal way of doing things. it's an international award made without any reference to the US's internal situation, or even US general opinion.