They're the ones to talk about violence and killing civilians...

Also this might be relevant to the discussion:
So, was he trying to summarize this thread?

Why the hell is this on the front page of google news? It's a gay reward no one ever cares about. Miss Universe is a bigger deal. Talk about a slow news day

used to be something before it became strictly political sadly, it has been hijacked it no longer means anything. Way to go leftieloonies, keep a professional distance for a change. Now obama I can even understand because of his exceptional ability to read what's in front of him, but Al Gore?

It already is - and it's called "His Majesty the King's achievement medal".

But that wasn't the one Obama got, so it would have to be something else then, now wouldn't it?

Hey, besides the times Norway is rated the best country in the world by all credible sources, this is our one time in the spotlight. Stop ruining it!

Anyway, read an interview with the head of the committee, Torbjørn Jagland, in the morning paper just now, in which he specified even more why obama got it.

He said that Obama had been on the cards along with a dozen others all the time, but it was 2 recent events that singled him out and eventually earned him the prize - canceling the missile shield and his UN thingy about nuclear disarmament.

Oh, and I just realized I haven't stated my own opinion on here... My opinion is that some guy in Kongo should've gotten the prize. Perhaps someone working with the centers for rape victims in eastern Kongo. But I'm used to never seeing my "favourite" getting the prize, so I little problem with Obama getting it. The only negative thing is, of course, Afghanistan, it pains me to see someone who engages in war get the prize.... But hey, he's doing more positive stuff, so what the hey.

Also, I'll let you silly foreigners in on a little secret: Norwegians have a serious diplomacy-fetish. Whenever someone says the word "dialogue", you get 4,8 million instant boners here. Yes, even the women get one. Don't ask. The committee is all norwegians, all nominated by elected norwegian politicians. Obama has been quite fond of dialogue.... You still wonder why he got it?

And Al Gore? nah

Very good point. Since nuclear disarmament seems to be a key aspiration of the NPP, one might have thought a balanced approach would have recognised this. But then HoreTore and others maintain the aspiration is enough - clearly actual results sully the vision.



Within the established parameters of the NPP, Al Gore is certainly an appropriate winner. One may not agree with his agenda politically, but the Committee does and recognised his undoubted contribution to that cause. He shared the prize with the IPCC, remember.

Obama hasn't even achieved that kind of contribution. I don't buy the arguments put forward to justify the award since previous winners have all had some sort of a track record or have got the prize just for doing their job (el Baradei or Kofi Annan, for example) as a representative of the organisation in which they are employed.

And I don't think it merits a trivial dismissal that Obama is still warmongering in Afghanistan and considering an even greater involvement. Set the reality of the dead and dying of that benighted place against some fluffy words (might I bring Guantanamo into the discussion - still operating despite the fine words?) and I note that the president has an awfully long way to go before being considered a man of peace.

I really fail to see how Al Gore deserves that price

Many security experts believe that Climate Change poses the greatest threat to international security. As resources dwindle, crops fail, etc, etc then war is more likely to become a real threat. Given that the Nobel committee believes in man-made climate change (Whether it is real or not is not what is at issue here, so don't derail the thread) then it makes sense that raising awareness and organising to do something about it deserves recognition.

Oh in that case, I see no purpose for the award. I more or less follow Whacker's logic on this one.

Well there seems to be at least one advantage to taking over from the previous idiot... you seem like a genuis compared....

Or previous warmonger... you seem like a peace activist compared...

He has started off some peaceful or at least peace encouraging ideas... (or adopting said ideas) so if the award is about encouragment to keep down the right path then it does kind of make sense...

That being said what matters more to the peace commitee, effort made towards peace of actual chances said person could bring about the peace...

Im sure theres hundreds or thousands of people who put more effort into making the world peaceful than Obama, but how many people who want to make the world peaceful have anywhere near as much power as Obama...

That tireless peace campaigner may have put her life towards peace, but Obama with a simple signature can bring the world far closer to peace than the campaigner could do in several lifetimes...

I have to agree the award being an encouragment for people who seem pro-peace to continue thier work seems a bit silly...that being said if it would work or help on any level to make the world more peaceful im happy for it to look silly...