Barack Obama gets Nobel's Peace Prize • Hacker News Board

Re: Barack Obama gets Nobel's Peace Prize

#161

Post by electromagnetic » Fri, Oct 09, 2009, 2:37 PM UTC

boredguy8 wrote: post #136

radu_floricica wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it does devalue the institution of the Catholic Church as a whole. Just as this prize may devalue the Nobel Prize idea, but doesn't touch one bit what other individuals who received the prize did.

Sure, the institution may be devalued, but that's not the claim being made. The claim is, "the others get devalued as well." Feynman's work in QED is no less amazing today than it was the day before yesterday, and the Nobel no more or less an appropriate prize.

The Catholic Church doesn't control the actions of its priests and nuns. However, it does protect its priests and as an institution it devalues it. As Teresa was neither protected by the Church, nor acting under direct supervision of the church, it doesn't devalue her actions.

However the Nobel committee has complete oversight and control over where these prizes go, the prizes aren't capable of deciding where they go, so a devaluing of the committee devalues the prize.

If the Nobel committee brought out an award for mathematics everybody would think it's about damn time. However if they brought one out for creationist research, not a single scientist on the planet would ever want a Nobel Prize again.

Re: Barack Obama gets Nobel's Peace Prize

#162

Post by nir » Fri, Oct 09, 2009, 2:39 PM UTC

The Nobel Peace Prize committee have done the world an important service today, by reminding us how meaningless and fickle most awards are, no matter how much prestige they are supposed to carry.

Re: Barack Obama gets Nobel's Peace Prize

#163

Post by colanderman » Fri, Oct 09, 2009, 2:46 PM UTC

silkodyssey wrote: post #150

I agree with the general sentiments that the award is probably premature but I think the general nature of the award lends itself to situations such as these. An award has to be given out every year and the world does not produce ghandis at that rate so the people who have made profound achievements will have to share the award with those who've done less. This does diminish the achievements of the greats in a sense…

They could have taken Time's route and given it to me...

Re: Barack Obama gets Nobel's Peace Prize

#164

Post by gloob » Fri, Oct 09, 2009, 2:50 PM UTC

thismat wrote: post #124

amix wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He also gets it while USA are in two wars (wars which have very little to do with peace and most likely related to oil and revenge). Anyhow, I like Obama as well, but giving him a peace award is just too early.

Please provide factual information the wars most likely relate to oil and revenge. To me the wars are more of a response to America's high state of emotion after 9/11, judging by the amount of people (even in political positions) who at the time agreed to them.

It might just be me, but starting a war as a response to a "high state of emotion" after being attacked is more or less the definition of "revenge". That said, I'm not commenting on the legitimacy or lack thereof of the wars, nor am I commenting on the "oil" part of the question.

Re: Barack Obama gets Nobel's Peace Prize

#165

Post by elblanco » Fri, Oct 09, 2009, 2:52 PM UTC

djehuty wrote: post #91

jacquesm wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. It should be a prize for achievement, not for intentions. The Nobel Prize has just devalued considerably.

Kissinger, Begin, and Sadat all won it in the 70s. It's had zero credibility since then. Which is a pity, because the clear purpose is to encourage rather than necessarily always to reward, and Obama's intentions definitely seem to be good.

Arafat was another strange choice.

Re: Barack Obama gets Nobel's Peace Prize

#166

Post by bitdiddle » Fri, Oct 09, 2009, 2:53 PM UTC

miked wrote: post #140

bitdiddle wrote: post #99

I'm hopeful that this prize provides a needed boost to his efforts. Obama has made great progress in restoring America's role in the world. He has the opportunity to make great progress on world peace and this prize is a strong vote of confidence in those efforts. Well done! I'll be curious to see where he donates the money, though he's not a wealthy man financially, he might want to keep some of it.

though he's not a wealthy man financially Both his books have sold millions of copies. The Clintons are now worth well over $100 million, just from giving speeches. Al Gore left office worth about $2 million and is now worth over $100 million from a combination of his global warming book, movie, and speeches and various board directorships, including at Apple and at Kosla's VC fund. Obama will scrape by somehow.

I think it was one of the Adams who opined that men go into politics to either help their businesses or hurt the businesses of their competitors.

Of course Obama's real wealth is in those two beautiful girls.

Re: Barack Obama gets Nobel's Peace Prize

#167

Post by felixc » Fri, Oct 09, 2009, 2:54 PM UTC

gaius wrote: post #123

jacquesm wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> USA has a prison system that is 19th century, compared to the rest of the western world. How much worse is Guantanamo than that? Good point, so maybe upgrade the US prisons to Guantanamo Bay standards ? > Also, afaik prisoners of war can be held until the conflict is ended. The conflict in Afghanistan is arguable not ended. But it isn't a war. Besides that, even if it was there are pretty strict guidelines on the t…

So either they're civilians that have been arrested for crimes or they're prisoners of war. You have to choose and then play by those rules. Inventing new terms ("enemy combatants") isn't going to convince anybody but the most gullible. The term is "unlawful combatant" and has the meaning of someone on the battlefield out of uniform. In the case of spies, they can be summarily executed perfectly legally - i.e. withou…

Certainly the Geneva Convention doesn't have legal force in this case, but I like to think that one can aspire to high standards of behaviour without the threat of legal sanction. In other words, do we obey Geneva Convention rules because we're forced to, or because it's right?

Re: Barack Obama gets Nobel's Peace Prize

#168

Post by elblanco » Fri, Oct 09, 2009, 2:58 PM UTC

lg wrote: post #144

mahmud wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dalai Lama, the slave driver .. Google Tibetan history and see what sorts of "religious order" he wants to implement in Tibet. Chinese are an occupying force there, sure, but the Dalai Lama, if he was no the leader of Tibet, would absolutely deserve a coup and summary hanging. Earlier visitors to Tibet commented on the theocratic despotism. In 1895, an Englishman, Dr. A. L. Waddell, wrote that the populace was under…

I'm pretty sure the dalai lama said: For many reasons, I have decided that I will not be the head of, or play any role in the government when Tibet becomes independent. The future head of the Tibetan Government must be someone popularly elected by the people. There are many advantages to such a step and it will enable us to become a true and complete democracy. I hope that these moves will allow the people of Tibet t…

He has also said that he would be more than happy having Tibet remain an autonomous state of China for reasons of economics.

Re: Barack Obama gets Nobel's Peace Prize

#169

Post by teilo » Fri, Oct 09, 2009, 3:03 PM UTC

brazzy wrote: post #45

AndrewDucker wrote: post #24

So, basically he gets an award for not being George Bush?

Spot on. I wish we lived in a world where he could openly acknowledge this: "I want to thank first and foremost my predecessor, George W. Bush, without whose service as a stark contrast, I could not have won this prize (nor, perhaps, the presidency)"

What contrast? Other than the fact that Obama doesn't snuggle up with the religious right, I don't see any significant difference between these two guys. A lot of perceived differences, sure. A D instead of an R, yeah. But judging by their far-reaching policy decisions, say, on war, personal freedom, privacy rights, transparency - not so much.

Re: Barack Obama gets Nobel's Peace Prize

#170

Post by jhancock » Fri, Oct 09, 2009, 3:05 PM UTC

tsally wrote: post #9

Gandhi died before he was awarded the Peace Prize, even though he was nominated five times. Obama gets it less than a year into his Presidency? I like Obama, but that's just wrong.

Obama seems to be a good man with good intent. Awarding him the Peace prize without a clear representation for a big problem he has helped solve does seem out of place. Al Gore didn't actually solve a problem either. Well, unless you count inventing the Internet ;).

The only interpretation I can offer is the Nobel committee wants to show its support for Obama. The 2010 elections are going to be the worst circus we've seen in a long time.