The Washington Post is typically the main-stream-media copy-press-release type of newspaper, but today one of their editors asked this fine question on an op-ed:
Would a Nobel peace prize winner authorize an attack on Iran?
Maybe Obama getting the Nobel peace prize is just a way to stop him from invading Iran.
Who could be behind this?
Iran is perhaps the most vexing challenge. Some progress toward a negotiated solution was made last week in Geneva, but it is too early to tell whether that will be sustainable. The diplomatic efforts may fail, forcing the president to consider sanctions that may bring suffering to the Iranian people. Ultimately, he may find on his desk a Pentagon proposal for a military strike on Iranian nuclear facilities. Or he may get a call from an Israeli prime minister saying such a strike is imminent.
An attack on Iran may be in the U.S. interests. But is it something a Nobel peace prize winner would authorize?
A better question would be Why would a Nobel peace prize winner continue an illegal war in Iraq that was started with an international lie saying Iraq had weapons of mass destruction which they weren’t even working on.
Why would a Peace Prize winner continue any war, and why would he continue programs of giving trillions of dollars to war profiteers like Halliburton and Dick Cheney.
These prizes are coming pretty cheap during this depression.
Let’s see …
If Iran produces a nuke and uses it against Israel, how would the US respond?
No Israel, no problems?
Or would the US then have a reason to invade Iran AND every other Muslim country out there?
Or is the intent to remove Israel to lower tensions to make it easier to extract oil from the region?
Yes … who is “behind” the prize?
Iran is a spider in a bottle, full of anger and poison, which we shake, to frighten the girls.
Man the Washington Post sucks major ass.
What an asinine article. Major geopolitical events, like wars, are decided by much more complex reasons than what awards are or are not given, regardless of the perceived importance of this one.
And as far as saying that “An attack on Iran may be in the U.S. interests.” That’s another asinine comment. Israel is the main country that has interests in attacking Iran. They are the single nuclear power in the region and they intend on keeping it that way.
The Israeli Air Force lacks the conventional assets to pull this preemptive strike off. Israel has several German built subs capable of tube launched nuclear tipped cruise missiles That’s not including their ground to ground and air launched delivery systems. What we will have is another MAD scenario.
Guilherme, again your warped mind is spread all over this blog. I know you are in good company with the right-wing nutheads here who promote torture, thinks america can bully the world for oil and continue raping it for natural resources. But how long do you think your hate-fest against a new and better world will last? You’re a dying breed. The whole western world is liberal now except for a few retarded republicans in the States. How long will you insecure cowboys cling to your guns? What are you so afraid of? A new and better world is coming where everybody’s Buddhists.
Wake up and smell the herbal tea!
Sounds right to me. Nobel himself manufactured military equipment and invented dynamite! How much more fitting would it be for a Nobel winner to get involved in a war?
#4:
“Major geopolitical events, like wars, are decided by much more complex reasons”
You might have been out of the room when we started this huge global event called the Iraq War.
The “complex” reason for it being that our President was a fucking idiot.
Come one. Winning the Nobel Prize and attacking Iran has zero relationship.
Let’s just accept God’s will that he wanted Obama to win the prize to tell the world that Obama’s philosophy for driving peace and unity are sound. That’s it.
Does anybody know if Rush Limbaugh burst into flames yet? Very puzzled not to see more conservative lather on this. Shock maybe?
After Arafat and Carter won the prize, there was never any question that it had lost its relevance and just been totally politicized. Years ago, Nobel Prize winners were to be rightfully awed, now accepting the prize at best, puts you in questionable company.
brm said, on October 9th, 2009 at 2:11 pm
#4:
“Major geopolitical events, like wars, are decided by much more complex reasons”
You might have been out of the room when we started this huge global event called the Iraq War.
True, but there were numerous players, with a variety of interests, that were behind the scenes and had tremendous influence on him.
$1.4 million (devalued) dollars is still a pretty significant bribe. Hmm, Can the President of the United States can be bought by the Parliament of Norway for $1.4 million (and a nice gold medal along with a trip to Oslo)? Methinks maybe yes.
Of course the US Constitution actually has something to say about this if anyone bothers to read it.
If this were the case they would have given the prize to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Then again, maybe not.
They should rename it the Nobel Delusional Posers Peace price. The U.N peacekeeping forces, Kofi Annan, Jimmy Carter, Al Gore, are you kidding me!
• 2009: U.S. President Barack Obama
• 2008: Martti Ahtisaari
• 2007: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Al Gore
• 2006: Muhammad Yunus, Grameen Bank
• 2005: International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei
• 2004: Wangari Maathai
• 2003: Shirin Ebadi
• 2002: Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter
• 2001: United Nations, Kofi Annan
• 2000: Kim Dae-jung
• 1999: Medecins Sans Frontieres
• 1998: John Hume, David Trimble
• 1997: International Campaign to Ban Landmines, Jody Williams
• 1996: Carlos Filipe Ximenes Belo, Jose Ramos-Horta
• 1995: Joseph Rotblat, Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs
• 1994: Yasser Arafat, Shimon Peres, Yitzhak Rabin
• 1993: Nelson Mandela, F.W. de Klerk
• 1992: Rigoberta Menchu Tum
• 1991: Aung San Suu Kyi
• 1990: Mikhail Gorbachev
• 1989: The 14th Dalai Lama
• 1988: U.N. Peacekeeping Forces
• 1987: Oscar Arias Sanchez
• 1986: Elie Wiesel
• 1985: International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War
• 1984: Desmond Tutu
• 1983: Lech Walesa
• 1982: Alva Myrdal, Alfonso Garcia Robles
• 1981: Office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees
• 1980: Adolfo Perez Esquivel
Is it just me or does any one else get the impression that the US is obsessed with war. I always get the feeeling that they’re always on the lookout for the next enemy to wage war on.
All we are saying… is give peace a chance.
Arafat never had a problem bombing children after he received his…
I hear he just barely squeaked out winning the award of Osama Bin Laden.
It’s not like the Nobel Peace Prize is made of kryptonite and Super-Obama’s warmaking powers will be destroyed by accepting the award. Unlike your average peacemaker, he’s got a country to lead and a nuclear arsenal at his fingertips. I’m sure he’ll do as he sees fit (or as he’s told), regardless of the prize.
Even though it seems like he’s won the Miss America Contest before the talent portion has begun, there is a difference. Unlike Miss America, the Nobel committee can’t nullify the award and grant it to the runner up.
…Obama heard whispering under his breath: “Cool, but what I really wanted was the Chicago Olympics 2016 FTW.”
amodedoma said, on October 9th, 2009 at 3:14 pm
Is it just me or does any one else get the impression that the US is obsessed with war. I always get the feeeling that they’re always on the lookout for the next enemy to wage war on.
It’s Israel that has the major hard-on for war. They just happen to control the government and virtually all the media in the country.
#17
I wonder how close your really are to the truth.
You know, I keep trying to find a reason to really like Obama (and I don’t dislike him – don’t ask about his friends), but the simple fact is that a classy act would have been to decline the award (since he didn’t deserve it)-maybe check back in 3 years.
Class shows – it is just whether it is 1st, 2nd or 3rd.
Guilherme such a silly man…
Nobel peace prize was awarded to Obama simply as vote of confidence and support for his approach to diplomacy not for it’s yet to be obtained goals. After Bush and his lie first shoot second and answer (dodge) questions later technique, Obama is a breath of fresh air to the world and progressives Americans. All Americans should be pleased the Nobel Committee has just given United States and it’s leader more influence to construct meaningful improvement in achieving peace and prosperity in parts of the world filled with unrest.
Geesh some of you act as if you would rather they gave it to supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
#21-hyper-NPP was awarded to Obama simply as vote of confidence…
Judging from who the prize is from it would make more sense to view it as a bribe for future services.
>>Obama is a breath of fresh air to the world and progressives Americans.
You are mistaking fresh air with the stench of a sewer rat.
#22
Dr Dodd I’m sure you speak for all neo-cons.
Hey how’d that Cheney approach to diplomacy work out for you?
I’ll give you a hint world a mess and the blame/hate America numbers were never higher, those techniques didn’t even keep the price of oil down. Please tell me what the Obama opponents have to show for 8 years of leading the free world? Whatever political capital you might have had left from WWII was pissed away.
I for one am glad US voters who think like you are now the minority
*sigh*
8 brm
“The “complex” reason for it being that our President was a fucking idiot.”
That and the whole Gog / Magog delusion…
14 RS
1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1989, 1990, 1993, 1994, 1996, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000… all seem to be banner years! Whats your point again? The three you don’t agree with mean nothing? Yes. I agree with you.
16, tekni,
Arafat gave his people dignity again. And a chance at life and hope. Look up at number 14 in 1994. Arafat, Peres and Rabin. A lot better than what Ariel Sharon taught…
19 Troublemaker,
Of course Israel has a hard on for war. They want the whole area cleaned out of non-whites. They even hate Sephardic Jews.
#23-hyper-I’m sure you speak for all neo-cons.
About as much as you speak for all neo-nazis.
>>how’d that Cheney approach to diplomacy work out for you?
What makes you think I am a fan of any politician? You should know by now that it is not Republican vs Democrat, but the people vs government… well at least you should.
We may have the worlds most powerful army; to the point, it makes U.S. feel all Dirty Harry
“This is a 44. Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world. It can take your head clean off. You’ve got to ask yourself one question, Do I feel lucky?”
Except that Europe, Saudi Arabia and China can bankrupt America before we can pull the trigger.
Now who has the biggest gun??
Comment: absurd decision on Obama makes a mockery of the Nobel peace prize
http://tinyurl.com/ygjg4h7
Oh No! Someone outside of the US thinks the close cover before striking graduate should not get the prize.
#26 Dodd
“You should know by now that it is not Republican vs Democrat, but the people vs government…”
So where does the church fit into your equation Doddy old chum, you non-Rebublican non-Neocon anti-statist non-nazi son of a gun?
#16, tekni,
Arafat never had a problem bombing children after he received his…
Simon Peres and other Israeli leaders were even less restrained about bombing Palestinians.
Will Obama strike Iran.
No, he’ll let Israel do it for him.
Of course, Iran will close the straits, and oil will go to $300/barrel.
Then we will have to go in and fight another war because Obama did nothing…