• Our software update is now concluded. You will need to reset your password to log in. In order to do this, you will have to click "Log in" in the top right corner and then "Forgot your password?".
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.

President Barack Obama Awarded the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

  • 4,294
    Posts
    14
    Years
    • Age 31
    • Ohio
    • Seen Jun 6, 2017
    Not every president has the luxury or taking office during times of peace. I think Bush had to make an difficult decision as to how Afghanistan/Iraq should be dealt with. Personally, I don't think he did a very good job, but that argument has nothing to do with whether Obama deserves a peace prize or not. If two people have shared the same job, and one arguably did not do his job well, that doesn't mean the second automatically did and is deserving of a reward =(



    You as well, my friend ^__^
    I don't know if you mean that Obama entered in a time of peace, but if so:

    It was a time of peace when Bush entered. Then, Bush ran our economy in the ground and started a war that no one can really win. Obama entered during a time of economic failure and war, and is stopping that and is going above and beyond what is expected of a president in this early of a term.

    If not, then ignore that.

    I do not believe Obama deserved this. However, I feel that if his plans do succeed than he should have gotten it then. Nuclear free world, that is definitely worth a NPA. But, since it hasn't been achieved yet there is no point in him getting one. The only other reason I can see him as deserving of this award is him breaking racial barriers. But that really wasn't him, it was the American public who voted him in.

    So yeah, he doesn't deserve it. But it's not like he is doing nothing at all and then received it.
     

    Hotaru

    Nostalgia Strikes Again
  • 44
    Posts
    16
    Years
    • Seen Sep 12, 2011
    What's really interesting is that Obama was only in office for two weeks when the nomination deadline was due. o_o

    So based off of two weeks in office, he gets the Nobel Peace prize just for his potential? People win Nobel Peace prizes for their accomplishments, not for the things they may or not accomplish in the future. :/ Seriously, was it that imperative that they couldn't have waited a few years and then analyze what he's done?
     

    Luck

    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • 6,779
    Posts
    16
    Years
    • Seen May 20, 2023
    He really hasn't.
    Whether you like it or not, doing a negative does not help world peace more than doing little action. Bush caused unneeded wars and enforced stupid bills(no child left behind.) He also made it possible for people to indefinitely hold non citizens just because they believe that they were involved in acts of terrorism. Whatever happened to habeas corpus?

    How is this man deserving of a Nobel Peace Prize only nine months into office, when most of his policies haven't even had time to take effect? It's great that he's trying to spread peace and reduce the use of nuclear weapons and stuff, but I was under the impression that you actually had to accomplish something before winning a peace prize...

    Closing Guantamo Bay maybe?


    I'm just going to be a conformist and say that he didn't deserve it. At least, not until he actually gets some of his promises done.
     
  • 2,956
    Posts
    18
    Years
    Not too surprising considering who's awarding the prize. The award committee is appointed by the Norwegian Parliament (yes, Norwegian), whose majority leaders have an obvious leftist stance. The decision was unanimous.
     

    Bay

  • 6,390
    Posts
    18
    Years
    Guys, it's all very well saying he deserved it or he didn't (I don't know where I stand on this), but you gotta look at what this really is. It's international propaganda. Obama is a symbol of a new system. A good chunk of the world hated Bush, and by extension, the United States. Obama is now perceived as a peacebringer, a new leaf for America. Whether or not he actually is is debatable, but that's how he's being portrayed. And it's helped by the fact that this is what the world wants. They want a figurehead they can look up to. They want a President with big ideas for peace. They want peace. So giving Obama the Nobel Prize is a reassurance to the world. They're telling us 'You want this? He's trying to get it. Love him.' They want the world to see (or think they see) that change is coming around, so they give Obama - a well-known, popular political figure - the Peace Prize to show people that it's possible.

    That's my view, anyway.
    This.

    Ever since Obama entered the office, I keep hearing "Obama will bring hope!", "Obama will bring change!", "Obama will change the future!" Talk is cheap. I'm not saying Obama won't keep his word (heck, I'm studying financial economics and I believe his economic polices will get around...soon :P ), but his polices will get delayed both at the domestic and international arena if they don't agree. I'm pretty much in agreement with one of the BBC corresponding analysts that commented on the article: it's more out of encouragement. For now I'm going to say if his polices did fail to bring world peace, the world will be in a huge disappointment. True, we can blame Bush for doing the mistakes Obama has to fix, but in the end we have to see how well Obama will execute his leadership.
     
  • 9,468
    Posts
    16
    Years
    An excerpt from Obama's acceptance speech:

    I still think the prize was given a little prematurely, but I think this was a perfect response.


    Yeah I was going to post that. XD


    US President Barack Obama has said he was "surprised and deeply humbled" to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, less than 10 months into his presidency.

    Speaking at the White House hours after the Norwegian Nobel Prize Committee named him as a surprise winner, he said the award should be a "call to action".


    The world faced challenges that "cannot be met by one person or by one nation alone," Mr Obama said.
    The committee said he won for efforts to boost diplomacy and co-operation.
    "Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future," the Norwegian committee said in a statement.
    "His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population."

    Long-term goals
    Standing in the Rose Garden to make his first public statement since being woken early by aides bringing news of the award, Mr Obama stressed that his win was just the beginning of his work.
    He said he did not feel he deserved to be in the company of some of the "transformative figures" who had previously received the award.
    Some of his aims, particularly the goal of universal nuclear disarmament, would be difficult to achieve even within his lifetime, let alone his presidency, Mr Obama said.
    And he sought to deflect some of the global surprise at his win, describing the award as "affirmation of American leadership on behalf of aspirations held by people in all nations".
    "I know that throughout history the Nobel Peace Prize has not just been used to honour specific achievements," he said.
    "It's also been used as a means to give momentum to a set of causes. And that is why I will accept this award as a call to action, a call for all nations to confront the common challenges of the 21st Century."
    The White House has said that the cash prize that accompanies the award will be distributed among several charities.

    Public bemused
    There were a record 205 nominations for this year's peace prize. Zimbabwean Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai and Chinese dissident Hu Jia had been among the favourites.
    Instead the committee chose Mr Obama, who was inaugurated less than two weeks before the 1 February nomination deadline.
    While there was support for the decision, notably from world leaders, many others expressed their scepticism.
    In the US the chairman of the Republican National Committee, Michael Steele, asked a simple question: "What has President Obama actually accomplished?"
    Attributing Mr Obama's win to his "star power", Mr Steele said it was "unfortunate" he "outshined tireless advocates who have made real achievements working towards peace and human rights".
    Iran's foreign minister said the decision to give the award was taken too "hastily".
    "A good timing for the award would be when US troops have pulled out of Afghanistan and Iraq and the United States is standing up for the rights of the Palestinian people," Manouchehr Mottaki told the Mehr news agency.
    But he said that if winning the prize encouraged the US president to reject the "warmongering" policies of previous administrations, Iran had no opposition to it.
    A large majority of remarks from BBC viewers, listeners and website users also expressed surprise.
    Senior Democratic figures rebuffed Mr Steele's remarks, with former Vice-President Al Gore, a joint recipient of the award in 2007, calling Mr Obama's win "extremely well deserved".

    Worldwide reaction to Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize
    "I think that much of what he has accomplished already is going to be far more appreciated in the eyes of history," Mr Gore said.
    But spokesmen from anti-US Islamist groups such as the Taliban and Hamas focussed on the present, saying they had seen no evidence yet of improvements in security for people in their regions and as such opposed the award.
    LOL.


    UPDATE: Either sensing an opening to cast the Republican Party as actively rooting against America, or just fed up with the stream of negative responses, the Democratic National Committee put out an unusually blunt statement Friday morning. The gist: that the GOP sides with the terrorists.
    "The Republican Party has thrown in its lot with the terrorists -- the Taliban and Hamas this morning -- in criticizing the President for receiving the Nobel Peace prize," wrote DNC Communications Director Brad Woodhouse. "Republicans cheered when America failed to land the Olympics and now they are criticizing the President of the United States for receiving the Nobel Peace prize -- an award he did not seek but that is nonetheless an honor in which every American can take great pride -- unless of course you are the Republican Party. The 2009 version of the Republican Party has no boundaries, has no shame and has proved that they will put politics above patriotism at every turn. It's no wonder only 20 percent of Americans admit to being Republicans anymore - it's an embarrassing label to claim."
    Have the Democrats finally found that spine that we've been looking for all these years? XD
     
    Last edited:

    TRIFORCE89

    Guide of Darkness
  • 8,123
    Posts
    20
    Years
    Guys, it's all very well saying he deserved it or he didn't (I don't know where I stand on this), but you gotta look at what this really is. It's international propaganda. Obama is a symbol of a new system. A good chunk of the world hated Bush, and by extension, the United States. Obama is now perceived as a peacebringer, a new leaf for America. Whether or not he actually is is debatable, but that's how he's being portrayed. And it's helped by the fact that this is what the world wants. They want a figurehead they can look up to. They want a President with big ideas for peace. They want peace. So giving Obama the Nobel Prize is a reassurance to the world. They're telling us 'You want this? He's trying to get it. Love him.' They want the world to see (or think they see) that change is coming around, so they give Obama - a well-known, popular political figure - the Peace Prize to show people that it's possible.

    That's my view, anyway.
    Yeah but... forgive me... but that's stupid. Such an award shouldn't be handed out based on image, words, or popularity.


    Whether you like it or not, doing a negative does not help world peace more than doing little action. Bush caused unneeded wars and enforced stupid bills(no child left behind.) He also made it possible for people to indefinitely hold non citizens just because they believe that they were involved in acts of terrorism. Whatever happened to habeas corpus?



    Closing Guantamo Bay maybe?


    I'm just going to be a conformist and say that he didn't deserve it. At least, not until he actually gets some of his promises done.
    It's still open though. Until the doors close I don't care. Actions speak louder than words.
     

    Misheard Whisper

    [b][color=#FF0000]I[/color] [color=#FF7F00]also[/c
  • 3,488
    Posts
    15
    Years
    Yeah but... forgive me... but that's stupid. Such an award shouldn't be handed out based on image, words, or popularity.
    I think you missed the point of my statement. I think that that's what they're doing. Doesn't mean I agree with it. I don't.
     

    TRIFORCE89

    Guide of Darkness
  • 8,123
    Posts
    20
    Years
    I think you missed the point of my statement. I think that that's what they're doing. Doesn't mean I agree with it. I don't.
    I know. Please do forgive me, if it sounded like I was calling you stupid. I meant more... what they were doing, if that was in fact the basis of him receiving the award. It would not surprise me, if it were.
     
  • 12,201
    Posts
    18
    Years
    Why?

    He really hasn't done that much to deserve this.
    Look at the previous people who have been awarded this:

    *Mother Teresa
    *Robert Cecil
    *Lord Boyd Orr

    These people have DESERVED it.
    I am not saying that he will never deserve it, but when you look at Mother Teresa's peace live and then at Barack Obama's, it just isn't right.

     
  • 892
    Posts
    16
    Years
    Yeah Obama hasn't done anything yet.
    Then why do people continually bash on him for "ruining" the country if he hasn't done anything yet?
    People need to make up their minds.
     
  • 1,806
    Posts
    14
    Years
    • Seen Jan 4, 2013
    Oh gawd @ the GOP. Bitter, unpatriotic, sore losers is what they sound like.

    It's nice to see some civility from Obama's former opponents, though. McCain responded,
    while Huckabee told his party to stop b****ing. (but not really.)

    I'm not so anxious to hear nutty blustering from media figures such as Beck, Hannity, Limbaugh, etc.
     

    Ineffable~

    DAT SNARKITUDE
  • 2,738
    Posts
    15
    Years
    Guys, it's all very well saying he deserved it or he didn't (I don't know where I stand on this), but you gotta look at what this really is. It's international propaganda. Obama is a symbol of a new system. A good chunk of the world hated Bush, and by extension, the United States. Obama is now perceived as a peacebringer, a new leaf for America. Whether or not he actually is is debatable, but that's how he's being portrayed. And it's helped by the fact that this is what the world wants. They want a figurehead they can look up to. They want a President with big ideas for peace. They want peace. So giving Obama the Nobel Prize is a reassurance to the world. They're telling us 'You want this? He's trying to get it. Love him.' They want the world to see (or think they see) that change is coming around, so they give Obama - a well-known, popular political figure - the Peace Prize to show people that it's possible.

    That's my view, anyway.

    Conspiracy. I don't care one bit what the [[insert Nobel Peace Prize awarding peoplez here]] want to make the world think; it's not okay. It disappoints me how heavily politics depends on lies and deceit.

    Gandhi can't get a Prize but Obama can when he's just started his presidency? Insanity.
    Whatever big talk he's making, Obama hasn't quite done anything yet. The smallest good deed is better than the grandest good intention. If Obama can be declared as a national hero for his good intentions...

    *Pulls a cat down from a tree*

    Where's my award? :<
     

    Melody

    Banned
  • 6,460
    Posts
    19
    Years
    Personally, I strongly disagree with anyone who doesn't think he deserved it, but I will admit they're giving him the prize a little early.

    But I can't say he didn't deserve it. If you look at all the big actions Obama has taken as president to help get the world back into a peaceful state, and the economy on the road to recovery, he deserves it. Most people know about all that he's done to bring peace back to the world since Bush left office, and considering all that he has done in the short time he's been president so far, he's worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize. You can't change the world in a day, a week or even a month..it takes years.
     

    Ineffable~

    DAT SNARKITUDE
  • 2,738
    Posts
    15
    Years
    You can't change the world in a day, a week or even a month..it takes years.

    u_u
    That's the very point though. People gain the Nobel Peace Prize after years of striving for peace. Martin Luther King Jr. acquired the award after 9 years (yes, years--not months) of working hard to change the world. Mother Theresa? She only took...well...29 years to get a Nobel Peace Prize after helping the dying, crippled...etcetera. And Gandhi--who I think is one of the most deserving of all people to receive a Nobel Peace Prize (perhaps second to the aforementioned winners)--never got one at all.

    Obama has not fulfilled any of his promises yet. And even once he did, I still don't believe he would deserve one. Like you even said, it takes years to change the world. And you need to change the world to get the Nobel Prize.
    Name me every thing Obama has actually done during his presidency. (don't mention anything intangible like his promises or racial like his "breaking of boundaries"--we have been without those boundaries for over 30 years if I am not mistaken; an African-American person could have run for president a very long time ago if such effort was made. [Lol, run-on sentence in parentheses.]) Then compare that with all the things people like Gandhi, Mother Theresa, and Martin Luther King have done...

    v_v I rest my case.

    This is not an attack on any of Obama's policies or ideas; I'm simply stating that nothing has been done yet and he has a long way to go before he can deserve any special award.
     

    Gunn

    horror resident
  • 1,404
    Posts
    18
    Years
    I think we should question the Nobel Committee on why they selected President Obama as the winner, instead of the little time he spent in office and what he has done so far. It's not like he asked for it.
     

    TRIFORCE89

    Guide of Darkness
  • 8,123
    Posts
    20
    Years
    Personally, I strongly disagree with anyone who doesn't think he deserved it, but I will admit they're giving him the prize a little early.

    But I can't say he didn't deserve it. If you look at all the big actions Obama has taken as president to help get the world back into a peaceful state, and the economy on the road to recovery, he deserves it. Most people know about all that he's done to bring peace back to the world since Bush left office, and considering all that he has done in the short time he's been president so far, he's worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize. You can't change the world in a day, a week or even a month..it takes years.
    Personally.... I like him, but he hasn't done anything. He certainly has tried though. He said great things. Has promised great things. Has the right ideas. But... that doesn't amount to anything.

    For as bad as Bush was - whether we liked it or not, if he wanted to do something, he did it. He plowed his idea through 'cause he was the president. Obama needs a little of that. He won. The Democrats have a majority. They could do whatever they want and quickly at that. And somehow...they don't. Whenever given the opportunity, the Democrats kinda blow it.

    But that's neither here or there.
     
  • 1,806
    Posts
    14
    Years
    • Seen Jan 4, 2013
    Personally.... I like him, but he hasn't done anything. He certainly has tried though. He said great things. Has promised great things. Has the right ideas. But... that doesn't amount to anything.
    Yes, disregard the several executive orders and laws he's signed, and mending America's reputation to the foreign world. His administration has accomplished as much as they could accomplish during his time in office, I don't know what makes you think he's done absolutely nothing.
     
    Last edited:

    twocows

    The not-so-black cat of ill omen
  • 4,307
    Posts
    15
    Years
    Yes, disregard the several executive orders and laws he's signed, and mending America's reputation to the foreign world. His administration has accomplished as much as they could accomplish during his time in office, I don't know what makes you think he's done absolutely nothing.
    Yeah, he's done as much as he could, but like I said, it would have been better to give it to him at the END of his term, rather than at the beginning. If he really accomplishes all the things that he is trying to accomplish, he will be more than deserving of it. However, that takes time, and there are other people who are more deserving right now.

    I lol'd at the political responses, though. It's like the past eight years, only in reverse. The Republicans are bashing the President, and the Democrats are calling the Republicans terrorists for doing so.
     
    Back
    Top