President Obama's Nobel Peace Prize

The people who voted on the award have already made statements as to why they elected Barack. Why are you people struggling with their reasoning, via absurd strawmen, when the full explanations are available?

If they reward Obamas ideas, their prize is purely a political side-taking.

The people who voted on the award have already made statements as to why they elected Barack. Why are you people struggling with their reasoning, via absurd strawmen, when the full explanations are available?

Ooops! Not more people to call fascist nazi socialist commies? What is the world coming to!

I don't understand. Please elaborate.

I think the committee might have had a hedonist on it.

They are Euro socialist commies. :Glasses:

Yeah, one of them's also a necromancer and another one's a vampire who buggers dogs.

What's your point? Are your even making an argument or disagreeing with me?

What else than sharing their Euro lefty view on the world did they give the Nobel price for?

How is it not political side-taking?

They must think that punishing the economy in the name of global warming is more important than smuggling thousands of Jewish babies out of the holocaust.

Nothing. That's what they often give it for.

I imagine it is, I even said so earlier in the thread. It's always a politically slanted award, and often used to encourage a work in progress.

The woman who saved Jewish Babies didn't win then either - that didn't bother you at the time, because you weren't interested in the award until now, I suppose.

What if they do? Global warming might well end up killing more than thousands. If Bangladesh floods there could well be 1,000,000,000 refugees. Can they stay at your house? That would be a war to gasp at wouldn't it?

People who live near the sea won't just drown or starve will they? They'll want to go somewhere else, and the people living somewhere else will want to stop them, and they'll fight each other.

EDIT: Are you referring to Irena Sendler, nominated for the 2007 prize, who saved 2500 Polish people (including but not limited to babies) who could not be nominated for this year's prize as she died before nominations were taken?

The people who voted on the award have already made statements as to why they elected Barack. Why are you people struggling with their reasoning, via absurd strawmen, when the full explanations are available?

Apparently, according to an Oslo newspaper, three out of five of the Nobel committee were opposed to awarding the prize to Obama. But were talked into it by the chairman who used to be Prime Minister. Who then said that the award was unanimous.

So the Nobel peace prize is awarded by one Norwegian minister. Okay.
I would think that it finally lost all credibility, but people are stupid and have a short memory.

Because the explanations are fatuous, and impossible to take seriously?

Apparently, according to an Oslo newspaper, three out of five of the Nobel committee were opposed to awarding the prize to Obama. But were talked into it by the chairman who used to be Prime Minister. Who then said that the award was unanimous.

Except that I, and many others, disagree with you. So, would you like to address their explanations specifically and explain why they are, in fact, "fatuous".



Well, if they happened to vote in favor of giving Obama the award, then the decision was, in fact, unanimous.

So what if, at first, there was opposition? Some people are capable of listening to sound advice and taking said advice to heart. It's really not so strange, and quite different from an inexplicable "somehow".

President Omaba did not deserve the Nobel peace prize it smacks of patronization to me