President Obama's Nobel Peace Prize

Not much of one unless you include inexplicable 'oh, you're just wrong' a response, coupled with ignoring my arguments about Obama's accomplishments and significance prior to his election.

You, again, mention that Obama had been in office for two weeks before his name was first considered for the award. Yet, you also neglect to consider the months of deliberation prior to the final decision during which time he was active as President, and you also neglected my long list of his significance which predate election night.

Then you decide to assert that I'm just wrong about Obama being an accomplished diplomat - even though I gave a great many reasons why he is in fact an accomplished diplomat.



If you are not willing to say anything more than simple, one liner contradictions, that's fine. But it's also rather disappointing, especially when my on topic points are glanced over in favor of restating the very claims I was responding to in the first place.

What accomplished diplomacy did he do in the few weeks he was in office before the nominations were closed?

Indeed, what accomplished diplomacy has he done while in office? He gave a few speeches while trundling around Europe. We are still confronting Iran and North Korea. Russian still will not cooperate in imposing sanctions on Iran, and neither will China. He disappointed and betrayed Poland and the Czechs by not placing missiles there because Russia did not want them. So, just what has he accomplished in diplomacy? Obama looks weak, and that is dangerous.

This is my point. I gave a list of diplomatic accomplishments of Obama's which predate election night, and also gave an explanation of his diplomatic accomplishments having been elected - namely, the rebuilding of international confidence in America.



Instead of arguing personal political ideology, try for a moment to approach the matter from a slightly more objective view. I get that you do not like Obama as a politician, and that you disagree with many of his efforts. However, disagreement with his efforts is not the same as the man having failed in his efforts.

To then bring up as yet addressed issues as somehow being failures of Obama is beside the point. Yes, we are still confronting Iran - and have been for over fifty years, but Reagan is not a failed diplomat because he was unable to recover good relations with Iran. Reagan did have diplomatic accomplishments despite Iran being held by a terrible regime, right? The same is true of Obama - sure, there are as yet unresolved issues in American foreign policy, and there will always be such issues. But to bring such matters up as if they were evidence that Obama, or any other diplomat, is not accomplished as a diplomat is simply beside the point. He's not Superman, and no one is trying to argue that he is.

I cringe just to think of the name "Nixon", and I cringe just to think of the name "Reagan", yet I also manage to credit both with being master politicians and marvelously accomplished diplomats.

And once again you ignore the list of accomplishments I provided for you. Another simple, one liner contradiction. So much for conversation and discussion, eh?

You do not believe rebuilding trust, hope, and faith in America around the world to be a diplomatic accomplishment? You do not believe overcoming centuries of racial prejudice by virtue of ideas and eloquence to be a diplomatic accomplishment? It was not someone else who accomplished these feats of diplomacy. It was Obama.

You do not believe rebuilding trust, hope, and faith in America around the world to be a diplomatic accomplishment? You do not believe overcoming centuries of racial prejudice by virtue of ideas and eloquence to be a diplomatic accomplishment? It was not someone else who accomplished these feats of diplomacy. It was Obama.

Wow, you sure do like to give the guy a lot of credit. Rebuilding trust, hope, and faith in America around the world? On what information have you concluded this? Number of times Obama has been praised in the mainstream global press? One thing I would look at when appraising the international faith in America is the value of our currency. Guess what, the dollar has continued to plummet ever since Obama entered office.

How did he overcome racial prejudice? People like MLK Jr. worked against racial prejudice...they paved that road well before Obama walked down it on his way into office. And because he's got dark skin and got elected, he overcame racial prejudice? Please...

But you've gotta take off those rose-tinted glasses and be realistic about his accomplishments so far. Give him at least until the end of the term before you begin to claim that he has restored faith in America or overcome racial prejudice. So far, he's simply continued most of the Bush policies in practice, while making nice speeches about all of the "change" that will supposedly be taking place.

Let's now see whether the Eastern European nations trust him after he surrendered to the Russians.

In the second place, he did not do it. It was his aura that did it. His personality, or rather his perceived personality. That's not an accomplishment.

A large fan club is not an accomplishment. It is not a product of work. It is not a feat of diplomacy.

But getting crowds into the streets cheering for they did not know what. That is not a feat of diplomacy. Maybe a feat of propaganda. Maybe a feat of personality. But not a feat of diplomacy.

And whose racial prejudice did he overcome? The Europeans? Just what are you talking about?

Centuries of American racial prejudice. You might try any basic overview of American history if you'd like to learn more about that subject.

Yes, currency means something. But I'm not talking about monetary speculation. I'm talking about public opinion. There were polls done internationally that showed Obama to have favorability ratings around the world in the 70 and 80 percent range. And this was all prior to his election. What's the point? This man gave people around the world hope: hope that America, that bellicose world tyrant, might live up to it's potential as the graceful world leader. That is an accomplishment.

Please nothing at all. Sure, many people came before Obama, King being one of them. I never once contested that. However, Barack Obama does happen to be of African American heritage, and he did manage to overcome a massive racial barrier by getting himself elected. That, too, is an accomplishment.

What rose tinted glasses? It's strange what people assume, isn't it? If you want to hear someone criticize Obama, I'd be happy to oblige you. However, my criticisms in no way diminish his accomplishments thus far.

And why people continue to talk about his time in office is beyond me. Mankind is capable of accomplishment without being the President. What's worse, your argument assumes that he cannot make real accomplishments without being in office for some extended period of time. Let me give you a hypothetical: if he ended world hunger before his first term was up, would it still be too soon to say he accomplished something? Obviously not. Give credit where credit is due. He has made monumental steps in rebuilding international trust and hope in America, and his the success of his Presidential campaign was a remarkable feat of political wit and overcoming racial prejudice.

By what practice do you imagine Obama overcame that racial prejudice in his diplomatic campaign to be elected President of the US? You can figure this one out.

And once again, how does being popular have anything to do with promoting peace?

If delivering popular, lubby-dubby, hopeful messages to the world round is promoting peace, then I guess each member of The Beatles really should have received that nobel prize...

Yep, it's a great personal accomplishment that he got elected. Diplomatic? Not quite.

He could be black, white, yellow, or green, but until he backs up his rhetoric with action, it doesn't matter to me.

And remember, he managed to beat McCain and Palin, who were running for their party on the coattails of one of the most unpopular presidents in history. Most of the prejudice (political, not racial) was on Obama and the democrats' side, not the other way around.

I don't care to read anymore criticism of Obama, but you are short-sightedly optimistic about his so-called accomplishments thus far, and so too is the nobel prize committee.

But, yea, I'd say for a president, it would be prudent to make these judgments at the end of a term, considering that one success or accomplishment can easily be overshadowed by a huge failure.

Look at Bush's first term for example. To claim that I would actually make an argument that someone can't accomplish something unless it's drawn out over some time frame is an insult to my intelligence really...but I'll let it slide, as you apparently can't see beyond your obamamania glasses and fellow fanboy opinion polls.

You again say that Obama has made all these accomplishments, yet I'm waiting to hear what they are, aside from getting elected and being popular.

We were talking about foreign diplomacy. You know that. Let's not abuse words.

In the case of Obama, his popularity was the international response to his stated policies toward the war on terror. Instead of an ill-informed, bellicose strategy, Obama managed to display a bit of understanding that people around the world appreciated. His policies, which made him popular, were more peaceful than Bush's, and the international response, which was immense favor, gave Obama greater latitude to exercise his policies should he get elected. And he was, as we know, subsequently elected.

I am not saying that Obama should or should not have recieved the prize - what I am saying is that people who claim Obama has done nothing or object that he has not been in office long enough to have accomplished anything are mistaken.

You do not believe rebuilding trust, hope, and faith in America around the world to be a diplomatic accomplishment? You do not believe overcoming centuries of racial prejudice by virtue of ideas and eloquence to be a diplomatic accomplishment?

Instead of arguing personal political ideology, try for a moment to approach the matter from a slightly more objective view. I get that you do not like Obama as a politician, and that you disagree with many of his efforts. However, disagreement with his efforts is not the same as the man having failed in his efforts.

Do you seriously want to suggest that Presidential elections do not involve diplomacy?

So what? What matters to you is irrelevant when the question is 'has Obama accomplished anything?' Again, I'm not saying he deserves the prize, I'm simply responding to fantastical criticism of the man.

Yet he also managed to beat a prominent field of Democratic contenders as well. And they were most certainly not running on Bush' coattails.

Besides, you are here talking about political prejudice, while I am talking about American racial prejudice.

How can I possibly be short sighted when I am not even attempting to look into the future? I think you want a different phrase.

Let us remember what judgments are being made: we are not talking about his success as a President, we are talking about the man's lifetime contribution to peace in this world. As a matter of fact, he has managed to accomplish something not insignificant to that end.

You said "Give him at least until the end of the term before you begin to claim that he has restored faith in America or overcome racial prejudice". Your words, buddy. Meanwhile, in reality, he has bolstered confidence in America, and he overcame a long history of extreme racial prejudice in the course of his Presidential campaign.

Aside from... so you do recognize that the man has accomplishments? Well, now that was my whole point. Unless you want to object to the notion that these accomplishments promote peace, at least to some degree, there isn't any more to debate.

Yes, again, in so many words, you've just stated, "Obama is popular", and have not said anything more about his work that was supposedly done to promote peace. If he becomes popular by promoting policies during his campaign that will improve peaceful relations around the world, I'm all for that. The problem is that those policies have yet to see the light of day in the real world.

Well, then you're not responding to me, because I didn't say these things. Obama has definitely done many things, and even a few of them I suppose could be considered accomplishments.

Because this was quite an exaggeration

If you can't see that your above exaggeration about Obama's 'diplomatic accomplishments' is not an argument of personal political ideology, then my point here is not being made.

yet I am wary when any political figure is backed by near-rabid supporters who view their favorite politician so favorably that they fail to remain objective.

Sure, every president has to look like a diplomat when getting elected, this is a part of the popularity contest. I don't care about this type of diplomacy as much as I do real diplomatic efforts that are made, after someone is elected to office, when states, countries, and groups with vastly different ideologies can be unified with at least an idea of mutual respect. Obama has a lot of fans, but he has yet to accomplish something like this at a deeper level. He has these fans, because they have invested hope in the man, due to his words. He will lose these fans (as he already has been), the longer he goes on without acting on his words.

No, the question of this thread is about whether or not he's accomplished enough to deserve a peace prize. I don't care about this, and was just responding to your own fanatical support for the man...

Well, you say that Obama overcame such great racial prejudice getting elected. I say, Obama getting elected simply proves that American racial prejudice was not as bad as we thought it was. The opinion polls showed that most Americans didn't care about race in an election, and the results proved that to be somewhat accurate.

I'm not sure how anyone goes about measuring 'peace', or measuring 'contributions to peace', but I'm quite sure that just talking about it, when running for election, is not quite enough to be awarded for it. Actions speak louder than words, and he's had several months to take some now, which you and I agree is long enough, yet he really hasn't.

You know what, forget it. Again and again I tell you what I'm doing in this thread, and again and again you, inexplicably, accuse me of the opposite.