Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 20th Nov 2009 17:11 UTC
Linux Now this is one to ponder. This year, the Nobel Peace Prize went to Barack Obama, president of the United States. The prize has been given to both politicians and non-politicians alike, and Keith Lofstrom thinks its time to hand over the Peace Prize to a non-politician once more: Linus Torvalds.
Thread beginning with comment 395705
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Why not
by tomcat on Fri 20th Nov 2009 21:19 UTC in reply to "Why not"
tomcat
Member since:
2006-01-06

This comment is somewhat off-topic, but I believe that the real reason that Obama received the Peace Prize is that the committee wants to steer American foreign policy. He didn't receive it for anything that he's done because, let's face it, he hasn't really achieved anything of significance in foreign policy. Certainly, other people did more in the past year to bring about peace. Hell, I'd vote for Bono, for all of the work that he does in raising money on behalf of Third World countries, the poor, etc. That's at least tangible and measurable.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Why not
by Thom_Holwerda on Fri 20th Nov 2009 21:35 in reply to "RE: Why not"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

The reason I find the prize for Obama specifically ridiculous is that he is someone who actually has the means to make a difference - and specifically THIS man gets the prize as an encouragement? It makes no sense to me.

Presidents of the US should be evaluated for the peace prize AFTER their term(s) is/are over. For all we know, Obama starts a crippling war somewhere down the line, and who'll look silly then?

In the end, Obama hasn't achieved a darn thing yet that earns him that prize. I mean, go him, but let's wait until we can actually evaluate what he has done with all this power he has now.

Disclaimer: this is not a political statement in any way. I'm not from the US, so I have no particular affiliation. Although, I do think Palin is totally hot.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: Why not
by krreagan on Fri 20th Nov 2009 21:58 in reply to "RE[2]: Why not"
krreagan Member since:
2008-04-08

The reason I find the prize for Obama specifically ridiculous is that he is someone who actually has the means to make a difference - and specifically THIS man gets the prize as an encouragement? It makes no sense to me.

Presidents of the US should be evaluated for the peace prize AFTER their term(s) is/are over. For all we know, Obama starts a crippling war somewhere down the line, and who'll look silly then?

In the end, Obama hasn't achieved a darn thing yet that earns him that prize. I mean, go him, but let's wait until we can actually evaluate what he has done with all this power he has now.

Disclaimer: this is not a political statement in any way. I'm not from the US, so I have no particular affiliation. Although, I do think Palin is totally hot.

The prize is for improving the outlook for peace in the world. Obama, just by replacing Bush improved the outlook and possibility for peace in the world by a large margin. By those standards, maybe he deserved it, maybe not.

Agreed that it would have been better to wait, but then again to insure any winner does not go out and start a war after getting the prize, you would only be able to give the prize posthumously.

KRR

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Why not
by Googol on Fri 20th Nov 2009 22:04 in reply to "RE[2]: Why not"
Googol Member since:
2006-11-24

spot on dude. If you watch Chomsky's excellent "Manufacturing Consent", he evidences how EVERY SINGLE US president since world war II is guilty of war crimes by the standards of the Nuremberg Nazi trails - every single one of them (they are all listed with there crimes, no worries). Now, that was a mid-90s documentary, but of course Bush has been doing his deeds since then, and we all know he is a war criminal. Now, I even think Obama is a good, upright guy, and a lawyer by profession - which I don't mean in a negative, but rather positive way in that I believe he will not just sign off everything in light of the constitutional teachings he received, and also as a matter of profesional integrity. But still, I think the "system" is going to force him into a position like his predecessors - so no, he does not deserve the prize, not even as an encouragement.

On a side not, yes, I am all for a non-politician. But if we are talking non-politicians, there are about 6 billion floating around - which brings us back to the Miss Universe point. If you asked Linus him very self what he did for peace, his honest reply would be: NOTHING! He's a busy guy, you know...


omg-omg ;) I committed the there/their crime- hahahah ;)

Edited 2009-11-20 22:05 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: Why not
by tomcat on Sat 21st Nov 2009 01:11 in reply to "RE[2]: Why not"
tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

The reason I find the prize for Obama specifically ridiculous is that he is someone who actually has the means to make a difference - and specifically THIS man gets the prize as an encouragement? It makes no sense to me. Presidents of the US should be evaluated for the peace prize AFTER their term(s) is/are over. For all we know, Obama starts a crippling war somewhere down the line, and who'll look silly then? In the end, Obama hasn't achieved a darn thing yet that earns him that prize. I mean, go him, but let's wait until we can actually evaluate what he has done with all this power he has now. Disclaimer: this is not a political statement in any way. I'm not from the US, so I have no particular affiliation. Although, I do think Palin is totally hot.


Agree with you, Thom about all things other than Palin being "totally hot". I like that she's a populist figure, but I do think that she needs to educate herself a bit more before she jumps onto the world stage. Let's face it: Very few people in this world are actually qualified to assume the office of POTUS, but Palin, especially, wasn't prepared for the kind of rough and tumble politics played in Washington, where every nuance of your domestic & foreign policy is put under a microscope. Her problem was that she only had a cursory understanding of a lot of important subjects, didn't know the history, and therefore would have required a steep learning curve. That said, if simple guys like Reagan and Bush could get up to speed, I think that Palin would be okay.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Why not
by MollyC on Sat 21st Nov 2009 08:45 in reply to "RE[2]: Why not"
MollyC Member since:
2006-07-04

Bush and Putin had embarked on a course to restart the Cold War. Obama changed policy and averted that. Averting a Cold War 2.0 is more than enough to deserve the prize, as far as I'm concerned.

In this interview, Geir Lundestad, Secretary of the Nobel Committee, explains why Obama was selected for the Peace Prize, the summation of which is "changing the international climate".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ooqkvd8JPfU

Incidentally, it's common for people to win the Peace Prize for effort rather than concrete accomplshment (Desmond Tutu won yet apartheid didn't end until 10 years later).

Finally, the scenario where Obama starts a war or whatever, and makes the Nobel committee look foolish, the committee already said they don't care. "Obama need not be worried that he'll do something and the Nobel committee denounces him. We always stand by our laureates."

As for "tech guys", I'd argue that Bill Gates has accomplished more in humanitarian activities than any other tech person, but I digress...

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Why not
by Googol on Fri 20th Nov 2009 21:41 in reply to "RE: Why not"
Googol Member since:
2006-11-24

How can it possibly be off topic, where I specifically say I am all for Linus getting it - which is the topic, including qualified explanation? ;)

Oh, and your comment repeats mine, in essence...

Reply Parent Score: 2