Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 20th Nov 2009 17:11 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 395762
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 14:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



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...