Japanese governments have been pushing for a nuke-free planet since August of 1945. Where is there Nobel Peace Prize? Oh, right … the Japanese government isn’t as cool as Obama.

This “award” just further cheapens the image of Nobel’s prestigeous award. In order for him to have won this prize, he would have had to been elected shortly after defeating Hillary, not McCain.

To be fair, even Obama was a bit, “WTF?”

Just be happy for him.

While the banks may have stopped lending, the Nobel committee clearly still gives out on credit. At least Mr. Obama now knows what it feels like to be in a negative equity situation.

Who cares.

All of the Nobel prizes are subjective – especially the “soft” Nobel prizes(ie literature, peace, economics).

Have you ever tried reading any of the books from any of the Nobel prize winners in Literature? That category baffles me every time.

このニュースがTVで流れた時の母と俺の会話。

俺「えっ？この人(オバマ大統領)何かしたの？ただ核兵器を持つの止めようぜって
世界中に言っただけじゃん！」

母「そうよねえｗ」

俺「きれいごと言うだけなら、誰にでも出来るでしょ。ちゃんと結果出してから
賞を与えるべきでしょ。」

母「そうそうｗ」

俺「そもそもこの賞(平和賞)の審査基準、選定基準が全くもって不明なんだよね。一番成果を数値化しにくいって言うかね・・・」

母「そうそうｗ何を基準にしているのかね・・・・」

俺「それにアメリカが核兵器全廃って言っているのは、核兵器に変わる新兵器をアメリカが開発したからじゃない？」

母「あーそれはあるかもねえ。」

俺「下らない。実に下らない茶番だよな」

Well… Obama is much better than Bush who was the guy who focused his goal on Iraq and Afeganistan rather than victims of Catrina and his own people and economy. I think every American should blame Bush for this shame.

Even though I am not not American, I believe that Obama will be a good President for USA.

I admit Prague Speech (April 5, 2009) was great, but there are practical reasons for US nuclear disarmament.

1. In order not to let terrorists (or terrorists supporting countries) get nuclear weapons, Mr. Obama has to show persuasive attitude that US commits on nuclear disarmament. (North Korea says “While US has nuclear weapons, they have no right to request a waiver of our right to have nuclear weapons”.)

2. To protect NTP system it needs to curb the spread of nuclear weapons. (The convention stipulates the nuclear disarmament efforts.)

3. The US needs to cut costs of maintaining lots of nuclear weapons. (Due to global economic recession and Iraq war, there is a problem of growing US budget deficit.)

Of course, the Nobel Prize Committee expects the award will lead to nuclear disarmament in the future.

The ironical enough that the effort of Japan/Japanese (the victim of nuclear weapons) has been questionable whether it did have practical effect or not.

The agenda of some liberal Norwegian politicians is pretty irrelevant.

I’m an American citizen and I don’t see why he got the prize. He hasn’t done anything yet. Like the salk guy who made the polio vaccine. I think its not right cause there’s someone out there who deserves the nobel prize and yet he get’s it because he’s the first African American “President”.

This was a total rebuke and repudiation of the failed and horrid policies of the previous administration which hath created so much misery, death, and destruction throughout the world. Sadly the U.S. continues to be in Iraq and Afghanistan, so this award is meaningless.

They should call it the Nobel Hope Prize.

This prize lost a lot of meaning some time ago. If people like Yasser Arafat can win it I don’t put much faith in it’s meaning.

Also I am puzzled by the poll question posted here. Is there some plan to rid the world of Nukes that I didn’t hear about? He has made a lot of vague promises but I don’t recall that one.

Aside from the fact that I don’t agree with Pres. Obama’s political views, I think this award to him has only cheapened the honor that the Nobel Prize used to hold. It is a joke to give it to him while he still has nothing but few speeches to show for it. I hope for a peaceful world but I don’t see it happening. Between the N Koreans, the Iranians Gov’t, and other terrorist types getting nukes, anyone who thinks we can put down our arms now is fooling themselves. That’s my view.

Truly amazed! First time I see that Simon Anholt let UK to be replaced with other country from top spot in his invented tops, surveys, PRs, indexes etc.

There is an article by BBC, full citation from the Norwegian Nobel Committee’s official announcement:

“Obama’s Nobel win: Full citation“, Friday, 9 October 2009

Some excerpts from the BBC report (partially highlighted by me):

the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and co-operation between peoples.

In their announcement, two sentences are related to nuclear disarmament:

The Committee has attached special importance to Obama’s vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.

The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations.

The other part is mainly concerned with Obama’s attitude toward diplomacy, international politics, and so on. It gives an impression that it is a welcome message to hopeful “good” America.

Like most, I really don’t think he deserved it. The fact that he accepted the prize was, in my eyes, a bad move. Also IMHO, I think he should have politely declined the offer saying that he will accept it when he actually reaches his goals. Now that he has accepted it however, the question is whether he will show that he deserved it.(Translated japanese comments made me laugh

So Obama should insult the Nobel Committee? Yeah, that would be smart.

As for the money, he already said he’s giving it all away.

The ironic thing is the “Peace” Prize over the past 2 decades, is being given to people with good intentions who actually make the world more dangerous.

Carter for negotiating with NK and giving them 2 nuclear reactors?
Al Gore for scaring governments into making energy costs higher, and stopping development in the 3rd world?
The IAEA for claiming to try toc ontrl nukes, but doing an about face on IraqArafat, who didn’t even have good intentions, oh wait, killing Jews IS a popular idea with European socialists since the 1930s.

I think giving the PEACE prize to someone who is actually the commander-in-chief for 2 ongoing WARS has got to be a first.

The ironic thing is the “Peace” Prize over the past 2 decades, is being given to people with good intentions who actually make the world more dangerous.

Carter for negotiating with NK and giving them 2 nuclear reactors?
Al Gore for scaring governments into making energy costs higher, weakening first world economies, bringing more politics and dogmatism into science, and reducing development to a crawl in the 3rd world for meaningless “carbon credits”?
The IAEA for claiming to try to control nukes, but doing an about face on Iraq when the Coalition decided to actually enforce IAEA and UN resolutions?
The UN itself? HAHAHAHAHAAAAA
Kim Dae Jung for failed negotiations with NK.
Arafat, who didn’t even have good intentions. Oh wait, killing Jews IS a popular idea with European socialists, at least since the 1930s.

Just keep giving the prize to people who actually negotiate peace treaties, or to local leaders in 3rd world shitholes who make progress to helping people not get killed by warlords. Give it to George Bush for stopping nuclear proliferation at least in Iraq. Give it to Isreal if they get back in the business of bombing Arab nuclear facilities.

Arafat was given the Peace Prize to give up his own agenda and to curb him towards peace and so he did but Israel did not comply. Obama was given the peace prize in hope that US stop their genocidal war adventures which people are getting tired of while slowing down the world economy. Obama got no answer for Iraq and Afghanistan yet but it is hope. He who was campaigning a Change. Now is his time to prove that he is more than hype. He can talk the talk, but we want to see him walk the walk.

Americans should not be flattered. Rather should think of this as, how terrible US have been. Forget this, we are the greatest. Greatest nations do not kill anyone and hide behind no brainer flag waving nationalism. Japan did this in the 40s, now US is learning.

“Arafat was given the Peace Prize to give up his own agenda and to curb him towards peace and so he did” which is exactly why the next Norwegian Pointless Prize should go to Kim Jong-il. If we could just give this prize to all the bad, evil men in the world, they would surely see the light and mend their ways! Why must we all be so cynical? Everyone is a fuzzy bunny rabbit at heart, if only they had their very own Norwegian Pointless Prize!

Kummbay, My Fascist Lord, Kumbaya!