A little while ago Obama was awarded a Nobel Peace Prize. The immediate reaction of people asking what he has done to deserve it was understandable. I have waited for someone to explain it rationally, but as of yet no one has.
A few people have made mention of it being for what he will do more than what he has done. This seems a little silly to me. He has reversed our policy of "no dialogue", he has supported the two state Israel option, and has made the decision to finish the nation building going on in Afghanistan and Iraq. I am confused as to what he has "to do". Apparently opening up dialogue with Iran isn't "doing" anything. Does he have to actually make up facts and invade a country to have "done" anything?
The award is a little premature, in my opinion, but I don't think it is completely unmerited like people pretend. Nominating Obama 12 days into his presidency and awarding him in the first year, is obviously an attempt to influence his decisions. If I lived outside the US I would be a little nervous too. Apparently, we can invade anyone we want and get away with it.
Obama has some major decisions with Afghanistan coming up, and it is obvious the Nobel Committee is trying to influence his decision, just like everyone else.
No comments:
Post a Comment