Nobel Peace Prize for Excellence in Appeasement

In a shocking turn of events which caught Americans and the world by surprise, Oslo Norway decided to award President Obama the Nobel Peace Prize.  Now, Obama will accept the Nobel Peace Prize in Norway later today amidst media fanfare. No doubt this will be a great photo-op opportunity for the President. A much needed boost. I am sure Obama intends to ride the waves of this award all the way up to Mount Rushmore. But, I must ask a very important question that has been on my mind ever since it was announced in October that Obama would be receiving the Nobel Peace Prize. Its a question that's on a lot of people's minds.  What did Obama do to deserve such a coveted award?  Usually people have to accomplish something or engage in some constructive action in order to deserve an award. This question becomes even more important when it was learned that the nominating committee had to select Obama around February 1, 2009 which was only two weeks after Obama assumed the presidency.  What could have Obama done so significant to deserve the Nobel Peace Prize only two weeks after he took the oath of office? According to the nominating committee, they were impressed with Obama's reaching out to the Muslim world and his attempts to reduce nuclear proliferation. In other words, Obama is receiving the award for adopting a worldview that Norway supports even if it is contrary to the goals of world peace. In other words, Norway could care less whether Obama achieved peace or not as long as he makes nice with the Europeans.  Because the Europeans were left out in the dark during the Bush years and rightfully so I might add, my guess is Norway was so happy to get rid of Bush who opposed EU policies that when Obama took over and openly endorsed EU policies, Norway had to show its sigh of relief and ecstatic pleasure by giving Obama the ultimate prize. Not a very impressive substantiation of why Obama should receive the Nobel Peace Prize.

Despite the unimpressive substantiation, let's closely examine what Obama has done to achieve worldwide peace since the nominating committee made its decision in the early part of February 2009. Perhaps, Obama did something monumental to deserve the prize in the weeks and months after he was selected to receive the award.

                         ARROGANT CARD                   

1)  As soon as Obama assumed the presidency, he went on his famous whirlwind tour apologizing to the world for Americas "arrogance."  Obama told Europe that America had been "arrogant and dismissive even derisive to its allies" as he offered an apology for the Bush presidency.  Its pretty low when the U.S. President calls his own country arrogant. The country that liberated millions of people in Afghanistan and Iraq and eradicated a terrorist supporting regime in that of Saadam Hussein and eliminated Taliban and Al Qaeda leaders. The country that was attacked on 9/11 and went to battle in order to defend its citizens from further attacks and in turn made the world safer. That country is arrogant according to President Obama. But besides the clear problem with what Obama articulated in that April 2009 speech to the Britons, Obama failed to realize that America's enemies were also listening to that speech. Iran, North Korea etc. who also have been calling America arrogant finally got vindication in the U.S. President agreeing with their malevolent dogma. Now, whenever an enemy disagrees with a legitimate U.S. policy, it will call America arrogant in an almost childish game to see if the U.S. President will run to their country and apologize for being an arrogant country. For example, what's stopping China or Russia from calling America arrogant if it attempts to procure sanctions against Iran? Will Obama rescind any efforts to bring about sanctions against Iran if China or Russia use the "arrogant" card against America in an effort to stop the U.S. from punishing Iran?  If Obama feels compelled to play it safe in order to mollify the international community, world peace will be irreparably harmed.

                OBAMA THE  PROLIFERATER REDUCER?


2)   What in the world has Obama done to reduce nuclear proliferation?  Since becoming President, he has leveled empty threats against the Iranian regime which have not worked. He tried to start low-level negotiations with the Iranian regime. That has not worked as the Iranians have already indicated that they will not talk to the West. The IAEA have already declared that negotiations with the Iranians are at a dead-end . Meanwhile, Iran have made several incendiary threats against Israel signaling that they intend to wipe Israel off the face of the map. And, a U.N. detector placed on the border near Iran determined that Iran has not stopped its nuclear program and we know that Iran will not destroy its secret nuclear plant despite demands to do so. Furthermore, Obama has done nothing to pursue the procurement of sanctions against Iran. We are right now at a crossroads with negotiations having failed and no sanctions as Iran vigorously makes strides towards obtaining the nuclear bomb. Surely, there does not appear to be any reduction of  Iranian nuclear proliferation which was one of the main reasons that Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize.

                        REACHING OUT TO THE MUSLIM WORLD?

3)   We have been told that Obama recieved the Nobel Peace Prize because he has reached out to the Muslim world. Why should the U.S. have to reach out the Muslim world? If anything the Muslim world should reach out the U.S. for supporting a culture that produced the 9/11 hijackers. If anything the Muslim world should explain to the U.S. why it denies its own citizens the freedoms that the rest of the world appreciates. If anything, the Muslim world should travel to Washington to give a speech as to why it spends millions of dollars on Kassem rockets and other weaponry that are launched on Israeli cities and towns? Why should the victim apologize to the aggressor? Sure enough, Obama went to Cairo in June of 2009 and tried to understand the Muslim world. He tried to understand a Muslim world that seeks to annihilate the only  viable democracy in the middle east and the only Jewish state in the world.  In that speech, he ended up comparing the German massacre of 6 million Jews to "Palestinian dislocation."  Obama did more harm to world peace in that speech by comparing the genocidal acts of the Nazis to legitimate acts of self-Defense by the IDF. Instead of condemning the Palestinians for promoting violence, Obama has had a field day chastising  the U.S.'s staunchest ally Israel and has thus caused a stir in U.S.-Israel relations. He has capitulated to a Muslim world that is largely opposed to western values and ardently supports terrorist organizations that seek to undermine world security.  And for all the talk during the campaign that Obama was the only one who had the special ability to bring about peace between Israelis and Palestinians,  he has found that its not so easy convincing the Palestinians that they should return to the negotiating table and rescind all enmity towards Israel. So much for the unique talents of the "anointed one."

The plain conclusion is that Obama has not shown at any time during his young presidency that he should be receiving the Nobel Peace Prize on December 10, 2009. (He should be receiving the appeasement award instead) But, what do you expect from an organization that also awarded the prize to Yasser Arafat(may his name be blotted from our memories), the anti-semite Desmond Tutu, Jimmy Carter, and Al Gore?

Nobel Peace Prize for Excellence in Appeasement