Yesterday, I derided the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to the International Atomic Energy Agency. In the ocmments, one reader questioned just who I thought might deserve the prize. So I started thinking.
The general requirements seem to be to have a certain level of international prominence and a few public actions in the direction of "peace." Previous conduct seems irrelevant (see Henry Kissinger, Yassir Arafat, Menachem Begin, and Anwar Sadat), just their more recent accomplishments.
With that in mind, a nominee comes to mind.
This candidate has done a great deal. He has freed an entire nation from a brutal dictatorship, and helped them achieve freedom for the first time in their history. He has removed another dictator, and is working hard towards helping that nation's people establish themselves as a free state. He has persuaded a third nation to not only acknowledge its previously-unknown research program into nuclear weapons, but to publicly abandon them and turn them over to another nation (an established nuclear power) for safe disposal. He has worked closely with India and Pakistan, the two newest members of the nuclear club, establishing close ties of friendship with both and helped them step away from their traditional hatred into a safe detente.
So I say that President George W. Bush certainly seems as much a contender as Mr. AlBaradei and the IAEA, and certainly far more deserving than past recipients such as Henry Kissinger or (spit) Yassir Arafat.




Comments (17)
If things work out well in ... (Below threshold)1. Posted by Defense Guy | October 7, 2005 2:15 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
If things work out well in Iraq, then Sistani might not be a bad choice.
1. Posted by Defense Guy | October 7, 2005 2:15 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 7, 2005 14:15
2. Posted by Laurence Simon | October 7, 2005 2:24 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Sistani? No.
The future president of the independent state of Kurdistan? Yes.
2. Posted by Laurence Simon | October 7, 2005 2:24 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 7, 2005 14:24
3. Posted by lawhawk | October 7, 2005 2:41 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
What about Hamid Karzai? He's overseeing the transition from the Taliban to a representative democracy that has already run several elections that were open and without bloodshed expected or hoped for by the usual suspects.
3. Posted by lawhawk | October 7, 2005 2:41 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 7, 2005 14:41
4. Posted by moseby | October 7, 2005 2:59 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
You're all missing an obvious choice...Sean Penn.
What, No??!! Ok...how about nominating that red SOLO beer cup then?
4. Posted by moseby | October 7, 2005 2:59 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 7, 2005 14:59
5. Posted by cat | October 7, 2005 3:19 PM | Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Just a reminder, Jay - "(spit) Yassir Arafat" shared his Nobel prize with Yitzhak Rabin. Like many previous winners of the prize, both Rabin and Arafat had a long record of violence. They won the prize because they agreed to make moves towards peace. Some people on both sides of the conflict thought this was wrong. One person, in particular, felt especially strongly about this and murdered Yitzhak Rabin. Do you agree with him? Should Rabin Square be renamed "(spit) Rabin Square"?
The one thing that Bush shares with many of the murderously bizarre winners of the Peace Prize is his espousal of war. What he has so far not done is to make any moves towards peace. You'll have to give him a bit more time before he does that and becomes eligible for the prize. But don't hold your breath...we've got to wait until God tells him to - and given God's record (according to G.W.) so far, that's not about to happen.
5. Posted by cat | October 7, 2005 3:19 PM |
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on October 7, 2005 15:19
6. Posted by McCain | October 7, 2005 3:25 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Ah what the hell, let's nominate Harriet Miers. She may not be the best available, but trust me when I say that she has some peace skills.
6. Posted by McCain | October 7, 2005 3:25 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 7, 2005 15:25
7. Posted by oliver bush | October 7, 2005 5:18 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
NOBODY DESERVES THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE MORE THAN CINDY SHEEHAN. USING HER SON'S COFFIN AS A SOAPBOX TO HURL INVECTIVE AT A REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATION SHOULD HAVE SURELY BEEN SUFFICIENT TO QUALIFY HER SAINTLY SELF, FURTHERMORE - I EVEN SAW A PHOTO OF HER WEARING A "PEACE" T-SHIRT. I AM QUITE DISAPPOINTED AND DISILLUSIONED SHE WASN'T EVEN NOMINATED. SHE HAS DONE MORE TO FURTHER THE CAUSE OF BUSH-HATE THAN ANYONE ELSE THIS YEAR. IT JUST PROOVES THAT THE NOBEL COMMITTEE IS YET ANOTHER SEXIST, RACIST, RICHEST 1%, COINTELPRO LIKE FRONT FOR SMIRKY MCcHIMPLERBURTON AND HIS SOON TO BE INDICTED DARK MASTER.
--
OHB
7. Posted by oliver bush | October 7, 2005 5:18 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 7, 2005 17:18
8. Posted by cat | October 7, 2005 5:34 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Oliver, just a friendly word to help you solve your computing problems - the CAPS LOCK button can be found on the left-hand side of your keyboard - just above the shift key.
8. Posted by cat | October 7, 2005 5:34 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 7, 2005 17:34
9. Posted by spurwing plover | October 7, 2005 5:49 PM | Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
Dont forget they gave it to that idiot JIMMY CARTER and he proved to be totaly worthless in anything but the dept of iresponiblity
9. Posted by spurwing plover | October 7, 2005 5:49 PM |
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on October 7, 2005 17:49
10. Posted by SilverBubble | October 7, 2005 5:55 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I am seriously hoping that "oliver bush" is a regular pretending to be a moonbat. God I hope so.
Jay Tea, I had a feeling you were going to do this...
10. Posted by SilverBubble | October 7, 2005 5:55 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 7, 2005 17:55
11. Posted by Steve Crickmore | October 7, 2005 6:01 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I agree with Jay Tea. Lawrence Simon's choice of Kay Rala Xanana Gusamo, President of Timor-Leste, or Timor East would have been palatable...however, but not in the same breath as Jay's other choice George W, many of whose Administration officials conspired to act against Gusamo's people for many years.
East Timor is a classic example of the bipartisan nature of US foreign policy during the Cold War - and the secrecy surrounding US military support for authoritarian leaders like president Sukarno, who ruled Indonesia from the US-backed coup in 1965, and then Suharto from 1967 till his downfall in 1998. From Wikipedia "The Indonesian invasion into East Timor was launched over the western border on 16 October 1975. The day before the invasion of Dili and subsequent annexation, U.S. President Gerald Ford and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger had met President Suharto in Jakarta where Ford made clear that "we will not press you on the issue." Paul Wolfowitz was US ambassador to Indonesia at the time. "Indonesian rule in East Timor was marked by extreme violence and brutality," especially by the US financed Indonesia military until Clinton started backing away in the late 90's. Remember it was the 2000 presidential election that our security policy in Indonesia backed and partly shaped by Democrat Holbrooke and Wolfowitz. "Paul and I(Holbrooke)," he said, "have been in frequent touch to make sure that we keep [East Timor] out of the presidential campaign, where it would do no good to American or Indonesian interests". Indeed, bloody embarrassing was the American backing of this brutal tyrant who acted in our US government interest in a cruel repression of the East Timorese people.
For the record.. Bishop CARLOS FELIPE XIMENES BELO and JOSE RAMOS-HORTA won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1996 "for their work towards a just and peaceful solution to the conflict in East Timor."
11. Posted by Steve Crickmore | October 7, 2005 6:01 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 7, 2005 18:01
12. Posted by KNM | October 7, 2005 9:53 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
"The general requirements seem to be to have a certain level of international prominence and a few public actions in the direction of 'peace.'"
Arafat. Though I guess there was really only one action in the direction of peace. But it was a big one!
12. Posted by KNM | October 7, 2005 9:53 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 7, 2005 21:53
13. Posted by OregonMuse | October 8, 2005 11:41 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I think "Oliver Bush" is a conservative prankster who likes to yank our chains by posting the most outrageous, deranged moonbat nonsense imaginable and then sits back and laughs while we go running around squawking about how bad it is.
It's kind of like throwing a stuffed fox into a henhouse late at night.
13. Posted by OregonMuse | October 8, 2005 11:41 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 8, 2005 11:41
14. Posted by Tom Arnold | October 8, 2005 1:10 PM | Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Hey, I just took a dump. As long as we're nominating morons like Bush, why not give some consideration to the corn-flecked turd I just pinched out?
14. Posted by Tom Arnold | October 8, 2005 1:10 PM |
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on October 8, 2005 13:10
15. Posted by Antioch | October 8, 2005 1:58 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Aw, it's gonna be so awesome when W. gets the Peace Prize! Then Condoleeza can be Preznit, Dick Cheney can be poet laureate for the US, Karl Rove can win, like, a thousand Emmys for his sitcom Hot Karl and the Gang, Tom Delay will get acquitted and take over Disneyworld and throw himself and all his friends a big parade every 30 minutes!
And I'm going to be there in the middle of it all, without excessively-PC Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn books about labor camps laying around.
Oh. Oh my, what a wonderful dream.
Oh no, Tea Tree, get up! You're going to be late for school! Oh, no, you've wet the bed again. Why can't I have a normal son? Grumble, grumble...
15. Posted by Antioch | October 8, 2005 1:58 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 8, 2005 13:58
16. Posted by damn, I'm funny | October 8, 2005 4:21 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
...why not give some consideration to the corn-flecked turd I just pinched out?
Probably because the Nobel Prize Committee wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the corn-flecked turd and your head.
16. Posted by damn, I'm funny | October 8, 2005 4:21 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 8, 2005 16:21
17. Posted by Rick | October 8, 2005 8:39 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I disagree about your implications that Henry Kissinger is undeserving. I would have preferred he receive three rather than Jimmy Carter and Yassir Arafat receive one or even share one. Henry Kissinger's only true fault was that he was wholly unprepared for the vile nature of Congress and its tendency to put easy political points above commen sense and national security.
17. Posted by Rick | October 8, 2005 8:39 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 8, 2005 20:39