What is wrong about obama winning the nobel prize?

under the Bush administration we had the largest reduction in Nuclear arms - 30%!

Source please?

We are still in Iraq

And we are withdrawing troops. Obama said we would be out by the end 2010.

We are still in afganstan

And?

Guantanamo is still open (because it is needed}

He said it would be closed within the year. He still has a few more months.

We are definitely still keeping military options on the table in response to Iran’s Nuclear threat.

As we should…

This award was a slap in the face to George W. Bush.

Partially. And he deserves to be slapped.

It was a statement by Obama’s left-leaning norwegian friends that they prefer a liberal policy maker.

No they prefer someone who actually practices diplomacy as opposed to using it to wage war.

I am pretty sure gandhi never won it.

Don’t be ridiculous. It does not cheapen the award. While I do think it was a little early to give it to him, I can understand why they did.

I agree with Jimahl that it may have been given as an enticement to employ diplomacy. Hopefully the positive reinforcement works.

There were far more deserving individuals who didn’t get noticed for it… most likely someone who could use the money worse.

Doing good is its own reward… or its own validation for punishment… both scenarios fit here.

Whats wrong is Obama didn’t do anything to deserve the prize, he hasn’t brought any peace at all to the war zones, all he has done is opened his mouth and said something

under the Bush administration we had the largest reduction in Nuclear arms - 30%!

WTF has this sitting president done except keep in effect the exact same policies of our last president? 

We are still in Iraq We are still in afganstan Guantanamo is still open (because it is needed} We are definitely still keeping military options on the table in response to Iran’s Nuclear threat.

This award was a slap in the face to George W. Bush. It was a statement by Obama’s left-leaning norwegian friends that they prefer a liberal policy maker.

If you read a lot of the articles it sounds a whole lot like he won because he is not Bush. I know that is an inference but if you consider the opinions of Bush and writers that have stated their opinions of him, it is very plausable!

He got it because his foreign policy is the complete opposite of Bush’s. Obama has embraced diplomacy as a vehicle for peace, rather than an excuse to wage war.

I think it was premature, and definately was meant as an incentive for Obama to keep relying on diplomacy to deter nuclear proliferation and to pursue peaceful resolutions to confilcts, particularly with the muslim world.

It must be a pre-emptive move. He is expected to do very big things in the name of peace. Yah! same kind of things that the Allies did when hitler re-militarized and took back Bavaria. France and England drafted “apeasement” policies and boy did that work. . . on second thought . . . Since the list of people nominated recently include Al Gore and Yassir Arafat, maybe it is time we see the Nobel prize as just a modified Academy Award, they could have at least nominated Barbara Streisand or Ben Afleck.

I don’t believe he has done anything too notable really, that would make him worthy of winning the Peace prize.

I’m just mad that I didn’t win.