[Peace-discuss] Nobel Committee, Strategic As Ever, Taps Obama for Peace Prize

[Morton K. Brussel]

I continue to believe that the U.S. has no right to be in Afghanistan  
(or Iraq, Columbia, Africa, …) except to give economic/humanitarian  
aid and to provide and manage reparations for the destruction they've  
caused.

And you, Bob? Do you think that Obama is doing good in Afghanistan and  
for the Afghan people with his escalation of the conflict there? Or is  
he doing it for narrow American self/national/corporate interest? It  
seems clear to me that he's knows that he's in trouble there, so he's  
trying to triage among more or less belligerent positions. He's being  
strategic, in your words.

With Obama, do you favor a continuing American military presence  
there, …so as to defeat Al Qaeda?

Al Jazeera tends to reflect the more conservative Arab views of the ME  
in my opinion, so the fact that they liked your piece neither  
surprises nor informs me.

The juxtaposition/comparison of Desmond Tutu with Obama is ludicrous,  
except for the shade of their skins. I could elaborate, but not here.

I recommend the article by Glenn Greenwald: He argues with the "peace  
prize" in more detail than have I:

[http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/10/09-7]

…Through no fault of his own, Obama presides over a massive war-making  
state that spends on its military close to what the rest of the world  
spends combined.  The U.S.accounts for almost 70% of worldwide arms  
sales.  We're currently occupying and waging wars in two separate  
Muslim countries and making clear we reserve the "right" to attack a  
third.  Someone who made meaningful changes to those realities would  
truly be a man of peace.  It's unreasonable to expect that Obama would  
magically transform all of this in nine months, and he certainly  
hasn't.  Instead, he presides over it and is continuing much of it.   
One can reasonably debate how much blame he merits for all of that,  
but there are simply no meaningful "peace" accomplishment in his  
record -- at least not yet -- and there's plenty of the opposite.   
That's what makes this Prize so painfully and self-evidently ludicrous.

You are being overly strategic in your analysis and your judgement (in  
my opinion)
--mkb

.

On Oct 9, 2009, at 12:08 PM, Robert Naiman wrote:

> Well, as someone who travels and reads internationally, I would hope,
> Mort, that you would consider a more thoughtful, less knee-jerk
> response.
>
> The Nobel Committee is chosen by the Norwegian parliament. Do you
> really think their goal in life is to whitewash U.S. imperialism?
>
> P.S. Al Jazeera called. They saw my piece, and they really liked it.
> That tells you something about where the debate that matters is.
>
> On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Morton K. Brussel <brussel at illinois.edu 
> > wrote:
>> All you're saying is that the Nobel Peace Prize is a farce.
>>
>> "Works in progress" include building up the military, bombing  
>> innocents,
>> excusing Israel's atrocities, and repression, etc.. You seem to be  
>> excusing
>> the Committee, and thereby Obama, for the latter's scurrilous acts  
>> (not
>> words). So far his nice words have have been belied by both his  
>> actions and
>> non-actions. Perhaps he's a wee bit "better", certainly more clever  
>> than
>> Bush, but all this award does is put the label "peace" in an  
>> Orwellian
>> context.
>>
>> Such a "strategy" be damned! Hope remains eternal and evanescent  
>> with Obama
>> it seems.
>>
>> --mkb
>>
>> On Oct 9, 2009, at 7:51 AM, Robert Naiman wrote:
>>
>>> Some initial commentary has called the award unprecedented and
>>> wondered why the committee would give President Obama the award when
>>> he "hasn't done anything yet." But anyone who thinks this award is
>>> unprecedented hasn't been paying attention. The Nobel Committee  
>>> has a
>>> long history of praising "works in progress" that it wants to  
>>> assist,
>>> like the downfall of apartheid. The Committee likes Obama's  
>>> diplomatic
>>> moves on Iran and Afghanistan and wants to help shield Obama from  
>>> his
>>> domestic adversaries.
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/nobel-committee-strategic_b_314980.html
>>>
>>> http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/10/9/82426/1566
>>>
>>> http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/node/366
>>>
>>> --
>>> Robert Naiman
>>> Just Foreign Policy
>>> www.justforeignpolicy.org
>>> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
>>>
>>> Withdraw from Afghanistan with a Public, Negotiated Timetable
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWk2aapaywk
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Peace-discuss mailing list
>>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>>> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>>
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Robert Naiman
> Just Foreign Policy
> www.justforeignpolicy.org
> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
>
> Withdraw from Afghanistan with a Public, Negotiated Timetable
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWk2aapaywk

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20091009/509df80d/attachment.htm