"the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations and the abolition or reduction of standing armies and the formation and spreading of peace congresses."
Hmmm.... perhaps I am a bit cynical, but what exactly has Obama achieved? He replaced Bush, who was disliked by many nations due to his hyperaggressive stance on Foreign Policy. He has promised to close Guantanemo Bay, but has it happened yet? He has increased the number of troops in Afghanistan, hardly a "peaceful" move. He has "promised" over and over again, but has yet to truly deliver. For the same reasons I found it hard to buy into the Obama propaganda surrounding his election, I find it hard to buy into his presidency. He is an amazing orator with little political experience outside of being a community organizer and a junior senator. His rhetoric mobilized millions to vote and for that he should be admired.
That being said, is he deserving of the most revered prize in world peace? I think not. Perhaps after another year of actually implementing his plans I can see this being the case, but it is a smack in the face to anyone who has sacrificed, put themselves out on the line, and worked hard to actually achieve that peace. His nomination in February was only two weeks after his election, give the guy a chance! What happens if he fails? What kind of pressure was just put on him to pull through in a time where Iran is developing nuclear arms, and with the Ayatollah on his death bed, who is to say they won't end up in the wrong hands?
Agree or disagree with me on his presidency, but one fact remains, regardless of your political stance, Obama should not have won an award simply for not being the previous president. That is like giving it to Admiral Karl Donitz for replacing Hitler. Hey, he surrendered in WWII, so wasn't he deserving of a Peace Prize?
