A premature Nobel Peace prize(nytimes.com)
nytimes.com
A premature Nobel Peace prize
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/10/world/10nobel.html?_r=1&hp
4 comments
My reaction is also that it's premature, but your comment is simply not true. There are many people arguing that it's deserved, from commentators like Andrew Sullivan to the figures cited in the international reaction pages of both the NYTimes and Le Monde. Furthermore, "ALL the media from left to middle to right" and your choice of publications to cite betrays a very US/anglocentric view of "ALL the media."
Inane in that Obama hasn't done anything to deserve it, yes. But it's smart if the Nobel committee wants to push the political scene in a certain direction. This award going to a young president will have an impact.
Probably not what the prize ought to be used for, but if it's effective...
Probably not what the prize ought to be used for, but if it's effective...
That's what I thought too. Obama has to make a decision on Afghanistan soon. Could this be a political attempt to sway his decision. It would be incredibly interesting if Obama now decides to dramatically increase the number troops in Afghanistan.
The NYT report doesn't say that the prize is premature.
Why use a misleading headline for the hn submission of the report ?
Why use a misleading headline for the hn submission of the report ?
This is news... just not hacker news.
Silly headline.
...but Slate ( http://www.slate.com/id/2231909/ ),
the NYT ( http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/10/world/10nobel.html?_r=1... )
the Telegraph ( http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/b... )
Reuters ( http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE5981JK20091009 )
The Atlantic, the Washington Post, etc., etc., etc. (basically, ALL the media from left to middle to right) are saying that this was an inane decision.
I have to concur.