Tag Archives: Nobel Peace Prize

Not From @TheOnion: the European Union Wins the Nobel Peace Prize? #FAIL!

European Union Nobel Peace Prize

1933 Nobel Peace Prize awarded to Norman Angel...

1933 Nobel Peace Prize awarded to Norman Angell on exhibit to the public at the Imperial War Museum, London, England (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Let’s see, so, one would think that making peace possible would qualify oneself for the Nobel Peace Prize, but apparently, unqualified parties get to win the prize now and then. First, President Obama, and now the European Union, you know the same one punishing innocent civilian with their sanctions against Iran. Causing unemployment, devaluing a country’s currency, and denying citizens access to medical care is not a way to stop a nuclear threat, no, in fact, it will only serve to embitter the populace against their “saviors.” Why should the people be punished for their leader’s mistakes? That’s why sanctions are an extension of war. But at least in formally declared wars, civilian casualties are talked about as a “risk of the operation.” Sanctions make civilian casualties the norm. And let’s not forget that time the EU promised not to send ground troops into Libya!

#InterventionistFail

#NobelPeacePrizeFail

From the BBC World News: Nobel Peace Prize Awarded to European Union

Enhanced by Zemanta

Nobel Peace Prize: You Didn't Earn That?

Ripping off President Obama’s speech last week, “Someone Else Made That Happen” I think this picture speaks for itself. But funny thing is, like the Huffington Post reported, “Lovitz’s tweet, however, seems to hint that Obama has claimed that he was fully responsible for his Nobel Prize, which he has never publicly done. In fact, the President has frequently given credit to the institutions and people that have helped him throughout his life.”

President Barack Obama’s Christian Realism

[Content Note: the author cites the late John Howard Yoder who victimized a number of his students who were women, – signed the author 12/26/17]

UPDATE: The Mormon Worker says that President Obama needs to read John Howard Yoder

HT: Antony Solomon

UPDATE II: Glenn Greenwald on The Obama Doctrine

I was half-awake/half-asleep at 7:00am yesterday morning when I had left my television on Fox News Channel.  As I was barely wiping my eyes, I was hearing a strange speech, and it almost sounded like Reinhold Niebuhr himself was talking to me, but I looked onto the t.v. screen, and low and behold, it was President Barack Obama giving his Nobel Peace Prize speech and defending his escalation of the war in Afghanistan.

Christian Realism rejects the polly-anna outlook of the early 20th century Social Gospel, which was liberal Protestantism bringing the kingdom of God here on Earth.  Only God can accomplish the impossible task of bringing heaven to earth, therefore Christians must work with the world as it is. Enter: Barack Obama, a politician who attracts the most politically progressive factions of the Democratic Party (the ones who advocate peace and diplomacy among other policy preferences).  In his speech, Obama argued that sometimes war is necessary, because it is the lesser of two evils. Reinhold Niebuhr even argued that there are empires of good, and empire of evil, and that it was up to the empires of good to distribute wealth and technology to their subservient colonies.

According to R.S. Sugitharajah, for Niebuhr, “imperialism was not in itself immoral.  Each empire must be considered individually. He also made a distinction between older and modern empires. The earlier empires were marked by nationalistic imperialism, where the stronger dominate the weaker.  These were considered morally inferior to modern empires.  The new empires are merely servants of the universal community [see Reinhold Niebuhr’s Nations and Empires, page 59].” (R.S. Sugitharajah, Postcolonial Reconfigurations, 146).

This is exactly what we are trying to do in Iraq and Afghanistan. In the end, Obama’s realist ideology blurs lines of difference between him and the politics of George W Bush, who I would argue was a socially conservative Social Gospeller  in the mold of Woodrow Wilson.

I am glad I was not the only one who noticed Obama’s Realist perspective.

Ben Witherington III adds,

“And I quite agree with President Obama that only a warped view of Biblical religion could lead to a belief in a doctrine of holy war as carried out by fallible sinful human beings. Fallen human beings are incapable of carrying out a holy war, incapable of making the necessary moral distinctions so that right is always done in any given situation, or at least so that there are more rescued victims of injustices than newly created victims in the course of a war.

But I must confess to being doubtful even when we talk about a justifiable struggle that it ever becomes a just war.  For what the President has admitted in this speech is that war is not merely hell, it is one of the ultimate expressions of human sin on earth, one of the greatest expressions of a violation of love of neighbor and even love of enemy imaginable.”

For the rest of his analysis of Obama’s speech, see here.

Truth and Peace,

Rod