he was praised for his reduction of tension in the middle east but as of right now things in the middle east are as bad as ever. president obama has alienated the people we have went there to help and since the reception of this award the president increased his military action in the middle east in aiding the the revolts in lybia and egypt. many of the things he won this award for have not been accompanied by matching actions. the people who supported him did so because middle eastern rulers "know he is somebody different from past leaders who supported Israel economically and militarily." at the time he won he had barely done anything to deserve this sort of praise and his track record shows that he is not shy of military conflict even though he continues to let the military become stagnant because of his lack of winning intensity in military conflict. taking military action without a clear goal and plan is foolish and deteriorating relationships between our only middle eastern ally is equally as foolish
It seemed at the time that awarding Obama the Nobel Peace Prize was more of a hope or wish than a literal award for something he had done. At the time that was the general consensus media like the NY Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/10/world/10nobel.html?_r=1) had put forth.Despite the fact that we are still operating in the middle east and Guantanamo is still functioning we are no longer torturing people in a widespread manner. We have also gained a definite goal to be out of Afghanistan and Iraq.
ReplyDeleteHis actions during the uprisings in Egypt and Libya were more to keep his image in the public eye up as well as not waste too much of the taxpayer's money.
Finally, Israel is a nuclear power that's moped the floor with the entire force of the middle east bearing down on it (6 days war and a few others), so it's a fallacy to think or say that Israel can't take car of itself.