• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

EU to win 2012 Nobel Peace Prize, says Norway public radio

This prize has become a joke. First, Obama... who hadn't been in office more than a few weeks... now, the EU, which is mired in economic crisis, multicultural clashes, while several of the EU's primary supporters... France, Germany and Spain... spearheaded military attacks on Libya to support the rebellion there.

The mind boggles.

You should read the reasoning behind the award and then you would understand. The prize is not given for "peace efforts during the last year"... it very rarely is.
 
I can understand why the americans are mad in this thread but if they want to win more nobel prizes they should start eating more chocolates.

Today in faulty causality: A study has found that a country’s consumption of chocolate is directly correlated to the number of Nobel laureates it has produced. Leading the world in both chocoholism and Nobels: the Swiss, followed by the Swedes and the Danes. The U.S. would have to consume an additional 275 million pounds of chocolate per year to catch up (still no word on what benefits salt, a preponderance of processed foods, and trans-fats impart to a nation).

The More Chocolate A Nation Eats, The More Nobel Prizes It Gets | Popular Science
 
This prize has become a joke. First, Obama... who hadn't been in office more than a few weeks... now, the EU, which is mired in economic crisis, multicultural clashes, while several of the EU's primary supporters... France, Germany and Spain... spearheaded military attacks on Libya to support the rebellion there.

The mind boggles.

As I said before, I think it's purely a joke and people win the prize based solely on ideology and the desire for the committee to push an ideology.
 
You should read the reasoning behind the award and then you would understand. The prize is not given for "peace efforts during the last year"... it very rarely is.

Well , maybe Norwegian politicians who sit in the committe shouldn't try to redefine the rules of the prize. There is a reason Alfred Nobel thought the prize should be given to the ones who have done the most the preceding year, because else they can give a peace prize to almost anyone with power, because almost anyone can be argued that they have led to peace. And in fact you don't even need to do anything. Obama got his prize for doing nothing but hold some speeches. The Nobel peace prize committee need to stop giving out peace prizes as an encouragement, and give it out for real recent achievements.

EU should have gotten a peace price in the 80s, after all of the dictatorships collapsed, not now. Also, EU can not solely get credit for the changes in Europe. If you are going to give the prize as an encouragement, why not give EU the Nobel price of economics too? Right not, democracy is eroding, there are huge conflicts between south and north Europe. There are a financial war going on in Greece. This is the worst possible time to give EU a peace prize.

There is a question why 80% of the members of the committee is for Norwegian membership of the EU, but 80% of the Norwegian population is against. The only reason they got it through is because the guy against EU got sick. Because of this decision, not only foreigners have lost confidence in the committee, but Norwegians too.,
 
Re: E.U. Wins Nobel Peace Prize.....

The Nobel Peace prize has become just a joke.

I stopped paying attention to the Nobel Prizes after Barbra Streisand won.

Or was that the Oscars?

Oh well, same difference.
 
You should read the reasoning behind the award and then you would understand. The prize is not given for "peace efforts during the last year"... it very rarely is.

Given their explanation it should have been the United States who won the prize.
 
Well , maybe Norwegian politicians who sit in the committe shouldn't try to redefine the rules of the prize. There is a reason Alfred Nobel thought the prize should be given to the ones who have done the most the preceding year,
Except you're wrong. He didn't mention "the preceding year". According to his will, the Peace Prize is for, those who have "done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses." Perhaps you can find quotes or documents from Nobel himself that contradict this.
 
Except you're wrong. He didn't mention "the preceding year". According to his will, the Peace Prize is for, those who have "done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses." Perhaps you can find quotes or documents from Nobel himself that contradict this.
This source agrees with me 'The Nobel Peace Prize' by Fredrik Heffermehl : A Book Review by Scott London

The key argument rests on an exegesis of Alfred Nobel's famous will of 1895. The peace prize should go to the person who had done the most in the preceding year to 1) organize and promote peace congresses, 2) eliminate or reduce standing armies, and 3) contribute to fraternity between nations, Nobel wrote.

and the full text agrees with me too. http://www.nobelprize.org/alfred_nobel/will/will-full.html

The whole of my remaining realizable estate shall be dealt with in the following way: the capital, invested in safe securities by my executors, shall constitute a fund, the interest on which shall be annually distributed in the form of prizes to those who, during the preceding year, shall have conferred the greatest benefit to mankind. The said interest shall be divided into five equal parts, which shall be apportioned as follows:
 
Last edited:
You will get a more accurate picture if you visit the original Nobel Prize website.

The Nobel Peace Prize 2012

We were talking about his Alfred Nobels will, not what the asshole Jagland decided to redefine the prize to become.

I said that Norwegian politicians who hand out the prize should stop try to redefine the prize and listen more to the original intent of the prize. The prize should at least be given to someone who have done recent achievements to peace. Problem is, recently EU has done the exact opposite.
 
Last edited:
We were talking about his Alfred Nobels will, not what the asshole Jagland decided to redefine the prize to become.

I said that Norwegian politicians who hand out the prize should stop try to redefine the prize and listen more to the original intent of the prize. The prize should at least be given to someone who have done recent achievements to peace. Problem is, recently EU has done the exact opposite.

Very, very few Nobels are awarded for the work of just the preceding 12 months, not in Peace, Chemistry, Physics, Medicine or Literature. Crick and Watson did not discover the helical structure of DNA in just a year.
 
We were talking about his Alfred Nobels will, not what the asshole Jagland decided to redefine the prize to become.

I said that Norwegian politicians who hand out the prize should stop try to redefine the prize and listen more to the original intent of the prize. The prize should at least be given to someone who have done recent achievements to peace. Problem is, recently EU has done the exact opposite.

You can't possibly complete a peace work overnight in a year.
 
Very, very few Nobels are awarded for the work of just the preceding 12 months, not in Peace, Chemistry, Physics, Medicine or Literature. Crick and Watson did not discover the helical structure of DNA in just a year.

You can't possibly complete a peace work overnight in a year.

That is why I said it should be recent and not redefined to anytime. He wrote it for a reason. Just because you think the requirement is too tough, does not mean we should discard what he said and make up our own rules. No what you do is to redefine it so it still remains the same intent.

Also, he never said all the work had to be done last year. That is bad straw man. He talked about the people who have done the most last year.
 
I don't know if this has been mentioned, but there are some who think that NATO, rather than the EU, should've gotten the Nobel Peace Prize. Talk about irony! (E.U.’s Nobel Peace Prize: Does NATO Deserve It More? | World | TIME.com) (NATO and not EU deserves the Nobel Peace Prize - The Globe and Mail)

You know what? **** it, everybody gets a Nobel peace prize. Ricky, Joe, that homeless guy ****ting on the wall of the courthouse, and that stray cat over there, give that little bastard a peace prize too. Everybody wins, just for showing up and doing what they do every day.
 
You know what? **** it, everybody gets a Nobel peace prize. Ricky, Joe, that homeless guy ****ting on the wall of the courthouse, and that stray cat over there, give that little bastard a peace prize too. Everybody wins, just for showing up and doing what they do every day.

I expect if that happens Oprah will make the announcement.

"You get a Nobel Peace Prize! You get a Nobel Peace Prize! Everybody gets a Nobel Peace Prize!" :mrgreen:
 
"You get a Nobel Peace Prize! You get a Nobel Peace Prize! Everybody gets a Nobel Peace Prize!" :mrgreen:

That's funny. I wish I thought of that one. I'd have smacked those Euros with it.
 
Very, very few Nobels are awarded for the work of just the preceding 12 months, not in Peace, Chemistry, Physics, Medicine or Literature. Crick and Watson did not discover the helical structure of DNA in just a year.

He may have worked on it for many years but proving to the world that he was right happened only once.
 
That's funny. I wish I thought of that one. I'd have smacked those Euros with it.

The rational might be to assist in a financial bail-out but the bureaucrats have probably already divvied up the cash.
 
We were talking about his Alfred Nobels will, not what the asshole Jagland decided to redefine the prize to become.

I said that Norwegian politicians who hand out the prize should stop try to redefine the prize and listen more to the original intent of the prize. The prize should at least be given to someone who have done recent achievements to peace. Problem is, recently EU has done the exact opposite.

To be fair Alfred had very little to do with the Peace prize, that was his wife's idea. She persuaded him he needed to rehabilitate his legacy. The prizes were originally to honor those who made developments in Nobel's field - arms manufacture and dealing. That's why there's no prize for mathematics.
 
The rational might be to assist in a financial bail-out but the bureaucrats have probably already divvied up the cash.

I did that one. Said the money is probably going to Greece.
 
Back
Top Bottom