Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - george bush and tony blair nominated for a nobel prize... for starting a war.

- General Discussion (https://thetfp.com/tfp/general-discussion/)

- - george bush and tony blair nominated for a nobel prize... for starting a war. (https://thetfp.com/tfp/general-discussion/5843-george-bush-tony-blair-nominated-nobel-prize-starting-war.html)

george bush and tony blair nominated for a nobel prize... for starting a war.

Quote:

<i>as seen here: http://asia.reuters.com/newsArticle....toryID=2706011</i>

Bush, Blair Nominated for Nobel Prize for Iraq War
Thu May 8, 2003 10:28 AM ET
By Alister Doyle
OSLO (Reuters) - A Norwegian parliamentarian nominated President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair for the Nobel Peace Prize on Thursday, praising them for winning the war in Iraq.

'Sometimes it's necessary to use a small and effective war to prevent a much more dangerous war in the future,' Jan Simonsen, a right-wing independent in Norway's parliament, told Reuters.

'If nobody acted then Saddam Hussein could have produced weapons of mass destruction and, in five or 10 years, could have used them against Israel,' he said.

An award to Bush and Blair would be a U-turn after the Nobel Committee awarded the 2002 prize to former U.S. President Jimmy Carter last October. At the time, the committee chairman called it a kick in the shins to Bush's Iraq policies as Carter had been calling for a diplomatic solution.

Simonsen said the war had 'made it possible to create democracy and respect for human rights in a country which for so many years has been ruled by one of the worst dictators in modern times.'

However, Geir Lundestad, the director of the Nobel Institute where the five-member committee meets, said Simonsen's proposal would have to wait for the 2004 award because the deadline for nominations for 2003 passed on February 1.

The secretive five-member committee names the annual winner in mid-October. More than 160 people and organizations have been nominated for the 2003 prize, including Pope John Paul, Irish rock star Bono and Cuban dissident Oswaldo Paya.

'I'm not especially optimistic that Bush and Blair will win but I think it's worth a try,' Simonsen said. He said he would encourage like-minded parliamentarians in other countries to also nominate Bush and Blair.

Nobel committees have frequently honored the United Nations instead of unilateral action by member states. The United Nations did not give an explicit mandate for the war amid opposition from countries including France, Germany and Russia.

The 2001 Nobel Peace Prize went to the United Nations and U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan.

Thousands of people around the world, including members of national parliaments, professors of history, law and politics and former laureates can make nominations for the prize. The nomination process is secret, but people sometimes publicize their choice.

::confused::

This probably should have gone onto the politics board because you and I both know where it's going. Can war cause peace? Can you actually have peace without war first? If events over in that part of the world continue going in the way it looks like they are right now then I would say Yes! they should be awarded the Peace Prize. India and Pakistan are talking - Syria and Israel have agreed to talk - their are rumors about Syria getting their occupation forces and puppet government out of Lebanon. Coincidence? or did what happened in the blink of an eye in Iraq get their attention? Only time will tell.

I'm glad you posted this, i was looking for an article and couldnt find one.

What a farce! I almost chocked on my broccoli last night when I heard that. George W. Bush a Nobel winner? My god!

theyll never get it. the nobel prize is just a meaningless liberal popularity contest.

It's a sad day in history..

Well it could be worse. Terrorists and war criminals could be nominated.

kissinger got one, why not bush? :rolleyes:

This is better than Norman Swartzkopf getting vote father of the year...

If Arafat can win it...

They don't stand a chance. But if the Nobel prizes given in other categories are so contentious and often upsurd, we should not be surprised that this category is so crazy.

Quote:

Originally posted by Liquor Dealer
Only time will tell.

For that reason, I think that if they are to be nominated it should be a good ten years down the track.

For them too, the nomination would be more credible and meaningful if their decisions were judged in the light of a full decade's hindsight.

That is the stupidest fucking thing I have ever heard. FUCK.

Quote:

Originally posted by Jack Ruby
That is the stupidest fucking thing I have ever heard. FUCK.

Yeah. My words exactly. I believe this is the most ludicrous thing I've ever heard in my life.

It could be worse, Bush could be shamelessly lobbying for it like Clinton did a few years back.

I'd give George Bush the award for the person who looks most like a confused muppet. That's all I'd give him.....besides, even if they do recieve the award, is it really going to change wahat people think about them? If your a Bush supporter, you're still going to be a Bush supporter, if your not a supporter, is it going to make you change your mind about him? I don't think so. So what I'm trying to say is, who really cares....throw 'em a bone, it's not going to change anything.

It's just gotta be for publicity anyway. I equate this with "Who's Brittany Spears dating now?"....same thing...it means nothing.

Wait and make sure what happened holds, see how the Middle East peace talks go, then nominate them if it's still holding together in five or ten years. If what they did works, they deserve it, but I get the feeling that everything will fall apart right after elections.

I do agree with the 10 year thing that Macheath suggested. Who knows, maybe peace and democracy will overtake the middle-east due. rofl

Quote:

Originally posted by Macheath
For that reason, I think that if they are to be nominated it should be a good ten years down the track.

For them too, the nomination would be more credible and meaningful if their decisions were judged in the light of a full decade's hindsight.

I actually agree with this.

Only time will tell us if what Bush and Blair have tried to do actually works.

Let's start with my opinion that there is not a hope in hell that they will win. I am not even going to get into whether they should win or not.

More likely is that this puts the thought out there. Then if Bush somehow contributes to a peace settlement between Isreal/Palestine or some similar thing, he'll probably get it. As was pointed out Arafat got one for agreeing to work for peace with Isreal.

He could even get nominated if he settles the North Korean issues and gets them to give up their nukes.

just nominated, i dont think they'll win or even get close.

Nominated?

What taken W so long to buy his way through this one.

Fuckin' dipshit.