I have no issue with this laureate, but it is sad that the comittee could not find someone deserving that is working on a more current conflict. I guess this is not a positive outlook for the current state international conflicts.
At a time when Russia threatens the use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine, Israel and Iran escalate tensions, North Korea tests missiles and warheads… it is hard not to relate the award to these circumstances.
Perhaps the committee thought it was best to express its opinion on current conflicts indirectly, as it has done so in the past.
Obama is by far the most vapid recipient of the award, but I wonder if he is also the best representative for the lack of peace given his legacy of "Yes we can, (but we don't)."
The reason we seemingly can't have peace is because we deliberately refuse it.
> I have no issue with this laureate, but it is sad that the comittee
You have no issue but it is sad?
> could not find someone deserving that is working on a more current conflict. I guess this is not a positive outlook for the current state international conflicts.
Just any issue would be fine for you? Or could it be some specific issue that you care abuot.
I see no issue with this org being nominated. Their advocacy seems to be right and useful. Good for them. On the other hand, reading the declaration, it's pretty clear that this nomination does not exist to celebrate good news. That is the sad part.
> Or could it be some specific issue that you care abuot.
I, of course, have causes that are closer to my heart. But even if it was a conflict I had no previous knowledge, learning about it through the news of its end, or even that people are working hard to solve it, is kind of beautiful. Peace in our time is always awing.
Since over 2 years, we again live now under the constant real threat of a nuclear war. Or this is at least what Russia is regularly claiming. This is very current as long as Putin doesn't get his s** together.
Of course there are other current candidates who would also deserve it, but I think it might be also a matter of how hot and current the problem is, and how much political impact this message would have. Russia and their threats are cooling down for the moment, so it's "safer" to send this message, instead of anything related to the Middle East, for example.
