It's pretty much breaking news right now... so there aren't any legit links yet. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33237202/ns/world_news-europe/
This seems premature. Merely being open to diplomacy, though it is a stark contrast to the last eight years, is not worthy of the Nobel. Here's to hoping he actually ends the Iraq War, develops a workable Afghanistan proposal, or follows through and forces Israel to give up settlements. Though if Kissinger got it, I guess anyone's eligible.
Indeed, one must wonder why they did not at least let a few years go by...or his first term before giving him such an award. He will probably end up being a worthy recipient but you have to think there are people out there have done more for the world than he has to this point. I get the feeling this is going to split worldwide opinions now when it could of been left for a few years and would of been widely accepted.
Two weeks in office and he got enough votes in that time to win it! To be honest, I don't think anyone really cares about these things any more, so no need to get upset over it.
Well, in his defense no US buildings were assaulted in the first nine months of his Presidency. That's a step in the right direction wrt peace.
This is a Joke, he hasn't done anything yet that makes him a suitable candidate. The US is still in Iraq and Afghanistan. I believe he might do thing in his term to make him suitable, but not yet. On wikipedia they have this written about the rationale i wonder how long it will be on there. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nobel_Peace_Prize_laureates
yo obama i'm really happy for ya and ima let ya finish, but beyonce had one of the most nobelest peace of ass of all time....all time!!
Premature is subjective. But this decision is not unprecedented for the Nobel Committee. Numerous awards have been for lifetime achievement for decades of work such as to Kim Dae Jung or Jimmy Carter but other Nobels prizes such as to Aung San Suu Kyi have been not for specific achievement but as political capital to encourage ongoing works that the Committee considers emblematic of the Nobel Peace Prize's ideals. If it's the consideration of the committee that Obama's works are well under way, that they embody the ideals of the award, and that this award provides him more political capital to realize those ideals then it's not subjective. This is not necessarily my take on the situation, merely an objective logical rationale why if you take the Committee at its word it's not necessarily "premature." Personally, although there's no mention of it in the citation, the fact that Obama was nominated mere days after he took office insinuates that the nomination was more for being an agent of social change (ie being the first black to take office as President of the US) than anything else because none of his policies were even in place at the time and the inherent conflict of giving a Peace Prize to someone whose nation is concurrently occupying 2 middle eastern countries and supporting a 3rd in an occupation of its own (part of the citation was for fostering peace with muslim nations)
Just read he was less than a month in office when the nominations had to be made. Better than 07 at least I guess.