Off Topic — HabitableZone

Off Topic » in reply to That argument doesn't even make sense.

It does. They shared the Prize with him. They could have refused if they thought it sullied by his presence.
Mary Anne — (archived)

Arafat took a chance, and lost. It was not without personal and political risk for him, you know.

Rabin took a chance, and lost his life. The political extremists did their best to sabotage the peace process, and won.

Arafat's actions since then have not covered him with honor. But to holler about a Prize ten years old, and to condemn a failed attempt in hindsight that had great promise at the time is just loud.

You're upset over Bush not getting an international award for his behavior, when so many in his own country are angry at him for what he has done. He had many tools and chose force. Arafat, in 1994, had precious few other tools than force to use, and chose diplomacy. The Nobel committee awarded that, they awarded Peres and Rabin for that, and Peres and Rabin did not deny Arafat's efforts by refusing the Prize. (It's not as if either of them needed the Prize money to make the payment on their condos.)

If you think President Bush deserves a Nobel Peace Prize for waging a pre-emptive war, you can nominate him. I'm sure someone else has nominated him already.

Regards--
Mary Anne

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (30 posts)