Fickle Cycle

I laughed out loud on learning that Barrack Obama recieved this years Nobel Peace Prize. I’m not a great believer in these prizes being anything truly significant but there is a big commotion over this (the recipient being who he is). What is significant about all this is that it is exposing just how blurred the line between policy and rhetoric has become in so many heads.

Let’s take a step back for a moment. In his first nine months as president, he’s doubled the amount of troops in Afghanistan, escalated illegal strikes on Pakistan, proposed the largest military budget in all of human history, and maintains Iraq troop levels and a vague withdrawl plan. In continuing with Bush II’s policies, he’s continued torture in illegal detention facilities around the world (noteably Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan), given immunity to those Americans responsible for the torture regime, and persists in extending the dates of Guantanamo’s closure. The president has backed down on multiple campaign promises, including renegotiating NAFTA and refusing to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide. He’s assured the Israeli prime minister of continuing to turn a blind eye to Israel’s illegal nuclear weapon programme, while regularly threatening Iran for a programme they’re legally entitled to. Let’s not even begin on his domestic policy.

I could go on, but to keep this concise, Obama is not someone bent on peace and is not much better than his presidential predecessor. The media is reporting the prize a strange decision because Obama hasn’t had enough time to do anything yet. This is wrong; Obama has done a lot, it’s just been counter-productive to peace.