Obama, the Nobel peace prize and bombarding the moon

You guessed it. There will be a lot of debate on this.

Anyway, i read the two headlines together this morning and found the irony funny.

"NASA bombards the moon" ..and i thought to myself why they used the word 'bombard'to describe NASA's experiment. Heck- to think we are bombarding the moon as well.

And then "Obama wins the Nobel Peace Prize". Read immediately after the first headline i could not help thinking why the man who started bombarding the moon of all places deserved the peace prize.

To me his award signifies a couple of things:

Firstly, it appears no clear and obvious choice seems ot have existed. It seems no one really delivered a significant peace initiative last year.

The only 'stabilisation' seems to be in Iraq- so Bush should have won for that. Life in Afghanistan seems to have takes a turn for the worse.

African states embroiled in unrest continue. The Palestine problem is not solved. India and Pakistan continue thier uneasy peace.

Was the Nobel prize really needed this year?

Secondly, is that the only wasy we could get Obama to work concretely towards expanding peace in the world. Is this what we are saying about the most powerful man in the world. That his good intentions need a prize before he actually is motivated enough to do something about it?

I mean we could have as well given the prize to Sarkozy- it was after all the French that started confronting Somalian pirates off the African coast?

Its like tipping a waiter as you enter a fancy restaurant.

Horrible.

C'mon folks, Gandhi did not get a Nobel prize for peace. Imagine that. And now Obama gets it.

Venkat