Anti-Chemical Weapon Group Awarded Nobel Peace Prize 61
elashish14 writes "The Nobel Prize Committee has chosen to award the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapon (OPCW) with this year's Peace Prize. The OPCW conducts inspections and oversees the destruction of chemical weapon arsenals. They were established in 1997 and 190 nations have agreed to the treaty. The Nobel Committee's decision was a surprise to many however, who expected Pakistani education activist Malala Yousafzai to receive the award."
Rewarding the Wrong Group (Score:1)
This whole thing is f**ked up.
Give the money to ones affected by the CW. Who cares if they, OPCW, needs donations, the state they are disarming should pay for it!
Nobel Peace Prize my ass. Nobel War Prize
ISRAEL NON-SIGNATORY (Score:2, Offtopic)
Stockpiles CW, Uses dual-purpose agents (White Phosphorus) on civilian populations.
Re: (Score:2)
Stockpiles CW, Uses dual-purpose agents (White Phosphorus) on civilian populations.
Of course, to the Israelis Palestinians don't even exist (they are really just Arabs and should be living somewhere in the Arab world) and how can you commit genocide against a people who never existed in the first place...?
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously? They are imaginary people? This whole thing has been a dream? Maybe you've take post-modernism too far/
No, its the official line. I don't believe it myself, I'm just saying what the Israeli line is. I think its based on the name 'Palestinian' being derived from 'Philistine' (the other people who the Jews exterminated in order to create a homeland) which, in turn, was derived from Phoenician. The Israeli theory is that the Arabs who were living in 'their, Jewish, homeland' in the 1950s tried to pretend to have a right to live there by making a connection to the ancient historical people of the region and that
Re: (Score:2)
And now? The recent Genetic discovery that Ashkinazim mitochondrial DNA excludes an origin in "the holy land", and places the maternal line of ancestry in a group with modern Italians.
The manifest Irony here is that the Palestinian people are the genetic and estate inheritors from the Judean people of biblical times - while the great majority of Israeli Jews are on the WRONG side of Masada, being descendents of Roman Legions, not Macabees.
Re: (Score:2)
An interesting story I read said that there came from Egypt, with the Jews, a group of people of mixed race whose fathers were Jews but whose mothers were not. It was decided that they were not real Jews and weren't fit to live in the promised land. They were kicked out and they went south and became the Arabs. This is also borne out etymologically; the Hebrew word for 'mixed race' is indeed 'arab'.
Re: (Score:2)
Impossible. Matrilinear inheritance of Jewishness was an invention of the Romans, imposed on Judea and Samaria, in a time half-again more distant from that of Pharoah, as we are from Caesar.
Firstly, this was done by Rome to destroy the strong tribal affiliation among the conquered peoples. Secondly, it was to remove the possibility of citizenship for the sons of Romans, sired in conquered Judea. These were codified into law, by Pharisees, etc.
There is also the entire question of Egypt, which has never bee
Re: (Score:2)
Allow me a MINOR correction. The Egyptians DO refer to a period wherein a nation is held captive. That is the Egyptian people, themselves captive, under the Hyksos. Most of the record of Hyksos coming and going is unclear. This was in a time corresponding with Mycenae and Troy. One would assume it was in Hyksos time that the supposed "bondage in Egypt" occured.
No coherent theory that corresponds these events exists, to my knowledge, other than correlation and speculation.
A group whose peace accomplishments... (Score:5, Insightful)
...are on par with Barack Obama, which is to say non-existent.
But at least they're better than Yasser Arafat or Le Duc Tho.
Re: (Score:3)
...are on par with Barack Obama, which is to say non-existent.
But at least they're better than Yasser Arafat or Le Duc Tho.
I'm pretty sure that the OPCW would need to be actively manufacturing and selling chemical weapons for that analogy to hold.
Actually, they seem like a fairly good choice (if, unfortunately, probably one made in knee-jerk response to the recent Syrian incident, rather than any more significant thought). The OPCW mostly does banal, administrative stuff in support of identifying and classifying scheduled compounds and precursors for the purposes of trade controls, and acting as a technical and advocacy grou
Re:A group whose peace accomplishments... (Score:5, Insightful)
...are on par with Barack Obama, which is to say non-existent.
But at least they're better than Yasser Arafat or Le Duc Tho.
I'm pretty sure that the OPCW would need to be actively manufacturing and selling chemical weapons for that analogy to hold. Actually, they seem like a fairly good choice (if, unfortunately, probably one made in knee-jerk response to the recent Syrian incident, rather than any more significant thought).
If it is a hasty decision, then they deserve it even less. Chemical deaths are less than 1% of the deaths in Syria. Tens of thousands have died by conventional means. Someone decides they want to get rid of the chemical weapons and they are suddenly deserving of the Nobel Peace Prize?
It elevates the destruction of a weapon to be of a higher importance than the elimination of war. That isn't what the peace prize should be about. Destroying chemical weapons doesn't mean diddly to the average Syrian in the conflict zone. Chemical weapons are mostly a fear of Western nations in the event they "got out" and into the hands of terrorists. Syrians are right to believe that the West only cares about their own potential safety instead of actually stopping a war.
I wouldn't have given the prize to Malala either. She can get it when she turns 18 or 21. Her actions have already made her more than deserving, but she is a big enough celebrity as it is. She should finish what is left of her childhood.
Re: (Score:2)
"I wouldn't have given the prize to Malala either."
She is, IMNSHO, far more deserving than a nearly nameless group of people who will try to do the job, but miss half of them, and will be forgotten by the time the next GP races results are posted.
"She can get it when she turns 18 or 21.
By whose rules? OTOH, that might serve as a mild life insurance policy they'll want to get a large piece of before the taliban kills her.
"Her actions have already made her more than deserving, but she is a big enough celebr
Re: (Score:1)
But if we elevate certain crimes and certain peoples above others why can't we do it with weapons. I mean if you are black and kill another black person, you might get a couple years in jail. On the other hand if you are black and kill a white girl, or are a white man and kill a black man, you are committing a hate crime, and will likely never see the light of day. It works the same way with homosexuals and jews. You can kill a white guy, but don't kill a homosexual. Esspecialy don't kill a homosexual
Re: (Score:2)
My suspicion (based on the apparent complete incompetence and goldfish-calibre historical memory of the Peace Prize selection committee) is that the decision was hasty, and based largely on dramatic (but, as you say, stati
There is some haste (Score:2)
She can get it when she turns 18 or 21.
Part of her merit is that several Talibans have decided she shouldn't turn 18. And the Nobel prizes are not posthumous.
they might be a good choice! (Score:2)
they might be a good choice! but after the obama fuckup you would think they would wait for a year or two AFTER the happening before giving the money.
add to this that this organization is just doing their job and it was other people who chose them to do the job. obama and putin of all fucking people too...
Re: (Score:1)
Is there any particular reason you mention Le Duc Tho, who declined the award, and not his co-winner who accepted it?
Re: (Score:3)
...are on par with Barack Obama, which is to say non-existent.
But at least they're better than Yasser Arafat or Le Duc Tho.
... but still better than say, Henry Kissinger?
Re:A group whose peace accomplishments... (Score:5, Insightful)
The Nobel Peace Prize is like Soviet Russia: a bad joke that nobody fucking wants to hear anymore. The prize committee should just skip the half-measures and award it jointly to Kim Jong Un, Dick Cheney, and Weird Al Yankovic, then commit group suicide. There's no possible way to recover the prize's reputation at this point, they might as well go out with a bang.
Re: (Score:2)
And by developing nuclear weapons he probably even prevented a war: the US doesn't dare to take the risk of attacking North Korea. Now let the Iranians hurry up with theirs.
It's a dirty job... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How is it dirty?
Because chemical weapons stocks are often poorly maintained and dangerous to handle and dispose of. Because working in NBC suits in a desert is a shit job to start with, without having to do it in a warzone.
Malala is just getting started (Score:2)
She's young and driven to do great things, so while giving her a Nobel Prize isn't premature -- oh, she's not done writing this legacy, there's more to come. If she continues doing as she plans, to become a leader in Pakistan when she's older and being an activist for the education of females in the meantime, she'll get another consideration.
Re: (Score:1)
I was rooting for Malala or Snowden. Snowden also as a mea culpa for that Obama prize years earlier.
But oh no, can't call out their own mistake, gotta award it to some obscure group like hipsters would do. Bullshit.
Re: (Score:1)
Malala is a posterchild for peace. Not calling for increased war against the Taliban, but instead resistance to their ideas and ideals. She greatly impressed me, and awarding her the price would be a way to peacefully add a loud voice against the Taliban. The million dollars into her fund would probably also not go amiss.
And Snowden exposed Obama and the US government as running a network to spy on their citizens that the KGB and Stasi could have only dreamt of. They basical
Re: (Score:2)
You missed it. My reply was to the anon who posted calling her a cunt. While I admire the girl I think awarding her the prize would only further incense the radicals that want her dead. She is safer without it.
Re: (Score:2)
I think they decided not to give it to her to save her life. The nut jobs are still talking about killing her for daring to talk about girls getting an education. If they'd given her the award it would have just been like throwing gas on a fire.
Re: (Score:2)
The nut jobs are still talking about killing her for daring to talk about girls getting an education.
In the UK? Hmm, although, you may be right... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
With all due respect, Malala's greatest accomplishment until today is getting shot and having it spinned all over the news. While talking and raising issues is important, practical contribution to general peace is far from having been established (yes, Obama peace prize was a major mistake). Her wiki page has only 3 meagre paragraphs on political career and activism which is not at all on par with Nobels of 2010 and 2011 who would be comparable to her. She's too young and she has much more to prove. I belie
PRO-chem (Score:1)
I'm not sure I support this (Score:4, Funny)
Just like Henry Kissinger (Score:4, Informative)
I'm sorry, but ever since Henry Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize over Viet-nam I've declined to consider it as anything but a badge of shame.
Re: (Score:1)
And they wouldn't even be there if it weren't for violent military threats from the US getting underway, for better or for worse.
It's like giving a prize for a painting to the guy who came in and put a frame around it.
Questioning the questionable (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The real question is: is it not sad that we need a prize for being a good human being at all?
Given how easy it is to be a bad human and how hard it is to be a good human, I'd say it's not sad.
"Anti-chemical" weapons? (Score:2)
One more in the list (Score:2)
With all the respect that surely deserves OPCW, this prize,in this moment, only makes more evident how low has fallen the institution of the Nobel Prize and how much is sold the committee to the powers that be. It was used to promote the US "intervention" in Syria business, while they wont ever destroy their own chemical, biological, or nuclear arsenal, for something that probably where rebel chemical weapons given by foreing powers.
In the other hand, the biggest event in this decade that is surely is ma
uninspiring choice (Score:2)
Why not Putin? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
There is no good cop bad cop game. Syria is Iran's only ally. Obama wants to change it's government and weaken Iran. Putin wants to keep it's government, because otherwise he would lose strength in the region. If Israel would have used chemical weapons, the roles would be inverted.
Re: (Score:2)
There is no good cop bad cop game. Syria is Iran's only ally. Obama wants to change it's government and weaken Iran. Putin wants to keep it's government, because otherwise he would lose strength in the region.
Well, you can't really blame Putin for preferring an evil dictator that sort of keeps the country together to letting the crazies in. It's pretty much what the West did with Saddam Hussein.