Nobel Committee criticized over Peace Prize choice

And the fight in Brussels who could come to Oslo to recieve the prize, the Cyprus presidency of the EU was not accepted, but Merkel is going: next year are getting the prize either CIA, NATO or Thaci with Gotovina. Nothing is now more impossible. And Jaglands comments as head of the commission for the prize are very funny. He also often in Serbia to tell them what they have to do. One other canddate is Busek from Austria.

No surprise really ... They lost their credibility when they gave it to Obama.

The EU has contributed nothing to peace.She actively encouraged war in Yugoslavia,with its ill-considered and premature recognitions of various separatist regimes,joined to US in the destruction of Iraq,Libya and Afganistan,supports AlQaeda and other Jihadists in the civil war in Syria and forcing punitive sanctions on Iran for not bending over to US and Israel.

The EU is a right-wing elitist project that seeks to take away democracy from smaller or weaker countries (Greece, Portugal, Ireland and even Spain)and supercede it with Germany's power.

Since Kissinger,Obama and the EU were awarded the Nobel prize for peace may I propose next year the award to go to Lehman brothers for brilliant entrepreneurship.

"The European Union clearly is not one of 'the champions of peace' Alfred Nobel had in mind and described in his will as 'the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses'," the organization noted.

Except for the fact that the EU is not a person, all other criteria fit well. EU countries reduced the armies, the EU member nations live in peace with each other, and the EU guarantees peace in other regions as well.

The Committee rejected all criticism coming from IPB. "A similar view was expressed on several occasions and will not affect the award," said Geir Lundestad.
--
Of course the committe rejects all criticism because it has been politicised. Exactly why did Martti Ahtisaari, Barak Obama and the EU win it? Simple, political reasons.

The Nobel Prize is a JOKE.

The EU has contributed nothing to peace.She actively encouraged war in Yugoslavia
(Leonidas, 5 November 2012 20:21)

Actually the break up of Yugoslavia was a big inconvenience for the EEC/EU, this is why they refused to recognise Croatia, Slovenia ect at first; only after a year of delcaring independence did EEC/ EU states recognise them. If it wasn't for the wars of the 90s, Yugoslavia would have been an EU member by now and that was the EU's intention before it broke apart.

However Serbs like to blame the break up of Yugoslavia on the EU becuase they always like to point the finger else where, they're just in denial and refuse to accept any blame.

Also I think you're confusing NATO with the EU. They're two very different organisations. I thought you should know ;) And even then some of the wars you mentioned, weren't NATO wars; they were wars involving specific NATO members; not NATO as a whole.

Actually the break up of Yugoslavia was a big inconvenience for the EEC/EU, this is why they refused to recognise Croatia, Slovenia ect at first; only after a year of delcaring independence did EEC/ EU states recognise them. If it wasn't for the wars of the 90s, Yugoslavia would have been an EU member by now and that was the EU's intention before it broke apart.

Also I think you're confusing NATO with the EU. They're two very different organisations. I thought you should know ;) And even then some of the wars you mentioned, weren't NATO wars; they were wars involving specific NATO members; not NATO as a whole.
(Ian, UK, 6 November 2012 11:06)

When one reads your postings one does wonder whether you actually believe in any of its contents.The EU,with Germany at the helm,had decided the fate of Yugoslavia because they wanted to include as territory of its “vital interest” Slovenia and Croatia which were old allies in the Second World War (the Ustashi fascist group in Croatia and the nationalists in Slovenia).One also would argue that the break up of Yugoslavia would have also given Germany access to the vital sea routes of Adriatic sea.

I am not confused to the role of Nato.Nato is the military arm of EU and that was shown when the coalision of puppets took part in the invasion of Iraq,bombing of Libya and Invasion of Afganistan.

When one reads your postings one does wonder whether you actually believe in any of its contents.The EU,with Germany at the helm,had decided the fate of Yugoslavia because they wanted to include as territory of its “vital interest” Slovenia and Croatia which were old allies in the Second World War (the Ustashi fascist group in Croatia and the nationalists in Slovenia).One also would argue that the break up of Yugoslavia would have also given Germany access to the vital sea routes of Adriatic sea.

I am not confused to the role of Nato.Nato is the military arm of EU and that was shown when the coalision of puppets took part in the invasion of Iraq,bombing of Libya and Invasion of Afganistan.
(Leonidas, 6 November 2012 19:00)

I think you need to get over World War Two. It was 60 years ago. The world has changed since then. It is an unhealthy obsession you have.


"Nato is the military arm of EU" is a ridiculous comment and therefore I refuse to comment any further on it. Not to mention how EU states were divided on them wars.

Peace Prize Choice: Agree with the International Peace Bureau!

" If it wasn't for the wars of the 90s, Yugoslavia would have been an EU member by now and that was the EU's intention before it broke apart.

However Serbs like to blame the break up of Yugoslavia on the EU becuase they always like to point the finger else where, they're just in denial and refuse to accept any blame. "
(Ian, UK, 6 November 2012 11:06)

Not much more to add, some voice of reason.

"The European Union clearly is not one of 'the champions of peace' Alfred Nobel had in mind and described in his will as 'the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses'," the organization noted.

Except for the fact that the EU is not a person, all other criteria fit well. EU countries reduced the armies, the EU member nations live in peace with each other, and the EU guarantees peace in other regions as well.

No surprise really ... They lost their credibility when they gave it to Obama.

And the fight in Brussels who could come to Oslo to recieve the prize, the Cyprus presidency of the EU was not accepted, but Merkel is going: next year are getting the prize either CIA, NATO or Thaci with Gotovina. Nothing is now more impossible. And Jaglands comments as head of the commission for the prize are very funny. He also often in Serbia to tell them what they have to do. One other canddate is Busek from Austria.

The Committee rejected all criticism coming from IPB. "A similar view was expressed on several occasions and will not affect the award," said Geir Lundestad.
--
Of course the committe rejects all criticism because it has been politicised. Exactly why did Martti Ahtisaari, Barak Obama and the EU win it? Simple, political reasons.

The EU has contributed nothing to peace.She actively encouraged war in Yugoslavia,with its ill-considered and premature recognitions of various separatist regimes,joined to US in the destruction of Iraq,Libya and Afganistan,supports AlQaeda and other Jihadists in the civil war in Syria and forcing punitive sanctions on Iran for not bending over to US and Israel.

The EU is a right-wing elitist project that seeks to take away democracy from smaller or weaker countries (Greece, Portugal, Ireland and even Spain)and supercede it with Germany's power.

Since Kissinger,Obama and the EU were awarded the Nobel prize for peace may I propose next year the award to go to Lehman brothers for brilliant entrepreneurship.

Peace Prize Choice: Agree with the International Peace Bureau!

The EU has contributed nothing to peace.She actively encouraged war in Yugoslavia
(Leonidas, 5 November 2012 20:21)

Actually the break up of Yugoslavia was a big inconvenience for the EEC/EU, this is why they refused to recognise Croatia, Slovenia ect at first; only after a year of delcaring independence did EEC/ EU states recognise them. If it wasn't for the wars of the 90s, Yugoslavia would have been an EU member by now and that was the EU's intention before it broke apart.

However Serbs like to blame the break up of Yugoslavia on the EU becuase they always like to point the finger else where, they're just in denial and refuse to accept any blame.

Also I think you're confusing NATO with the EU. They're two very different organisations. I thought you should know ;) And even then some of the wars you mentioned, weren't NATO wars; they were wars involving specific NATO members; not NATO as a whole.

The Nobel Prize is a JOKE.

" If it wasn't for the wars of the 90s, Yugoslavia would have been an EU member by now and that was the EU's intention before it broke apart.

However Serbs like to blame the break up of Yugoslavia on the EU becuase they always like to point the finger else where, they're just in denial and refuse to accept any blame. "
(Ian, UK, 6 November 2012 11:06)

Not much more to add, some voice of reason.

Actually the break up of Yugoslavia was a big inconvenience for the EEC/EU, this is why they refused to recognise Croatia, Slovenia ect at first; only after a year of delcaring independence did EEC/ EU states recognise them. If it wasn't for the wars of the 90s, Yugoslavia would have been an EU member by now and that was the EU's intention before it broke apart.

Also I think you're confusing NATO with the EU. They're two very different organisations. I thought you should know ;) And even then some of the wars you mentioned, weren't NATO wars; they were wars involving specific NATO members; not NATO as a whole.
(Ian, UK, 6 November 2012 11:06)

When one reads your postings one does wonder whether you actually believe in any of its contents.The EU,with Germany at the helm,had decided the fate of Yugoslavia because they wanted to include as territory of its “vital interest” Slovenia and Croatia which were old allies in the Second World War (the Ustashi fascist group in Croatia and the nationalists in Slovenia).One also would argue that the break up of Yugoslavia would have also given Germany access to the vital sea routes of Adriatic sea.

I am not confused to the role of Nato.Nato is the military arm of EU and that was shown when the coalision of puppets took part in the invasion of Iraq,bombing of Libya and Invasion of Afganistan.

When one reads your postings one does wonder whether you actually believe in any of its contents.The EU,with Germany at the helm,had decided the fate of Yugoslavia because they wanted to include as territory of its “vital interest” Slovenia and Croatia which were old allies in the Second World War (the Ustashi fascist group in Croatia and the nationalists in Slovenia).One also would argue that the break up of Yugoslavia would have also given Germany access to the vital sea routes of Adriatic sea.

I am not confused to the role of Nato.Nato is the military arm of EU and that was shown when the coalision of puppets took part in the invasion of Iraq,bombing of Libya and Invasion of Afganistan.
(Leonidas, 6 November 2012 19:00)

I think you need to get over World War Two. It was 60 years ago. The world has changed since then. It is an unhealthy obsession you have.


"Nato is the military arm of EU" is a ridiculous comment and therefore I refuse to comment any further on it. Not to mention how EU states were divided on them wars.