Thorbjorn Jagland, said that members this year took a more practical approach in their unanimous vote for President Obama.
“It’s important for the committee to recognize people who are struggling and idealistic,” Mr. Jagland said in an interview after the prize was announced, “but we cannot do that every year. We must from time to time go into the realm of realpolitik. It is always a mix of idealism and realpolitik that can change the world.”
But Mr. Jagland seemed to savor the risk. He said no one could deny that “the international climate” had suddenly improved, and that Mr. Obama was the main reason.
Of the president’s future, he said: “There is great potential. But it depends on how the other political leaders respond. If they respond negatively, one might have to say he failed. But at least we want to embrace the message that he stands for.”
He's not gonna get the Nobel Peace Prize. Liu Xiaobo can get the prize because pissing off China is not controversial, but the Norwegians wouldn't do the same to the US.
Not sure why you weren't specific in your first comment, and then when it became clear you had been confusing, you still didn't bother to name him in your second comment. Apologies if you didn't intend it this way, but just seems like you're being purposefully awkward.
Because "strengthen international diplomacy and increase cooperation between peoples" is exactly what President Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize for in 2009.
But clearly not everyone is going to know that. And your second comment, you were clearly talking to people who didn't know it, yet still wrote something that would cause those same people to have to google who that was.
