LETTERS: Obama's Nobel prize

<p class="bold allcaps">Who better?</p> <p>EDITOR: I understand some people are questioning why President Barack Obama should win the Nobel Peace Prize.</p><p>Let’s look at other world leaders who may have been considered. There is Vladimir Putin of Russia or Nicolas Sarkozy of France. How about Prime Minister Gordon Brown of England or Queen Elizabeth II, who still oversees a vast commonwealth of realms? Or maybe any one of the African presidents or prime ministers, such as Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe? How about Raul Castro of Cubaor, Alvaro Uribe of Columbia or Hugo Chavez of Venezuela? Of course, the real front-runners might have been President Shimon Peres and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel and the disputed Palistinian President Mahmoud Abbas or Aziz al-Duwaik and the disputed Prime Ministers Salam Fayyad or Ismail Haniyeh. Those bring to mind the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran and Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki of Iraq.</p><p>I hope it is needless to say that if not Obama, then who? At least he has tried for communication. That is the only way to lead to peace for our tiny globe floating in this vast universe of space.</p><p>KAY ASHBROOK</p><p>Santa Rosa</p><h3>Outstanding choice</h3> <p>EDITOR: I am delighted that President Barack Obama has been honored with the Nobel Peace Prize, and I think he fully deserves it. His return to diplomacy and negotiation as viable tools in moving toward peace in this very troubled world, and his insistence that his cabinet make use of those tools, is alone sufficient for his award. Not for many years has this country engaged openly (and perhaps not even secretly) in partnership with the world community rather than taking adversarial positions or refusing contact at all.</p><p>So often this presidency is evaluated by looking at what hasn’t been done. I see Obama’s first year as one of undoing, of having to tackle economic problems and wars not of his own making. He’s doing exactly what he promised to do: re-evaluate, with the help of wise advisers and through listening to those who oppose his actions, all parts of the government’s policies and redirect them toward peace and prosperity. </p><p>Let’s take off our rose-colored glasses of expectation and take a fresh look at his stature in the world and the changing views of America because of it, his gestures in every area of our government and throughout the world toward seeing things differently and acting on those differences. Let’s give this highly honored and greatly honorable man a chance to do his work before we dishonor him.</p><p>GAIL LARRICK</p><p>Cloverdale</p><h3>Hoping he changes</h3> <p>EDITOR: I am shocked that President Barack Obama has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize while dedicated, non-violent, courageous people who risk their lives to save others go unnoticed and under-funded.</p><p>He is the commander-in-chief of wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan and supports the use of unmanned drones that kill 50 civilians to one so-called enemy. It was very telling that a reporter repeatedly questioned the speaker for the committee about of Obama’s war activities and escalations. I can only “hope” that this award will weigh so heavily on his soul that he will have a “change” of heart. May he be visited by the ghost of Martin Luther King Jr., who had the courage to oppose the Vietnam War, seeing all war as a tool of the military-industrial complex.</p><p>MAGICK ATMAN</p><p>Sebastopol</p><h3>An ulterior motive?</h3> <p>This country has a long-standing policy of imposing its will on other countries — sometimes by military force and sometimes by economic force. Our leaders often cite protecting our “self-interest.”</p><p>It’s great to see Europe, through the Nobel Committee, taking its turn. They see “self-interest” differently — they see it as peace in the world. If you can’t get the bully on the block to act peacefully by other means, then flatter us into it.</p><p>How can a president with a Nobel Peace Prize escalate a war? The strategy is brilliant and so much more subtle than anything we’d think to do.</p><p>The Nobel Peace Prize was created to honor those who work for change so ground-breaking that nations could eliminate their military forces. Despite all the pretty words, until Friday, Barack Obama had no intention of doing any such thing.</p><p>If this prize moves him in that direction, I say hooray. Of course, we must keep Obama from emulating that other peace prize winner, Henry Kissinger, who never saw a military solution he didn’t like.</p><p>Now, I invite them to impose a more democratic health system on us as well. We clearly need the help.</p><p>SUSAN C. LAMONT</p><p>Santa Rosa</p><h3>Spending the prize</h3> <p>EDITOR: I understand that the recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize receives a cash award also, something in the realm of $1.5 million. Now, President Barack Obama flew to Copenhagen to beg that the 2016 Olympic Games be awarded to Chicago. His trip, accompanied by his posse and the press, cost the U.S. taxpayer about $900,000. I don’t know how much was spent flying the first lady over there and back for her lobbying efforts. Would it not be appropriate that he reimburse the taxpayers for his trip to Copenhagen? I do take comfort in the fact that he did not apologize for past American transgressions in Copenhagen or in his Nobel Award acceptance speech.</p><p>ART HACKWORTH</p><p>Petaluma</p><h3>Irrelevant prize</h3> <p>EDITOR: The Nobel committee has awarded President Barack Obama the Peace Prize for 2009. In doing so the committee has devalued the award to the level of the old TV program “The Gong Show.”</p><p>Obama has done nothing to earn the award. He was nominated 10 days into his presidency. Years ago, the Nobel committee awarded the prize to Al Gore for his global warming efforts and making the film, “An Inconvenient Truth.” The committee ignored the sacrifice of a woman who rescued a thousand or so Jewish children from being victims of the Holocaust for Gore’s movie-making ability.</p><p>The Nobel Prize is no longer relevant. The best thing Obama could do would be to refuse to accept the award.</p><p>ANTHONY MORGAN</p><p>Petaluma</p>