PRC demands Nobel Prize apology from Norway

[dead0man]

link

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Insula Dei]

How much fun would it be if the Nobel Prize commitee would award Bradley Manning this year! Of course, it's not like anyone  would tell Manning about it if he won.

[dead0man]

I see what you're trying to do here (it's obvious), but what exactly did Manning do that made a positive impact on peace?  Just being treasonous against the US doesn't make you a peaceful person.

[Insula Dei]

Well, if having an impact on 'peace' was the thing that landed you the Nobel Prize, I think very few of its winners would qualify. In practice winners tend to be whistleblowers (Al Gore, Xiaobo), humanitarians (the Micro-Credit woman, the Red Cross,...) and so on. Manning very clearly falls in those categories, as his actions have been revealing about US foreign policy and its shady side. More relevantly, I'm just finding it weird that you could be angry about the disgracefull way Xiaobo is being treated and yet support Mannings treatment.

And of course, Manning would never get the prize, if only because of political reasons. Damaging the PRC is very certainly something that the Commitee intended to do, damaging the US is very clearly something that it wouldn't dare do.

[dead0man]

Well, if having an impact on 'peace' was the thing that landed you the Nobel Prize, I think very few of its winners would qualify. In practice winners tend to be whistleblowers (Al Gore, Xiaobo), humanitarians (the Micro-Credit woman, the Red Cross,...) and so on.

Clearly the Nobel Peace prize has become a joke, I'm not arguing against that.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I think it's a bit of a stretch, but to each their own.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

cite for me supporting Mannings treatment?  I'm pretty sure I've never weighed in on the subject other to say that what he did was treason.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If that's why you think he won't get it, then I seriously doubt anybody could convince you otherwise.  I've been married twice, I know how delusions work.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

And of course, Manning would never get the prize, if only because of political reasons. Damaging the PRC is very certainly something that the Committee intended to do, damaging the US is very clearly something that it wouldn't dare do.

The Nobel Committee has not been shy about thumbing its nose at US governments.  Arguably, five of the last fourteen have been about that.  (1997, 2002, 2005, 2007, 2009)

I suspect that they will try to find somebody relevant to the Arab Spring suitable to award the 2011 prize to, but unless they pull a Time X of the Year thing, and award it to the Arab democracy movement in general, it'll be hard to do.  Maybe Gene Sharp but that would be a stretch.

[Insula Dei]

There's a difference between the commitee thumbing its nose at the US government and it nominating a guy in a Max Security prison. As I've said though. It would be funny.

[Franzl]

Well it's obvious that anything that harms the United States is a wonderful thing worthy of honor. Just say what's on your mind. No reason to beat around the bush.

[Insula Dei]

Why, have I ever claimed to not be vulnerable to some degree of anti-Americanism? Though, no, what I was complaining about is the idea that the PRC behaving as it does about these things isn't any worse than the US would.

[Franzl]

Why, have I ever claimed to not be vulnerable to some degree of anti-Americanism? Though, no, what I was complaining about is the idea that the PRC behaving as it does about these things isn't any worse than the US would.

If you don't notice some difference between the two....ummmm.....well....

[Insula Dei]

So okay, suppose Manning would win the Nobel peace prize, not exactly outside of the realm of things one can visualize as happening. What would the official US response be like?

[Franzl]

So okay, suppose Manning would win the Nobel peace prize, not exactly outside of the realm of things one can visualize as happening. What would the official US response be like?

Is this serious? Do you understand the differences in reason for imprisoning the two? Treason is a crime that exists in practically the entire world and is recognized as something worthy of punishment. What he did was clearly (and understandably) in violation of United States law.

Are you seriously saying it's comparable to taking Liu as a political prisoner for fighting for democracy? Really?

I mean, come on. Even European socialists aren't usually that dishonest.

[The Mikado]

The Nobel Peace Prize isn't really about peace, nor has it been for a long time.  It's more about commitment to human rights and spreading the cause of said rights.  If it were just about peace, someone like Aung San Suu Kyi wouldn't even be in the running, let alone a widely-hailed Nobel Laureate.  Similarly, Muhammad Yunus has done wonders furthering Third World economic development, but that is only tangentially related to peace.  Even Muhammad El-Baradei isn't really a peace activist, and his work at the IAEA (or even his post-Nobel work in Egypt) was never primarily about peace.  Liu Xiaobo is totally in line with Nobel precedence.  (Barack Obama's was a colossal error and should never have happened, but what can you do?)

[Insula Dei]

Now, the discussion is not why Manning is in prison, but about the way the PRC has reacted to the Xiaobo Nobel prize. I'm open to the suggestion that Xiaobo's less deserving of inhumane treatment and torture, but the point Dead0man was truing to make, I suppose, was that the PRC is internationally behaving like a bully. All I'm saying is that, in purely power political (not moral!) terms, the PRC is acting exactly as the US would. The idea that any Imperialist power would play nice, is extremely naive, I'd say.

[Franzl]

Now, the discussion is not why Manning is in prison, but about the way the PRC has reacted to the Xiaobo Nobel prize. I'm open to the suggestion that Xiaobo's less deserving of inhumane treatment and torture, but the point Dead0man was truing to make, I suppose, was that the PRC is internationally behaving like a bully. All I'm saying is that, in purely power political (not moral!) terms, the PRC is acting exactly as the US would. The idea that any Imperialist power would play nice, is extremely naive, I'd say.

But the reasons the people are in prison are relevant. The fact of the matter is that the US wouldn't be able to react the way China is because the US doesn't simply go out and lock up people that oppose or criticize the government.

Don't you think this makes a good deal of difference? The situations simply aren't comparable, even theoretically.

[Insula Dei]

Well, yeah, but surely there isn't a single reason that can justify the US treatment of Manning.

[Franzl]

Well, yeah, but surely there isn't a single reason that can justify the US treatment of Manning.

No. And I don't. Don't get me wrong.

What I'm saying, though, is that it's quite important to note that it's perfectly legitimate under the rule of law to imprison Manning. How he's been treated is certainly a disgrace.

But even if Liu were being treated perfectly, it's undeniable that it's completely unacceptable to imprison him at all to begin with.

[Insula Dei]

I agree with you there. My comments here shouldn't be read too deep, either. I was just trying to have an (admittedly weak) jab at the US treatment of Manning by drawing a semi-functional parallel with the PRC and Xiaobo or Ai Wei Wei.

[Franzl]

I agree with you there. My comments here shouldn't be read too deep, either. I was just trying to have an (admittedly weak) jab at the US treatment of Manning by drawing a semi-functional parallel with the PRC and Xiaobo or Ai Wei Wei.

I understand what you mean. And I'll readily admit that the U.S. would not appreciate a criminal receiving the Nobel Peace Prize...and that they would certainly complain about it if it were to happen.

It's just that the two cases are not comparable in my mind in terms of morality.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

If you want a US case which would be even remotely similar to Liu Xiaobao, imagine if you will that in an alternate universe, the 1862 Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to Clement Vallandigham for his efforts to restore peace in North America.  (Yes, I know there was no such prize in 1862.)

[dead0man]

Another thing we're forgetting here is that the PRC is trying to punish the Norwegian government and Norwegian businesses for something an independent organization in Norway did.  If the Nobel committee for whatever stupid reason gave Manning (or whomever) the Peace prize the US govt certainly wouldn't bitch to the Norwegian govt.  That's pointless and a dick move and would be worthy of our mockery as the PRC is receiving now.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Another thing we're forgetting here is that the PRC is trying to punish the Norwegian government and Norwegian businesses for something an independent organization in Norway did.  If the Nobel committee for whatever stupid reason gave Manning (or whomever) the Peace prize the US govt certainly wouldn't bitch to the Norwegian govt.  That's pointless and a dick move and would be worthy of our mockery as the PRC is receiving now.

     It's like Zhukov trying to get Eisenhower to dispose of an article that was critical of Zhukov. I'm not sure that the PRC's government really sees that the Norwegian government takes no responsibility for the actions of the Nobel Prize Committee.

[Antonio the Sixth]

LOL China LOL

[Stranger in a strange land]

And of course, Manning would never get the prize, if only because of political reasons. Damaging the PRC is very certainly something that the Committee intended to do, damaging the US is very clearly something that it wouldn't dare do.

The Nobel Committee has not been shy about thumbing its nose at US governments.  Arguably, five of the last fourteen have been about that.  (1997, 2002, 2005, 2007, 2009)

I suspect that they will try to find somebody relevant to the Arab Spring suitable to award the 2011 prize to, but unless they pull a Time X of the Year thing, and award it to the Arab democracy movement in general, it'll be hard to do.  Maybe Gene Sharp but that would be a stretch.

Sharp deserves it, if only because his work was greatly under-recognized before the Arab Spring, even in Academic Circles.