My apologies. Yes, you are right, Obama received the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo, not Geneva.

However, you are incorrect on your first point.

Nobel Peace Prize is decided by the Norwegian Nobel Committee, a group of five members appointed by the Norwegian Parliament (Storting).

This is different from the other Nobel Prizes, which are decided by Swedish institutions and awarded in Stockholm.

Not to mention that prizes can't be revoked.

My point is not just that Nobel Committe offered the Nobel Peace Prize to Barack Obama, it is that: he went and accepted it in person, AFTER he had already certainly signed off on new wars (you can cross-check their timelines) almost immediately after he took oath as the new President. And he did sign off on new wars, during BOTH tenures.

So Obama is a hypocrite, who shamelessly accepted Peace Prize after starting wars and conflicts.

History tells us: * Obama inherited the Iraq War and Afghanistan war, started during Bush Jr. regime. But to his credit, Obama ended them. * However, Obama (USA) and NATO intervened in the Libya civil war and escalated it. * Obama did the full scale war in Syria (but one can argue it was to combat terrorism). * But under Obama regime, there was major increase in drone strikes in: Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia. These were highly controversial due to civilian casualties.

In a nutshell, Obama ended one war, he didn't initiate traditional large-scale wars, but he certainly expanded air, drone, and proxy conflicts.

That's why I said Obama is the only 2-term US President who kept his country at war during both tenures.

Now that is a dubious honor for any politician, whether he be black or white or any color in between.

Now Trump Sr. is following the bloodsoaked footsteps of Bush Jr. and Obama (in terms of warfare, I mean).

Trump has invaded and seized Venezuela, and he's threatening to do the same to Greenland. And he won't stop there. But bullies never do.

FYI, I am brown. But irrespective of skin color, I do not condone a warmonger getting or coveting a peace prize (a highly prestigious and huge amount involved at that: $1+ million dollars prize money).

Perhaps Americans and their NATO allies do not see such perspective, maybe because they think that blind patriotism and war-for-oils are greater than pragmatism and world peace.

Or maybe they think their country being a warmonger bully is justified, to "soothe the tensions".

In the annals of history, Obama and Trump will both be judged, on the same pedestal of warfare. And it won't paint them in a good picture.

A simple Google search of the wars started/involved by USA under the regime of Obama should tell you whether it is historical fact or a syndrome of your own coinage.

What is copy-pasta here? All these facts about Obama and his wars are known to the world.

Or do Americans have wool on their eyes when it comes to their politicians' wrongdoings?

It is my bad that I wrote Geneva instead of Oslo. But that typo/errata doesn't change the facts about Obama or Trump.

How can you claim it to be zero relevance when the discussion is about incumbent US President not deserving the Nobel Peace Prize, when it is a fact that the US President he replaced earlier certainly didn't deserve either (for doing wars through 2 consecutive tenures)?

Or are you accustomed to making excuses for the most powerful men in the world, using their privilege to get or expect Nobel Peace Prize like it is some cotton candy?

Although, cotton candy might have more relevance than the Nobel Peace Prize, IMHO.

Considering that some of the previous recipients of the Nobel Peace Prize are of dubious distinction:

** By your "Cheney did wars that Obama didn't stop" yardstick, Henry Kissinger should also be squarely blamed, though he himself got the Nobel Peace Prize. (Hmmm, what's up with such warmongers getting Nobel Peace Prize?!) Of course, Kissinger didn’t start the Vietnam war, but he played a major role in how it was conducted and ended. He helped design the policy of “Vietnamization” (gradual U.S. withdrawal while training South Vietnamese forces). He was involved in secret bombing campaigns in Cambodia and Laos, which are among the most controversial aspects of U.S. policy. ** Aung Sang Suu Kyu supported military genocides on some communities, though she spent most of her life in jail or house-arrest and was a crusader for democracy (unfortunately she appears to have died, as her son and others claim she's missing from last few years after her government was overthrown by a military junta coup and she was jailed).

** Mahatma Gandhi was a wife-beating paedophile, he was responsible for Partition of India and genocides on Hindus (due to his open support for Jinnah who unleashed those genocides), his actions caused millions of Indians to suffer for years under brutal British enslavement.

But I see you are making excuses for the US Presidents not being able to stop wars their country started or involved in.

So you think Bush Jr. and Obama were puppets of Dick Cheney? So is your vice president running your country, not the President? Then why have that seemingly irrelevant position of President at the White House?

Is that your excuse now to ignore Trump's wrongdoings? (He won't get the Nobel Peace Prize, for sure, but he'll try to buy it or coerce it, he doesn't seem to care what the world thinks of him, because he knows Americans think highly of him, because they elected him twice (the second time he took oath for the highest office, was AFTER he was convicted of felony))!

Even I am finding this all ridiculous to type out, it is even more frustrating that this is all real history, and (like it is wont to do) history seems to be repeating itself: The most powerful men in the world doing wars/invasions, while chasing after Nobel Peace Prize.

aut 商 aut 官?

I'd say "Systems of Survival" certainly called this US administration.

Aside: IIRC a few members of the House of Berndadotte have reliquished 官-dom in order to better pursue 商-dom. (end of aside)

(is part of the brouhaha over Netflix that it can show that parts of the world outside the US are not just NPCs?)

> Bottom line:

> Yes — it is overwhelmingly likely (and effectively certain) that Obama knew he was overseeing active wars and new military escalations before he went to collect the Nobel Peace Prize.

So your "assistant" supports my reply, he was fully aware of that and acknowledged this. And in the speech you didn't read, he went into how war came as naturally as the first man, and how some wars are necessary and "just".

Indeed Ukraine is at the moment shooting back at Russian conscripts...

And since we're allowing AI responses look at the answer of my second question: https://gemini.google.com/share/57839224db00

But I'm sure you would've been a better at politicking than Obama's team!