Trump nominated for Nobel Peace prize for 3rd time

 

 

“Trump Doctrine” basis for 3rd nomination

Direct negotiation with the affected states, bypassing the Palestinians, has brought success. The prize is being considered for actual accomplishment, not participation.

24 thoughts on “Trump nominated for Nobel Peace prize for 3rd time

  1. These Nobel Peace Prize nominations are simply laughable. We both know that. His latest “accomplishment” is to broker a peace deal between states that have NEVER been at war. Deals between the criminal Netanyahu and the autocrats ruling minor city states. Big whoop!

    Like

    1. You miss the point.

      By bypassing the Palestinians, who would never have accepted a lasting peace, Trump has isolated them and they will now have no choice but the negotiate realistically.

      Divide and conquer,

      Like

      1. There already is a Israeli and Palestinian peace deal on the table. I don’t believe the Palestinians are signing on to it.

        Will they because UAE formalized a treaty with Israel? Who knows.

        The biggest “benefit” with the UAE deal is that, it unifies somewhat the Arab states against Iran, which for pretty sad reasons, is the “bad boy” in the Middle East.

        But it is just this kind of deal making where Trump’s lenders and assets overseas may be a problem. He has had strong ties with the Saudis, as does Kushner, with bailouts when he was just about bankrupt in the 90’s.

        I know, it may be all coincidental and of no importance. But like Ivanka getting impossible to obtain patent protections in China and Dad getting 500 million into his Indonesian deal from China and at the same time, within days, lifting sanctions on ZTE. And ZTE was a big security problem for the US until…

        And these are all good arguments for requiring the tax returns and more investment details in future presidents. This is the modern era, not George Washington’s overseas whisky sales. We are a world power and may still be a leader, so every international deal we make has to make sure our presidents are not making national decisions based on his or her international deals and personal interests.

        Liked by 2 people

      2. You miss the point.

        By isolating the Palestinians and ignoring their legitimate claims, these phony baloney agreements reduce the chances for peace. And increase the growing influence of Iran. Stupid. Like almost everything Trump “accomplishes.”

        Conquer? WTF are you talking about?

        Like

    2. After all the news in the past couple days about ‘djt’s tax information and the many millions he owes heaven-knows-who, it’s easy to see why he’s hitting up people to nominate him for the Nobel Peace Prize. He needs those nearly 3 million clams that would come with the medals. How ironic for the poor fella to be begging for these prizes considering he hasn’t a clue how to pursue PEACE anywhere even in his own country.

      It is beyond laughable – it’s worthy of on-the-floor on all-fours hilarity. Trump and even one NPP still has me snickering . . .

      Liked by 2 people

        1. You say Obama was given the Nobel Peace Prize for getting elected? That is not what the Nobel committee said. And it was nearly a year after the election that Obama won. They gave it to him because he supported and advanced ideas of international cooperation that the Nobel committee had been promoting for a century.

          https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nobel-peace-citation-text-sb/text-of-nobel-peace-prize-citation-for-obama-idUSTRE5981RA20091009

          YOU may not like their reasons and – like so many Trump supporters – enjoy sniggering at the award, but most Americans at the time were proud to see him recognized in this way.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. “What had he actually done at the time he was NOMINATED?”

            Read the citation.

            But the serious answer is that he started a process that the Nobel Committee wanted to advance by recognizing it. The heart of it was his clear repudiation of the cowboy approach of his predecessor which was very troubling for people all over the world.

            Liked by 2 people

          2. Obama armed Isis?

            Without trying for the umpteenth time to straighten you out on this laughable slander, I will simply note that the Nobel Committee in 2009 did not have a time machine allowing them to weigh events in 2011.

            Liked by 2 people

  2. These Nobel nominations are interesting for their counternarrative value:

    • It is said that Trump is not well-liked or respected among world leaders, but three foreign leaders apparently like and respect Trump enough to recommend him for the prize.
    • It is said that Trump’s foreign policy is a complete disaster, but that obviously is not objectively true.

    • It is said that Trump is self-serving and venal, but the deals to which these Nobel nominations relate don’t directly serve Trump’s interests in any material way.

    These things may not be proof of Trump’s superiority, but they do undermine the mythology of his inferiority.

    Like

  3. So here is some info on the Peace Prize nomination:

    https://tinyurl.com/y2l9v8an

    “Each year, hundreds of people are nominated, and that any lawmaker serving in a national legislature can nominate someone for the Nobel Peace Prize.

    So who, exactly, is the person responsible for bestowing this Fox News bonanza upon us? Tybring-Gjedde, a member of the Progress Party known for his staunch anti-immigration stance, believes Trump should be considered based on this one act alone, referring to the historic deal made between Israel and the United Arab Emirates to normalize relations between the two nations.”

    “This isn’t the first time he has nominated Trump for the prize either. In 2018, Tybring-Gjedde was one of two Norwegian lawmakers who nominated Trump, citing his reconciliation efforts between North and South Korea. Given his history, though, it’s not much of a surprise that he is fond of Trump. Tybring-Gjedde was heavily criticized in 2011 for suggesting that Muslims, by nature, were more aggressive than Norwegians. He also likened hijab head coverings to Ku Klux Klan robes.”

    Interestingly enough, a peace agreement between two nations that have never fought each other is kind of curious.
    But I understand a treaty is a treaty.

    Now a peace treaty between Iran and the US that would be something. Normalizing relations with a country that is much more advanced, educated and essentially loves the US (except for the Mullahs whom the people hate anyway). After all, it is the Saudis who are spreading terrorism worldwide at the beck and call of the Wahhabi extremists. Getting Iran on our side might pressure the Royal Family in Riyadh to join the modern world and stop sponsoring terror.

    IMHO

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Obama fully vindicated his Peace Prize by leading the world – allies and adversaries – to the Iran nuclear deal. THAT is peacemaking. And quite a bit more than “jack.”

      Don’t waste your effort telling me what bad guys the Iranians are. I will only remind you that you do not make peace with your friends. Besides, I know the history of our relations with Iran going back to the fifties. I can list a dozen major ways that WE have been the bad guys and Iran has every reason to not trust us.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. I don’t disagree that our policy with Iran has been foolish for a long time.

        The Iran deal wasn’t good, but by that time things were already fubar.

        The Iranian people are not bad, but their theocratic dictators are. But they are in power because of our earlier interventions.

        It’s much like what Jefferson said about slavery. ‘We have a wolf by the ears. we cannot hold on yet we dare not let go.’

        If someone finds a reset for that mess, a Peace Prize will be appropriate.

        Like

        1. The Arabs are very wary of Iran. Old animosities and religious issues regarding the origins of Mohamed’s successors.

          We, on the other hand, are wedded to the Saudis because of oil history. We gladly overlooked the religious extremism until we couldn’t anymore and Al Qaeda and 9/11 are the crops we reaped.

          I think it is about time to tell the Saudis to shape up, stop arming them and start some backdoor negotiations with Iran. The Saudis treat us like suckers, but we don’t need the oil anymore, so “us fish” need to swim to a friendlier pond.

          Israel under Netanyahu needs to work with us, or get rid of the Prime Minister.

          And for humanity’s sake, stop sending bombs and missiles to Saudis for killing Yemeni civilians, children and destroying hospitals.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. Well, thanks to fracking, we no longer are dependent on the Saudis.

            My position on the Sunni/Shite conflict remains unchanged, Our only involvement should be to take care neither side runs out of flamethrowers.

            Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s