Conference turris::womannotes-v3

    
    
    Reactions to what?  President Bush being nominated?  I would react
    favorably.  Here's a guy who is sending a very strong message of peace
    world-wide.  Here's also a guy who let half a million of his own people
    sit in the desert for 5.5 months to give peace MANY chances.  Here's
    also a guy who responded within hours to the threat of an overrun of
    Saudi Arabia.
    
    NICK
    

    What a joke!  Bush is for peace all right.  He starts a war, will not
    negotiate...
    
    argggh.
    Maia
    

    
    
    Bush did not start this war.  The world community decided to stop
    Saddam's war with force.  This force is basically led by Bush.
    
    There is nothing to negotiate.  Why on earth should we consider giving
    Saddam a nice little reward for his agression?  What concession can we
    give him?  What has he earned that would be worth negotiating over?
    
    NICK
    

    
    I see it as a sort of maraschino cherry on the gigantic ice cream sundae
    of madness the world seems to have come to lately...kind of tops it all
    off.
    
    D.

        If this is going to be the new war topic, then someone
        should at least change the title.
        
        Dan

    It makes me want to retch.  Nominating Bush for the Peace Prize is as
    cynical as nominating Reagan for it.  After all, this is the person who
    gave us Panama (another "let's get rid of the wimp factor").  I have
    severe problems with giving the Peace Prize to someone who enjoys using
    military power to help achieve an end.
    
    (Of course, the Peace Prize is probably the most manipulative Nobel
    prize around.  It's used more often than not to reward someone for an
    action or actions that the committee thought was a good idea)

    My intention was not to start a new _war conf_. Never the less,
    subjects are related, especially when you have candidates like the ones
    we are talking about (and previous as well. Kissinger, G.Meir etc.).
    Why I ask, is because of heavy discussions on last years winner
    (Gorbachev). As I mentioned in my base note, he didn't appear at the
    main arrangement, but said he would come in spring to held his "Peace
    Price Speech. In Norway, we have serious discussions of if he is
    welcome to do so (in regards to what's happenig in the "Balic
    Countries"). When Mr.Bush now appears as a candidate, we are alert.
    "It might be good what he is doing now, but should we wait and see the
    result-..." type of comments are usual.
    
    Why I brougth it up in *womennotes*?
    
    Well, this is not only because of the *Chairwoman* fact, but mostly due
    to the fact that this discussion in Norway, is dominated by women. (pls
    don't ask me why, but there might be a connection to the fact that we
    have come a long way in regards to the man/woman balance in society as
    general, female primeminister, 40% of the representatives in our
    goverment are female and so on..)
    ...and it gets hot. Should we cacel earlier elections?
    Should we stop electing?.. Like to get your perspectives. 
    
    
    PerS,
    

    
    
    RE:   .7
    
>     After all, this is the person who
>    gave us Panama (another "let's get rid of the wimp factor").  I have
>    severe problems with giving the Peace Prize to someone who enjoys using
>    military power to help achieve an end.
    
  As if past actions have anything to do with this year's NPP, right?
    
    Anyway, would you rather have a drug dealing dictator in charge of the
    most important shipping channel in the world?  Remember, the US paid a
    lot of money to build the Panama Canal, and it is our responsibility to
    protect it.
    
    NICK
    

re .7

>	I have severe problems with giving the Peace Prize to someone 
>	who enjoys using military power to help achieve an end.

	Do you believe either Reagan or Bush enjoy(ed) utilizing
	military power? If so, what evidence lead you to that conclusion?


					Tom_K

    hmm,
    
    just a rhetorical, rathole-type question... now that Noriega is
    'safe behind bars,' has the drug problem decreased in America?
    
    Inquiring minds want to know.
    M.
    

    
    
    RE:  .11  No, you're right.  The drug problem has not decreased.  Let's
    close all the anti-drug youth centers, lets stop all Coast Guard drug
    interdiction, lets dissolve the DEA and lets let all imprisoned drug
    dealers free.  
    
    Is this what you're saying?  It doesn't help?  Every little bit helps.
    
    NICK
    

    re: 0
    
    Who else has been nominated, Pers?  I am interested in knowing. 
    Although I am not personally in favor of George Bush receiving such an
    award, my opinion is of little value to those who must do the
    selecting, so really doesn't count.  Are there any non-political
    figures who are being considered?
    
    Barb

C'mon folks, regardless of what you think of the morality of the Gulf war or
the justifications for it isn't there just the tiniest bit of irony in
nominating someone who is actively prosecuting a war for a "peace" prize?
It's Orwellian doublespeak at it's finest.

However, I'm not surprised. No nominee for the Peace prize will ever surprise
me again after Henry Kissinger GOT the prize. You can either be infuriated by
it, or cynical. I think I'll save my stomach lining...


	-- Charles

	Not at all. Before the coalition involvement there was war. 
	After the successful conclusion of the coalition action there
	will be peace, this peace being directly brought about by the
	coalition action.

	FWIW: The Nobel Prize is named after (and is endowed by the 
	estate of) the inventor of dynamite.

					Tom_K

    ... that he/she gave up political satire when Henry the K got the Nobel
    Peace Prize...?  Figured that no one could NEVER top that...  
    
    Not a bad statement, imho -- notwithstanding that it was a dual award 
    with Le Duc Tho of NVN, as I recall...

    RE: .11
    
    I'm not sure about the affect on drug trafficing (sp?) Poppy's invasion
    of Panama had, but I recently read an article that described how
    wretched the Panamanians lives are under the current government and
    left over American "advisors".  But then, Poppy never lets anything
    like peoples' lives interfere with "protecting our way of life"
    
    RE: Poppy's nomination for NPP: GGGAAAAGGGG!!!!!!
    
    Linda

    
    
    Re a few back... so are there any other nominees for the prize?  I
    suspect we in the US already made up our minds about George Bush, but
    maybe there are other nominees that we know nothing about.
    
    Justine

    Yes, on 20/20 I believe they showed the thousands of people left
    homeless in Panama after we got in there to help them.  Approx. 15,000
    people...and countless of orphans.
    
    Who made Baby Doc Bush the world's policeman?
    
    M.
    

    
    RE:  .20
    
    The following have made PRESIDENT Bush the leader of the new world
    order:
    
    1)  Internal resolve   (ie no states are trying to sucied (self-annex))
    2)  Powerful military
    3)  Backing from US citizens       (Congressional support)
    4)  Backing from world citizens    (UN support)
    
    NICK
    

	For a nomination that might seem a bit odd at first, how about
	King Hussien of Jordan. He has done a remarkable job of keeping
	his country out of the war despite incredible pressures.

						Tom_K

How about giving it to all the women who have used/are using various
strategies to defuse potentially violent situations on the home front? 

Just a thought,

D.

    Ref.: .13 & .19   ...who else?
    
    Anyone are free to nominate a person for the Peace Prize to the
    commitee. The nominator can go public by telling the world who he's
    nominating, the commitee however, are not allow to give any info about
    hwo is nominated. Till now, rumors has only been whispering Mr. Bush.
    
    
    PerS,