Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Are you saying that bombing multiple countries for little to no reason, trying to force a regime change in Venezuela, and threatening to steal Greenland by force isn’t peaceful????


It’s not right. Until you have carpet bombed a place, Kissinger style, are you really worthy of the prize?

https://theconversation.com/henry-kissingers-bombing-campaig...


Well duh, he’s got the peace prize ticked off already, thanks to FIFA.

Now he’s aiming for the war prize.


[dead]


In his defense, he got it before he did any of that. Before he did much of anything except get elected, really. Which was apparently sufficient.

(Everyone, including Obama, was pretty flummoxed by that prize.)


No, Kissinger was far, far worse than any other recipient of the peace prize.

Quote from Gary Bass, professor of politics and international affairs at Princeton University and author of "The Blood Telegram: Nixon, Kissinger, and a Forgotten Genocide:"

"In at least one crucial part of the world, Kissinger’s legacy is fixed: In South Asia, Indians and Bangladeshis widely remember Kissinger as an unusually cruel and cold-hearted person. As they bitterly recall, he and Richard Nixon firmly supported Pakistan’s military dictatorship throughout its bloody crackdown in 1971 on what today is Bangladesh, sending some 10 million Bengali refugees fleeing into India. In one of the worst atrocities of the Cold War, Pakistan’s junta brushed aside the results of a democratic election, killed awful numbers of Bengalis and targeted the Hindu minority among the Bengalis. (Bangladesh is now the eight-largest country in the world, with a population larger than Russia or Japan, as well as a major Muslim country with considerable strategic importance in South Asia.) On the White House tapes, Kissinger sneered at Americans who “bleed” for “the dying Bengalis.”

"Kissinger’s actions in 1971 were clouded by his own ignorance about South Asia, his emotional misjudgments and his stoking of Nixon’s racism toward Indians. Kissinger’s policies were not only morally flawed but also disastrous as Cold War strategy. As U.S. government officials presciently warned him, a Pakistani crackdown would result in a futile civil war with India sponsoring the Bengali guerrillas, creating the conditions for Soviet-backed India to rip Pakistan in two—a strategic defeat for the United States and a strategic victory for the Soviet Union. And don’t forget that Kissinger knowingly violated U.S. law in allowing secret arms transfers to Pakistan during the India-Pakistan war in December 1971. Despite warnings from White House staffers and State Department and Pentagon lawyers that such arms transfers were illegal, Nixon and Kissinger went ahead, with Kissinger saying that doing so was “against our law”—a scandal of a piece with an overall pattern of lawlessness that culminated with Watergate."


Kissinger was a horrific choice. You get no quarrel from me on that. But the Obama thing was ridiculous and they should have waited longer before giving him it.


Sure, and no one was more surprised than Obama, but he was self-aware in his graceful acceptance. You should read his speech [1]

In the context of Nobel's history of controversial awards, your complaint sounds like a petty grudge against Obama.

[1] https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/remark...


Why wait longer was he going to become more black than he already was?


Maybe to see what he would do in his presidency? There's a thought.


He got the prize before he did much mongering though.

Also he didn’t try to overthrow an election he lost.


> He got the prize before he did much mongering though.

He and Nixon did plenty of mongering already in 1971, when they firmly backed and tried to cover up Pakistan's military atrocities in what is now Bangladesh. 10 million refugees didn’t prevent the Nobel committe from giving him the prize in 1973.


I think you might be replying to the wrong comment. I was talking about Obama. I do not believe Obama was doing a lot with Nixon in 1971, considering he would have been like 10 years old at that point.

Not defending Kissinger at all.


Oh, I see, sorry!


The peace prize is supposed to be about international matters. But somehow many people overlook his warmongering which comes close to Dubya's. Also his Standing Rock betrayal was disgusting.


I agree that Obama wasn't as great as a lot of people make him out to be, but what does that have to do with the current situation?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: