Nobel Prize for Peace or Hope? Please RT, don't just report the obvious. We come to you to know more - not just read an echo of the Western free press. Do some research and make some projections. What is the reason behind this move and who engineered it? Who may gain and how? Go behind the covers for God's sake! We really expect more from you.

Yes, Alexey. You are really sounding like an old Republican. :-) I personally, do not have much respect to the Nobel Prize award (not to be confused with the people who receive this prize) because the way the Committee treats all scientists who are not part of the Western club. Say, Russian's. Therefore, this event with Obama doesn't attract much of my attention. May be just to give me one more change to goof on it... So, Alexey, you are looking at the event from the "main street" and therefore it seems confusing. But, if you look at this through the "back door" then you would probably understand that this is 100% political move. And as such -- it has perfect sense.

Didn’t the US through NASA recently bomb the moon? Since when did we declare war on the moon? Nobody really deserves it as 2009 has been pretty uneventful although it was better than last years Soros/Rothschild connected Martti Ahtisaari and his Kosovo plan. @Michael Scott I was wondering who finances the Nobel foundation. Aung San Suu Kyi and other anti-Burma government organisations are on the payroll of George Soros at least since the late 80's early 90's and the Dahli Lama is a well known CIA agent. Did this have an impact on them receiving a reward? Did they spend money promoting these people and lobbying the committee for the award it makes good PR and publicity? I would actually expect it would have gone to someone connected to Darfur who western government are trying to intervene so we can get Sudanese oil.

Well, Michael Scott, I came to the same conclusion. RT looks more and more like CNN. Perhaps the ownership has changed.

Of course the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize was poltical. I think the majortiy of people everywhere are very aware of that. There are two possible outcomes of this. One was to give him momentum in his political agenda and aspirations.And secondly, an albatross round his neck if he fails to deliver on his promises. I will put it this way, given the results and policies of the prior US Administration. I am willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt. The US is like a huge ocean liner...it does not turn on dime and neither does US politics. By the way, if you think we have free press in the west, your woefully mistaken my friend, it is the best that MONEY can buy.

100% correct, Bodganov. Though, it is relevant to point it out, Aleksey ;) well done.

He deserves it for being a symbol, I guess, and his speeches - an attempt to think outside of the box in addition to restoring our image abroad. I'm not sure you really aspire for this, just do work and if it works, it works. For being an award that you don't put your own name in for, poor President Obama has been taking a hit. It's not like he bought it, nor did he spend countless nights awake waiting for it. It was given to him. It's a political award, so logically it's going to go to a political person of some sort. The fact that it was given to him after 12 days is saying something. I agree with you there, but we don't know who his competition was and won't for 50 years. Honestly, this makes me think of the time I was in fifth grade and decided that I was going to run in our school's race because I was fat and thought that that would help. I signed the paper, and it was decided that on field day I would be in the race. Little did I know that the race was separated into girls and guys, and I was the only girl who signed up to run. Well, the gun was shot, and I ran against the guys and came in last, but I won first place. I got a ribbon and everything. This could very well be something our grandchildren laugh about when they reveal the details surrounding this award. Was President Obama the only one who met the standard or the best of a limited pool? Might I ask, who do you think deserved to win?

i think he deserves it because of his work changing the world look on the United States. Also his work at the U.N.showed he really wants to get this world nuke disarmament under way. Also if he did seem to help the climate between the U.S. and Russia. He also puled out of the city's in Iraq I know not a big deal but it showed he doesn't want to be where we don't have to when it comes to "occupation wars", I'm just saying he is showing an attempt at getting out of these wars.

Re: Micheal Scott I have to say I was outraged when I first heard Obama won the Nobel Prize. Without going into too much history of Obama and the Nobel Prize I would like to express my point of view as to why Obama was given this "present". It is all part of "The Strategy". Let's face it - America and Bush messed up big time in the past 8 or so years (Iraq, "fighting" terrorism.. the list goes on). Being the #1 superpower, hence leading by example it is not a smart idea to create negative image of yourself in the world arena. Alas, Bush did. Marketers know well that consumers are always right, otherwise they just do not buy and boycott the product... But wait, here comes the new era - Barack Obama! We see him and Michelle on every tabloid, TV, radio in the world, his inauguration ceremony is shown live on every channel (like I care) - the Saver is here. What do you think this is all about? World "adaptation strategy". I will explain. It does not take us one day to get used to something, that is perceptions cannot be build overnight but rather though prolonged drilling of your mental system and repetitive exposure to a particular concept/idea. Companies spent millions to achieve brand loyalty and recognition. Awarding the Nobel Prize to Obama is somewhat smart move by those above to manipulate you and me and lead/mislead into believing that he IS the new change, the new leadership, the new guy on the block who will make things better. And he very well could be, although it could be argued that he is involved in "puppetry". The bottom line is world domination: business, government, entertaining and so on. By the US. When major decisions will need to be made the world will look at Obama to see what he says because he will have the influence and thus power and control. By "he" I mean America as a whole. Do you understand where I am coming from? America will rule and push for whatever reforms they need to achieve their goals; this would always result in more money being made by the top of the pyramid. Are we going to stop the world domination?

My dear Alexei, first of all let me tell you that Nobel prize can't be given to dead people. On the other hand, I'm not as sure as you that president Obama hasn't accomplish anything yet. I mean, possibly in terms of material things you're right. But the fact is that never ever humankind has had as many expectatives in peace and in a "better world construction" than now with Mr. Obama in office. There's a wave of empathy with USA as never before and followers and people inspired by Mr. Obama are legions. We have to give time to time so ideas may cristalise in facts. I think this Nobel prize its a promise to humankind, as saying look at this new model of politician. this is the way things have to be done in politics from now on. You are an american citizen and probably you find that in these 11 months material goals achived by Obama's office are poor. But believe me: animic goals are also important. the time of a new Jefferson. Cheers my friend. Time will say who's right, but I think that we are very lucky 'cause we are living

Dear Alexsey Sazonov, I fully agree with you. Don't be surpriezed , this the world of idiots not at all a world for intelligent people like you and me ! But don't happy , be worry !

PASCUA MEJIA wrote: "But the fact is that never ever humankind has had as many expectations in peace and in a "better world construction" than now..." Oh, really? I think that you are living in your private world which started its existence only a few years ago. I may be too harsh on you, sorry. By my problem is that somehow people take their current local events and magnify their significance to the scale of the Universe. Like Americans did with the 9/11 event by trying to represent it a something which has Biblical importance in the history of humanity. They started to misinterpret Nostradamus writing. Or even looking about it in the Bible. I simply call it arrogance and ignorance. So, similar -- with Obama. He may have some significance for the United States and some other Western countries. Today. But, that is. For the rest of the humanity, Obama is just another American President. Considering the facts which "humankind never ever has had...", I think the Communist revolution in Russia in 1917 had much more to bring in the expectations of a "better world constriction". Or say, the end of WW2 -- this is the time when people really had good expectations on the years to come. Or, how about collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of Cold War? If people ignored this event or had some big expectations for the better world? And I only took three events in the last century. But, how many of them the humankind had in its history? Finally, talking about Obama as "never ever..." before. He is not even original. He is just following footprints of the Soviet leader M.Gorbachev. Exactly step-by-step... Don't believe it? Then, guess whom this is applied to? a) He arrived at the time when the country collected a number of almost unsolvable problems b) ... and the world was in crisis. c) He rapidly appeared on the political horizon like a morning star and represents a new wave of world politicians d) He is young, very charismatic, and excellent speaker e) He came as an agent of hope and change. f) He came on the basis of the very liberal political platform and promise of radical reforms. g) His message is simple and easy to understood by everybody formula (slogan) h) He is attracting and inspiring new generation of people i) He is traveling with his beautiful wife around the globe and collect the sympathy of foreign people and politicians j) He politically polarized the country and (politically) divided it on two camps k) He is the first ... President l) He inherited from his predecessor a crumbling economy and the country which is on the spiral descend m) ... and conducting not very successful war in Afghanistan n) He is more popular abroad than in this own country o) He won the Nobel Peace Price ... I think, as time goes by, we will see how this list is growing. I am afraid, that the English alphabet will not be enough for it. And the saddest part, these days -- after just few short decades -- not many young people in the West probably know who Gorbachev is. I don't think that Obama will be an exception from this rule (I am talking about other countries).