Bush and Giuliani nominated for Nobel Peace Prize

February 21, 2002 1:32 PM

Bush and Giuliani nominated for Nobel Peace Prize Rudy? No way - I still don't know what this guy did beyond being a fatherly voice for NYC. As for GW, well I know some will strongly disagree, but waging war for peace is sorta like having sex for virginity.
posted by holycola (15 comments total)

As much as I love Gandhi, and I do...civil disobedience against terrorists doesn't quite strike fear in the hearts of our enemies. That said, our war isn't for peace.
posted by BlueTrain at 1:38 PM on February 21, 2002

Luckily, being nominated isn't the same as winning. Ping us all again when they actually announce the prize.
posted by briank at 1:42 PM on February 21, 2002

Pretty well covered 17 days ago.
posted by Mack Twain at 1:45 PM on February 21, 2002

When was the last year in which somebody DIDN'T nominate the U.S. President? Seems to be an annual topic of bemoanment.
posted by obfusciatrist at 1:56 PM on February 21, 2002

waging war for peace is sorta like having sex for virginity

No, it's not. For instance, England and the U.S. wanted to protect their virginity in the 1930s, and as a direct result we got thoroughly screwed by Germany. Along with the rest of Europe.
posted by luser at 2:18 PM on February 21, 2002

uuuhhhhh, luser? Speak for Europe all you want, but I seem to remember something about the US having a winning war effort. Admittedly, we played hard to get with Europe, and Japan tried to bend us over, but I wouldn't go so far as to claim that Nazi Germany plucked our cherry ...
posted by Wulfgar! at 2:42 PM on February 21, 2002

Look. He was only nominated. Besides. Yasser Arafat won one (although both Yasser and Nobel could be associated with TNT). This prize makes Olympic ice skate officiating look respectible.

Is bringing the crime rate down now worth a peace prize?
posted by ParisParamus at 2:51 PM on February 21, 2002

I don't know about the virginity metaphor, but I will agree that the GW nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize is up there on the top ten list for doublethink/doublespeak.
posted by mosspink at 2:53 PM on February 21, 2002

... all of which happened in the 1940s.

Anyway. There are lots of people who can nominate someone for the prize. According to this page, the following people can submit nominations:

1. Present and past members of the Nobel Committee and the advisers at the Nobel Institute.
2. Members of national assemblies and governments, and members of the Inter-Parliamentary Union.
3. Members of the International Court of Arbitration and the International Court of Justice at the Hague.
4. Members of the International Peace Bureau.
5. Members of the Institut de Droit International.
6. University professors of law, political science, history and philosophy.
7. Holders of the Nobel Peace Prize.

Now look at #2... do you seriously think no one in the Bush Administration thought to nominate Bush? Regardless of whether he had any chance of winning?
posted by kindall at 2:55 PM on February 21, 2002

You're being totally unfair to sex for virginity. No sex means no babies means no virgins. I have two nominations:

Sex: Takes the mind of restless young males off subjects like killing the tribe over the hill, religious fanaticism, etc.

Atom bomb: Makes war too costly. No two nuclear powers have ever fought a full scale war. Without US/USSR bombs, I suspect WWIII would've gone off before the cold war petered out. Without India's and Pakistan's recent acquisition of nuclear capabilities, I suspect they'd be engaged in full scale war right now.
posted by mlinksva at 3:21 PM on February 21, 2002

maybe this has been discussed in the past, but it was never this sexy
posted by fuq at 3:30 PM on February 21, 2002

I added this post to the very end of that prior thread, probably too late for anyone to read it. Comments welcome.
posted by aaron at 3:57 PM on February 21, 2002

"I still don't know what [Rudy] did beyond being a fatherly voice for NYC"

Here's something, holycola:

Giuliani made NYC a dramatically safer place to live in, allowing millions of people of all races to lead happy and productive lives.

I'd say by any measure that's a pretyy significant accomplishment.
posted by nobody_knose at 8:56 PM on February 21, 2002

I agree with holycola 100%, both people in both situations did what any person in that situation would do, in order to present themselves in the best possible light. It's politics.
posted by banished at 9:06 PM on February 21, 2002

banished: I don't see that as the message holycola is expressing here. and besides, if the end result of an action helps people, what does it matter what the benefactor's internal intentions are?

isn't judging people on the merit of their deeds enough?

obviously, many here will still feel that neither of these men is deserving of the prize, but it would be a more legitimate and quantifiable measure.
posted by nobody_knose at 9:23 PM on February 21, 2002