Should he have won it, or should he not have one it?
He shouldn't have won it. Perhaps after his 8 years, with the benefit of hindsight with some real achievements under his belt, but not now. He hasn't really affected any real change since he's taken office.
He shouldn't have won it. Perhaps after his 8 years, with the benefit of hindsight with some real achievements under his belt, but not now. He hasn't really affected any real change since he's taken office.
I don't think he should've won it, for a few reasons. First of all, like others have said, he hasn't had much chance to do anything. I'm not criticizing what he has done, but I certainly don't think he's done anything epic enough to win him the prize. I also happen to think a Nobel Peace Prize should steer clear of political figures under radar. Obama has a lot of supporters, but also far too many critics. People could least consider that maybe they are wrong about him. I'm not saying whether Obama's taking the right or the wrong direction, but with so much controversy over his decisions, it really isn't fair to judge them as automatically right before they've taken effect, and before some of them have even been made.
What does this mean? He didn't win a prize? Yes he did. He doesn't want the prize? That's not the issue. He doesn't deserve to win the prize? Back up your answer.
What you've typed is the most illiterate thing I've seen in quite some time.
i knew this will come up in time... i think he deserves it,but he has to prove it now,he is sending troops to afanghistan when he should send only aid,it's not his prob about the fight
