You literally just started the Nobel Peace Prize is irrelevant, without qualification.
And now you want to claim I’m not “answering anything”.
I have made my best effort to answer replies. But why should I do more than what you are doing?
So please, as a Swede, somehow giving you special knowledge of the subject, explain why the Nobel Peace prize is irrelevant? I mean it started in Norway, so not even in your country. 🙄
I mean was it irrelevant when the Red Cross won it twice? What about when it was won by Bertha von Suttner? What about Kofi Annan? Or Narges Mohammadi?
Or is it maybe that it is only irrelevant when it doesn’t support your position?
The Paris Peace accords leading to a ceasefire in Vietnam were signed on January 27, 1973. To critics, “peace with honor” didn’t look that different from options available when Nixon first took power: “Kissinger and Nixon wasted four years of negotiations with the Vietnamese communists, agreeing to virtually the same peace terms in 1973 that were on the table in 1969,” argues Brigham. In total, 2.5 million to 3 million Vietnamese and other Indochinese and 58,000 Americans died in Vietnam. Hundreds more were missing in action.
On the other side of the equation, a consultant to the Johnson Administration on the peace process stood ready to pass information from the 1968 peace talks to Nixon, who then did his utmost to sabotage them, even though, according to the Logan Act, it is illegal for U.S. citizens “to engage in unauthorized diplomacy with foreign countries with intent to ‘influence the measures or conduct’ of a foreign government.” The informant from within the talks? None other than Henry Kissinger, who used his role as Johnson’s adviser at the peace talks to help secure Nixon’s 1968 victory.
You don’t get to claim you contributed to peace when you deliberately stalled it and lengthened the war and then achieved literally nothing at all in terms of improving the terms of the piece. His role in the negotiations was to ensure more people died.
As a swede I know in detail why the peace prize sucks and “globalization” is just your excuse to not answer anything
You literally just started the Nobel Peace Prize is irrelevant, without qualification.
And now you want to claim I’m not “answering anything”.
I have made my best effort to answer replies. But why should I do more than what you are doing?
So please, as a Swede, somehow giving you special knowledge of the subject, explain why the Nobel Peace prize is irrelevant? I mean it started in Norway, so not even in your country. 🙄
I mean was it irrelevant when the Red Cross won it twice? What about when it was won by Bertha von Suttner? What about Kofi Annan? Or Narges Mohammadi?
Or is it maybe that it is only irrelevant when it doesn’t support your position?
Unfortunately we get to hear all about them anyway
Replies and answers are not the same thing
https://bigthink.com/the-past/worst-nobel-peace-prizes/
https://www.reuters.com/world/nobel-prize-body-knew-kissingers-1973-vietnam-deal-unlikely-bring-peace-2023-01-11/
https://www.history.com/news/henry-kissinger-vietnam-war-legacy
https://progressive.org/magazine/kissingers-culpability-cords/
You don’t get to claim you contributed to peace when you deliberately stalled it and lengthened the war and then achieved literally nothing at all in terms of improving the terms of the piece. His role in the negotiations was to ensure more people died.
So you didn’t rebuff my point. Only continued your line that the Nobel Peace Prize is irrelevant.
But I noticed you didn’t comment on the irrelevancy of those examples I gave you.
So tell me, why are these awards to Narges Mohammadi irrelevant? Why is it irrelevant to Nelson Mandela?
Don’t post more IamRight links about Kissenger. We established that this was a controversial award. We established that he is controversial.
I agreed.
Tell me why the award is irrelevant? Because your position is now hinging on the fact it is. This was your point was it not?