Yes, ends justifying means, always. Read this.

I haven't and don't, hence why I said "escalating illegal war". Sending yet more troops over "in the name of peace" (!!!!) is a continuation of imperialism as a means of serving the political self-interests of those in power. And all vague blanket terms such as "peace" and "freedom" do is maintain enough domestic support for this war - and in doing so, the ruling elite tame any would-be opposition from within. It happens time and time again. Republican, Democrat, Autocrat, Bureaucrat. They're all the fucking same.

The System is bigger than the man, always. Thus: the system must change. Don't be under any illusions that it cannot.

I don't think awards should ever be given out on the grounds of potential or promise. I much prefer concrete evidence of achievement.

This is going to be a humiliation for the Obama regime, in long-term retrospect. Perhaps short-term, too, if people start raising their consciousnesses.

Also, what purpose lies behind the prize that you find "quite agreeable"?

The prize committee comprises five members of the Norwegian parliament. They range from the far-right to the social democrats. Giving Obama the prize just reflects what is emanating politically within Europe at present. It serves to endorse 'him' and the US in general in their further military advancements in the Middle East. "War for peace"?!

This isn't the question, though. I don't even know or care who else was up for the prize, because it's irrelevant. And it's revealing that your answer suggests a stance that is translatable to: "Well, Obama was the best candidate, thus deserved to win it on these grounds." I remind you that he was inaugurated as President just over a week before the nominations deadline. What, in those 11 days, had he done to merit even a suggestion of "peace"? His electoral campaign? Come on; all he needed to do with that was suggest a shift away from Bush, with any vague policies presented strong enough to seem convincing, while remaining strictly and nauseatingly jingoist. ("God bless America!!!!")

This is as much to do with Bush as it is with Obama; anybody of the US Democratic party could have been inaugurated and they would have been a potential candidate and possible/probable winner of the prize, just by not being George Bush.

Which is why the award is farcical and shouldn't be taken seriously. But sadly, whether or not it's taken seriously by us lot doesn't figure, because the prize is a political one made by and for the ruling elites of the bourgeois powers of the world, all wanting their share of the world's energy resources and its money (at the expense of their own populations' welfare, may I add), and seeing in Obama and the US someone who can now lead them all to "prosperity".