Peace? - Reader comments at The New York Sun

Recent Blog Posts

Reader comment on:
The Next Nobel

Submitted by Trevor, Oct 12, 2007 15:11

I would have never though to nominate a military general for the Nobel Peace Prize. Yes, with war can come peace, but usually only for a time - people don't like being ruled by foreigners or puppet governments. And there are too many outlets that cause wars.

Regardless of the reasons that we're in the Iraqi Conflict (as it once was called), the General hasn't done anything spectacular to promote peace. Now, if he went in the middle of the fueding groups and made some headway in stopping the violence and got the groups at a ceasefire, then maybe he can be considered a "peace"-promoting person. As far as I can see, he leads troops to protect the citizens of Iraq, which is noble, but it's also his job and his superiors got him into it.
To note, the reason that the US invaded Iraq has nothing to do with democracy. After the first few days when Saddam's regime fell, then and only then did the leaders promote democracy - "for the good of the people" as a cover for what happened. You can't change reasons and intents... that's manipulation!

One commentor noted that we get peace by spreading liberty (a.k.a. democracy). Really? So we spread peace by spreading democracy. First of all, democracy is not the perfect ideal of peace nor is it the necessarily the answer for peace in a certain country. Second of all, I think that most countries arrive at democracy through force, as most politicians in power in other countries don't convert to democracy that easily. However, I do think that democracy can be a good step in terms of maybe unearthing corruption.

What would the General do with the money? It's not that much money, but a good amount for us. I don't think he's donate it like Gore did. If he did win, I hope he would. There's a stark difference between the two groups: those that use their money to help others and those that use their own money for their own good.

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.

Other reader comments on this article

Comment	By	Date
You take yourself seriously with this story? Petraeus was put in command specifically for his views which are, like this... [MORE]	Netmonger	Oct 14, 2007 01:07
Why shouldn't George W. Bush be nominated? He's doing more than the general!According to most of the people in the... [MORE]	Thomas	Oct 12, 2007 15:15
I would have never though to nominate a military general for the Nobel Peace Prize. Yes, with war can come...	Trevor	Oct 12, 2007 15:11
on the other hand, henry kissinger is a nobel "peace" prize laureate. so why not a mediocre neo-con tool like... [MORE]	arch stanton	Oct 12, 2007 14:54
No one could seriously consider the unprovoked invasion of a country, destruction of its infrastructure and wholesale torture and massacre... [MORE]	NormanW	Oct 12, 2007 11:49
You would have to sponsor your own award in order for the logic you cite to be applied. You can... [MORE]	Patrick S Pattillo	Oct 12, 2007 08:56
Well, I guess you can say.....'another loss for the Neocons.....and....Bushie Backers'.....why don't you finally realize....you're beating a 'dead horse'....with the... [MORE]	Mortyboy	Oct 12, 2007 08:44
I applaud the Sun for their recommendation and I'm proud to call myself a reader. The U.S. military has... [MORE]	rhino_itall	Oct 12, 2007 07:48
A war monger winning the peace price...?Righhhhht.....Why not propose Osama or the Myanmar general while you're at it? [MORE]	JD	Oct 12, 2007 04:42
I welcome this nominee in General David Petraeus. He is an honorable American who is working hard in spite of... [MORE]	Robert	Oct 11, 2007 20:36
Let's see: A theocratic dictator who kills civilians because his god personally told him to do so is never a... [MORE]	Canadian	Oct 11, 2007 18:25
American forces are in Iraq for one reason and one reason only, to secure American access to Iraqi oil. Only... [MORE]	KennethC	Oct 11, 2007 16:59
The Left continually trots out this "we're only there for the oil" cr*p. Leaving aside for a moment the notion... [MORE]	fool	Oct 12, 2007 17:59
1) Do you know what "peace" means? 2) No, seriously - do you know what it means? [MORE]	LemmyHavit	Oct 11, 2007 16:41
...that it means "the absence of war." We should've gone alone with Mr. Chamberlain, shouldn't we? All that war back in... [MORE]	fool	Oct 12, 2007 18:02
Not a bad idea, but I really think the prize should go to Burma's monks this year. They really risked... [MORE]	Dominic Jerry Nardi Jr.	Oct 10, 2007 23:15
Even though the committee would never consider them, You are 100% right to say the american soldier is the greatest... [MORE]	mark healey	Oct 10, 2007 16:25
The Sun continues it's cultlike worship of General Petraeus based on wishful hopes. I'm guessing you would have published a... [MORE]	Yoda	Oct 10, 2007 13:54
Why not indeed? General Petraeus in his brief address and for the questions posed by his congressional critics he answered... [MORE]	RAJA MANDAKALATHOOR VENKATARAGHAVAN	Oct 10, 2007 13:39
Bravo! I'll bet that General Petraeus feels a minor swell of pride that the New York Sun has suggested that... [MORE]	Steve Sf	Oct 10, 2007 10:23
Ummm, just a few questions; Who wrote this? What kind of drugs is this person on? Are they 'over-the-counter' meds,... [MORE]	ASanePerson	Oct 12, 2007 13:14
Is there a link to Neil Kressel's essay? [MORE]	rich	Oct 10, 2007 09:26

Reader comment on:The Next Nobel

Other reader comments on this article

Comment on The Next Nobel

Reader comment on:
The Next Nobel