Geez for heavens's sake why should there be a winner for "Nobel Peace Prize". There is NO PEACE IN THIS WORLD! Then NO ONE is entitled to win a Peace Prize!!! Get some SENSE!
2007-02-07 05:36:53 · 7 answers · asked by Debs 5 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
Much as I'd like for their to be peace in our world, we need to stop trying to make earth, which is fallen, the utopia that heaven alone can sustain.
2007-02-07 05:50:19 · answer #1 · answered by Fergi the Great 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The Nobel Peace Prize should be changed to the Nobel Appease Prize. Just look at some of the past winners particularly Jimmy Carter. What did he do? but kiss Yassir Arafs butt a few times.
2007-02-07 13:53:31 · answer #2 · answered by mr_methane_gasman 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The prize is supposedly more for those who made strides toward peace. Though, with Carter and Arafat receiving it, it has become more of a joke.
There never was, nor shall there ever be peace in this world. At least not till after Armageddon.
2007-02-07 13:43:12 · answer #3 · answered by jeffpsd 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Wow what a question! how profound. No prize until there is full and total peace everyone
2007-02-07 15:13:25 · answer #4 · answered by leon 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Never has been peace in the world.
I do like it that Rush and Al are up for it.
If Rush does get it. The liberals imploding would be worth it all.
2007-02-07 13:52:32 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
George Bush should win it. He's the only one besides Blair willing to take on the terrorists whereever they hide. Regardless of what you little liberals think, Bush promotes peace!
2007-02-07 13:43:58 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
I agree with you! 2 thumbs up!!
2007-02-07 13:49:16 · answer #7 · answered by 14 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋