English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

For a project, but have a lot of time-

Can you tell me based on your knowledge, what did Jimmy Carter do?

I know that this president won the Nobel Peace Prize, for what though?

Also, what were his morales? What did he believe was best for the country?

Any and all help would be appreciated

2007-04-08 17:30:38 · 6 answers · asked by AZRocks12 2 in Arts & Humanities History

I did some research- He DID win the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002 for his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts and to advance human rights- just thought i'd let you know.. Thanks anyway oldironclub.. Your info is great!

2007-04-09 10:56:17 · update #1

6 answers

I voted in my first Presidential contest the year Carter was elected. I didn't support him, but I thought he would be "OK". I've since concluded that he was the WORST President since before the Civil War (Pierce and Buchanan were both inept at best, but at least they had the excuse of the intractable North-South conflict over slavery in the territories, etc).

Carter was a disaster on domestic issues, esp. the economy ("misery index" -- a combination of very high inlation AND unemployment), but that dims compared to his foreign policy, allowing Communist expansion in Central America (which Reagan had to try to clean up) and the fall of Iran, which we are STILL suffering the consequences of!! (For those who speak of the "unfortunate" incident with the hostages, please note that it was PRECISELY because of CARTER'S decision to LET the government fall to the mullahs, that we had that problem to deal with.)


And Jimmy Carter certainly wins my vote for worst EX-President...

I USED to think that, because of his work with Habitat for Humanity (a worthy organization indeed... though Carter did NOT found it!!), that he was a decent human being making a worthy contribution after an unsuccessful presidency.

But then I found out about what ELSE he was doing.

He is, sad to say, a very small man. Breaking all precedent by bad-mouthing his successors (before him there was an understanding that you did not do so).

But more important than that, in his own self-righteous view that HE knew what was best, beginning under Reagan (whom he hated bitterly, thinking HE ought to have been re-elected), he has frequently run around secretly (and not alway so secretly) trying to run his own foreign policy, even if it directly contradictory to the current elected administration.

For example, when George H.W. Bush was building a coalition for the first Gulf War, Carter, because he disagreed, used his contacts with foreign governments to urge countries NOT to support the U.S. effort. (Note: if you or I or any other private citizen --and he is legally no different-- were to do such a thing, we could be charged with treason!)

And even when he WAS invited (or at least allowed) to be involved in foreign affairs, he has bollixed them up horribly. CARTER was one of the chief architects of Clinton's DISASTROUS decision to give North Korea nuclear fuel and simply (and very foolishly) TRUST them.

Sadly, as one answer has already noted, those who award the Nobel Peace Prize have, in recent years, too often used it to make an inappropriate political statement, including to insult the sitting administration. So it was for his ANTI-Bush actions that he received the award (NOT the peace treaty that Sadat and Begin made --mostly at SADAT'S initiative while Carter was President). Just look at the list of recipients in recent years (including ), and you'll see that receiving that award is hardly evidence of a genuine contribution to world peace.

And as you look through Carter's entire record, during and since his Presidency, I'm afraid you'll have to conclude that, whatever his intentions, his view of the world has been skewed and simplistic, and his actions have served to UNDERMINE peace.

You will also see from his most recent book --widely and rightly criticized-- that the man is very much ANTI-Israel, and quick to blame THEM for the crimes of Palestinian leaders and terrorists. (In fact, this has been his basic perspective all along; some are just now beginning to notice it.)

2007-04-08 21:03:55 · answer #1 · answered by bruhaha 7 · 0 1

Sorry, but James Earl Carter did NOT receive a Nobel Peace Prize. He may have been considered for his role in brokering peace between Egypt and Israel in 1978-79, but the 1978 Peace Prize went to Anwar Sadat and Menachem Begin, while the 1979 prize went to Mother Theresa.

As for morals, Carter was one of the most religiously devout Presidents we have had, being a Southern Baptist. He was a strong believer in human rights, and worked hard trying to get other nations to improve their human rights records (with only limited success). He believed that the U.S. needed to greatly reduce its dependence on foreign oil, and made some progress in this area.

Unfortunately, Carter's presidency was stymied by the taking of American hostages by Iran, a situation he was ill prepared to handle. He may have been too much of a "peace nik" to do what needed to be done, but this is second guessing decades after the fact. For the information of a previous answerer, the hostages were held for over a year before being released the same day that Ronald Reagan was inaugurated.

Carter may have been a less than stellar President, but he has by far been one of the best (if not THE best) ex-Presidents in our history. Since leaving office he has devoted a lot of time to Habitat for Humanity, personally helping build homes all across the country. He has also, believe it or not, been consulted by his successors on issues of foreign policy and diplomacy.

2007-04-08 19:23:25 · answer #2 · answered by oldironclub 4 · 2 1

Carter resolved a lot of international conflicts during his presidency. There was a lot of tension between Egypt and Israel. He invited the leaders of both countries to Camp David to resolve issues. This and other issues lead to his winning the Nobel Peace Prize. He is deeply committed to social justice. When he works with habitat for humanity, he often helps others build houses. He is not scared to get dirty. He believes in promoting democracy all over the world. The link below discusses that and others give details about his actual work.
http://www.jimmycarterlibrary.org/documents/jec/jecbio_p.phtml

This link is from the White House on Jimmy Carter:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presidents/jc39.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Carter

Charity work done by Carter:
http://www.cartercenter.org/homepage.html
http://www.habitat.org/how/carter.aspx

Nobel Peace Prize:
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2002/

2007-04-08 19:32:23 · answer #3 · answered by Alletery 6 · 1 1

Well under his reign Iran held our hostages for about 100 days or so. - Then the same day when Ronald Regan took his oath they released the hostages.

Again during his reign we had a oil problem in this country with a national gas shortage that went on for months.

We went into a ressesion

He started habitat for humanity - building low cost housing for the poor.

2007-04-08 17:41:29 · answer #4 · answered by caciansf 4 · 1 1

He won the noble prize because he bashes America.That prize is a joke .Ever since they gave it to Gorbachev instead of Reagan.He is a anti semite who hates Israel.He was the worst president that this country ever had right up there with James Buchannon.He is a disgrace who only became president because of watergate.

2007-04-08 18:34:39 · answer #5 · answered by Hector 4 · 1 3

During his administration, Carter tried to reinforce his image as a man of the people. He adopted an informal style of dress and speech in public appearances, held frequent press conferences, and reduced the pomp of the presidency. Carter's ambitious programs for social, administrative, and economic reform, however, met with opposition in Congress despite the Democratic majorities in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. By 1978 Carter's initial popularity had dissipated in the face of his inability to convert his ideas into legislative realities.

In foreign affairs, although Carter's championship of international human rights received prominent attention, his major achievements were on the more pragmatic level of patient diplomacy. In 1977 he obtained two treaties between the United States and Panama that would give the latter control over the Panama Canal at the end of 1999 and would guarantee the neutrality of that waterway thereafter. On Jan. 1, 1979, Carter established full diplomatic relations between the United States and China and simultaneously broke official ties with Taiwan. In 1978 Carter brought Egyptian President Anwar el-Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin together at Camp David and secured their agreement to the Camp David Accords, which ended the state of war that had existed between the two countries since Israel's founding in 1948. The accords provided for the establishment of full diplomatic and economic relations between them on condition that Israel return the occupied Sinai Peninsula to Egypt. In 1979, also, Carter signed with Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev in Vienna a new bilateral strategic arms limitation treaty (SALT II) that would establish parity in strategic nuclear weapons delivery systems between the two superpowers on terms that could be adequately verified. (Carter removed the treaty from consideration by the Senate in January 1980 after the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan.)

These substantial foreign policy successes were soon overshadowed by a serious crisis in foreign affairs and by a groundswell of popular discontent over Carter's economic policies. On Nov. 4, 1979, a mob of Iranian students stormed the U.S. embassy in Tehran and took the diplomatic staff there hostage. Their actions were soon sanctioned by Iran's revolutionary government, and a standoff developed between the United States and Iran over the issue of the captive diplomats. Carter's response was to temporize and try to negotiate the hostages' release while avoiding a direct confrontation with the Iranian government. This stance initially met with public approval, but by the time a secret U.S. military mission in April 1980 failed to rescue the hostages, Carter's inability to obtain the hostages' release had become a major political liability for him. He responded more forcibly to the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 when he placed an embargo on the shipment of American grain to that country and pressed for a U.S. boycott of the 1980 summer Olympics due to be held in Moscow.

On the home front, Carter's management of the economy was arousing widespread concern. The inflation rate had climbed higher each year since he took office, rising from 6 percent in 1976 to more than 12 percent by 1980. Unemployment remained high at 7.5 percent, and volatile interest rates reached a high of 20 percent or more twice during 1980.

Despite the apparent failure of his domestic reform and economic policies and the diplomatic crises of 1979, Carter won the Democratic presidential nomination in 1980. But public confidence in Carter's executive abilities had fallen to an irretrievable low, and in the elections held that November he was overwhelmingly defeated by Republican nominee Ronald W. Reagan, winning only 41 percent of the popular vote.

2007-04-08 20:57:29 · answer #6 · answered by Retired 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers